Lest anyone forget or misunderstand, the objective of the “Reset Lakeside” initiative is centered on the Council’s adoption of specific legislation that will have the specific effect that has been the objective of Talbot citizens throughout the recent campaign, and for many months prior. “Reset Lakeside” is not some amorphous catchphrase that means, “Let’s just talk about it some more, new faces, new decorations in the room, different attitude.”
What the Talbot community has been focused on is reestablishing integrity in our land use approval processes (by acknowledging, as required by law, the decision by the Planning Commission that Lakeside is NOT consistent with the Talbot County Comprehensive Plan), and bringing Lakeside back anew for a proper review (by the Planning Commission, the public itself, and the County Council, including its impacts on schools, traffic, taxes, and so forth).
What triggers this restatement of the obvious is the fact that late on Friday evening the final County Council agenda was published that includes a heretofore unannounced meeting: “A. Work Session with the Town of Trappe — Overview of the Lakeside Development Project.” Such a meeting is perfectly welcome and appropriate, especially with a new Council on stage. There is no lack of updated information concerning Lakeside that would be nice for everyone to know.
But one should be alert to the possibility, by design or by happenstance, that a dialogue about Lakeside, a review of its recent history and current status, the introduction of fresh faces in the conversation, a friendly and cooperative tone….that this sort of thing is declared or perceived to “Reset Lakeside.”
This dialogue and a refreshed conversation are of course welcome and positive—but is not at all what the “Reset Lakeside” initiative has ever been about.
“Reset Lakeside” is, and always has been, about adoption of specific legislation to restore integrity and to bring Lakeside back for a new, formal review. That was clear in the first announcement in the Spy of the “Reset Lakeside” effort (which included a brief outline of a resolution) ; it was made clear throughout the campaign in many ways; and it was clear on December 2nd when newly elected Council members were requested to introduce and adopt such legislation, a draft provided.
All those “Reset Lakeside” lawn signs on display in recent months, and all the work invested by so many over the past 21 months, were not directed to the end goal that things stay the same but for the tenor of conversation. The adoption of specific, carefully drafted legislation is essential; that alone will create the pivot point after which fresh dialogue and new attitudes will be meaningful and productive. They are not a substitute for “Reset Lakeside” legislation, and do not alone fulfill the promise.
Tom Dennis
Volunteer
Talbot Integrity Project
David Lloyd says
Well said!!!
Mike Davis says
Many thanks are due to the members of the Talbot Integrity Project. They are fighting the good fight.
Rebecca Ellison says
Yes, they certainly are … but, truthfully, we ALL need to be in this fight. We can’t sit back and expect a small group to ‘save’ us, esp. at this point where we have a new County Council yet again and it is already clear that new Council members have a lot to learn about the past 20 years of accumulated bullying and wrong-doing by the Lakeside developer. We all need to participate in reminding the County Council that it is the Council’s JOB to represent the citizens of this County against opposing outside monetary interests. It is crucial that we unify to let the Council know once again (as was done on Oct. 28th, 2021 at the MDE hearing held at the ice rink) that the citizens of this COUNTY are overwhelmingly OPPOSED to the creation of an outrageous new MUNICIPALITY of 2,500 homes and 550,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, in open fields across Rt. 50 from Trappe, i.e. ‘Lakeside’.
Vincent De Sanctis says
I recently drove through Lakeside. Clearly construction is going quickly. Many homes are occupied. But what remains unclear in my mind is why officials in Trappe aren’t more a focus of the conversation. Most of the public conversation focuses on the County Council and what many folks consider incorrect interpretations of the applicable legal requirements. However there seems to be little effort to understand the particulars behind Trappe’s decisions.
Reed Fawell 3 says
To restate a portion of the above Letter to the Editor:
“What the Talbot community has been focused on is reestablishing integrity in our land use approval processes (by acknowledging, as required by law, the decision by the Planning Commission that Lakeside is NOT consistent with the Talbot County Comprehensive Plan), and bringing Lakeside back anew for a proper review (by the Planning Commission, the public itself, and the County Council, including its impacts on schools, traffic, taxes, and so forth).
What triggers this restatement of the obvious is the fact that late on Friday evening the final County Council agenda was published that includes a heretofore unannounced meeting: “A. Work Session with the Town of Trappe — Overview of the Lakeside Development Project.” END OF QUOTE
The quote refers two separate but related issues, namely: It is obvious Talbot County’s land use and development “system” is inadequate to meet the development and land use challenges confronting the County today. The Lakeside illustrates this. So does the more general master planning done to date for the Town of Trappe generally. Both lack a proper vision and purpose of good development, and so they fail to specify the ingredients of necessary for success on the ground. Instead, we find a text of platitudes for walk-able, and sustainable mixed use development, while the site plans therefore deliver precisely the opposite when they are laid out and built on the ground.
So for example:
Lakeside in practical affect is not mixed use all. It is a dense, auto-centic track housing subdivision. One built to house some 6 to 8 thousand people cheek to jowl in small lot houses, townhouses, and mid-rise apartments served by more than 5 thousand automobiles. Hence each home and townhouse, totaling 1800 units, has a two car garage. The 700 apartments each are served by at least 1.5 parking spaces. These 4650 car spaces are reserved for those 6 to 8 thousand residents. This excludes off street and curb parking for guests, service providers, and other visitors, plus the few convenience shoppers within the project. This mass of automobiles will generate enormous traffic within and around the project, given the single use overwhelming nature of Lakeside. In addition, the regional shopping center wedged between Lakeside and Route 50 compounds this traffic problem as do the weak interior and exterior road nets and access points in and around the Lakeside. It’s Levittown, Pa. redux. But it is also in one of the most constrained and fragile location imaginable, given that it fronts an inter-state highway that is, like Lakeside hemmed in by water and marsh on three of its four sides, to the east, west, and south.
Then too consider what is planned for Route 50 fronting Lakeside and across Route 50 on its west side. The development planned for here reminds one of an industrial version of Parole, Maryland that is across Route 50 from Annapolis. The vision misses a huge opportunity, and creates a disaster instead.
What is one alternative to this cramped and unworkable vision of Lakeside and Trappe generally?
Consider Poundbury:
Poundbury is an urban extension to the Dorset county town of Dorchester … built on Duchy of Cornwall land, it is currently home to some 4,600 people in a mix of private and affordable housing, as well as providing employment for 2,400 people working in more than 240 shops, cafés, offices and factories. A further 200 people are employed in construction across the site and many more are self-employed and at times work from home.
Poundbury is an integrated rather than zoned development, consciously designed to challenge a number of the town planning trends and policies of the 20th century; isolated housing estates and shopping centres far from places of work and leisure, forcing ever greater reliance on the car.
There are four key principles in particular which have been pioneered at Poundbury:
Architecture of place. Creating beauty and reflecting local character and identity.
Integrated Affordable Housing. Integrated with and indistinguishable from private housing, offering a variety of options.
A walkable community. Designed to be welcoming and useable for pedestrians and other road users in addition to the car.
A mix of uses. Integrating homes with retail and other employment uses and public areas.
Currently home to some 4,600 people in a mix of private and affordable housing, Poundbury also provides employment for over 2,400 people working in more than 240 shops, cafés, offices and factories. A further 200 are employed in construction across the site and many more are self employed and occasionally work from home.
Begun in 1993, Poundbury is based on some of the timeless principles that have enabled many places around Britain to endure and thrive over the centuries. The result is an attractive and pleasing place in which people can live, work and relax. Affordable housing (being provided at 35%) and private housing share a public realm with the many businesses.
As Poundbury has developed, it has demonstrated there is a genuine alternative to the way in which we establish new high density communities in this country. Poundbury is approximately 80% built and is planned to grow to around 2,700 homes by 2026.”
For more see:
https://poundbury.co.uk/