A Big Box text amendment, which could place large retail development near the corner of 213 and 544, was approved last night by the Queen Anne’s County Commissioners in a highly unusual 3-2 straw vote. The text amendment would expand the square foot restriction for retail development in Suburban Commercial Districts from 65,000 to “unlimited” throughout Queen Anne’s County and allow the landowner near 213 and 544, Pete Sheaffer, to draw a Big Box retailer to the location.
The vote ignored the recommendations of the Queen Anne’s County Planning and Zoning Commission, which recommended 4-1 vote against the amendment back in April because the text is in direct conflict with QAC Comprehensive Plan.
“I’ve never seen a straw vote,” said QAC Commissioner David Dunmyer, who voted against the amendment. “It’s not usually how it works…it was not a planned event.”
It is out of the ordinary to vote on a text amendment during the first public hearing, but Commissioner Steve Arentz apparently believed the amendment could be passed last night. The Spy learned from a anonymous source a week ago that the Commissioners could try to force a vote at the first public hearing and that Commissioner Phil Dumenil, who told the Spy in June he would vote against zoning change, was in play to change his mind and vote for the text amendment.
“It isn’t going to be pretty,” Arentz told Dunmyer during a break in the agenda last night. “[But] we’re going to vote on it tonight.”
Arentz seemed surprised minutes later when QAC Attorney Pat Thompson said the bill first had to be in writing to be certified — before it could be adopted. Thompson then suggested a straw vote could be taken to help draft the text for the Commissioners meeting [on August 9] when the amendment will be passed and become law.
Voting for the amendment were Commissioners Arentz, Dumenil, and Dave Olds. Voting against were Commissioners David Dunmyer and Bob Simmons.
QAC Conservation Executive Director Jay Falstad said he was disappointed in the vote, and the low number in opposition to the text amendment.
“I’m naturally disappointed because I believe that part of Queen Anne’s County has a lot of unique business opportunities that focus on small town type businesses,” Falstad said. “I don’t believe that a Big Box is consistent with the [QAC] Comprehensive Plan, the [QAC] Planning Commission felt the same way…it’s disappointing. QA Conservation did not take a position on this text amendment at this time because we were hopeful that the business community thought this amendment was important enough to come out and stand up on their own. I’m disappointed that the local business community didn’t show up in stronger numbers.”
Falstad did acknowledge that some stakeholders did show up, but it was not enough.
“You’re only talking about a fraction of the number of businesses that will be affected…where were Centreville [businesses]?” Falstad asked. “The Town of Centreville should have come and spoken out…the Comprehensive Plan says that Centreville should be the primary area of growth in Queen Anne’s County.”
Falstad would not say what action QA Conservation might take at this point, but that he would bring the issue to his board of directors.
“In light of tonight’s vote, naturally I will report back to the board what is going on, and we’ll make a decision on what are next step is going to be,” Falstad said.
The first to speak against the Big Box was Richard Altman, former Executive Director of QAC Conservation, who reiterated that the Planning Commission’s 4-1 negative recommendation against the text amendment was appropriate with Comprehensive Plan and in protecting the small town setting of communities in QAC. Altman also said that the amendment could risk triggering a lawsuit.
“This [text amendment] proposal ignored the prospect of large suburban commercial facilities throughout the county,” Altman told the Commissioners. “The Planning Commission considered that and decided it was not a good idea because it would threaten the existing small town character of the community. [The Planning Commission also] made a finding that is was not consistent with the [QAC] Comprehensive Plan, and that is a very strong finding…[the Comprehensive Plan] has much language [that] stresses the kind of small town character that the planners and the citizens preferred. If you were to work towards overruling that you will potentially find yourself in an at-risk situation for litigation. I don’t think given the financial condition of the county that it’s a prudent thing to do at this time.”
Also speaking against text amendment was Elizabeth Ruddie of Chester, Md, who said the small farming community in Illinois where she’s from was adversely impacted by Big Box retailers. Ruddie also made note of a multitude of lawsuits against Wal-Mart and the way the retailer treats their employees.
“I saw the impact of a large business like Wal-Mart coming into our small community,” Ruddie said. “The affect of that was to run local businesses out of business. I know there are over a million lawsuits brought against Wal-Mart by women for sexual discrimination and in general I do not think that Wal-Mart treats its employees well.”
Mareen Waterman of Business Queen Anne’s spoke in support of the amendment lamenting that large retailers far from the county were taking business out of the community. Waterman also said that limitations on the size of retail stores were harming the environment.
“Business Queen Anne’s enthusiastically supports this amendment and urges your prompt adoption,” Waterman said. “Limitations on size has been detrimental to our tax base, because it prevents major tenants from locating in our county – thus preventing the smaller stores “[from succeeding] near bigger anchor tenants. For too long here citizens, especially those of low and modest incomes, have been forced to drive out of the county in order to shop at major retailers who offer competitive prices…[citizens] have to spend extra gasoline dollars and create additional carbon footprint and air pollution.”
Barry Griffith of Lane Engineeing, LLC, whose firm represents landowner Pete Sheaffer, insisted that size limitations were hurting jobs in QAC — and that large retailers and small business can co-exist successfully; Griffith used Easton as an example.
“Since this ban on large scale retail…the result has been no new large scale retail [anchors in QAC],” Griffith said. “We have our residents continuing to commute to Annapolis, Middletown, and Easton for the type of price and selection alternatives that these stores offer. We’re spending their time, their gas, their mileage in the car [and] the traffic and the pollution that it all generates to go elsewhere — because we don’t have those opportunities.”
“Easton has a Target, Wal-Mart, and soon to be a Khols,” Griffith said. “Easton is one of the most successful and vibrant downtown locations on the Eastern Shore…those stores are an attraction for commercial activity.”
Landowner Pete Sheaffer echoed Griffiths comments, but added that development must follow market forces.
“I go down to Easton a lot and I go in small stores and I go in big stores,” Sheaffer said. “Everybody gets along fine…to turn around and say you’ll put the little guys out of business [because of the large stores] is ridiculous. All you got to do is drive down to Easton, those stores are still flourishing there on the main drag. You have to be able to do what the market dictates, you can’t tell people the size of the store they need to survive.”
But Stan Ruddie, founder of Up Against the Wall, an organization that fought the development of a Wal-Mart on Kent Island a decade ago, disagreed with Griffith’s and Sheaffer’s success stories about Easton.
“When the Wal-Mart in Easton opened, one in five competing businesses ceased operations,” Ruddie said. “I see this as a disaster for a small rural community. The [companies] that pay people a living wage, like PRS Guitars and Zodiac Boats International, are welcome in the county, and predatory businesses are not.”
Mary Roby of Kent Island said people should be allowed choices.
“I guess I’m in the minority, but I’m in favor or [the amendment],” Roby said. “I think the residents of Queen Anne’s County need choices where they shop and where they spend their money. Many people currently go outside the county for shopping services, and they’re not spending one penny of their money in the county. We’re losing an opportunity for revenue, which would help keep our taxes lower.”
Downtown Chestertown Association President Nancy McGuire spoke on behalf of businesses in both Kingstown and Chestertown in opposition to the amendment.
“There is a reason you have limited the size of the buildings. I ask that you remember why that important decision was made. When a change, such as this happens, it changes its neighborhood. The argument for changing either the use or zoning of any adjacent land is that there has been a change in the neighborhood. Before we know it, an area becomes a new Middletown. One parcel after another replicates the first “Big Box.”
“We are stuck with that decision for I have never seen a subdivision nor a shopping center demolished for open land or a use changed for a more fitting one in size or scale. This is highly complicated change. Everything changes from traffic, lifestyles, infrastructure, noise, light pollution and on and on. “Big Box” use of land never follows the neighborhood; the neighborhood is suddenly forced to keep
up with the “Big Box.”
‘This creeping change in neighborhoods is insidious but has a beginning. Someone (or persons) was responsible for that beginning.”
“Towns in Queen Anne’s County, such as Stevensville, Chester, and Centreville began and have been devoted to small independent businesses from local hardware business to Kingstown Southern States. We all know they will adversely feel the affect of a large “Big Box” that, like a vacuum, sucks the life-blood from local independent businesses. We don’t even have to discuss the details of that statement for it has been proven over and over again. The DCA and all local business organizations are doing, whatever they can to influence citizens to buy locally so our local dollars stay locally. The definition of an independent small business is where business decisions and dollars remain locally. Large corporations that need such a large footprint drain more than 50% of every dollar from the local economy. We should not be fooled to think otherwise. By necessity these large corporate marketing and product decisions do not have our local welfare in mind.”
QAC Commissioner Phil Dumenil said he changed his mind on the text amendment because he thought the development would be at the intersection and not four tenths of a mile away on Route 544.
In review of taped interview with the Spy on June 27, Dumenil said, “That would not be one of the areas I would support a box store to be at, so under that pretense I could not support the text amendment.”
Dumenil clarified his position after the vote.
“My opposition to it was that it was actually going to be on that corner,” Dumenil said.
Two sources very familiar with text amendment said Dumenil should have been aware of the exact location of the site before the June 27 interview with the Spy.
.
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.