foreign
[Music]
are you ready
um Hello everybody welcome
um this is the board of appeals meeting
uh 7 P.M September 19th 2023. uh we are
here to hear case number 2023-03
um we will begin with our roll call of
the members present
um I will ask if you're present please
respond informatively uh Mr Paul Doherty
president Miss Amy Everett
Stephen sharp present I am Jody Hoon
star
chair uh we are also joined by town
clerk Sharon hum and legal counsel Fred
Sussman at this point I'll pass it to
Sharon for confirmation of posting and
any documents entered into the record
in the matter of the application for
case number
2023-03 rod and reel Inc Donovan
estate's LLC I caused to be published in
the southern Maryland News newspaper a
notice of the public Hearing in this
case the three consecutive weeks
beginning Friday September 1st
continuing Friday September 8th and
Friday September 15th on August 24
2023 I transmitted to the Planning
Commission notice of time and place with
a copy of application on August 24 2023
I mailed by registered mail notice to
the applicant and adjoining property
owners of said properties involved in
the case and signs giving notice of said
case were posted on said properties
August 29 2023 by the Department of
Public Works
yeah
um at this point do you have a affidavit
to enter into the record yes I do yes I
do
yes that'll be exhibit one okay it's a
bit one
foreign
okay in that case uh we will begin with
case 2020 303 to consider an application
from Rod and Reel Inc or Donovan Estates
LLC of 4160 Mears Avenue Chesapeake
Beach uh for a decision on
interpretation or alleged error
um to article uh six of the Chesapeake
Beach zoning ordinance uh and some
sections of the Chesapeake Beach Town
Charter applicant requests the
Chesapeake Beach zoning board of appeals
to quote order of the zoning
administrator and planning and zoning
commission to immediately commence and
prioritize the processing and review of
the relevant site plans submitted by Rod
and Reel Inc and Donovan Estates and
that the zoning administrator and
planning and zoning commission be
ordered to apply the zoning ordinances
in effect as of January 29 2021 when the
applications were submitted and for
other such and further relief as the
nature of their cause requires at this
point I will pass it to Mr Blitz
representing rod and reel and Donovan
Estates
oh apologies one note
um in the event that the presentation
here tonight extends past 8 30 PM we
will adjourn this session to resume
October 30th 7 pm at this point in time
we don't know how long it will take to
hear the full presentations and to
receive public comments it may be one or
more evenings if you have provided your
contact information on the sign-in sheet
be aware that you may not have the
opportunity to speak this evening
now Mr Blitz if you please
thank you
um members of the board
chair uh my name is Eric Blitz I
represent the rod and reel Inc in
Donovan Estates LLC Donovan Estates LLC
is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rod and
Reel so throughout this hearing I'll
basically just be referring to the rod
and reel as that's the real party in
interest in moving forward in this case
um
I'm going to sit down just to make sure
I'm closer to the mic if that's okay
with you
[Music]
um quick question on just process
do we need to
have Mr pounds entered in as
representing a party at this time
all right pardon is Mr pounds here to
represent a party and if so should he be making a statement in the
beginning of the case that he is
I'm following the instructions of the
chair and the chair instructed this uh I
mean when it's time my turn I certainly
will enter my appearance just for the
record on Todd pounds
I'm the town attorney and uh I will be I
will be speaking when I'm addressed
for the record
there's a record being made of this so
that are we supposed to hear it or what
no I'm sorry you can't hear it I'll try
to speak up as loudly microphones
it was don't aren't for broadcast
they're just for the record all right
um by way of introduction I'll summarize
uh the issues and some of the key
evidentiary points uh you will hear in
this case uh to give you some background
um context for the information we will
present to you tonight
um
as the chair noted this is an appeal
alleging error by the Planning and
Zoning commission and the zoning
administrator
um in failing or refusing to review
properly filed site plans for five
properties owned by the rod and reel
the rationale for their refusal was a
Reliance upon an invalid moratorium that
purported to Halt the processing of some
category one site plans uh and then
later when the moratorium had obviously
expired
um and they had spent countless time and
energy on explaining
um and promoting the moratorium as a
temporary
um moratorium and only for a discernible
duration
um they apparently changed their
argument and took the position that the
moratorium was in fact indefinite
um we will just demonstrate why the
attempt at passing a moratorium on site
plans review was invalid and therefore
they were in error in relying upon it uh
to deny uh the rod and reel site review
applications
um we'll also show how absurd the later
position is that the moratorium was
indefinite
um and therefore subject to their
discretion to turn out
um how long it would be
um we're going to show how the
obligation to process site plan
applications when they are submitted is
a mandatory obligation on their part on
the part of the administrators that's
the zoning administrator and the
Planning and Zoning Commission
and not something that can simply be
removed by simple resolutions of the
Town Council
um then if after considering all the
evidence that we will produce uh for you
that demonstrates that their Reliance on
the purported moratorium uh was legally
faulty we will demonstrate that the harm
caused by this failure is a good reason
for this board to exercise its appeal
Authority in a responsible fashion
um we will be asking you to
find that the refusal
of both the zoning administrator and the
Planning and Zoning commission to
process the site plans to have been in
air but
that in the just responsible I'm sorry
the just and responsible response to
this is to exercise your Authority
um to order the site plans to be
reviewed
um with the law in effect at the time uh
that therefore the the site plans would
have proceeded in January of
2021
um but for this uh erroneous
interpretation and Reliance on the
moratorium
um but before we get to the request
relief we need to establish the
administrative agents namely the zoning
administrator and the Planning and
Zoning Commission
we're in air
um
so unlike your more typical variance
case or special exception case
um in this case you were determining if
there it was an error on the part of the
zoning administrator and the Planning
and Zoning commission and then crafting
your relief uh this makes this appeal
more like a legal hearing uh than you
may be used to and I will try to go slow
in explaining my Reliance on certain
statutes and cases
um
we have lots of exhibits to demonstrate
the factual points that I'll rely upon
um
I've I've prepared booklets that I'll
hand out to each of you for all of the
exhibits that doesn't necessarily mean
they're in the record but that way
Council and each of you can look at the
exhibits as I talk to them rather
because they'll be handed just one the
official exhibit and I've provided a
copy to uh Mr pounds
[Music]
closer to them like I will try yes but
that's not going to help you here
oh do you okay
let me bring it closer then
how's that
yes great
um similarly I'll be asking you to
consider the impact of various statutes
and code sections and even some case law
and I'll hand out that binder so let's
get started the first three exhibits are
pro forma introductions to make sure
they're in the record
um the first is the zoning applications
I mean the application for appeal that's
filed in this case
um so that would be
submitted it as I believe exhibit two
and let me go ahead and hand out those
binders
and why it was really
good
what's that
really that's Town Council
so the black binders
[Music]
foreign
ERS are the exhibits
file
apologize
[Music]
and Mr chair just for procedural
purposes uh I also had no objection to
the uh affidavit as far as exhibit one
uh I and and as far as exhibit two which
is just the application but many of the
exhibits I'm going to be objected to as
we go forward
so at this time I would ask Mr pounds to
identify who he's representing in this
case
I am uh I've been asked to uh present
the position of the town as released
this application so in essence I am the
town attorney uh I'm not acting as a
town attorney even though I am the town
attorney Town attorney uh and I may have
that capacity but primarily uh since the
uh zoning administrator as all of you
know that uh has resigned and he's taken
another position the town does not
presently have a current zoning
administrator uh which they've recently
been hired and moving forward but they
have not uh been up to speed with regard
to any of these projects whatsoever so
um uh as a result I'm the one who's
presenting this uh on behalf of the town
uh much of what and I'm going to be
saying much about Mr Blitz as said
earlier we're going to be objecting to
and that we believe is completely
incorrect so
um obviously we're going to follow
whatever procedure the chair wants to
follow with regard to the hearing and so
I'm
you know I guess
since he had an opening statement right
into his case uh we did not have an
opening statement but we're going to
follow the instructions on the chair
thank you Mr chair so my question is
yeah
sorry
so my question is
the Town Administrator and the Planning
and Zoning commission or the Apple
leaves in this case
and then you can also represent the
mayor and Town Council who can join this
case under the law as parties so I'm
trying to figure out and establish for
the record
are you representing the Planning and
Zoning commission all all of them the
Planning and Zoning commission and the
zoning administrator and the mayor and
Town Council the record
filed an appeal in this case we are that
is only thing that is that is going to
be heard with regard to this uh review
by the board of appeals only your appeal
so with regard to uh who I represent I'm
representing the town has released to
this appeal that's all it's going to be
heard by this board and that's who I
represent
so
just for the record I'm trying to
identify who the parties to the case are
uh their Autumn they're automatically
not the case this is simply an appeal
any any other case that may have been in
court or any other place that is not
those parties are separate and distinct
from what is going here tonight what is
going on here tonight is you filed an
appeal and that's what is being
addressed is your appeal that's it so Mr
pounce you can't say that you represent
the town you need to identify who you
represent there are
four options Mr but you have my answer
please proceed well I'm going to direct
this thing to the board
the Planning and Zoning Commission and
the zoning administrator are those who
we allege that committed error
they are automatically
parties to this appeal and can be
represented
in addition the mayor and Town Council
have the right to join this case as
parties themselves
I'm trying to identify
because Mr pounds has just said he
represents the town which isn't unless
he's saying he represents the mayor in
Town Council
isn't a thing there's these are the
parties the potential parties that Mr
pounds could represent
just let you filed an appeal yes and the
appeal is before the board of appeals
and and I am presenting the case on
behalf of the Town through the board of
appeals that's it
the town
you mean the corporate body of the town
of Chesapeake Beach it's you know are we
going to stay here all night that's fine
the reason I'm asking is we have to know
who are parties to this appeal this is
huh
the we know that don't don't direct
comments to
the Planning and Zoning commission and
the zoning administrator are the people
that the rod and reel alleged commit
error and therefore they're the applese
we're the appellants in this case
so they're automatically parties I don't
know whether Mr pounds represents them
or whether he's trying to introduce and
represent the mayor in Town Council
who do have the right to join this as
parties but we should we have to let the
record reflect who the parties to this
appeal are in addition anybody that
testifies in this case under Maryland
law becomes a party because they get a
notice if this goes to subsequent
um appeals and courts and things like
that and so that's why you have them
sign up so you have their information so
we have to identify who the parties are
and I'm trying to find out whether the
mayor and Town Council or parties to
this case
at this point your clients are the going
parties
there's no process for Apple leaves in
an adversarial role
uh if if Mr Townes uh determined to
speak or offer evidence he will I hope
identify who he's offering that evidence
for and at that point in time uh
that individual or those individuals of
that group may as a matter of all become
a party but they may not okay the reason
I asked at the beginning was he was
mentioning that he's maybe making
objections for him to make objections he
has to represent a party
okay I'll proceed
we typically allow on this board the
petitioner to do their entire
presentation and have never heard
objections at the time the statements
were made I'm not saying that I'm not
open to that if that's how you would
recommend proceeding we have never done
it
um I guess I will leave that question
open why don't you proceed with your
presentation and assume that no
interruptions or objections will come
and if it does
what yeah
thank you
so
we've got the application we're just
doing the pro formas right now so the
second one is that I'm offering would be
exhibit three and this represents uh
and we start early I don't know how a an
order of the Court would have any uh
really binding or any type of
governments as to what the board is
going to be you know seeking
um uh or what what the questions are
going to be addressing so uh this is a
this is we're here based on appeal
um and so I obviously I think it's going
to be the relevance would be up the
council into the Mr chair but we're
going to start right out there how
that's going to be relevant these
proceedings for the purpose of while
we're here I have no idea that that's
not good Mr Blitz I think I take issue
with your characterization that is the
opinion the order of the court in this
case this case is an administrative
appeal and is not uh part of the
judicial proceeding that was decided a
number of months ago so let me make my
argument for why it should be
number one
um as you'll hear tonight uh improper
delay using an arbitrary and capricious
denial of procedural rights guaranteed
by Maryland law and town laws is a big
part of the rationale for this appeal
paragraph two page one of the order
directs the portion of this board's
process
you are under a court order to do it
according to that process
the court found that the rodent real Inc
was an agree a grieved party
which is a prerequisite requirement for
the appeal to this board and you can see
that uh in the his finding on page 14 of
the original order
the court found that the rod and reel
had filed its application in a timely
manner that also is subject in this case
and it's it's important for this board
who is under this court order to know
that and see the the rationale of the
Court the court order specifies
procedural conduct required of this
board with respect to this case in its
final paragraph of the order which
should be memorialized in the record of
the appeal as it forms a part of the law
of the case so I think it's I think it's
quite obvious that it needs to come into
the order you are being directed by a
judge to hold this hearing in a certain
way with procedures dictated by the
court order that should be brought into
the record I'm not disputing that but
with the only thing I was disputing was
your characterization that that order is
an order in this case I apologize if I
said that I didn't mean to say that
that's what I was questioning I
apologize for Mr Sussman um I just
misheard you and didn't realize what you
were saying
so help we've taken care of the
admission
because I don't think it's been ruled
upon I mean so my question now is Mr
pounds is making an objection he needs
to identify which party he represents
I would agree with that okay basically
uh you know well the parties in this
case okay we're talking about this case
as opposed to you know any other case
the court case or anything like that is
the town of Chesapeake Beach because
that that is the party here uh which is
the part the other two parties in the
court case are not going to be part of
this case so as it applies to the town
of Chesapeake Beach that was not a party
to the court case therefore uh uh how is
any Court decision would have been on
those parties are different than
whatever they would be going on with
regard to anything on this matter okay
which is in essence on behalf of the
town so uh as a result the relevance on
behalf of the Town becomes it means that document becomes completely
irrelevant so I would object because the
town has a corporate body can't be a
party
to this case
the people that can be a party to this
case
are
the mayor
the Town Council
the Planning and Zoning administrator
and the planning on zoning Commission
I need to know
if Mr pounds is going to be here
representing somebody as an attorney
whether he represents any of those four
parties so that we know that whether
they are parties of record in this case
you know and then then okay and then the
council wants to keep you know going
back and forth here's the problem the
problem is is that exhibit two the
application Zuni board of appeals town
of Chesapeake Beach doesn't say anything
about any other parties or anything his
application that he filed that he
introduced says the town of Chesapeake
Beach not any other parties this is his
document his appeal so therefore uh you
know by his own document he wants to try
to switch it and turn it and change it
the problem is that he's the one that
presented the application he's the one
who filled it out he's the one who
presented this
he's stuck with his own document
so respectfully
I'm not trying to by introducing the
order change who the parties are the
parties right now
or the rod and reel because I understand
it as as an appellant
by introducing the order all I'm doing
is telling putting into evidence for you
what the court found with respect to the
procedures that are required in this
board of appeals hearing in this case
and the rationale for that that doesn't
change the parties
but for an attorney to represent someone
here and make objections they have to
say who they represent and it can't be a
corporate body as far as I know I've
never heard of the corporate body of
Chesapeake Beach being the party in a
board of appeals case in a zoning case
I mean perhaps they could but it I
that's when you you filed it okay
and that's what the document says you
filed it this is what it says and of
course the a corporation can have a
presentation through the attorney that's
what a corporation does I mean this is
this isn't anything new that you're this
is your uh this is your appeal you filed
it you're stuck with it I don't know
what you think I'm stuck with all I've
done is is gone to court to force the
board to hear this case
and one
and then we're holding the case
we're the party now
we're complaining about only the conduct
of the Planning and Zoning commission
and the zoning administrator
because we wouldn't be able to challenge
directly into the board of appeals
the conduct of the town or the Town
Council
but they are entitled to represent
themselves and join a zoning case
and in doing so it has nothing to do
with that order I'm not trying to make
that order change who the parties are
the parties right now are just the board
of appeals we're trying to find out
whether other parties are going to join
by Mr pounds representation
Mr bullets I think Mr pounds has made it
quite clear that he is representing the
corporate entity of the town of pet
Chesapeake Beach and that is the entity
uh
that can move forward and I would
determine that your
opinion in order are invisible
thank you
uh
next is a letter dated August 14th 2023
this is the last of what I would
describe as pro forma introductions
um August 14th 2023.
like the gallery please
um
feed that's required to have this appeal
just getting that into the record
that's why I call them pro forma these
first three are just kind of
need to be sure
so I'm going to begin
um testimony
um
with uh Mr Paul Woodburn um Paul would
you come up to the lectern to answer
these questions so that you can be heard
um
or anybody attending in the in speaking
from the audience Please be aware that
we're going to do a blanket swearing in
right now
um if you come and speak to the lectern
please uh note your name down on uh any sheet along with your name address
and uh who you represent or if you're
speaking on your own behalf obviously
witness
um so for the swearing in for anybody
stepping to lectern please know uh do
you solemnly swear or affirm under the
penalty of perjury that the testimony
you're about to give and the responses
and statements you're about to make
believe the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do
okay thank you
um
Mr Woodburn um
if Mr woodburns could be testifying he
has a document as we can proceed forward
but if he indeed is going to be
expressing an opinion such as an expert
witness obviously we're going to be you
know objecting to that as well as the
fact that I'm probably going to avoid
the error uh uh on his request to uh
issue any opinions
understand that that's fine if we get to
that but
[Music]
I get to put on his qualifications from
the start anyway before we get into that
objection I think Mr
um pounds is kind of
got a trigger finger on objections here
um Mr
um Woodburn um what's your profession
oh no can you actually say where you
live please
in your full name uh my name is Paul
Woodburn I'm a professional engineer I'm
with the offices of Atwell engineering
at 11721 Woodmore Road in Mitchellville
Maryland and are you licensed to
practice Engineering in Maryland I am
um have you submitted site plans to
municipalities before I have and in that
process do you put your seal on
documents uh as an engineer submitted to
the various local jurisdictions
um and
do you represent well no in January of
um 2021 did you represent the rod and
reel yes
and so you were acting as the agent for
the rod and reel yes
um and did you have uh occasion to file
five site plans with the uh town clerk
on January 29th 2021
I did
um and was that for the review of the
site Plans by the Planning and Zoning
Commission of Chesapeake Beach Maryland
yes uh in your experience uh were the
plans to be reviewed by the zoning
administrator of the Town who at the
time was Christopher Jakubiak
oh yeah I missed the question sure
um in your experience were the plans
also to be reviewed by the zoning
administrator of the Town who at the
time
this is January of 2021 at the time was
Christopher Jakubiak
what's the basis basis yeah well one of
these things is one is his experience I
don't know what his experiences or basis
for his experience but uh as I said if
this if it's just to your knowledge
that's fine and that's going to be a yes
or no question but if he's going to be
expressing an opinion here uh I just
want to let you know that
starting off that's where we're going
very quickly so if he if he says you're
based on your experience yes or no then
I'll withdraw the objection but we're
going to quickly hit that wall
that's what I said in your experience uh
I'll ask a preliminary question before
you get to that Mr Mr Woodburn have you
presented prior to filing the site plans
with the right
the rod and reel in on January 29th 2021
had you experienced had you um filed uh
other plans with the town of Chesapeake
Beach prior to that yes how many can you
guess
1000 okay so in your experience were the
plans to be reviewed also be reviewed by
the zoning administrator of the Town who
at the time was Christopher jukubiak all
experience yes
um so for the five site plans were each
of them to be considered category one
site plans I believe they're category
one site plans okay and why is that
uh because they're in critical area and
they include multi-family dwelling units
as the use correct correct
um
and can you describe the five Projects
please and and give them names so that
the
word he knows what those are
sure so uh
through the first three are and um we
call Harbor Vista there's Harbor Vista
North Harbor Vista South Harbor Vista
West
um and they're down next to kellum's
field just so you have an idea of the
general location
sure and Council I'm going to leave it
up to you as far as how far this but
obviously where are we going today is
this is going to be far uh different
from the ultimate questions that the
board is going to be looking to testify
to even in Mr blitz's opening statements
so the fact that there were five
projects if he wants to do a brief
summary of the five that's fine but you
need details we're going to be objecting
that also so I'm assuming this is going
to be just a summary of where we're
going with this it is going to be a
summary and I would ask that you'd not
make objections in the middle of his
testimony I'll do my case you do your
case okay
so three uh as I said are on we call
Harbor Vista
Northwest and South
um two are on Gordon Senate Avenue one's
on Old Bayside across from the library
um the fourth project is called stenets
place
um which is off of C Street the two open
grass lots I'm sure you all know where
that is
and the the last project is called Home
Place
um
it's on Cox Road
called what sir Home Place
on Cox Road
Mr Woodburn we're all five projects uh
located in the critical area
yes and
did you submit critical area site plans
along with the applications
um
we do okay
so at this time
I'm going to offer a copy of the
application
to
the Planning and Zoning Commission
and at least I'm gonna
help
but I don't have one
I would also uh like to submit my PDF
the entire site plans this is just the
applications
not going to be asking you really to at
this stage
review any of those details but you do
need to be in the record because those
are all the things
Mr Blitz are you asking they be
introduced collectively as exhibit six
if that's okay yes
for the purpose of
Mr chair and Council just to indicate
that there were projects and these are
the projects the note fashion
okay
Tom are you sure that that was six
it is okay
it's good
I'll call Mr Woodburn back up but I've
gotta a lot of the legal side of this to
go over first
I'm going to want to examine Mr Woodburn
is is he
you can't just set somebody down and
bring them back if it's Mr bird Barn I
wouldn't examine him now
um you know
I think that's appropriate yeah he can
cross-examine I'm going to bring him
back and he can cross-examine him again
after that so Mr Woodburn can you return
to the left turn please
okay I didn't know if he had something
else so Mr Weber you testified earlier
that uh indeed you were the one who
actually prepared the site plans the
five site plans that are being discussed
here
honor my direction correct so you didn't
actually do it it was under your
direction
well my office did them under my
direction it takes more than one person
to prepare these plans yes okay so uh
you're the one who signed it signed
these applications correct and you're
either you stamped them
the applications no plans yes okay who actually uh stamped the plans
uh I'd have to look at each one I know I
stand some I don't know if I stamped
everyone okay so basically you're
telling me that applications were filed
and you were unaware of it wasn't you
who actually uh uh either signed or
stamped them no I didn't say that I said
I don't know if I signed everyone but I
did oversee and
um
worked on each site plan
um and you know all the computations and
the applications that go with them okay
so basically uh this you testified this
was a category one multi-flame family
plans that included the critical area
right let me ask something Mr Woodburn
um did these have five applications go
before the Planning Commission uh with
regard to their review
ever or under this application during
the time that the Planning Commission
was reviewing the uh the comprehensive
plan that these five applications go
before the Planning Commission
I was not involved in any review of them
why not
ified so we have five applications your
testimony that were filed but none of
these applications went before the
Planning Commission for the review for
the comprehensive plan is that your
testimony a test I could read it in if
you'd like an email that I received from
the Planning and Zoning I want to know
what your knowledge is my knowledge if
I'm gonna read it I'll be happy to get
it do you have knowledge that indeed the
Planning Commission reviewed these five
applications
I do not have knowledge that they did or
did not review them can you tell me why
this these applications would not have
gone before the Planning Commission for
the review objection
look
the entire case is about the fact that
the Planning and Zoning commission and
the zoning administrator didn't review
the applications I didn't ask
Mr Woodburn about that so it's beyond
cross-exam the scope of
cross-examination to cross to expand Mr
uh Woodburn's testimony at this point
we're going to be going over in quite
detail why the Planning and Zoning
Commission in the zoning administrator
didn't review the site plans we don't
need Mr Woodburn for that well a couple
things first of all this obviously is
within the scope of his knowledge and
what he was testifying to as well as the
fact that the rules or procedure for the
board of appeals does call for broad uh evidence to be incorporated into the
record so you know under the board of
appeals own rules that have that would
be admitted
okay so uh basically there's a question
pending for you Mr Woodburn yeah no uh
no there's a question for the board I I
objected to the scope of the
cross-examination
I think the scope's appropriate broad
latitude is given in these
Administrative Hearings and if I think
it's going way too far I'll uh say
something about it okay so the last
question was Mr Woodburn why were these
applications not presented to by the uh
to the Planning Commission for their
review
I received after submitting the
applications and email from Christy
Kubiak
February 5th 2021 905 a.m and I'll read
it says hi Paul this is unprecedented
and imposed is a significant challenge
to the Planning Commission and the
town's planning zoning and project
review functions
no town could reasonably and reasonably
handle
or excuse me responsibly handle a load
of projects like this without
significant delays to or derailing
of its comprehensive Plan update and or
zoning review and update further these
projects if implemented have real
potential compound
to compound the challenges the planning
commissions work on planning and
ordinance drafting to seeking to address
is seeking to address today is the news
in the newspaper is legal notice of
public hearing to be conducted by the
Planning Commission on two 24-21 to
consider a resolution
recommending to the mayor and Town
Council that
they adopt an ordinance creating a
temporary moratorium on the processing
of major development projects which
would include these five plans please
contact Sharon hum at Town Hall if you
want a copy of the resolution Chris okay
so and obviously uh Mr pounds uh it's
not going to be made a part of the
record that email I was planning on it
but it's by cross-examining he's
jumbling up our case to in the timeline
so if you want it now we can do it but I
think it would be appropriate okay so I
haven't seen a copy of that
okay
everybody this is
the B exit seven
and that's the email of February 5th uh
2021.
[Music]
from Mr Jakubiak to
Paul Woodburn with a copy to me and
um another engineer working at Mr
Woodburn's office I believe
foreign
basically based upon that one email
about Mr uh Kubiak
um uh you're telling me that's what
caused these five projects not to be
sent to the Planning Commission
I can't make a judgment call not I don't
know well you're the one submitted his
email
I mean I'm I didn't never talk to Mr GK
after that you can take it for face
value you heard what I said okay so
basically uh who made the decision at
that point so you're telling me if
that's the whole email that made the
decision not to file any type of
applications with the Planning
Commission
just because of the way it was phrased
we filed all five site plans the result
of that was an email seven days later
that you just received into the record
on exhibit seven saying they weren't
going to be reviewed and that the
moratorium was going to be the one of
the two rationales for not reviewing it
Mr Woodburn can't testify as to why the
town did or didn't do something
he could you can ask him whether he
heard from him I know what to ask him
Council but so basically the question
comes into so in essence is that your
testimony that based upon that eggmail
that those projects were not sent before
the Planning Commission is that your
testimony
my testimony is that I know that those
site plans were not reviewed and the
reason that was given was emailed to me
on the date that I
let me ask you this is Mr Kubiak part of
the Planning Commission
hey no at that time
um
he's the zoning administrator I believe
so your testimony is that he was not
part of the actual Planning Commission
correct so you could have in essence
brought those applications to the
Planning Commission to be reviewed
objection we did it's one of the
exhibits the very uh first exhibit no
first exhibit was our appeal
um it's it's the exhibit that
the application which was filed with the
town that's the way you file for site
plans you don't file it but the first
person to review those is Mr
um jacobiak the zoning administrator and
then the Planning and Zoning commission
gets the file and holds a hearing
the refusal or the failure of them to
hold the hearing which they have never
done
is what's at stake in this case why are
you asking Mr
wood burn I generally don't get into
debates okay but but the reason I'm
objecting is I will answer that question
okay because he is the one who testified
he was acting as an agent for Rod and
Reel he's the one who filed the
applications so in essence he is the one
and even though he didn't sign off on
them he's the one whose office and he's
supervised and he was in charge of these
applications so in essence if he's the
one to charge the applications and why
didn't you take him for the Planning
Commission to be reviewed
the question is as simple as that or
does he know maybe doesn't know or or
anything but that's the question because
I can tell you that's going to be part
of my case and I'm setting this up for
later on if you can do what's happening
so so Mr boardburn
and that's that's the question is do you
have any knowledge as to why these five
applications were not presented to the
uh uh Planning Commission
let's let's move on
are there any further questions aside
from based upon his limited testimony of
what he's gone so far nothing more
obviously there will be more when he
comes we'll have another chance when he
adds uh substantial commentary yeah
thank you Mr Woodburn um
so the board's going to need to consider
the legal context of what is happening
in this case so I'll start with an
explanation of that
um
are you testifying no I'm giving them
I'm giving my presentation and my please
let me speak report Mr Blitz cannot give
you legal
that's Mr Sussman but as far as him you
know having legal opinions to the board
that's that's completely improper I'm
going to object right now to the entire
process of of interrupting our case at
every turn solely for the reason of
interruption what's happening
introduction that's not I am presenting
an argument can I please finish this
case
I get to make a presentation as I bring
in evidence I can explain the legal
context of what we our case is about to
make the legal argument so that you
understand the context of all the
evidence that will come in a big part of
this case is a legal argument
this is an appeal on alleged error so I
need to explain to you as a board and I
need to convince you if I'm going to be
successful of the merits of those things
we're going to be bringing a lot of
legal arguments because that's what
you're going to have to decide you're
going to have to decide whether the
Planning and Zoning commission and the
zoning administrators failure to process
site plans and the reasons for that were
in error that's the case so I'm going to
be talking a lot of Law and explaining
what our position on the law is I'm not
giving an opinion to you about the law
Mr Sussman can always weigh in if you
have questions about the law or
questions about what I say but I get to
present a case and it shouldn't be
interrupted at every turn when all I'm
doing is presenting
the basic case
oh you continue okay
first we start with you know the basic
property rights as it relates to zoning
power
um the default is that you own property
um
and if you own it fee simple and and
the owners get to decide uh free from
all interference uh on what is done with
that property including what is built
there that's the base
all limitations on that basic property
right are evaluated on whether they are
consistent with the law
such as zoning in this context
a zoning regulation does not direct a
property owner of what to build
uh or when to build it but provides the
youth limitations applicable to that
property as well as many other site plan
limitations on design orientation
mitigation that may be required Etc
that range of options
is limited by the zoning code
and
sometimes the subdivision regulations
um but the decision remains with the
property owner
that discretion that I'm describing is
important to remember because unless a
regulation on property development is
valid
and applied according to due process of
law
then the default is that the owner is
entitled to Bill
foreign
in the exhibit that I submitted uh for
the order of the circuit court for
Calvert County you can see on page 10
of exhibit three
um
the Court's point that the Supreme Court
of the United States has recognized in
multiple cases the high importance of
property rights
so there's a legal process associated
with zoning which must be clear and
constitutionally precise
it must not be impermissibly
overburdened the property interest and
it must be fairly and non-arbitrarily
applied to property owners
treating every property owner of a
similarly situated property interest
within the town zoning wall equally and
without bias or improper discrimination
a part of that due process is
if there are administrative procedures
that are set up to allow properties to
qualify under the zoning law
uh to develop their property
um you know it's a foundational concept
of zoning law in Maryland
throughout the country you know this is
traces back all the way to the Euclid
decision of the Supreme Court which you
know that's a century ago that
um established the constitutionality of
zoning that
both the substantive law and the process
for administering it must not be
arbitrary or unreasonable and there has
to be a constitutional due process in
the administration of all zoning laws
the importance of this point
is that when conducting the
administration of the zoning law the
Planning and Zoning commission and the
zoning administration's task is not to
legislate
or to create substantive policy on their
own but to administer the laws properly
passed by the Town Council
and with respect to property rights
existing at the time
I apologize with respect to the
properties existing at the time that the
applications are filed
um
those conducting the administrative
functions of the Town zoning laws in
site plan review
or reviewing the applications to
determine their consistency with
existing zoning laws
and while during site plan review the
Planning and Zoning commission has broad
broader discretion than the zoning
administrator uh to achieve uh more
abstract principles
um
determining whether the proposed site
plan complies with the zoning code that
applies at the time of the review
typically measured as of the time of the
application
this fundamental
principle of zoning law is made clear in
the very first sentence of the town code
section on site plan review
so in your binders on
um
the law I point out I provide you
section
290-23a of the Town zoning code I'm
going to read you the section
you know focusing your attention on
that's uh
293 23A
want site plans prepared and approved in
accordance with the provisions of this
article should be required to assist
Town administrative officials in the
review of applications
for building permits and assure
compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Charter
I bring all this up because the rod and
reel in initiating the site plan process
is legally required to do so for this
development
okay so I've described the basic
fundamental property rights and now
there's a process site plan review that
applies the zoning
to the to the site plan that's being
presented
now the Planning and Zoning commission
is responsible for reviewing and it's
exclusively responsible for reviewing
all category site one category one site
plans you've heard from Mr Woodburn that
they were all category one site plans
and that's in section 290 23 C3 and 4.
this is not a discretionary Authority
the commission must undertake a process
and approve or disapprove or approved
with conditions any site plan filed with
it
the commission can reject the site plan
only for non-compliance with then
existing zoning and or subdivision law
or other laws impacting the development
plan such as the county stormwater
regulations or is a common example
um
in addition because the rod and reel
properties are located in the critical
area which you've heard
the Planning and Zoning commission's
exclusive and mandatory review Authority
is repeated again in your town code in
section 290 25a2 and 2A
and that process is set forth in A5 and
I'll I'll read it to you
number five procedure for processing
upon receipt
of the site plan the Planning and Zoning
commission shell
conduct a review soliciting comments
from other technical agencies
departments agents agencies and
officials as the ploning and Zoning
commission may deem appropriate
subsection B
the site plan shall be approved if it
meets the requirements of this article
comma the other requirements of this
chapter and all other federal state and
town regulations and all necessary
permits and approvals have been obtained
C
the Planning and Zoning commission shall
approve conditionally approve or reject
a site plan within 60 days from the
filing of the application
notice of such actions shall be given in
writing to the applicant
as you may be able to tell I emphasized
the words shell those are all
in statutory language considered indicia
of a mandatory obligation it's saying in
the law
that the Town Council and mayor passed
to apply in the zoning code to the
properties filed by this rod and reel
this this is the site plan review for
critical area site plans and it must be
reviewed and
by either approving it conditionally
approving it or rejecting that site plan
within 60 days of the filing application
so that gives you the timeline where the
town code mandates that
it should be noted that
resolution is done in Chesapeake Beach
with a preliminary site plan approval
typically that includes conditions set
by the Planning and Zoning commission so
what they do is review it
first at a hearing have a preliminary
site plan
that's reviewed
then
conditions for the developer to meet
before you get back to the final site
plan review
um I've done lots of site plan reviews
with the Chesapeake Beach so I I know
how the process works I just want to
make sure you understand that how it
typically Works doesn't technically have
to
have both a preliminary and final but
that's almost always the way it is on
anything
substantive
um
I want to point out another important
code section that's relevant as we begin
this timeline sorry
um section
290-31e1 of your zoning code
provides another binding obligation of
the commission
it's grounded in law and not in a
discretionary power
and addresses the condition the
commission's meeting obligations with
respect to site plan admissions
I'll read it
the Planning Commission shall establish
a regular meeting schedule and shall
meet frequently enough so that it can
take action on all complete applications
in an expeditious manner
the Planning Commission shall hold
meetings quarterly or more often as the
planning commission's duties require
if there is no business before the
Planning Commission the chairman May
cancel the meeting
so not the meetings also have to be as a
mandatory process
be held and they have to be held
frequently enough so that they can take
action on to complete applications in an
expeditious manner so that's the
standard that the town code provides to
the Planning and Zoning commission when
they get site plan reviews and this
especially with critical area
now the zoning administrator also a
party that we allege error is required
under your code the town code
to assist in the in the administration
of site plan review and that's found in
subsection C2 of section 290-23 which
also uses the mandatory language the
shell language and says the
administrator shall review the
application for completeness and will
refer the application to the appropriate
individuals or agencies for review
comment or approval
note that for category one-site plans
like in the critical area that we have
in this case
um this would need to be done in time to
fit within the 60-day resolution
requirement
uh this obligation of the zoning
administrator is restated in the section
establishing the zoning administrator's
Authority as set forth in section
290-2615
typically uh the zip Tana zoning
administrator provides a staff report to
the commission which provides the
administrator's view of the proposed
development and its compliance with the
zoning ordinance subdivision regulations
or other related laws uh consistent with
his authority in 290-2613.
so to recap we've got a mandatory
obligation of the Planning and Zoning
commission to review category 1 site
plans hold a public hearing on them and
must provide a decision within 60 days
of the filing
mandatory obligation of the zoning
administrator to assist in that
pre-hearing review for category one site
plans and assist the Planning and Zoning
Commission
you've we already brought into the
record
I believe it's exhibit seven is it
Paul's letter seven the email that Mr
Woodburn received on February 5th seven
days after we file the site plans after he
filed the site plans for the rod and
reel
it's important to
understand the be that this is the
beginning of refusal to process the site
plans and he's telling you the two
reasons why
he believes those site plans shouldn't
be reviewed
if you want I can read it again to
emphasize it you've already got it in
the record but I don't want to
take more time but the point
is
that he makes two
reasons why site plan review shouldn't
proceed
one that it would compound the
challenges of the Planning and Zoning
commissions work
on planning
and ordinance drafting
um that they were doing with the
comprehensive plan
and then second that
a moratorium was going to be proposed
prior to this there was no moratorium
being discussed
at all
notice in this email that the zoning
administrator completely ignores the
60-day review requirement and the
obligation of the commission to hold
meetings
as often as necessary to get that work
done
so when he says that
one of the reasons for not reviewing the
site plans and not having the Planning
and Zoning commission review the site
plans is that it's too much work
I I cited you the section the section of
the town code says they shall meet must
meet as often as necessary to to do both
of their functions
to explain that
understand that the Planning and Zoning
commission has two different types of
functions they have the planning and
policy oriented function and that would
have been done for the comprehensive
plan
um and that's what Mr uh jacobiak was
referring to that they were working on a
comprehensive plan
that's a policy thing
they also are administrators
two different roles and they have to do
both of them under the law at the same
time and hold as many meetings as
necessary to do both of those functions
that administrative function is site
plan reviews like we filed for the rod
and reel but also subdivision plots get
reviewed if
the the
Town opens a new road they they do a
review they have a series of required
administrative tasks
under the town code that they must
complete
and a lot of those flow from Maryland
statutory law
[Music]
the I'm going to take take on the first
I'm going to divide the presentation now
between the two reasons why Mr Kubiak
was saying they weren't going to
do the site plan reviews
I mean we've been going on for some time
now and I've been letting him just kind
of go on with his presentation that's
fine but Mr jubiak has no Authority okay
so you keep speaking of talking about Mr
jubiakin is is his emails and so forth
he's got no Authority the Planning
Commission or or to the Town Council he
is someone who makes recommendations
that's it and so you know the idea that
somehow Mr Jupiter gets made final
decisions here
you've been we've been going on for some
time and obviously you know we've been
dancing around some of the key points of
the law so I'm going to be asked to have
just a few minutes when this ends
um uh but you know I just want to bring
up that point of saying at this point
I don't know what the relevance is what
Mr jubiak was doing but uh thank you I
noted uh with regards to Mr jacobiak and
we will give you some minutes to uh
respond in bulk later in the minute
please continue so
just to respond to that Mr jakku I just
read Mr jacobiak's Authority Under The
Zone obligation under the zoning code to
assist in site plan review that's what
he was doing when he sent his February
5th meeting I just read you the statute
that's what I'm referring to
so as I was saying I'm going to divide
up the rest of this dealing first with
the part that's associated with his
rationale for not proceeding with site
plan review
which was that there would be
that the commission it would be two
burdensome on the commission to do the
site plan reviews because they were also
doing the comprehensive plan
I've pointed out the statute that says
they have to do both at the same time
and do it as expeditiously with as many
meetings as necessary to do it
so what's particularly ridiculous about
this point in in the zoning
administrators argument in his email
is at this point in time
the town's comprehensive plan and the
implementing zoning ordinance was
already four years late
excuse me Mr pleasure are you going to
have a present evidence uh to uh
elucidate on these points that you're
making now or are you testifying uh I
will present well
number one you want to testify raise
your right hand and take the oath okay
or if you already took the other so we
can clear away I do include to include
any facts that I offer
that's fine
is that okay I mean you you're except
accepting that I mean we are moving
towards closing throughout a lot of what
he's talking about this is not testimony
does not you're Way Beyond where we
started with it's this is definitely
like a closing type argument but
um
this is you know where this is right now
not making a closing argument I'm making
the explanation of why we say that the
Planning and Zoning administrator and
the Planning and Zoning commission which
are the parties that we allege committed
error were wrongful in denying site plan
review so I get to go through all of the
reasons and the rationales and those
things that are related to that that
make their decisions completely unjust
with respect to the rod and reel
applications that were filed that's kind
of the raison Detra of this case so I'm
going to explain why first the first
argument of the zoning administrator in
his February 5th email
was so ridiculous
so remember that the applications were
filed on January 29th of 2021
that means the 60-day requirement
um to hold a hearing
on those site plans would put that date
on March 30th of 2021.
that hearing did not occur
at this point
the last comprehensive plan of the town
of Chesapeake Beach had been passed on
January 20th 2011. you can make take
judicial notice of that because it's the
official government thing it's on your
website that's actually where I get the
date we'll have other exhibits that
actually
um probably show that as well
um so it it's not a
issues so the point is that at that
point in time the last comprehensive
plan was January 20th of 2011.
now the legal obligation on the Planning
and Zoning commission is to propose a
new plan at least every six years under
the town law
that's found in section 290-31a1
and it reads
a purpose
the Planning Commission shall advise the
Town Council on all matters relating to
the orderly growth of the town of
Chesapeake Beach more specifically the
Planning Commission with the advice and
assistance of the Town staff and or
retained town planning experts shall
number one
prepare and recommend a comprehensive
plan for the town of Chesapeake Beach
and review and update said plan at least
once every six years
notice the mandatory language in that
section
this is not a discretionary Authority
the mayor and Town Council through a
legislative act adopted a zoning code
that uses the mandatory language shell
to establish that one of the legal
obligations of the Planning and Zoning
commission for Chesapeake Beach is to
prepare and recommend a new
comprehensive plan at least every six
years
now there is also a state mandate that
comprehensive plans be reviewed at least
every 10 years and that's found in
section 3-301 of the land use article of
the annotated code of Maryland and
that's in your white notebook
but that's at least every 10 years
municipalities are authorized to do it
as often as they want and this
municipality Chesapeake Beach
Road a law
it binds the Planning and Zoning
commission to do it every six years
the reason I bring that up is
the art the first argument of Mr
Jakubiak for not
preparing a site plan
was that the commission was working on a
comprehensive plan
and that's why I say
it's kind of ridiculous to say we we
don't have time to do your site plans
when they're six years late on doing
their current plan
sorry to interrupt you uh several times
you've mentioned a white notebook
did I not pass those out no I apologize
I did
foreign
[Music]
make one comment
okay
um you know we've been going on about
various things Mr chubiak did this Mr
trivia didn't do that uh I just want to
make sure that the the board understands
it's the Town Council that made the
decision okay the Town Council is the
one who passed a moratorium that told
him what he can and can do this has
nothing to do with Mr zubiak didn't
comply with dysregulation didn't comply
with that maybe the Town Council
everybody knows the Town Council runs
the town they make decisions on behalf
of the town they tell the people in the
town what they can and can't do so in
essence this this this tirade of going
on with Mr Kubiak didn't do this it
didn't comply with that doesn't make any
difference because the Town Council
passed a moratorium it was a legislative
function and they said this is what
you're going to do this is what you're
not going to do and I'm going to be
talking about that later but but I just
want to kind of it's one of the many
things we're going to be bringing up
thank you all right thank you continue
and kind of object to having our case
constantly that wasn't an objection it
was merely just an argument
under the board's rules we present our
entire case first
that's it our witnesses can be
cross-examined but I'm making the legal
arguments about why
the failure of the Planning and Zoning
commission to process site plans was
wrongful and I get to explain all of the
reasons and we're starting with the fact
that the zoning administrator who I've
demonstrated is legally obligated to
assist with site plan review with the
Planning and Zoning Commission
sent the letter and gave two rationales
why they weren't going to do it
and the first one is that they were too
busy because they were working on the
comprehensive plan and that these five
site plans would have
made that difficult or impossible you
didn't say that but he
you can read the letter I don't wanna
put Mr words in Mr jacobiak's um
I'll read the relevant section
um further these projects if implemented
have real potential to compound the
challenges of the planning commission's
work on planning and ordinance drafting
is seeking to address
wasn't
a complete sentence but
so
we're back to the idea of why that was
ridiculous first
they were he was pointing to the fact
that they were working on a
comprehensive plan and I'm pointing out
that they were legally already six years
behind
and I was talking about the state
deadline as well
but that state deadline also actually
has an important point
because even though the town law is
mandatory on the zoning administrator
and the Planning and Zoning commission
well I apologize on the Planning and
Zoning commission not the zoning
minister
um
you're going to hear
that the commission did not even meet
the state's 10-year deadline
the final resolution proposing the
updated comprehensive plan was adopted
by the Planning and Zoning Commission on
November 9th 2021.
okay and you can take judicial notes to
that given that the previous plan had
been adopted on January 20th January
20th of 2011 the commission was over 10
months late in meeting the state
deadline
this failure has important consequences
because both the state and town
deadlines are meaningful substantive
legal obligations of the Chesapeake
Beach Planning and Zoning Commission
property owners and citizens have the
right to rely upon those requirements
being met
and especially when their properties are
the ones being regulated by those zoning
laws
this is necessary to meet basic due
process
um in the application of the regulations
to property owners
these obligations are enforceable
because Maryland's adoption of what is
known as smart growth which includes as
one of the of its many state mandates
the obligation of the Planning and
Zoning commission and the Town Council
to adopt and apply what are known as the
smart growth visions
in their comprehensive plans
including any updates to the plan
to understand why these deadlines are
not merely aspirational goals under
state law but meaningful deadlines with
consequence
the board should consider section 3-304
of the land use article of the annotated
code of Maryland
that section requires inclusion of the
required plan elements in subtitle one
I'm not going to review
all the details of what those are but
their divisions
it's not really relevant to my point
um in accordance with the review
schedule in section
3-303 of the land use article
that imposes a deadline
which we just covered the required plan
elements have been added to over the
years they started off I believe at 12
and up to 17 or 18 of them now
um but notice that under subsection B
the local jurisdiction can request but
must establish good cause
May request a six-month extension of
that deadline
and they do that request to the Maryland
office of planning
the commission could have made up to two
extension requests but they did not make
any requests nor did the department of
planning Grant such an extension to the
Chesapeake Beach
planning a zoning commission
um
thank you
apologies Mr Bliss please continue
okay thanks
so since the plant the previous plan had
been adopted in 2011 January 20th I
believe the date was
um the new plan was required by Town law
on January 20th of 2017.
therefore at the time the rod and reel
had filed the five site plans and the
zoning administrator was taking the
position that the commission did not
have time to review its applications
because it needed to work on finishing
an update to the comprehensive plan that
plan was already four years overdue
the commission didn't really begin
discussing work on the comprehensive
plan until 2018 after the deadline
a year after the date
when Mr Foltz was appointed chair of the
to replace Miss riser in February of
2018.
in the February 15 2018 minutes of the
Town Council for the report to the
planning zone of the Planning and Zoning
Commission
councilman Jaworski reported the
commission held a meeting on February 14
2018.
and that it discussed the upcoming
conference a plan update with the hope
that it would be completed in one year
so he's saying that in 2018.
the town does not have the commission's
meeting minutes for that February 14
meeting up on its website
um
so I will submit the February 5th 2000
2018 Town Council minutes relevant to Mr
Jaworski's comment
and obviously most of the time
I'm just submitting the minutes for
these bodies not all of the attachments
that are on the files on the website
because those aren't actually
technically so I believe we're on
exhibit eight then
which would be
thank you
just as a note we are coming short on
time so if there's a natural break in
your presentation please plan for it now
so then I'm going to move forward with
the next exhibit which are the minutes
of the Planning and Zoning Commission of
May 9 2018.
hand her up for a moment
these exhibits in our binder yes
what was the date of that Mr Blitz
May 19 2018.
so uh
using that exhibit the Planning and
Zoning commission according to the
Planning and Zoning commission itself
they did not begin the process of
updating the comprehensive plan until it
held workshops on September 12th and
18th of 2018. I actually attended one of
those
um that's in the fifth whereas Clause of
the uh moratorium resolution that we're
going to get to
um
but this shows that they did begin
addressing the conference plan as an
agenda item in May of 2018
and the zoning administrator then
provided a presentation on economic
development and land uh availability and
walkability
so that's when they're starting a year
after the commission was due the the
comprehensive win was due that's true
I'm going to judge I don't seem to have
any any minutes from either 2018 or 19.
oldest one I got is 2020 in my book I
don't know if you guys have a different
book but somehow it's not in there
I'm sorry mine's in there oh yours in
there okay yeah it's a good bit in but
a few pages after exhibit seven if you
had that okay I'll look again thank you
next I'm going to submit
all as one exhibit a series of minutes
of the Planning and Zoning commission
that go from June 20th of 2018
to January 27th of 2021. what was the
first date uh June 20th 2018.
foreign
January 27th of 21 which is
chosen because that was the period
between when they started the work on
the comprehensive plan and when we filed
our cycling application
[Music]
the point
that I want to demonstrate with those
minutes is that during this period
the commercial worked on many different
administrative reviews including site
plan reviews while at the same time
often in the same meeting
working on the comprehensive plan
remember that's their legal obligation
to do but it was one of the reasons why
Mr Jakubiak was saying there would not
be any site plan review
while the commission didn't meet every
month typically they missed about three
months a year
um they also had a few extra work
sessions so they were keeping a pretty
regular schedule
like the point of this exhibit is to
show that
by doing both of their tasks from 2018
to 2020
that included some major site plan
reviews including one for the rod and
reel and one for Beach Elementary those
are all in the minutes package that I
just gave you
so in that minutes package you know in
May of 2018 the commission gets started
and puts comprehensive plan as a regular
agenda item
in June and July of 2018 the commission
considered Harbor Vista South Extension
requests and works on the comprehensive
plan
in November of 2018 they did a
reapproval of the site plan for a
portion of Richfield station and also
work on the comprehensive plan
February 2019 they did a sign review
issue in Richfield station and work on
the comprehensive plan so there's I'm
making the point they're doing both
their administrative tasks and their
planning tasks at the same time
May of 2019 there was a big issue
associated with a street opening
at the 18th Street entrance so they
handled that
they did the same in June of 2019
apparently that was a big issue
in December of 2019 the commission
worked on a revision of the site plan
for Richfield station and a review and
approval of this Subdivision plat in the
middle subdivision
in that package you might want to take
note of the June 2020 meeting because at
that time the commission was setting
timeline goals for finishing their work
on the comprehensive plan
with a projection that they would
finally complete the plan in May or June
of 2021.
so as I mentioned they handled Beach
Elementary that was in August 2020 and
in the same meeting they had they did
work on the comprehensive plan
November 2020 again Beach Elementary for
their final Flight Plan and the
comprehensive plan in the same meeting
in December of 2020 the commission
worked on the revisions of the rod and
real Redevelopment site plan and
comprehensive plan in the same meeting
this takes us up to the time when the
commission acted on the request for a
moratorium suggested in Mr jakubiak's
email of February 5th 2021.
so you cautioned me about time I don't
know whether you want to stop now the
next segment would take
15 to 20 minutes so this is a good time
to
um
return this session and reopen at a
later date
um
I did tell Mr pounds you could have a
few minutes if there's anything you
would like to address now or if you'd
like to hold till next time briefly if
you please very very very briefly like
if like three three minute briefly I'll
take the three minutes okay uh basically
you know it's interesting and obviously
Mr Blitzen going on for some time now
and so now he's talking about other
projects uh you know with regard to this
I mean like I said before you know this
is you know and I'm going to be bringing
this up just a little bit kind of a
heads up here you know if indeed Mr
jubiak was making the comments that
that's not going to be reviewed you go
before you know as a developer you know
the applicant here isn't somebody who's
brand new at this uh I mean he's been a
round he should have definitely gone to
the Planning Commission so I've got
these projects you know started
reviewing them right away nobody did it
okay nobody in fact uh Mr Woodbury you
know even admitted that he never you
know had you know with regard to these
projects somehow they want to wait until
afterwards uh to ask you somehow use the
law that indeed has been changed there's
going to be no doubt that the Town
Council has the right to change the law
they can make those decisions that's
part of what the County Council does
that's part of what the uh uh uh you
know their obligation isn't the zoning
code also what's going to be interesting
and we're going to be bringing this up
too you know again I'm going to keep my
three minutes these projects aren't
something that just came out of the
woodwork now these Prime projects have
been going on for the last 10 years or
so and uh you know many many years and
you know Council you know went on and on
about well the planning process was
delayed everything was delayed well if
these things have been going on for the
last years and he was aware of it the
delay would have helped them to use the
Old Law you know why are they waiting
till the comprehensive process starts to
suddenly file these applications to
another move forward so you know you
know since those those were important
too and also you know uh again I'm gonna
keep my three minutes it it says that
the Beach Elementary project was being
reviewed well you know an elementary
school is different than a category one
development which is going to include
both development for residential as well
as areas that's going to be you know
critical area so the idea that you're
going to compare that to helping out
kids and making sure their project gets
built seems to be kind of disingenuous
but uh we look forward to the new data
we will continue on thank you I need to
reply to some of that on the record so
firstly briefly
we don't go to a Planning and Zoning
commission until they schedule a meeting
that's the way the law works we file
applications typically the zoning
administrator gives us comments and we
work with the zoning administrator to
get it ready before the Planning and
Zoning commission Planning and Zoning
commission sets the schedule and the
hearing just like you did for this
hearing we don't have we don't go to any
meeting and say oh we're here to present
our case they schedule us
they never did
second
made reference to Beach Elementary it
literally is a category one site plan
thank you
um at this point I'm going to make a
motion for the board
um to pause where we're at to resume on
October 30th
7 pm
do I have a second
thank you
so this meeting I guess is in recess
um and I would advise Council to think
on ways
um we are not we are acting as a
legislative body but obviously no one
other than Town Council has legal
experience I'd advise you to take that
into account uh in terms of how you
address the board and how you come to
this meeting
um
thank you
[Music]
I was worried I'm like oh my God
you know I'm going home
you need those separators
so