[RP TownTalk] Synapses

[Jonathan Ebbeler]

Hi Stan -

Please quote me correctly vs. parsing a statement.  My exact statement was " Fact is if this was any other property on the entire route 1 corridor, it would have been rejected at a staff level due to county-prescribed prohibited materials."  And that was and still remains a factually accurate and true statement.  

Crescent Cities is in R-55 (Residential Zoning), not commercial zoning and any alterations or changes require a Special Permit.  The totality of commercial properties in Riverdale Park are zoned appropriately to Mixed-Use-Town Center commercial (not residential) zoning.  This application if it were any other commercial property in RP on the entire Route 1 Corridor would not require such Special Permit with the County but a normal building permit subject to the commercial zoning conditions for fences.  On Page 35, Standard 3 of Fencing, Screening, and Buffering of the Riverdale Park MUTC development plan, the following language dictates compliance with Subtitle 27 of County Code:  "Chain link fence, razor wire, and barbed wire are inappropriate in a town center and shall not be used for fencing, screening, or security, except where chain link is used to surround athletic courts."  There is even a picture of appropriate screening of mechanical equipment that looks substantially similar to what Crescent Cities ended up building.  Horary for compatible compliance.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i8u72s3hp6exfqn/G-RiverdalePlan-Design%20Standards.pdf


The basic facts are as follows as have been stated repeatedly:
*The application was for a commercial property in residential zoning requiring Special Permit to every alteration, the use and existing building are grandfathered non-conforming; any proposed changes are not grandfathered and subject to whatever conditions County or municipalities place on the application
*Given the non-conforming nature of the building, changes and permits fall into a grey area in code of what standard should be applied (commercial vs. residential) - obviously it is a commercial building but it is still zoned residential
*Every other commercial property in RP in the Route 1 Corridor prohibits what was proposed
*If the argument is to be made that the existing commercial standards should not be applied and compatibility should be ignored then the town applies the residential standards.  Section 66-1 (b) requires a Special Exception be granted by the Council
*Even Residential Special Exceptions have codified guidance towards approvals using "ornamental iron fence or such that it would enhance the beauty of the property" and "having a more finished face on one side be so erected that the more finished face is outward"
*The vote was unanimous against what was proposed, I get one vote
*Any condition could have been appealed to the Planning Board - the client declined to demur and built as conditioned


The ERCO construction fence was ever put towards RP to approve or disapprove - it would require a permit before a municipality had any jurisdiction.  

A business directory is currently being put together by the town as part of the requirements to obtain certification for state-funded grants  This effort was coordinated by the town with the Riverdale Park Business Association.  Council passed a new business license ordinance that went into effect recently.  As part of this effort, there has been policy guidance to audit and bring non-compliant companies into compliance.  A quick web search of your address arrives at many listings having Rapid Permit Services located on Oglethorpe:

http://www.alocations.com/MD/Riverdale/Rapid-Permit-Service-113227.html
http://www.manta.com/mb_55_A62E57N2_8V6/construction_management/riverdale_md
http://www.theusaexplorer.com/Maryland/Riverdale.html

At some point in time, the company had to be tied to your residential address otherwise these listings would not exist.  Clearly, the fact that RPS is incorporated elsewhere negates any potential code infraction.    I too have over the years received code violation notifications including one 4 hours after my house fire with the structure still smoking due to debris in the yard.  I fully understand and empathize with your frustration of receiving a notice in apparent error.  I too complained to the mayor and my CM at the time when I received notices that I felt were in error.

Please feel free to challenge me at will - just be prepared for the debate.  I may disagree with your interpretation of the facts but this does not mean I have any ill will or malice towards you personally - I might even like you :).  I enjoy the opportunity to learn and these exchanges are all part of our democratic traditions.

Best,

Jonathan