[RP TownTalk] Character Counts

[Roland Walker]

Dear Ann,

How nice to hear from you.  The MUTC visioning process for Riverdale
Park occurred primarily during the Herman administration, well after
you had moved to Virginia.  Most of the things that you have heard
"through the grapevine" about MUTC are incorrect.

MUTC does promote redevelopment. That is its purpose. Here is the
first line of the MUTC book

   The Mixed-Use Town Center (M-U-TC) Zone was created in
   1994 to promote reinvestment and redevelopment in the county's
   older, more established mixed-use areas.

Here's where you can read it

   http://www.mncppc.org/cpd/PDFs/Riverdale/Introduction.pdf

Since MUTC only applies to new buildings, it can *only* meet its
vision by redevelopment.  So MUTC is all about redevelopment, from
start to finish.

MUTC also strongly promotes density.  It does this by such methods as
moving build-to lines closer to the street and allowing taller
buildings.  It is even possible that the Wachovia application will be
denied for not being dense enough!

If the Dumm's boarding house was left out of MUTC, any redevelopment
on that property would have been limited to single-family homes.  Now
that it is inside MUTC, that property is part of the highly dense
proposed condo development.

On the subject of that property, a relevant aside:  during the
visioning process, Mr Wernek and the rest of the committee overrode
the county's proposed MUTC boundaries to pull in the complete
Spiropoulis property.  This was done for the specific purpose of
spurring new developments there.  There was ample negotiation over the
terms of inclusion; there will be minutes and correspondence detailing
that decision on file at Town Hall.

All of this was discussed, and decided, and voted on, and written into
law years ago: the decision to promote redevelopment, the decision to
promote density, the decision to include the Spiropoulis property.

Right now the town would better profit by a practical discussion about
which variances to grant, which not to grant, and what concessions we
can squeeze out of the developers.

Respectfully, and with kindest regards to you, Ann,

Roland

On 3/15/06, johnferg27 at aol.com <johnferg27 at aol.com> wrote:
>
> I first learned of the benefit of an M-U-TC zone in the Fall of 2000 when
> the threat of demolition of a major portion of the Route One corridor old
> buildings first loomed to be replaced with an Eckerd Drug Store.  I tried to
> get the designation of the zone on a fast-track through County Councilmember
> Hendershot's office.  He did not choose to move it along and, as you all
> know only too well, the buildings were torn down and you've been forced to
> tolerate a mess at that property since then. It appears you will eventually
> have a bank there AND it is because of the M-U-TC that you are able to place
> certain demands on the table in the way that bank is placed and designed.
>
> At no time did I ever understand that the M-U-TC zone was intended to expand
> and increase development within its boundaries.  It's intent was explained
> to me then (and I have no reason to believe it has changed) that it gave the
> local government a stronger voice in keeping rehab and new development and
> in-fill development in keeping with what the local residents and government
> felt were compatible with the existing development.
>
> The proposed development at Dumm's Corner will remove a significant measure
> of the existing character of the town -- I'm not suggesting that character
> is Georgetown or Alexandria chic -- however, it is unique as a five (or
> four) story apartment building will not be.  The present boarding house is a
> circa 1910 home -- would it not add to the town's character if it became a B
> & B with a dining room on the ground floor that would cater to guests and
> the public at large (just one possibility).  Such a use could play off
> having the railroad crossing there.  The former Credit Union is a circa
> 1930s-40s building and was occupied by the Ben Dyer Survey operation for
> decades.  It can't be held up as an example of Frank Lloyd Wright
> architecture, but it is unique (art moderne) and could be developed into a
> store or restaurant wherein you would play off that characteristic.
>
> The foreward to the M-U-TC legislation states:  "The intent of the zone
> [M-U-TC] is to provide more design flexibility, while promoting more
> compatible development for older communities"  -- I do not read anything
> therein that calls for more intensive land use.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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_riverdale-park.org
>
>
>