[RP TownTalk] issues with Patriot Group condo proposal

[Roland Walker]

Hello all,

This will be a lengthy email.

The Patriot Group has finally made an actual application to the MUTC
committee to build condos on the Dumm's corner properties.  This is
important.  The project has finally moved from a fluid notion to a
firm proposal.

The MUTC meeting tomorrow evening will take up the formal application
for the first time.  This probably the most important meeting to
attend if you are interested in the Patriot Group project.

We need good development in Riverdale Park.  Negotiating with
developers is the only way to get that.  I have fought strongly
against the short-sighted notion that we should not be at the table
with the Patriot Group.

Now that we are at the table together, we as a town need to look out
for our interests.  The Patriot Group will not do that for us.  They
are in business for one purpose: to make money.

We interested citizens should go over the proposal carefully, bringing
specific, substantive criticisms to the MUTC committee and to the
mayor and council.  We should encourage MUTC and our elected
representatives to seek what is best for the town, and to stand firm
under pressure.  And there will be pressure.  Developers will smile
and shake your hand, but their negotiating tactics are always
hardball.

Below are just some of the substantive issues the town should be
haggling over with the Patriot Group.  I present them as criticisms of
the current proposal, not in the interest of knocking it down, but in
the interest of improving it.

It is often necessary to compromise.  But if we give in on any point
(say, the reduction in the amount of commercial space) then we can and
should demand concessions from the developer in return.

1 Height.  The area in which the development is proposed is zoned for
three stories, with some notes about variances being granted for four
stories at most.  The Patriot Group is asking for five stories, which
is a huge variance.

2 Building materials.  The building materials in the proposal are not
better than average.  We should expect top-quality materials.  We can
call on local architects and developers to help us navigate the
technical details.

3 Facade.  The current facade, while it draws elements from some
nearby residences is neither attractive nor fitting for a historic
district.  The facade should be broken up so that it looks like a
series of different buildings, as is being done in the EYA development
in Hyattsville and in the KSI development on the north side of
Riverdale Park.  One can also break up the elevation so that the
building does not look so monolithic.

4 Parking.  The Patriot Group is still seeking a variance to put in
less parking than the MUTC rules require.  MUTC already allows a
generous discount on the standard county parking guidelines in the
interest of promoting development.  In my view, we have *already*
compromised on parking, and should not give up a single additional
space.

5 Parking location.  The proposed surface lot is so inconvenient to
the commercial space that it is probably unusable for anyone to drive
up and shop.  You need to look at the plans to see the layout -- I
can't describe it well here.

6 Commercial space.  While the amount of commercial space has been
increased since the first ideas were floated, we are still talking
about reducing the total amount of commercial space in our town
center.   We need more businesses in our town, not less.

7 Commercial space location. It has yet to be decided whether it is
preferable to have commercial space lining Lafayette, Riverdale, or
Queensbury.

8 Setbacks.  While MUTC encourages urban-style small setbacks, the
proposal reduces the setbacks we currently have at those properties. 
Part of the MUTC mission is to be pedestrian-friendly.  Smaller
sidewalks are not pedestrian-friendly.

It is probably more important to have a generous setback on Riverdale
Road.  Currently, they give more space on Lafayette (Gerry pls correct
me if wrong).

9 Rental units.  Many people oppose adding more rental units to
Riverdale Park.  The proposal calls for condos, not apartments.   
However, individually owned condos can be leased, and the developer
might seek to lease units while waiting for sale.  The town can seek
conditions to address this, such as an agreement from the developer
not to lease directly, and a clause in the condo association bylaws
limiting rentals.

10 Amenities.  The developer calls these "high-end" condos, but they
include no amenities (such as a gym).  They have claimed (contrary to
fact) that amenities are only found in rental apartments.

I could go on, but that's a start.  Not all of these issues are
directly addressed by MUTC, but we have the right to ask for anything
in exchange for a variance.  All of these issues, and more, are fair
game for discussion tomorrow evening.

R