[RP TownTalk] Redevelopment and Traffic

Wed Feb 14 18:46:12 UTC 2007

Dear neighbors,

I've wanted to stay back from the current discussion and allow others to get
in there thoughts in a free flow of ideas about the Dumm's Corner Proposal
and issues surrounding it.  Having done so for a while I'd like to share
some information and thoughts with you.

1) The Condo Market.  For those who missed it, Riverdale Business
Association President and local realtor Audrey Bragg shared some industry
information with us that shows the condo market in Prince Groege's County
is robust and clearly not part of the wider down turn in the Metro
area. Sales were up more than 50% last year and thereby condos seem a good
investment in Prince George's County.

The sales picture remains good in the recent report to MUTC by our other
local development project Eakin Youngentaub, who remain optimistic about
condos in our area.

Lastly, the fact that Pete and Son's must finance virtually the whole
project provides us some significant security. This means that a bank will
have to actually carry the brunt of the project's risk and if the market
were to look truly bleak IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY the financing will simply
not happen and thereby the project will never get out of the starting gate.

2) Congestion in and around the rail road crossing.  We have done a fair
amount of fact gathering about this choke point, and can fairly conclusively
make the following statement:

The overwhelming majority of trips through the town center neither begin nor
end in Riverdale Park.  We all intuitively known that "cut through traffic"
makes up a substantial part of our problem, but based on combining police
ticket information, average household trip information, what we know about
jobs based in Riverdale Park and the traffic count we did in the fall of
2005 at least 80% and probably closer to 90% of the traffic coming through
at rush hours begin and end outside of town.

Thus, any answer to containing traffic must focus primarily on curbing
traffic that is, in effect, using our neighborhood streets as a highway.  In
order to reduce this flow there are several things we are doing or can do:
1) continue to work with State Highway to improve traffic flow on Route One,
Kenilworth and 410; 2) consider strategic changing of streets with high
volumes of rush-hour traffic to ONE WAY during some or all of the day; 3)
closing a few streets outright; and 4) investing in more up-to date
intersection monitoring technology.

REMINDER: there is a Public Safety Meeting this Thursday evening 7:30 at
Town Hall.  One item open to discussion will be expanding the time that the
4700 block of Queensbury is a one way street.  Other ideas will likely be
floated and discussed too.

3) Dumm's Corner Proposal and redevelopment in Town Center.  As most of you
know, I've always strove to build consensus in the town and no where is that
more important than in regard to Town Center and redevelopment.   I'd like
to catch everyone up on what has happened so far.

1) The design was submitted to the Mixed Use Town Center Committee in
December and was approved subject to it obtaining the necessary variances
from several standards.  This conditional approval was given because this
project meets the overall intentions of MUTC in style, purpose and quality.
There were questions about upward of 30 standards out of the 200 standards
that MUTC set although the critical one is the height issue.  Central to
MUTC's approval was that the proposal was for a high quality project.

2) When discussing the project with the Dumm's team and County Park and
Planning, and during the presentation to the town on Monday January 29th, it
became clear that there were only three issues, parking, height and setback
from the tracks.  Pete and Sons then requested the town take a position on
these issues prior to their making the $150,000 investment in getting the
variance through the County process.

The council unanimously passed a resolution on Wednesday February 5th
that approved the height and setback, but demanded that the project meet the
already lenient parking requirements (the project was already within a very
few spaces of meeting the standard).  Thus, the town's official position is
that the project can be larger, but demands compliance with every other
standard set forth in MUTC--99% compliance of the 200 standards. Pete and
Son's have assured us that they can and will meet every other standard.

The resolution made plan that our support is based on the project
maintaining the high quality of the original proposal.  The town has much
power over the process and we have the will to demand that the quality
remain through to the end.

Why did the Council agree to these changes?  I certainly do not speak for
anyone specifically, but as Chairman of the Council I understand our actions
as follows.

The biggest factor was that we are now convinced that we are getting a
good deal for the town. It will bring significant improvement in a much
larger Dumm's market and a genuine restaurant; it will bring more people
into our otherwise basically deserted town center; it will hopefully
inspire our two landlords in Town Center to get businesses into their
spaces.

One of the reasons we let the Patriot Group walk last spring was that we
were skeptical that a project couldn't be done with a reasonable profit
margin less than 5 stories, but since then significant evidence has
accumulated that this is not the case.  Pete came to the town with a four
story project and thought he could get the financing for it.  We said go see
what you can do, and then come back.  He did and the banks refused to
finance saying it would loose money and likely end up failing.  He then
added a 5th story to the North building and the numbers now appear
acceptable enough to some banks for them to look at the next step.

Is my opinion or the council's based simply on Pete's word? NO! As soon as
the Patriot Group walked, I immediately started trying to find other
developers that would be "town center" developers and be willing to do a
smaller project.  Despite meeting with a number of such persons, not one
thought there was any way to do it at 3 stories and no one was confident
enough in doing a straight 4 story to create a concept plan for me to take
to Pete.

Also, we've spoken with our Park and Planning staff and others on MUTC about
how the 3 floor standard was arrived at.  I specifically asked if there had
been any economic viability analysis done during the drafting process, and
the answer was a clear NO.  However, what did come back from Park and
Planning was an equally clear statement that they were not receiving
applications for permits for any project similar to this one without it
being 5 stories tall.

Lastly, we looked to see who had the guts to get something done.  The
Council and I have said lets look to successful business men who have made
good in our town center to help lead us forward. Enough gloom and doom--lets
at least try to succeed.

I will continue to try to create a consensus that includes all and was
heartened by the good sporting words that were exchanged yesterday on this
list.  However, a working consensus has to be based on all of the facts and
account for the evidence available to us. Presenting only the negative will
lead only to our never having the nerve to move forward.  Let's take
precaution against failure, but have the nerve to act with courage to seize
a good opportunity.

Best wishes,

Vern

-- 
Vernon Archer, Mayor
Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20070214/8e98fd3f/attachment-0003.html>