COMMUNITY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES
This page of our web site contains the testimony of 30 individuals that opposed the Howard County 2003 Comprehensive Rezoning Process Request #29.25 submitted by Reuwer Enterprises to rezone residential properties on Route 108. The first two papers set the tone of our opposition as presented at the March 10, 2003 DPZ hearings. The remaining 28 papers are from individuals and organizations that joined in our opposition.
Beaverbrook Community Association, Inc.
Columbia, Maryland
Department of Planning
& Zoning
3430 Court House Drive
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Reference:
Reuwer Enterprises
Conversion Request
10425-10435 Route 108
Amendment No. 29.25
This letter is intended
to provide expanded details to the Howard County Comprehensive Zoning Board
Hearings held on 10 and 12 March 2003.
Mr. Reuwer is currently converting the Crown Pub at 10435 Rt. 108 into the Iron Bridge Wine Company that is expected to open some time in April 2003. This conversion is allowable because the property is currently zoned residential with a special exception for the "non conforming use"; i.e., the bar was in operation during the years when Howard County Zoning was practically nonexistent. The café will initially hold 44 patrons. In the summer he plans to expand the seating to 88 with the addition of outside patio dining and perhaps an outdoor grill. Future plans call for the addition of some 1000 sq. ft. of dining area and perhaps a four seasons pavilion. For now, the existing facility will offer wines by the bottle or glass, imported beers, and rare scotches & aperitifs. . There will be planned events like structured wine tastings and lectures. The café will also be serving gourmet coffee starting at 6:30 AM along with pastries. These offerings will be available through a drive-up window. The managers want people to stop on the way to work and on their way home. All items will be available for retail sales to take home. The Iron Bridge plans to open seven days a week starting at 6:30 AM till midnight serving breakfast, lunch, dinner, and deserts and dessert wines for those that may stop in later.
The adjacent Rt. 10425 Allen property is also included in this request. This property is currently zoned R-20 and contains several rental properties. Reuwer believes the site would be better utilized as an Office Townhouse project similar in mass and architectural to his Simpsonville Mill Project. A Washington Post article on 24 February 2003 stated that the office vacancy rate in Howard County is among the highest in the state at 18.2%. This includes sublease space, with 1.9 million square feet available in the Columbia/Ellicott City Market. Liberty Place at Columbia Crossing has had vacant space since it opened in 2001. The Reuwer amendment request indicated his proposed townhouse office complex would provide 32,000 sq. ft. of office space and the bar/restaurant area would be 3500 sq. ft. in size. These combined properties would also include parking for 138 vehicles.
The quality of
life in our residential community will be reduced if the property is converted
to business activities.
Reuwer’s very intensive business plans are not compatible with the neighboring residential and farmland properties. Inadequate buffer space will exist between the proposed business activities and nearby residential homes. Commercial establishments will reduce the value of residential properties in the general areas.
Noise generated by the operation of the bar will be present throughout the year but especially when warmer weather allows for outdoor drinking. Alcoholic beverages increase the noise generated by individuals and group events. Traffic noise caused by car doors, motors, alarms, and horns will be significantly increased. This noise will be most annoying to the 12 homes closest to the bar. These noise levels tend to be most irritating on warm evenings when windows are open during the times for sleeping or when home back yard activities are to be enjoyed. Remember, this bar is expected to be open for business from 6:30 AM till 12 midnight seven days a week.
Lighting can spill over into the residential areas if not properly designed.
Police calls for service over the past few years for drunk and disorderly bar patrons will increase depending on the amount of and type of business that will be realized. There have been more service calls centered at the bar during the last 3 years than all of the homes combined within a 3 mile radius from the bar. Parking lot accidents, and crime will also be contributing factors to increasing police presence in the area.
There is a strong possibility that business activities may not develop as expected and the bar could be sold and converted to a very undesirable establishment.
Traffic Issues
These properties are located on Rt. 108 midway between the intersections of Beaverbrook Road/Centennial Lane and Eliot’s Oak Road. The following conditions exist between these two intersections.
Traffic on Rt. 108 has reached the saturation point especially during the morning and evening rush hours.
All left turns onto and off of Rt. 108 are dangerous. These turns often cause traffic back-ups in both directions.
Local residents living on Rt. 108 are having difficulty entering and leaving their driveways
The traffic back-ups caused by the traffic light at Beaverbrook Road have necessitated the installation of flashing warning lights near the bar to warn eastbound motorists of a possible backup of traffic at the Beaverbrook intersection. .
Increasing traffic at the intersection of Eliot’s Oak Road into Longfellow may soon reach the point where new traffic lights will be needed at that location causing additional back ups.
The Clark Petting Farm and Produce Stand directly across from the Crown Pub has slowed traffic in the area. Many school buss groups visit the petting farm. Ingress and egress traffic is handled by widely separated one way roads. This solution is not feasible for the bar proposal due to the limited Rt. 108 front footage of the bar property.
Traffic will increase when the proposed soccer fields on Centennial Lane become operational.
Horizontal and vertical sight distance conditions are a major safety problem in this section of the roadway. Elimination of this problem requires a major realignment of 108 for 0.2 miles on both sides of Beaverbrook Road. This problem and solution were documented in a State Highway study published in 1976.
The hope for improvements along this portion of the highway ended after the 1978 study. Complaints about traffic safety by the Beaverbrook Association over the past 3 years resulted in Howard County recently asking the State Highway Administration to study the problem once again but as the last priority on a list of 10 other state highway traffic problems in Howard County. There are no plans underway to make any major improvements to Rt. 108 in the foreseeable future.
Due to the negative impact on the quality of life of Beaverbrook residents and the current traffic conditions in our area, commercial activities should not be allowed on Rt. 108 between Beaverbrook Road and Eliot’s Oak Road.
George Paytas
Beaverbrook Community Association
5205 Lynngate Court.
************************************************************************
Department of Planning
& Zoning
3430 Court House Drive
Reference:
Reuwer Enterprises
Conversion Request
10425-10435 Route 108
Amendment No. 29.25
This letter is intended
to provide expanded details to the Howard County Comprehensive Zoning Board
Hearings held on 10 and 12 March 2003.
Mr. Reuwer of Reuwer's Enterprise is converting the present Crown's Pub at 10435 on Rt. 108 into the Iron Bridge Wine Company and is expecting to open by 1 April 2003. This conversion is allowable because the property is currently zoned residential with a special exception for the "non conforming use"; i.e., the bar was in operation during the years when Howard County Zoning was practically nonexistent. The cafe' will initially accommodate 44 patrons. If approved, he plans on expanding the seating to 88 with the addition of an outside patio and grill. Further plans call for the addition of some 1,000 sq. ft. of dining area and perhaps a four season Pavilion. For now the existing facility will offer 250 wines by the glass on a rotational basis. If you like the taste you can purchase a bottle and take it home. The cafe also plans to serve gourmet coffee starting at 6:30 AM along with pastries. These services will be available through a drive-up window. They plan to be open from 6:30 AM to 12 midnight 7 days a week. Naturally all of these planned additions must first be approved. The quality of life in our residential neighborhood will be significantly reduced if the business is permitted to expand as is planned. The proposed changes will produce a commercial atmosphere that is not compatible with the residential and farmland properties. Recognize that there is not one single commercially zoned parcel within a large radius of the present bar. Granting the rezoning would provide a foot hold in an area that has no need for commercial enterprise and where the majority of the neighbors are strongly opposed to such a change. The bar is surrounded by all residential properties. From Ten Mills road to Eliot's Oak Road on 108 there isn't a single commercially zoned parcel. Few if any want a commercially zoned enterprise in their backyard and this is what will happen to numerous properties that abut the bar property, including my own.
Noise will undoubtedly become a major problem. Remember this establishment plans on operating from 6:30 AM straight through till midnight 7 days a week. Mr. Reuwer stated that his establishment will "change the clientele that will patronize his business. When clientele of most any category consume alcohol the noise will correspondingly increase as will disorderly conduct. Mr. Reuwer’s desire to change the clientele will not necessarily reduce noise or unruly conduct. As a matter of fact we can expect a considerable increase in both as compared to the previous establishment, the Crown's Pub During a busy night at the Crown's pub one might find 10 to 15 patrons Couple the noise generated by individuals and parties at some events with the traffic noise that will be generated by car doors closing, motors running, horns, car alarms, and you have created an atmosphere that can only have a detrimental impact on the entire surrounding area. This problem will be most annoying to the 12 homes closest to the bar and unquestionably more considering the outdoor business being planned. This new cafe will literally be in my back yard . Our properties are directly connected. Higher noise levels tend to be more irritating on warm evenings when people are sitting outside in their yards and when their windows are open during the hours for sleeping. Again 6:30 AM till midnight 7 days a week will unquestionably cause many problems. Many people are in bed by 10:00 PM particularly the elderly and children. The environment that will be established will undoubtedly increase calls to the police because of noise, disorderly conduct, parking lot accidents, accidents caused when exiting the premises and the potential for an increase in crime. There is a strong possibility that this business may not develop as expected and the bar could be sold and converted to a far less desirable establishment.
We then have 10425 Route 108 that has also requested rezoning under the Comprehensive Rezoning Plan. They have not yet made public their reasons for requesting the change therefore it is difficult to address this issue. However what is known is that Mr. Reuwer in conjunction with the owners of 10425 Route 108 a Mr. Allen have devised a plan where they would call for the removal of the apartments on that property and replace them with a 32,000 sq. ft. office complex. Mr. Reuwer stated that he would not pursue development of the office complex however; a Mr. Allen who owns the property at 10425 has submitted papers requesting a zoning change. So what will stop him from proceeding with plans for an office complex? The bar was to be integrated into the office complex and parking was to be provided for 138 vehicles. This we find to be totally out of place in that environment. At a meeting on Feb. 25,2003 at 7:00pm in Mr. Reuwer"’ office in Ellicott City this plan was presented to a group from our neighborhood. He stated that he would not peruse the matter if the people present did not agree. It became very evident that no one at the meeting approved of such a plan so Mr. Reuwer stated he would join forces with the Allen family to build the complex. All this would have accomplished would be the displacement of four or five families from their affordable apartments. Something that we need more of in this county. If Reuwer has indeed canceled his plans for the office complex, what will he do after you grant him a zone change from residential to commercial? This process is paramount to giving developers a signed blank check! In order for either of these properties, 10425 and/or 10435 to proceed with their plans they will, in all probability, require city water and sewage. Mr. Reuwer had hoped he could receive "right of way" from one of a number of Beaverbrook home owners. No one has agreed to grant his request so that necessitates him having to run lines from the entrance of Beaverbrook along 108, approximately 0.2 miles to his property. This will create havoc at one of the busiest intersections along Rt. 108. A by-pass lane will probably be required. This construction can only increase traffic back-ups, increase accidents and be costly.
Now on to the problem that in it's self should rule out the rezoning of either of these properties--traffic. The bar is located on Rt.108 between the intersection of Beaverbrook road/Centennial Lane and Eliot's Oak Road. The traffic on Rt.108 has increased dramatically over the years and has reached a saturation point especially during morning and evening rush hours. The time that encompasses the rush hours has also increased significantly. All left hand turns onto Route 108 have become increasingly more dangerous. Residents living on the south side of Route 108 find it near impossible to make a left turn during rush hours. Many choose to make a right turn then turn into Beaverbrook, make a U turn and exit left at the light to head west. At times east bound traffic is backed up from the light at Centennial half way to Eliot’s Oak Road. The traffic backup is caused by the light at Centennial that has already necessitated the installation of flashing warning lights near the bar to warn east bound motorists of a possible backup of traffic at the Centennial intersection. I believe the records will show that to be a high accident rate area. The Clark Petting Farm and produce stand are directly opposite the bar and this has further added to the traffic problem. You have many school busses entering the farm along with many private vehicles. There are no acceleration or deceleration lanes to these facilities. Ingress and egress traffic is handled by widely separated one way roads. This type solution is not feasible for the bar due to the size of the property and the physical location of the bar. Due to the traffic situation alone this area should not be zoned to allow any commercial activities between these 2 intersections in the foreseeable future. The hope for improvements along this portion of the highway ended after the 1978 study. Horizontal and vertical sight distance conditions are a major safety problem in this section of the roadway. Elimination of this problem requires a major realignment for 0.2 miles on both sides of Centennial Lane. The bar is approximately 0.2 miles west of Centennial Lane. This problem and solution were included in a State Highway study published in 1976. Complaints about traffic safety by the Beaverbrook Assn. over the past 3 years resulted in Howard County asking the State Highway Commission to study the problem once again but as the last priority on a list of 10 other problems in Howard County. In reality there are no plans underway to make any major improvements to Route 108.
The development in Howard County is proceeding at a rapid rate and unfortunately in some areas in a seemingly uncoordinated manner. One just has to look at Clarksville. Its a zoning disaster. Used car lots, new car dealers, 3 gas stations within a stones throw of each other and a 4th in the planning. There are 5 uncoordinated traffic lights within a quarter mile stretch. Developers claim this is all to benefit the community. I don't think there is any question as to who the real benefactors are. I'm sure that the whole mess was started with a couple of zoning changes. Could this happen to the area around the bar? That first zoning change opens the door to further commercial development and once developers get a foot in the door there influence and capable lawyers do the rest.
We are thankful and grateful to former Senator Clark for his proven interest in the quality of life for those in his neighborhood. His farm will remain as such and his addition of the petting zoo will benefit our children. We cannot and we must not allow our lovely neighborhood to be tarnished by the so called "neighborhood improvement" developers . We believe we have presented strong evidence to support our position and hopefully this group will help us to preserve our neighborhood.
Anthony Scarpone
10493 Rt. 108
************************************************************************
From: DEBRA BARLLY
Subject: zoning request #29.25
My family currently resides in the Beaverbrook Community and we support the other Beaverbrook residents that are against the Route 108 bar and expansion that has been proposed. We feel that by going forth with this bar and expansion it will in turn result in many negative outcomes and following are just to name a few that are important to us.
First Route 108 already has a large amount of traffic at all hours of the day. Adding more traffic to and from this bar will only add to the increased traffic congestion on this curving 2 lane route. Increased traffic congestion combined with alcohol consumption results in increased traffic fatalities and other life threatening injuries.
There are several school buses that use the Route 108 to transport our children to and from school during the hours this bar has proposed they will be open for business. The buses full of unseatbelted children will also be passing this bar and will have the increased risk of perhaps being involved with a patron leaving or entering this bar parking area.
Our neighborhood prides itself on being a quiet family oriented neighborhood and that is one of many reasons people are looking to buy a home in Beaverbrook. By allowing this bar and expansion of the outdoor eating/drinking area will lead to increase noise levels for the homes and their residents that back up to the bar. Upon speaking with the neighbors in Beaverbrook one of the things residents bring up over and over again is the importance of raising their kids in a "good old fashioned neighborhood" by allowing this bar and expansion will take away the innocence and charm of Beaverbrook and will in turn lower real estate values.
Sincerely,
Randy and Debbie Barlly
************************************************************************
As a resident of Longfellow in Columbia, I am very much opposed to any zoning actions that would permit the construction of an office building along Rt. 108 near Centennial Lane. Please register my objection to project #29.25.
Susan Bartnick
5175 Endymion Lane
Columbia, MD 21044
From: Michael Cesario
5138 Durham Rd.
Subject: Zoning Request# 29.25
I have been a Beaverbrook resident since 1989 and am strongly opposed to the commercial development on Route # 108 abutting my neighborhood. My objections are that such a development is out of character with the surrounding residential property and that the increased traffic will bring substantial delays along this heavily traveled route. Even more importantly this proposed development is likely to contribute to more traffic accidents along this route because of increased volume and unsafe entry/exit into the commercial businesses proposed. No amount of commerce with additional tax revenue is worth the dangers to human life that result from these traffic accidents.
Board hearing on March 10, 2003
This testimony is in opposition to Amendment Number 29.25 submitted by Reuwer
Enterprises, LLC Requesting the Rezoning of property at 10425 and
10435 Route 108 from residential to commercial B-1 Zoning
My name is Sara
Chedester. My husband and I reside at
5033 Dover Court in Beaverbrook. We
have lived here for 30 years. Our
property is next to residential property 10425 Route 108 (the Allen Property)
which is next to 10435 (the Crown’s Pub property). We are here to speak against the requested rezoning proposal to
change these two properties to commercial zoning.
The Crown’s Pub property was
grand fathered in – as residential nonconforming – to allow this operation to
continue in a limited way. Except for
this very small business the other properties along Route 108 are all
residential. There is no need to set up
a commercial area for a larger restaurant and an office complex as
proposed. Allowing this zoning change would set up the
beginning of a chain reaction of requests for zoning changes to commercial to
continue west up the south side of Route 108.
The north side of Route 108 in this area – Senator Clark’s farm has been
protected to continue operation as a farm.
Why would it be thought of as a good idea to change the south side from
residential to commercial. Indeed if
any zoning change were to be made it would be more appropriate to change the
Crown Pub property to strict residential.
Since this may not be feasible the best alternate plan would be to leave
the zoning as it is residential with only the small exception of residential
nonconforming on 10435 Route 108 – the Crown Pub property.
The change of zoning of
these two properties to commercial would initiate the beginning of a
significant change of the area from what it is now – a very nice residential
/farm area to a commercial area with many problems. The influx of a large number of cars would create hazardous
conditions for all traveling this portion of Route 108. The difficulty in exiting a larger
restaurant/office park area would greatly increase the traffic accidents in the
area. Eastbound traffic already backs
up to our property from the traffic light at Centennial Lane. With increased traffic it would undoubtedly
be further backed up to the proposed office park/larger restaurant property
right next to us.
A much larger restaurant and
office park complex would generate more traffic noise for us and the other
residents whose property surrounds 10425 and l0435. More commercial lighting would be objectionable as well. We are outside people in warm weather and
our yard would lose the enjoyable quality it has now if we are suddenly living
in a business area.
The area we live in is a residential area. However, we are not far from many existing commercial areas in Columbia and Ellicott City. A Washington Post article on February 24, 2003 stated that the office vacancy rate in Howard County is among the highest in the state at 18.2%. Therefore, starting a new commercial area in an existing residential area is not necessary.
Careful consideration of the
implications of this requested zoning change should enable those making the
decision to understand that this requested change from residential to
commercial of properties 10425 and 10435 Route l08 would not be a necessary or
a beneficial change.
Sara and Alan Chedester
5033 Dover Court
From: "Peggy L. Ciniero
Subject: Zoning changes
To: Department of Planning and Zoning
I am opposed to zoning request #29.25 and any other Zoning changes that would allow business developments in residential neighborhoods. I feel that allowing business development in residential neighborhoods lowers the tax assessments of any houses in the vicinity of the business and would not add anything to the improvement of Howard County.
At the next election, I will NOT vote for anyone who votes for this zoning request.
Peggy L. Ciniero
5049 Castle Moor Drive
From: "Martha Clark
Subject: Opposed to Zoning Request #29.25
Thank you for the opportunity to express my opposition to Zoning Request #29.25. As a lifelong resident of Howard County and a neighbor of this property for which this zoning change is requested, I feel strongly that this residential neighborhood does not need an influx of commercial development. The original bar has been there for a long time, and as a small establishment it has at least co-existed relatively peacefully with the neighbors around it. It was basically open evenings and weekends (or at least that's when you'd see cars there) and it was never very crowded. Thus the traffic it generated did not affect rush hour Route 108 traffic very much. If this zoning change is allowed, the bar/restaurant establishment will be enlarged to serve a much larger number of people, it will require a large number of additional parking spaces, and will be open from 6:30 AM until midnight seven days a week. The impact on our residential neighborhood will be very detrimental. This zoning change will also allow for a large office complex with parking spaces accompanying it. These offices (which we don't need) will be replacing affordable rental units (which we desperately need in this County) and creating a large expanse of blacktop area which will make a bad storm drainage problem even worse.
Thank you for the opportunity to oppose this zoning change.
Sincerely,
Martha A. Clark
4370 Centennial Lane
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25.
Dear Sir:
We are strongly against the proposed Zoning Changes that would allow the expansion of the Crown Bar and possible Office Complex bordering on Route 108. The exiting road cannot handle the additional traffic that such a rezoning would grant to the developer (Reuwer). Route 108 would be extremely over congested if this commercial zoning is granted.
Route 108 should be expanded to four lanes all of the way from Route 29 to Route 32 just to handle the current traffic. There are far too many accidents on Rout 108 under the present conditions. And the traffic stops every day during rush hour.
There is so much traffic on 108 that I have great difficulty turning left westbound on Route 108 from Elliot's Oak Rd. Beaverbrook residents must use the traffic signal at Beaverbrook Rd and Route 108 with a green turn arrow to go westbound. Think of all of the accidents caused by drivers making turns onto 108 out of an Office Complex, or more so out of a Bar after the driver has had a few drinks. How about Friday nights after happy hour?
As I resident of Beaverbrook, I strongly urge the Board to reject Mr. Reuwer's proposal, not only on behalf of Beaverbrook residents, but for the safety and welfare of all who use Route 108.
Mr. and Mrs. Robert D. Coleman
5020 Castlemoor Drive ( Beaverbrook)
From: Boyd Davis
Subject: Input for Howard County Planning Board
I am opposed to the proposal by Mr. Reuwer to rezone the two houses (10425 and 10435 Rt 108) next to his bar from residential to commercial. As a 30 plus year resident in Beaverbrook, the development that will be impacted by Mr. Reuwer's expansion of his property, I view this as an unwarranted and unwanted intrusion on the privacy of Beaverbrook homeowners. In addition, the section of Rt. 108 along which Mr. Reuwer's bar is located is not particularly safe. There have been a number of vehicle accidents along this area including, if memory serves, at least one fatality. The expansion of Mr. Reuwer's bar to include a 138 car parking lot will place added burdens upon Rt. 108. Should a customer/driver overindulge, the situation could very easily result in a good many more accidents. Finally, I find it odd that Mr. Reuwer went ahead with the renovation of the bar before he knew he could get the two lots rezoned. The only conclusion I can draw is that he does not need the extra room to operate his bar nor to make a profit.
I applaud you citizens who give your time and energy to country government and ask that you do not allow Mr. Reuwer's proposal.
Sincerely,
Boyd Davis
5016 Lake Circle West
From: "Guy DiRoma
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
Department of Planning and Zoning
3430 Court House Drive
Ellicott City, MD 21043
March 17, 2003
Re: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing this letter to voice my opinion against Zoning Request # 29.25 specifically and to voice my opposition to any more business development in residential neighborhoods in Howard County generally.
I live in the Beaverbrook neighborhood and under no circumstances wish to see any more business development on Rt. 108 or the general area. I am 100% against turning Crown’s Pub into a larger winery and building a 32,000- square-foot office complex next door.
Rt. 108 cannot handle any more traffic than it already carries. The traffic backups at the entrance to Beaverbrook are already unbearable each day without expanding commercial development in the area which will bring in even more cars.
I recently moved to Beaverbrook and Howard County from the Bethesda/Rockville area purposely because it was not as commercial and congested. Howard County to me offers a much better quality of life. Rezoning Rt. 108 for business development is the first step in turning the road into another Rockville Pike. I suffered endless hours in traffic jams and pollution on Rockville Pike, let alone its general suburban sprawl unsightliness and do not want to see a repeat of that here. It would be very disappointing to choose to settle in such a beautiful area as Beaverbrook, Rt. 108 and Centennial Park, only to have it begin to clone what I just got away from. As a dutiful taxpayer and voter I will not tolerate it!
Please make sure my opinion is considered for any future hearings or consideration on this matter. I am against Zoning Request # 29.25!
Thank you.
Guy DiRoma
5053 Castle Moor Drive
From: "Bill Flaherty
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
I am writing to express my opposition to the zoning changes contained in Zoning Request # 29.25. I have lived just off route 108 for over 25 years and have seen traffic steadily increase year after year. Rezoning to expand a business in one of the most congested areas will only make things worse.
One of the things that attracted me to Howard County was that it had a thought out zoning and development plan. This area was zoned the way it is for a reason, and the motive for changing it seems to be profit oriented and not people oriented. Please do not change the zoning on this location of Rt. 108.
Thank you.
Bill Flaherty
5064 Lake Circle West
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
To: Department of Planning and Zoning
Dear Sir,
We are requesting that no part of the Beaver brook subdivision should be changed to business Zoning. We made our home in Beaver Brook for the quality of life it offers. If you change the zoning in Beaver Brook sub division, it will have adverse effect on the residential community. We sincerely hoping you would protect our interest Thank you,
Sincerely
Mohan Goyal and Rekha Goyal
5304 Durham Road East
Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
We join our neighbors in Beaverbrook in saying NO to business developments in residential neighborhoods. We are opposed to the zoning changes on Rt. 108 as this will affect the integrity and peaceful atmosphere in our neighborhood. We moved to this area four years ago because of the way the Beaverbrook residents have kept this neighborhood safe, pleasant, welcoming and private. We want to keep it that way.
Sincerely,
Bruce and Gigie Grant
10109 Darlington Road
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
Department of Planning and Zoning
3430 Court House Drive
Ellicott City, MD 21043
March 17, 2003
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing this letter to voice my opinion against Zoning Request # 29.25 specifically and to voice my opposition to any more business development in residential neighborhoods in Howard County generally.
I live in the Beaverbrook neighborhood and under no circumstances wish to see any more business development on Rt. 108 or the general area. I am 100% against turning Crown’s Pub into a larger winery and building a 32,000- square-foot office complex next door.
Rt. 108 cannot handle any more traffic than it already carries. The traffic backups at the entrance to Beaverbrook are already unbearable each day without expanding commercial development in the area that will bring in even more cars.
I recently moved to Beaverbrook and Howard County from the Bowie MD area. Howard County to me offers a much better quality of life. Rezoning Rt. 108 for business development is the first step in turning the road into another development area. I do not wish for the general suburban sprawl's unsightliness to disturb the nice environment near a farm and Centennial Park. It would be very disappointing to choose to settle in such a beautiful area as Beaverbrook, Rt. 108 and Centennial Park, only to have it begin to clone what I just got away from. As a dutiful taxpayer and voter I will not tolerate it! Hopefully, they will not attempt to change the zoning of the farm as well. I am sure that is being eyed as prime development property.
Please make sure my opinion is considered for any future hearings or consideration on this matter. I am against Zoning Request # 29.25!
Thank you.
Lynn Kilcoyne
5053 Castle Moor Drive
Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
To Whom it May Concern:
From; Milton and Judy Kline
5036 Dover Court
Along with many other residents we are vehemently opposed to zoning changes on Rt. 108 regarding the bar/restaurant. Please refer to zoning request #29.25. WE DO NOT WANT MORE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. We are strongly against this zoning request for it will increase a traffic situation that is already horrendous and dangerous. The noise, car lights, and partying going on will be a continuous disturbance to neighbors adjacent to the property. Not to mention drunkenness that has previously occurred and will be greatly increased with the additional numbers the bar will serve. We concur with our neighbors in the community who have already expressed themselves about their opposition to zoning request #29.25.
Sincerely
Judy and Milton Kline
Subject: Beaverbrook Development
Dear County Planning Board:
I am vehemently opposed to any commercial development in my neighborhood. I moved here last summer because of the quietness and the quality of life this neighborhood offers. I am raising 4 children and would not like a bar in my back yard. I pay my taxes like everyone else and would like to live in Beaverbrook without the fear of unwanted traffic and noise in my back yard. I live about 4 houses from the property and am very concerned about this. I am deeply concerned about all the congestion this would bring as well. Please take all the families thoughts and concerns under consideration before allowing this development to occur. Thank You
Stefanie Knab
5013 Durham Court
Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
The planning board needs to see the Crown Pub site during the morning and the evening rush hour before making any decision to rezone any of this area. This is a residential and farm area with a county park nearby. WE DO NOT NEED a larger expansion of a high class drinking establishment in the area. My wife and I have lived in Beaverbrook for over 28 years and have seen the traffic grow on Rt. 108 over the years and it has just about reached the saturation point. IF THIS WAS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WOULD YOU WANT A BAR IN YOUR BACK YARD?
Albert and Mildred Lawson
5113 Durham Road East
Reference: Amendment Number 29.25
To Whom It May Concern:
In the mid-1960’s, I decided to move to Howard County because of the rural nature of the county. I purchased a home in the Orchards and resided there for eight years. As the area grew, I decided to relocate to Beaverbrook. At this point, the city of Columbia was in full development (early-1970’s). I appreciated the idea of clustered business centers, allowing residential areas to remain as residential areas. In my particular case, the location of Beaverbrook directly across Rt. 108 from Senator Clark’s farm and the wetlands now developed as Centennial Park ideally satisfied my desire to live in an area that maintained a rural ambience. I have remained in Beaverbrook since 1974 because the area has maintained the rural nature I sought originally.
I’d now like to address my thoughts on Route 108. As we all know, Route 108 is a major east-west conduit in Howard County. Anyone who travels this route, particularly during “rush-hour”, but at most any time during the day will agree Route 108 is heavily traveled. The need for main road conduits is perfectly understandable. They offer the greatest protection against traffic accidents.
Our particular intersection, Route 108 and Beaverbrook Road/Centennial Lane, has been the site of numerous accidents. The traffic signal redesign, implemented some years ago, has reduced the incidence of accidents, but they still occur at a more than acceptable rate. Throughout the year, but particularly during the spring and summer seasons, the residents of the Beaverbrook community too often hear the sounds of screeching tires, crunching metal and the sirens of police and emergency vehicles as accidents occur at our intersection. These occurrences occur throughout the day, evening and night.
Additional traffic passing through this intersection will produce a greater probability of the threat to life and limb. Implementation of the Reuwer Enterprises proposal will create this greater traffic flow; hence I am against any zoning change to this area that would allow for the Reuwer Enterprises proposed expansion.
My second concern is the yet additional “noise pollution” created by the additional noise during the outdoor seasons created by the outdoor eatery and substantially larger parking lot planned as part of the Reuwer Enterprises proposal. This would be particularly aggravating to those Beaverbrook residents who reside along the north side of Durham Road West and Dover Court.
Finally, it appears to me this zoning change goes against the design approach for the city of Columbia. It “flies in the face” of the idea of having business center clusters in town centers, thus leaving residential areas as residential areas. Other than Senator Clark’s farm, Columbia girdles the land subject to rezoning consideration. The implementation of the Reuwer Enterprises plan will degrade the residential ambiance of Beaverbrook and the homes in the Elliot’s Oak area.
Respectfully submitted,
William Lane Letsch
5013 Durham Road, West
Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
I am a resident of Beaverbrook. I am writing in deep protest and opposition to the Reuwer's proposals/plans for the development of the Rte. 108/Beaverbrook intersection area.
My primary concern is safety. Rte. 108 is already congested, especially during rush hours. The area surrounding the Reuwer property is hilly, curvy and dangerous. The idea of increasing traffic there, and ESPECIALLY the idea of drive-through traffic is irresponsible. Many teenagers (i.e. NEW, INEXPERIENCED drivers) use Rte. 108 to travel to and from Centennial High School and River Hill High School. A drive-through before or after school would appeal to many kids. It is frightening to picture teenage drivers with little experience and limited judgment re: driving decisions rushing to school and turning in and out of that property for a quick cup of coffee.
My secondary concern is the idea of developing 108 at that site. The Clarks have committed to keeping their farm to preserve the nature of that area. Beaverbrook is a quiet residential family neighborhood. It is inappropriate to develop that area, to create the noise and traffic related to a restaurant, drive-through, and patio! I have also heard about the possibility of a mini-mall, of apts or townhouses, of a large parking lot........none of this is appropriate for that site or for our neighborhood.
Please visit the site. Please drive on Rte. 108 at rush hour. Please notice the poor visibility, the high speed of existing traffic. Please imagine significantly increasing the volume of traffic, adding in many new drivers, and consider the dangers. Please picture making that stretch into a commercial area. It would be irresponsible to abandon the safety and noise issues for the sake of business dollars. Please do not let any of this happen.
Rona Levi
5026 Durham Road East
ZONING REQUEST # 29.25
My name is John Mason; address 5050 Durham Road West. I purchased the Durham Road property specifically due to the nature of neighborhood esthetics, and personality. My neighbors, the residents of the effected area (zoning request # 29.25) are for the most part long time residents, who like my wife and myself want their neighborhood as it is, and not transformed by zoning changes that benefit only a few individuals.
The proposal (zoning request # 29.25) is contrary to common sense for the Howard County residents familiar with the traffic problems at this juncture of Route 108, and the absence of planning for short term or long term solutions to them, and "most importantly" the particulars of the surrounding properties.
The "Centennial Lane Parkland" is a rural treasure, shared by Maryland citizens whose taxes also support the state subsidies that guarantee the adjacent "Clark Farm" property and petting zoo remain a rural treasure as well. When Centennial Park was conceived and proposed, the long-term look at the geography of the general area was vital and an integral part of the debate. When the decisions were made to maintain the Clark Farm as rural, the decisions were prejudiced by the same reasons. Any proposals made after the fact that would change that geography warrants revisiting the decisions made on the state level, and request a Maryland state study to measure the effect of zoning request # 29.25 on the Parklands, and the Clark Farm.
The department for environmental Resources should be informed of the proposals (zoning request # 29.25) and their input requested on the effects of the proposed changes to the surrounding protected areas, and adjoining properties where there are currently wetland restrictions downstream from the property requesting zone changes.
Many ask, why would such a Prodigious effort as (zoning request # 29.25) be attempted on property with such limited parameters (under current regulations and zoning,) and the obvious infringement and negative effect on neighboring properties?
It would scorn the communities concerns to indiscriminately change zoning to accommodate a few connected individuals at the detriment of so many.
John and Pamela Mason
5050 Durham Road West
Subject: ZONING REQUEST # 29.25.
Dear Sir:
I am astounded that the Zoning Board would even consider an expansion of the Crown Bar and possible Office Complex bordering on Route 108. The exiting road cannot handle the additional traffic that such an rezoning would grant to the developer (Reuwer). Route 108 would be extremely over congested if this commercial zoning is granted.
As I resident of Beaverbrook , I don't want to see a neighbor bar elevated by this proposal to a full fledged winery drawing many "happy hour" and party goers with associated traffic to the Route 108 area west of Beaverbrook. Even worse is the elevated reality of drivers leaving the expanded establishment after a few drinks and "attempting " to make a left turn out of the bar to go westbound on Route 108. Presently, there is so much traffic on 108 that I great difficulty turning left westbound on Route 108 from Eliot’s Oak Rd. Beaverbrook residents must use the traffic signal at Beaverbrook Rd and Route 108 with a green turn arrow to go westbound. Before the Board considers this proposal , have a Board Member try to go westbound on Route 108 from Eliot’s Oak or any other access Rd to Route 108 without a traffic light for assistance. Can you imagine turns ( especially left turns) onto 108 out of a Bar after the driver has had a few drinks or leaving an Office Complex to go home? How about Friday nights....after happy hour?
I strongly urge the Board to reject Mr. Reuwer's proposal, not only in behalf of Beaverbrook residents, but for the safety and welfare of all members of Howard County who use Route 108 in their daily lives.
Mr. John J. Migliore
5024 Castlemoor Drive ( Beaverbrook)
From: Herman J Pierlioni
Subject: Route 108 Bar
To: Department of Planning and Zoning
From: Mr. & Mrs. Herm Pierlioni Beaverbrook
Pleased be advised that we do not support the proposed plan to open a coffee/bar/restaurant on the property that is now or has been the Crown Pub.
The Clark’s Farm Petting Zoo across the street will be very popular during the spring/summer and fall. Mr. Clark's produce stand will be open during those times as well. There will be lots of children and traffic.
Route 108 is heavily traveled daily since all the new growth of homes and schools. This area is not a commercial area. The traffic problem at that spot will be horrendous.
Further, the noise level will be very annoying. This is a neighborhood, not a shopping and eating/drinking strip. It is very irresponsible to build a structure such as you propose right in the backyard, so to speak, of a very docile neighborhood. It will only cause problems that we do not want our children, teenagers and life time residents to be confronted with when there is loud music, talking, partying and lots of traffic from 6:30 am to midnight 7 days a week. Would you?
We do not approved.
Subject: Reference: zoning request #29.25
I am writing in regards to the referenced request. I STRONGLY OPPOSE any more business developments in residential neighborhoods! This is especially true in the vicinity of Crown's Pub and Eliot’s oak Farm i. e west of Centennial Lane and east of Eliot’s oak Rd. on Route 108. The traffic on Route 108 is already horrendous. Should this request be approved, the powers in Howard Co. should be prepared to widen Route 108 and/or install additional traffic lights to relieve the congestion that this will cause.
Regards,
Charles P. Scheiner
10485 Route 108
Deborah Seate
4752 Leyden Way
To: Planning Board
c/o Department of Planning and
Zoning
3430 Courthouse Drive
Re: Amendments 30.03, 30.04,
24.02, 24.03, 24.04, 31.25, and 29.25
My name is Deborah Seate. I am a resident of 4752 Leyden Way, Ellicott City, Maryland. I was present for all of the testimony presented to the Planning Board on March 10 and March 12, 2003. For the proposed rezoning along the Route 108 and Montgomery Road corridors, I heard residents repeatedly pleading for you to protect their quality of life. These pleas were supported with specific examples of adverse quality of life impacts.
I am a resident of the Summerhill Townhouse development. Our community is diagonal to the parcels covered by Amendment 30.03. Additionally, almost daily I drive past the properties covered by Amendment 30.04. When I examine these areas, I see the roots of Howard County. I see a reminder of a time when life was slower, and stress was lower. It is true that some of the homes are in severe need of maintenance. So is Normandy Shopping Center, and I haven’t heard any proposals to effectively raze it and replace it with something more modern. Why does commercial development have to be repeatedly wedged along Route 108 and Montgomery Road, until both roads are 6 lanes wide like Route 1 and Route 40? Why is it acceptable that the irony riddled solution to traffic congestion is to let the developers overbuild the land, and expand the roads? Why is it acceptable to increase the overcrowding of schools when we profess to value children?
I propose that certain roads in Howard County be “residential corridors” (i.e., Montgomery Road, and Route 108), and others be “commercial corridors.” Currently, starting with the area defined by Amendment Number 30.04 and heading westward along Route 108 towards Senator Clark’s farm, everything on the right-hand side is single-family dwellings or park-like. This creates a visible decompression zone for residents. As Americans we fight for our quality of life. On a national level President Bush is positioning the troops in response to the September 11, 2001 act of terrorism that adversely changed the quality of life in the United States. In a nonviolent, but no less focused manner, community leaders are gathering the residents along the Route 108 and the Montgomery Road corridors. It is time to end “zoning as usual.” It is time to declare certain corridors “Residential” and certain corridors “Commercial”. We will fight for this.
I encourage you to send a strong signal to the Department of
Planning and Zoning. Say “no” to the
proposed zoning changes for amendments 30.03, 30.04,
24.02, 24.03, 24.04, 31.25, and 29.25. Leave those properties zoned
R-20. People choose Howard County for the quality of life. Please preserve it.
Deborah Seate
From: "Chris Sikora" Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
To the Department of Planning and Zoning:
I have been a resident of the Beaverbrook Community for over 20 years and during that time have seen the tremendous growth experienced in our county. My family is STRONGLY OPPOSED to Zoning Request #29.25. The character of the area where Crown Pub is located has changed dramatically from when this business was originally built, such that the development plans that Mr. Reuwer wants to implement are NOT appropriate. When the Crown Pub operated in that location, it did not have a significant impact on traffic or noise (the customers were confined within the building), in fact for years I wasn't even certain that it was an operating business as I rarely saw any cars in the parking lot. However, if this Iron Bridge Wine Company succeeds in implementing its proposed plans of adding an outdoor patio and expanded dining area, and opening from 6:30 am to midnight on a daily basis, this will adversely impact our community.
I don't care how "upscale" the clientele will be with an outdoor patio and dining area there will be a lot of noise generated, especially when alcohol is involved. Also, that stretch of Rt. 108 is already a traffic problem in terms of congestion and speeding. When you add more people trying to get back onto Rt. 108 whose judgment may be slightly impaired due to alcohol consumption, you're just inviting an accident. As the road is already congested, trying to make a left turn onto Rt. 108 without the benefit of a traffic light takes concentration and good judgment. Additionally, with the expansion of the business at that site, the increase in trash (especially food products) will serve as a magnet for rats. I don't care how careful the owners may say they will be about keeping trash contained, you only have to look at the trash areas of any area restaurant to see the reality.
Traffic congestion along that corridor of Rt. 108 is extremely heavy and with the "curves in the road" makes it very dangerous as many people continue to speed. We have yet to see what impact the opening of the Soccer Association of Columbia/Howard County soccer fields and the church that is to be developed on nearby Centennial Lane will have on traffic, but you can be sure it will not be favorable. Since those projects have already been approved but not yet developed, it makes no sense to allow Zoning Request #29.25 to be approved and further adversely impact the area.
As for the developers plans to have this establishment open at 6:30 a.m. to provide a drive-through for coffee and pastries, again this is inviting accidents (drinking your coffee & eating your pastry at the wheel, while talking on your cell phone) at the most congested part of the day. There are already enough establishments located in shopping centers in the area(designated business areas) that provide these services--there is not a vital need for this. I will even go out on a limb to suggest that people could even make coffee and eat breakfast in their OWN HOMES before leaving for work.
Finally, if you allow this re-zoning to go through, I fear that Mr. Reuwer will eventually go through with his initial plans to develop offices at the location. Although Mr. Reuwer states he would not pursue an office development project at that location, I have absolutely no trust in such a statement. Such development is just as out of character for that area as is the expansion plans of the Iron Bridge Wine Company.
If Mr. Reuwer wants to make money, he should establish businesses in appropriate areas. There are plenty of areas still left in Howard County where such businesses as an Iron Bridge Wine Company could operate without being out of character (how about the former Piccolo's location on Snowden River Parkway that has been vacant for about 2 years now?).
Thank you.
Christina A. Sikora
5209 Lynngate Court
Subject: Re Zoning request #29.25
To Department of Planning and Zoning:
I am writing to strongly protest the amendment 29.25 being passed. I recently had the opportunity to testify at the recent hearing and hear is a summary of my objections/ concerns.
1. I am very concerned that Rt. 108 cannot handle larger volumes of traffic. AM and PM rush hours are already bad. Also 108 is primarily one lane each direction and there aren't any alternate routes.
2. Howard County planning board needs to assess the area itself. This is clearly residential with the large scenic Clark Farm and Centennial park right down the road. Also the Crown Pub backs up to homes in my neighborhood which will clearly infringe on people's rights to have peace and quiet in their own back yard. A 7 day week 24 hour bar type facility is clearly not wanted or needed.
3. Lastly there are serious safety concerns. Alcohol consumption, more cars, = more potential accidents on a one lane route. There isn't even a good shoulder on this part of IO8.
4. It seems this developer doesn't just want to change the pub but seems he has plans for this entire section of Rt 108. Once you start approving plans that aren't wanted or needed you open up a Pandora's box of more requests from the developer. As I testified Clarksville, downtown Columbia, and Ellicott City are nearby. Why can't commercial type development be put in those ample commercial areas?
Thanks for your consideration. We are residents of
Beaverbrook at 5096 Durham Road West. Christina Thomas&
Farhad Haghighat.
Subject: Zoning Request #29.25
Dear Planning and Zoning Board:
At their meeting on March 4, 2003 the Board of Directors of the Harper's Choice Community Association expressed their concerns for the development of the property around the old Crown Pub. They felt that this is a very dangerous portion of Route 108. Access and egress onto the property is inherently dangerous since sight lines are minimal and traffic speeds can be quite high. Currently, there is a double yellow line that should prevent cars from crossing over the road; realistically, the double yellow line would probably not prevent cars from crossing into on coming traffic. Also, there would be an increase in the amount of traffic that would occur with further development. The Harper's Choice Village Board strongly feels that until the inherent problems with Route 108 are solved, then development in that area should not proceed.
Wendy Tzuker
Village Manager
Harper's Choice
Subject: ZONING REQUEST #29.25
Department of Planning and Zoning
3430 Court House Drive
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Subject: ZONING REQUEST #29.25
MD Highway 108 in Howard County is essentially a narrow two lane road and it is imperative that another area such as that in Clarksville at Routes 32 and 108 not be started. That area has 6 (six) traffic lights in one half mile of roadway. It is an understatement to say that it is a nightmare. There are limited site areas both east and west of the Rt. 108 bar on Highway 108. Often we hear the screeching of tires in the vicinity of the Rt. 108 bar. At times this sound is followed by a vehicle crash. Some may be minor and not reported to the police. Others are major causing a human toll that is immeasurable to those involved. This zoning request will amplify the problem. What is the solution going to be? Another flashing sign(s) warning of an unnecessary traffic congested area? It will be TOO LITTLE TOO LATE! SAFETY FIRST is still a valid and an important consideration. Please do not let a great opportunity get away. Saying No now to the proposed zoning request #29.25 is a wise decision that, for the sake of safety, must be made.
Respectfully submitted,
George Vanisko Janice Vanisko
5026 Durham Rd. W. 5026 Durham Rd. W.
