[RP TownTalk] MUTC Meeting Outcomes

[Alice Ewen Walker]

In answer to Dwight's question, the plans available at Town Hall include the
landscape plan, unit layout w/dimensions of the units, a 13 page checklist
of how the plans either conform or deviate from the mandatory pieces of the
MUTC guidelines, and the parking/garage layout. As far as the general look
and materials, what's online is probably sufficient for most people to get a
sense of what's been proposed.

- Alice


On 12/11/06, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see that some of the drawings have been posted to the website.  This is
> great.
>
> Can someone tell us how much more is available at Town Hall than what we
> have here?  Thanks.
>
> Available plans include the layout at the ground floor (retail) level<http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us/Misc/2006/12/RiverdaleCorner-02RetailPlan-11.13.06.pdf>from above, a view from the
> other side of the railroad tracks *at the crossing*<http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us/Misc/2006/12/RiverdaleCorner-07Elevation3-11.13.06.pdf>,
> a view from the other side of the railroad tracks *a little bit north of
> Riverdale Road*<http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us/Misc/2006/12/RiverdaleCorner-08Elevation4-11.13.06.pdf>,
> a view from the other side of the railroad tracks *a little bit south of
> Riverdale Road*<http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us/Misc/2006/12/RiverdaleCorner-09Elevation5-11.13.06.pdf>,
> and a set of numerical tables<http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us/Misc/2006/12/RiverdaleCorner-01Summary-11.13.06.pdf>about the development's square footage.
>
>
>
>
> On 12/7/06, Alice Ewen Walker <alice.ewen.walker at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Town Talkers,
> >
> > Last night the M-UTC committee met with Pete and Sons (owners of
> > Dumms) to review their new application for redevelopment of properties
> > at Queensbury / Lafayette / Riverdale Rd. (the properties where the
> > boarding house, convenience store/sub shop, and credit union building
> > are now located.)
> >
> > As with the previous development proposed by Patriot Group, the
> > redevelopment does not meet the M-UTC guidelines on a few very major
> > points: building height, setback, and parking.  Those are standards
> > that are mandatory, which the zoning committee has no legal ability to
> > waive. The county, in consulatation with town council, does have that
> > authority through the 'special exception' process.
> >
> > The M-UTC voted to approve the project subject to it securing permits
> > from the county through the special exception process. In essence,
> > this means the zoning committee approved everything that we have the
> > authority to approve and now the proposal passes to the county to
> > secure those big exceptions. The county will consult w/ the town in
> > this review.
> >
> > It is really up to the town's elected body, reportable to voters, to
> > determine major variations from the zoning -- such as building height.
> >
> > (In my view, building height is the only big issue on the table.  The
> > variance needed for setbacks is reasonable - it allows them to build
> > closer to the train tracks than current county codes now allow, but is
> > consistent with our historic build to lines. The parking variance is
> > minor.)
> >
> > About the project -
> >
> > The proposal we saw reflected effort by the applicant to incorporate
> > many of the comments the committee and public provided during the
> > Patriot Group's earlier application process. Several of the
> > concessions/improvements that were made in this application are:
> > - 4 stories rather than 5 on the building on the south side of Riverdale
> > Rd.
> > - use of quality materials and articulation on all faces of the
> > building, including the courtyard/back sides
> > - more surface level parking to serve retail businesses
> > - no net loss of retail space. this version of the project provides
> > about twice the retail area as what the Patriot Group had proposed.
> > - effort made to minimize the roof profile
> > - a two phase building process that will allow the owners to continue
> > to operate their businesses with no shut down and no loss of these
> > valued businesses to the town.
> > - larger unit sizes to the residential units than what was previously
> > proposed
> >
> > While there are some details that are still pending regarding interior
> > amenities, landscaping and other features, these are things that the
> > applicant has stated will be in compliance with the M-UTC guidelines.
> >
> > At this point, the applicant is going to move with all haste to submit
> > for the special permit and get a decision about whether the project
> > will be granted an exception or not.
> >
> > If you have opinions about the project (in favor or not), the most
> > appropriate thing to do is to review the plans at town hall and get in
> > touch with your council person. You may also want to talk to the folks
> > at Dumm's Corner, who would like to keep the lines of communication
> > open and would rather have a chance to answer/address concerns now
> > than later.
> >
> > Many thanks to the Spiropoulos family and their architecture team for
> > a thorough and straight forward presentation of the project last
> > night.
> >
> > Alice Ewen Walker
> > M-UTC Committee Chair
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TownTalk mailing list
> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org is for automated subscription
> processing only
> http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>
> For more information about Riverdale Park, visit
> http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20061217/afe4ff2b/attachment-0003.html>