From: Petze Frederic W. Mr.

Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 1:53 PM

To: 'Robert.Karge@eastonmd.com'

Subject: Big Boxes

Mr. Karge -

What occurs to me about this controversy is the future not only of Easton but also of Talbot County. If we assume that population grows naturally (fewer deaths than births, as a general statement), then the needs of Talbot County to accommodate the increased population are several. Beyond the simple needs of materials to build structures, food stores to stock the groceries, and shops to provide the durable goods is the need to provide an employment infrastructure that will occupy those who do not leave our fair county. Let's look at that for a moment. Many of those who go off to college in fact never return. Why? Because there is limited professional employment in the county. We can absorb only so many engineers, business majors, teachers, nurses, and the like. Who, then, is left? Those who are tied to the county in some way, those who largely do not go off to college, and those who go off but are drawn inexorably back. And where will many of them work? The family farm or business can absorb only so many of the family - once the number of children exceeds the work capacity, the others must find another line of work.

What about the "retired" population that moves here for the quality of life? They too need services, stores, and building materials. Even the "gang-plankers" modify, restore, remodel, rebuild their homes, and they too want the convenience of shopping locally, from local people.

If we then agree that the population is growing, that it has needs in increased retail offerings, that it generally prefers to shop locally, and that there is a significant need for employment/ownership for this increased population, then how best shall we meet those needs. Does, in fact, a "big box" lumber yard (a Home Depot or a Lowes) meet that need? Of course it does - we recognize that, and understand that not only does it meet those needs but it also meets them at a lower price than would a smaller retailer. Would that big store then unfairly compete with other established business? Maybe, but isn't that the essence of the free enterprise system - that the better competitor wins? Instead of protecting business operating inefficiently, ineffectively, unprofitably, or at too high a profit margin, shouldn't we expect that we could welcome a better mousetrap with open arms? Given, then, that there is a need, for example, for a big box lumber yard in this region, why should we permit it to go to Dorchester, Caroline, Queen Anne, or anywhere else. Beyond convenience for the shopper, why not provide for our own county the job opportunities, the income tax revenues on those jobs, the tax revenues on the property and business, and the associated revenue from having a hub business that will attract further retail offerings (the essence of the mall concept). Certainly, the developer recognized the potential for revenue here, by his immediate investigation into the area near Black and Decker (if the town won't let us, then let's go into the county). What a loss to the town coffers.

From an environmental perspective, we do need to pay attention to run-off, to pollutants, and to traffic concerns. They are all solvable problems, though. And we could also require some sort of bond or insurance that if the business failed the building would either be converted or be pulled down. Once again, a solvable problem. Where to put it? I don't know, except that I do know that the current zoning for the Easton Commons is right for commercial development - if not accessible to Route 50, then where? On the bypass? On St. Michaels Road? Every site off 50 costs traffic, and therefore costs potential customers. Is this the wrong area due to residences, etc? Of course not - there are residences behind Talbottown, behind Glebe Road, behind Marlboro Road, behind Elliott Road. When has that ever stopped development? The new ball field? If someone hits a baseball over Route 50, call the Orioles – they could use him or her. And with a fence along Route 50, a traffic problem with the ball field is minimal. Chapel Road is too small? A solvable problem for the builder and county/town - any competent engineer could fix that. I believe the moratorium is wrong, and that the time to approve this development is here. Build it, and reap the benefits of the business. Build it in a way that will minimize damage to the environment and will not degrade our way of life (progress will come, regardless of how we fight it or how much we want to pull up the gangplank), but build it. The need is demonstrated and the future Talbot Countians will not only need it, they will use it.

Fred Petze