Capital LTE: “Crystal Spring’s few proponents distort the issues”

Capital Gazette: Letters to the Editor, October 7, 2017

My family and I must travel past Crystal Spring and Mas Que Farm daily and will be directly affected by the development of these properties. With all of the back and forth, I’ve noticed a common deceptive thread within the small minority favoring development:

  • Any reference to Crystal Spring is avoided, as if the developers’ renaming of the massive development is going to change the ultimate outcome: less forest and more traffic.
  • Those who object to the project are often castigated as no-growth extremists. On Aug. 11, Department of Planning and Zoning officials sent the new development filings back as “inconsistent, incomplete, lacking analysis and detail.” The planners refused to further process the plans until the deficiencies are corrected. Doesn’t this adds validity to the concerns of those who oppose the plans?
  • The environmental destruction was dismissed in a guest column (The Capital, Sept. 9) with “some trees will need to be cleared.” The writer alleged there are only “overgrown vines and fallen trees.” The developers’ latest plans would destroy 39.5 acres of designated priority forest meant to be left undisturbed. Many species of wildlife depend on thick acreage of forest to thrive and will never return.
  • Traffic problems are ignored, with the columnist alleging she had never witnessed a major backup on the Forest Drive corridor. The new filings not only add to the senior unit numbers but, shockingly, lead to the development of more land to accommodate more than 150 nonsenior housing units full of commuters.

Like a lot of other families, we love Annapolis exactly because it’s different than the hyper-developed metro area to our west. Let’s be honest: Any objective evaluation of the facts leaves one to seriously question the appropriateness of this development.


Link to Original Article