'Input' Editorial Was MisguidedThe Oct. 22 editorial...


November 07, 1993

'Input' Editorial Was Misguided

The Oct. 22 editorial, "Fast Track and the Fast Shuffle," endorsing the proposed legislation calling for additional public input to the building development approval process in Harford County, is totally misguided.

Our company has built homes, developed residential communities and commercial properties in Harford County for more than 45 years. We know very well the importance of public input, not only for our future public relations but also for gathering information to satisfy any issues we may have overlooked in planning our various projects. Most developers make it a standard practice (as we do) to inform surrounding communities of their plans for feedback. Even if the developer does not do this, public notice is given on all projects submitted ++ to the county for review and the public has the ability to attend these sessions and to make comments.

The large "fast track" projects were cited in the editorial but it failed to mention how this extra burden would affect the hundreds of smaller projects submitted each year that are subject to the normal governmental approval process -- a process many think takes too long and is too costly now. Affordable housing has become a thing of the past as the costs and time associated with the approval process escalate. Furthermore, small businesses are unable to expend precious capital . . . at a time when the county needs to expand its commercial tax base. Adding the unnecessary hardship of additional notification, public meetings and redundant public input in this process will only add to the problem.

One important aspect to consider from an investment point of view would be as follows: When a developer considers buying property for development, an analysis and investigation of the surrounding and adjoining properties is performed to see what impact they may have on the proposed project. When individuals buy homes, this also is an investment and as such should entail some analysis on their part. The onus should be on those individuals to investigate the surrounding area, to learn the zoning of the land and to find out what future plans and potential it may hold. I am not saying "let the buyer beware"; I'm saying that a decision to invest in real estate whether for a residential or business purpose requires analysis. I'm suggesting that the due diligence be performed by the buyer of property and not by the existing owners of the property around it. . . .

It is interesting to me that the "newcomers" to the Harford County development area are the ones suggesting this unnecessary legislation.

If such a law was in effect prior to them moving to this area, their developments may never have been built.

James Lambdin

Abingdon 2

The writer is president of Art Builders, Inc.

Trivial Pursuit

There is a sickness which has infected this city. . . . It is not the Asian Flu or Lyme's Disease. It has spread to the humblest man on the street, our political leaders, the usual thoughtful works of Michael Olesker and even has invaded National Public Radio. Can a National Football League franchise be that important to a city?

I was just a little relieved after reading Theo Lippman's column Oct. 28. He noted: "We probably wouldn't give that much coverage if Jesus came back."

It is frightening to anticipate the state of events . . . should the second franchise be given to one of the other candidates. I suppose there will be a declaration of war without the approval of the U.S. Congress. I suggest that an alternative would be that all of those infected souls get themselves to "O Re Ole" Park at Camden Yards and have a good cry.

Grover C. Condon


First And Second Amendments: Which Do You Want To Ignore?

I would like to thank you for the Roger Simon and Mike Littwin columns that appeared in The Sun on Oct. 22. Once again, you have provided an excellent example of flawed logic and biased journalism in trumpeting your agenda to disarm America.

Both commentaries express appall and horror at congressional intervention on our constitution's First Amendment rights. They correctly conclude that the government should stop meddling with the constitution and that parents need to show more concern and responsibility. Mr. Littwin's analogy on the Disney decision to edit its movie based on a few idiots' impropriety was right on target. Mr. Simon's third from last paragraph that states that Congress cannot teach values to our children was right on the money. Then, after displaying a ray of hope in conveying common sense, both writers fail to read the Constitution and the First Amendment.

It would only stand to reason that if Congress cannot teach our children the values that our society finds acceptable, and that an inanimate object such as a movie or television program should not be controlled by our government because we cannot substantiate that doing so will reduce crime, than one must also conclude that further gun control is just as wrong and useless a venture.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.