Be Part of the Conversation
Walter Vasquez’s promotion for the development of Crystal Spring (The Capital, April 12) left out some very important points:
He left out the words “Crystal Spring” in mentioning the project now dubbed by the misnomer of “The Village at Providence Point.”
Next, Mr. Vasquez cites economic data from a study of a development at Crystal Spring that is irrelevant, as the project studied no longer exists.
He also overlooks the major traffic and environmental problems with the current proposal for nearly 400 new housing units, a 48-unit assisted living facility, 500 parking spaces and a couple of new roads.
The writer claims that since the property is privately owned it can be developed in any way the owner sees fit. Not true!
Of course, all of us owning property cannot do what we want with it. We live in a community and benefit from having planning, zoning, environmental and traffic laws to assure that proposed developments don’t overwhelm existing infrastructure and pollute our environment.
The owner has not yet set aside any part of the land to be preserved.
The writer alleges the owner could easily develop all 111 acres of the property. This is also not accurate, based on the same restrictions put in place in respect to wetlands, Critical Area lands, priority forests and zoning restrictions to prevent this.
Mr. Vasquez is correct that once the owner has strategically split the property, cleared 27 acres of forest and constructed the intensive Providence Point project, the owner will have cleared the way to develop the remaining 66 acres at Crystal Spring.
The current proposal simply is not responsible development and is deceptive by design.
POLLY RODRIGUEZ, ANNAPOLIS