|
Myers’ Annexation Only Contender, For Now
Ingrid Mezo
Two of the three proposed annexations to the Town of Thurmont stand no chance of receiving a favorable vote any time soon from the town’s board of commissioners.
The Drees annexation request has been tabled until the town can fulfill its Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) consent agreement. That means the request can
come up again later.
The Lawyer’s recent proposal to the town attempted to evade the town’s adequate public facilities ordinance (APFO), and also conflicts with the town’s consent
agreement.
To make the town’s obligation with the MDE to fix its sewer problems before allowing anyone to tap into its sewer system even more clear, Mayor Martin Burns
recently asked town officials to adopt a moratorium on development until the town’s sewer system is capable of handling more homes.
The Myers’ proposal is the only one that does not fall under the town’s MDE consent agreement, and is not affected by the moratorium because developer Tom Hudson
proposed building a separate sewer plant there to serve that development, if allowed to annex. A separate sewer treatment plant at the Myers’ development sidesteps the town’s sewer
problems.
Burns has asked all town residents to provide the board with their feelings regarding the Myers’ annexation by responding to an unofficial poll. A memo prior to
boxes requesting residents check "yes," "no," or "indifferent" to the Myers’ annexation provides pros and cons for the annexation, explains how tax rates will go up if the town does
not allow any further development, and attempts to inform residents about why the decision is a complicated one for board members to make.
The poll has been sent out to residents in their electric bills, and has also been sent separately to residents who are not part of the town’s electric service,
Burns said.
"I did Myers’ solely because they’re the only ones with a draft annexation agreement," Burns said. "Lawyers didn’t proffer anything. The two remaining proposals,
they don’t even play, and they don’t play because they connect to our sewer treatment plant, and with an MDE consent agreement no public official could possibly even think [to allow
them to annex], and even if they come forward with proposals, I can’t assure them they can go forward without [the sewer problems being resolved.] They’re not going to forward fund
the town millions of dollars to fix the town’s sewer problems, and I’m not going to approve them for development until I can determine how much money will be required to fix the
problem. I have to have assurances that that money applied to the sewer system will actually fix it."
The second sticking point to the Drees and Lawyer’s proposals is that the number of homes they requested to build each year "would never be accepted by my
residents," Burns added.
"The board already voted we would not wave any provision of the APFO," he continued.
But, the Myers’ proposal is also the one that the Catoctin Area Planning and Preservation Association (CAPPA) has come out most strongly against, though they also
came out against the Drees and Lawyer’s annexation proposals in their position paper available at www.cappaweb.org.
CAPPA has expressed concerns that all three developments could potentially overcrowd schools and increase traffic volume on roads that may not be equipped to handle
it. They also questioned whether the town’s water table could handle so many more users.
Many county residents who live near the Myers’ Farm have come before the board to express their disapproval of the annexation due to the land’s scenic view. They
also stated a desire for the town to focus on tourism potential instead, which they said would be diminished if the area is developed.
Commissioner Ron Terpko during a recent town meeting offered county residents a solution for how they could keep their scenic views.
"I think 35 homes a year is low growth," Terpko said. "I’m not really sure that people realize what the outcome of no growth will be. You know what, if you don’t
want growth, buy the property."
Residents Take Poll Seriously
By Tuesday evening, 1,133 Thurmont town residents had responded to the poll, Burns said. But, Burns said he would not release the results until more votes come in,
or say which way the results are leaning to avoid influencing the outcome of future votes.
"It’s safe to say though, that the residents have clearly stated an opinion," Burns said.
The poll results are leaning one way, rather than the other, and there are very few indifferent responses so far, and those responses would not affect the outcome
anyway when applied to either yes or no, Burns said.
"I’m extremely pleased with the response to date, but I still want everyone to send the poll form back," Burns said. "I still need a lot of poll forms returned."
Residents have until 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 30, 2006 to turn in their survey to the town office.
Burns added that he had changed his mind about releasing the poll at a planning and zoning meeting. Instead, the results will be released during a town meeting.
"Other board member said it should not affect Planning and Zoning," Burns said. "Their issues are houses per year, and consistency with the master plan…The poll is
for the Board of Commissioners."
 |
