For more than two years (and some would say decades), the challenge of the Lakeside housing development in Trappe has been an all-consuming concern for the Talbot County Council, the incorporated town of Trappe, the Maryland Department of the Environment, and most of all, the residents of Talbot County.
In short, could a project approved in 2003 but slow in finding financing and market demand continue with plans to eventually build more than 2,400 homes in a town whose total population was half that number? And were there appropriate plans for wastewater treatment, and had other infrastructure issues like schools and roads been adequately assessed?
These concerns led to the passage of Resolution 338 by the County Council. This resolution required a full review of each additional phase of Lakeside’s development to ensure compliance with the Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan. It also mandated that any future expansion of the wastewater treatment plant beyond the initial 100,000 gallons per day allocation (around 400 housing units) must evaluate Trappe’s wastewater treatment capacity at each phase.
With the support of the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Resolution 338 was intended to safeguard the community and manage growth responsibly.
However, local environmental advocates like the Talbot Integrity Project questioned whether this was enough to protect the county’s critically important environmental assets. Specifically, they raised concerns about whether the maps used to define property and sewer lines were accurate when the project was approved.
The answer became clear at Tuesday night’s Talbot County Council meeting with the passage of two resolutions that attempted to address these concerns.
By a 3-2 vote, the council approved Resolution No. 347 with Amendment No. 3, which amends the Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan (CWSP) to provide the Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) for all phases of the Lakeside development. This aligns with the Planning Commission’s finding that Resolution No. 347 is consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan at their May 1, 2024, meeting.
Additionally, by a 3-2 vote, the council passed Resolution No. 348, which clarifies and confirms the water and sewer classifications for certain parcels incorrectly shown in previous revisions. The County Planning Commission also found this resolution consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan.
Following this important debate on such a high-impact housing development, the Spy’s Dave Wheelan turned to Councilmember Pete Lesher for an explanation. Yesterday, via Zoom, Lesher (who, along with Council Member Lynn Mielke, voted against Resolutions 347 and 348) clarified in simpler terms what action the Talbot County Council has taken and what it will mean for the Lakeside project going forward.
This video is approximately 15 minutes in length.
Peter Gallagher says
Pete Lesher does a terrific job of explaining the facts of the issues and the several resolutions. Thanks
Dan Watson says
My friend Pete Lesher presents an anodyne version of what happened with Lakeside: not inaccurate, but missing the point. Towards the end he rightly says that, taken together, the 3-person majority essentially voted to confirm the actions taken in 2020 in permitting Lakeside to proceed without a meaningful review. And Pete notes wistfully that even he, who voted against it back then, really didn’t understand the many things that were going on, that he was misled. The truth is that the developer obtained those approvals only because of falsehoods and misrepresentations. In 2024, unlike 2020, everyone knows the of hose falsehoods, and yet, disgracefully, a majority of the Council (Callahan, Haythe, and Stepp) chose to back the developer and ignore the truths that had come out.
Sadly, any future review per Resolution 338 cannot possibly have any real effect on Lakeside. It is a pipe dream.
As Pete said, elections matter.
The Talbot Integrity Project
Dan Watson
Acting Chairman
Eva M. Smorzaniuk says
Thank you Mr. Lesher for a thoughtful and understandable review of this complex issue. I appreciate your and Ms. Mielkes efforts to speak out on behalf of the citizens of Talbot County who are concerned about the myriad negative impacts of Lakeside on our environment and our infrastructure. And yes, we will all remember this defeat at the next election!
Paul Rybon says
Nothing in the Spy article makes any sense. And nothing Mr Lesher edifies makes any sense either. And what does he imply with the observation that elections matter? We seem to be left with the impression that the Talbot County Council has voted by a narrow entrenched majority to continue being ineffective at handling the serious side effects or environmental impacts of the continued Lakeside build out.
Steve Shimko says
Resolution 281 was passed using the wrong map that delineated the current (in 2020?) CWSP designations for the parcels that became Lakeside – the infamous Map 24.
The question no one seems to be asking is “how did the wrong map come about being used?” With all the experts involved – lawyers for the developer, Trappe, and the County; DPW officials and other personnel working for the county; engineering firms; you name it. Are we to believe that all of them missed the fact that the wrong map was being used to determine if Lakeside was compatible with the CWSP?
Without a deep dive into the root cause of this mistake (I’m being generous here), a similar problem could very well occur again in the future. At every Public Works Advisory Board or Planning Commission hearing going forward, there’s going to be that nagging doubt of “how do we know we’re using the right maps?”
The County owes it to itself and the citizens of Talbot County to find out why the wrong map was used to pass Resolution 281. Just saying “this is behind us and let’s move on” is not doing the due diligence needed.