Merchants press Council to send Wonderland site to planning board as residents urge master-plan process

Ocean City business leaders urged the City Council on Oct. 9 to send the vacant Sixth Street/Wonderland Pier parcel to the planning board for a formal rehabilitation review, saying a planning evaluation would allow professional study of whether the site could support new hotel rooms and related uses that could restore year-round visitation.

Wes Kasmark, president of the Boardwalk Merchants Association, told the council the vote under consideration was not approval of a hotel but simply a referral: "This process ensures transparency, fairness, informed decisionmaking — allow the planning board to examine whether this site meets the criteria for rehabilitation," he said.

Why it matters: Speakers representing the Boardwalk Merchants Association, the Downtown Merchant Association and multiple long-time boardwalk businesses said the north end has lost foot traffic and customers since the amusement park closed. They argued that a rehabilitation finding and subsequent redevelopment agreement could unlock tax revenue and year‑round business, and that delaying review risks losing potential investors and further vacancy.

What supporters said: Caitlyn Quirk, president of the Downtown Merchant Association, said merchants had voted nearly unanimously to support referring the site for rehabilitation review and warned that without redevelopment status "nothing can be built at that proposed site without being required rehabilitation status." Several business owners described large declines in summer staffing and sales at Sixth Street since the park closed and urged the council not to close off the planning‑board review path.

What opponents said: Many residents urged the council to adhere to a careful master‑planning process rather than use rehabilitation status as a quick zoning shortcut. Susan Crackavanner and others argued the planning‑board route would take longer but produce more durable community outcomes, and warned that redevelopment powers can enable zoning changes the public may not expect. "If we're looking at this hotel to bring immediate help to the merchant community, that's not going to happen," Crackavanner said.

Prior votes and process concerns: Several speakers referenced earlier council action, saying the council had voted previously on the matter and that some residents felt blindsided by attempts to revisit it. Multiple public commenters criticized what they described as a lack of transparency and demanded that any reconsideration follow standard public‑notice rules and the master‑plan timetable rather than last‑minute referrals.

Council response and next steps: Council President Sean Crowley announced formation of a boardwalk subcommittee to develop a focused review and recommendations — a group he said will report back to council and could inform any planning‑board review and the broader master‑planning work. Crowley named local business and civic members to the subcommittee and said its work would be autonomous and forwardlooking.

Claims and counterclaims: Pro‑redevelopment speakers repeatedly framed the referral as a procedural, nonbinding review; opponents framed the same step as opening the door to zoning changes and urged reliance on the master plan. Multiple speakers also referenced a proposed developer investment (cited in public remarks as a $150 million offer) and disagreed about its feasibility and whether the city should accelerate review for that proposal.

What happens next: The council has not adopted a new redevelopment designation at this meeting for the Sixth Street/Wonderland parcel; instead the meeting produced a public record of strong, competing views and the creation of a council subcommittee the mayor and several speakers said should feed a more comprehensive planning review.