By Donald Wittkowski Some people love them, while others loathe them. However, members of City Council aren't quite so sure how they feel about "coastal cottages," a new type of housing that has polarized the community and generated litigation. Council was expected to give final approval Thursday night to a proposed ordinance that would have dramatically slowed down the development of the cottages, but instead tabled the measure for further discussion. Council President Keith Hartzell said the ordinance will be considered again at the May 26 meeting. Antwan McClellan, the only Council member to vote against tabling the ordinance, said he wants to see it changed by the city's Planning Board to reflect feedback from the community. Councilwoman Karen Bergman expressed hope that the extra time would allow Council a chance to scrutinize the ordinance and come back with something that "makes sense." Councilman Peter Madden, who recommended tabling the ordinance, said it should be re-evaluated and possibly replaced with a new version. A former councilman who owns property where two coastal cottage projects would be built disclosed Thursday that he has filed a lawsuit against the city to challenge the ordinance. John Flood, who served on Council from 1988 to 1996, also revealed he has filed a petition with the City Clerk's Office opposing the ordinance. He said the petition contains the signatures of at least 20 percent of the property owners within the development zone where the cottages are currently allowed. The city originally proposed clustering the cottage projects within the Drive-in Business Zone, an area concentrated along Haven Avenue in the center of town. But the proposed ordinance would eliminate the cottages from the Drive-in Business Zone.Flood owns property at 16th Street and Haven Avenue that currently serves as the site of the Ocean City Chevrolet dealership. Plans call for developing two coastal cottage projects there once the dealership's lease expires in four and a half years, Flood explained. Appearing before Council at Thursday's meeting, Flood urged the members to kill the ordinance. He argued that it would constitute "illegal spot zoning" against the cottages. Flood also believes that Hartzell and Councilman Tony Wilson should recuse themselves from voting on the issue because of alleged conflicts of interests. Hartzell said after the meeting that he owns two pieces of property within the Drive-in Business Zone. Speaking to reporters, Hartzell noted he has hired an attorney to determine whether his ownership of the property constitutes a conflict of interest. Hartzell added that he doubts he has a conflict because his property is too small to develop and he would gain no financial benefit even if he opposed the coastal cottages. Wilson, meanwhile, did not vote when Council tabled the ordinance. He told reporters that he recused himself because his plumbing and heating company is located within the cottage redevelopment zone. City Council originally approved the concept of coastal cottages in 2013 as a way to attract more year-round families to town. The cottages were envisioned as a smaller, more affordable type of housing that would appeal to young families looking to buy their first home. However, the arrival of the Costeria project brought complaints that the cottages were too big, too closely bunched together and too expensive. They went on the market in late 2014 with a sales price ranging from $499,900 to $649,900. One local resident, Bill Hartranft, ridiculed the cottages as expensive "rowhouses." "Half a million dollars for a rowhouse is laughable," Hartranft told Council during the public comment session on the cottage ordinance. Marie Hayes, another local resident who criticized the Costeria cottages, called them tall, narrow homes with no backyards. Carmen Costanza, a local contractor who is building the cottages for Costeria, defended the project. He joined Flood in calling on Council to rescind the ordinance. Responding to public criticism of the Costeria project, Costanzo said the cottages offer attractive, affordable housing and plenty of open space between each home. He said that of Costeria's 18 homes, 16 have been sold so far.
"It's a cute, little development," Costanza said. "No one feels they are on top of each other. Rowhome is a mischaracterization." However, Council and Mayor Jay Gillian believe the cottages should be studied following questions about their sales price, larger than expected size and potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. Previously approved cottage projects would be grandfathered in under the proposed ordinance. No new projects would be allowed. In other business Thursday night, Council gave final approval to a $475,000 bond ordinance that will finance the purchase of an abandoned former BP gas station on the Ninth Street entryway. The city plans to demolish the BP station and convert the property into green space and a parking lot. Removal of the blighted BP property is part of the city’s efforts to clean up three abandoned gas stations along the Ninth Street corridor, the main artery in and out of town. The city is in talks to acquire an old Getty station next to the BP property. If the city buys the Getty site, the station will be demolished and transformed into green space. A former Exxon station across the street from the BP and Getty sites is slated for redevelopment into a new multimillion-dollar office for the Ocean City real estate firm Keller Williams.
