In a recent public meeting, various speakers discussed the development and master planning in their community, the differentiation between capital improvements and maintenance, collaboration between entities, and strategies to maximize funding opportunities. This article aims to detail the key conversations from this meeting.
Master Planning and Development:
One speaker raised concerns about the lack of master planning within development districts, villages, and town centers. They stated: “We have done a very poor job about master planning.” The speaker suggested a more delineated approach, addressing roadways, water, and sewer. They acknowledged their limited success with small area master plans, expressing uncertainty about future developments.
Another speaker emphasized the relationships they have built and how they tackle planning by absorbing information and making the best plans possible. They mentioned working closely with George Erickson at MetCom and looking forward to a new relationship with Ms. Andre.
Capital Improvements vs. Maintenance:
A board member expressed confusion over categorizing certain expenses, such as roof replacements, under traditional capital improvement instead of maintenance. It was clarified that a project ends in the capital improvements program if it costs over $35,000. The speaker also explained how state funding contributes 58% for specific projects like roof or HVAC replacements, while lesser amounts are bundled together.
Building Capacity and Maintenance Strategy:
Questions were raised about how capital improvement correlated with building capacity. Board members explained that state funding doesn’t consider capacity except in underperforming buildings or new constructions. They also discussed additional renovations and the collaborative effort to maximize opportunities and investments.
They cited examples of schools like Great Mills High School and Benjamin Banneker, highlighting the county’s investment in maintaining the buildings rather than tearing them down and rebuilding them.
Collaboration and Acknowledgments:
Speakers discussed the collaborative efforts between the state and county in funding infrastructure maintenance. The county’s comprehensive maintenance plan and state capital improvements program were mentioned.
The acquisition of 170 acres in Leonardtown was mentioned, inquiring about the master plan written in collaboration between the board, Leonardtown, and the county. Speaker 4 confirmed the plan’s existence, available with the county’s Department of Public Works and land use of growth management.
Board members praised the efforts in taking care of the buildings, thanking all involved and pointing out companion documents to the capital improvements program. They appreciated the partnership between the state and county in funding the maintenance of infrastructure.
The meeting closed with thanks and appreciation for the insightful discussions. Reading a report on highway accidents was recommended, emphasizing its importance for the community.
The conversations at this board meeting shed light on the challenges and collaborative efforts to ensure thoughtful master planning, maintenance, and investment in the community’s infrastructure. The exchange of ideas illustrates a shared commitment to continually improve and adapt to changing community needs.