[RP TownTalk] Wachovia and the Field of Rubble
Gerald King
Gerald at geraldking.com
Wed Jul 16 19:51:37 UTC 2008
Heather Blanchard wrote:
{I can't help but think that the end goal would be to restore the Rte. 1
corridor into a walkable community, similar to the approach
Hyattsville's downtown. There would be mixed use, incorporation of
community needs and consistent aesthetics.}
What a quaint little thought. Walkable, mixed use, consistent
aesthetics-these have been the fantasy thoughts of the good people of
Riverdale Park. Too bad they are not the dominant thoughts of the
pragmatists, developers and and power brokers in this town and county
who see gold in this strip of the nations oldest highways. We were
told, the corner was too valuable to allow old buildings and a landmark
mural to stand in the way of building a brand new franchise
business-Exhart Drugs. They (Exhart) were the only ones willing and
capable to pay the absentee owners who wanted more for their properties
than any small businesses could afford. The deal had to include several
other (old) buildings that might be considered (aesthetically
consistent). Money talks and the demolition of all but one of the
buildings was done surprisingly quick. Then came the never ending
struggle between big bucks business, power giddy governments, and the
good people of Riverdale Park. Financial problems knocked out Exhart
and led to "The Field of Rubble" The financial value of this large
buildingless property can only be developed by deep pockets with
political pull. The good people of Riverdale and historic
conservationists posed problems for the deep pockets. Walkable, mixed
use, and consistent aesthetics are not conducive to financial sharpies
who seem to put maximum profit over citizen,s desires. This is not
unusual and I do not mean to imply that all the investors and developers
are mean spirited, cold hearted crooks. They are practical business
people who usually feel they are doing good.
My fantasy (suggestion) is to break up the property into separate lots
(originally the there were four separate lots). Then limited purchases
to small entrepreneurs. Assist these purchasers in financing the
building of small one or two story structures whose facade would be
aesthetically consistent with our late nineteenth-early twentieth
century style. Save and restore the one remaining building in the
original land purchase. It has some fine lines and good brick work. I
know the old argument that its an eye sore and not worth saving. They
use that to eliminate historic buildings and replace them with Rite Aid
cookeycutter brickwork.
Finally, I think the town owes a reward to the owner of the Calvert
House who is the only one who has invested in a trellis in front of his
business. I said "invested" because it cost him plenty to make the area
aesthetically inviting and maybe even a little 'walkable'. We need more
business men of this nature.
That's my rant. Once that fantasy is complete, we can turn our attention
to the other side of the street.
Gerald King
Heather Blanchard wrote:
> Appreciate all the kind words. I agree with both of you as well, why
> would businesses want to develop in Riverdale Park when we make it
> extremely difficult to build? But I would put forth that we make it
> difficult because we don't know what we want, or, maybe, the better
> thought here is that we aren't attracting the right development to our
> town.
>
> I can't help but think that the end goal would be to restore the Rte.
> 1 corridor into a walkable community, similar to the approach
> Hyattsville's downtown. There would be mixed use, incorporation of
> community needs and consistent aesthetics. I don't think a drive
> through bank really is a place where I want to walk a dog, ect.
>
> I agree we have to give to get. I guess my point is that in the
> "getting" we should be a little bit more specific. I bet if the
> development was a small Trader Joes, set back from the street with a
> commitment to work within the historical aesthetics, I don't think the
> town would that developer such a hard time.
>
> If you like Riverdale Park to be drive thru banks, McDonalds and other
> "pad site" development in the middle of a historic district, then the
> current direction is appropriate.
>
> But if you want something like what is happening down the street in
> Hyattsville - like a new bike store, a planned Bus Boys and Poets, and
> a Franklins type of restaurant, then maybe you might reconsider how we
> are accepting whatever comes along.
>
> We need businesses. We just need to think about how allowing this type
> of development will change the character of the community.
>
> Heather
>
> On Jul 16, 2008, at 6:39 AM, bruce.wernek at mindspring.com
> <mailto:bruce.wernek at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> I would also like to add that the litany of requirements imposed upon
>> Caputo by the Town/tenant has to be translated into building permits,
>> right of ways (sewer), road improvements at the Rt 1 intersection,
>> architectural drawings, tenant leases, tenant rights of refusals,
>> build to suit tenant, build to suit Town, construction contracts,
>> endless legal fees, new churches being built (to replace the one
>> thats adjacent to the property, building maintenance on the existing
>> church (to be demolished), appeasement of town residents, etc, etc,
>> etc.
>>
>> Imagine owning a property which you want to develop but you can't
>> because of the previous reasons. At the same time it's eating a hole
>> in your pocket not to mention all of the complaints from Town
>> residents. If you want something to happen stop complaining and give
>> the guy a hand or we will have another "Jey's Auto" on our hands for
>> the reasons that Dwight articulated.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>> From: Cranky old Coot <lking at knob.com <mailto:lking at knob.com>>
>>
>>> Sent: Jul 16, 2008 6:36 AM
>>
>>> To: TownTalk <towntalk at riverdale-park.org
>>> <mailto:towntalk at riverdale-park.org>>
>>
>>> Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] Wachovia and the Field of Rubble
>>
>>>
>>> As Alan said the history of the agreement for what would be done with
>>
>>> this peace of _private_ property at Rt 1/410 is long and filled with
>>
>>> emotion. Players have come and gone some have changed from one official
>>
>>> position to an other.
>>
>>>> ... why can't we -- as a community -- tell him what we want to see
>>>
>>>> there?
>>>
>>> And we wonder why development has been so slow to come to Riverdale
>>
>>> Park? If this were your house (not your neighbor's house) would you
>>
>>> feel the same? First, 'we as a community', want to discuss whether your
>>
>>> house will be historically correct; anything from provincial to Federal
>>
>>> to Victorian (before the mansion to after) - what you can afford is not
>>
>>> part of this discussion. Even after you decide on a design that is
>>
>>> historically correct let's discuss it.
>>
>>>
>>> Now that "we" have approved what "your" house will be, let us discuss
>>
>>> historically correct lead-base paint. Now the color. Now when that is
>>
>>> decided, lets go back and require "your" house be multi-family - "we"
>>
>>> don't care how reclusive you are. Oh and by the way "we" think your
>>
>>> front door should be on the other side.
>>
>>>
>>> "We" also have views on your landscaping, where your driveway should
>>> be,
>>
>>> the number of parking spaces.
>>
>>>
>>> Do you still want to build "your" house in Riverdale? Or will you find
>>
>>> it easer to build somewhere else? I'm really sorry if you already own
>>
>>> the property in town. Now that Riverdale has tipped its hand it will be
>>
>>> hard to find someone else to sell the property to or build on it.
>>
>>> ==
>>
>>> I'm sure I have overlooked something (Ok the lead paint may be a
>>
>>> stretch) but all these topics were part of the council's discussion. In
>>
>>> many cases a topic was addressed by both M-C-TC and then again by the
>>
>>> council. Time at council meetings was spent discussing where the
>>
>>> planters should be and what should be in them; Council members spent
>>
>>> time counting parking spaces and the pros and cons of where the front
>>
>>> door should be.
>>
>>>
>>> The council (I think, maybe it was M-U-TC) required the bank
>>> building be
>>
>>> a multi use building. How many thriller books/movies do you know of
>>
>>> where the basic story line involved tunneling from an office/building
>>
>>> into the neighboring bank? Just lately I have seen a NCIS and Sherlock
>>
>>> Holmes episodes with this plot element. Logic not withstanding
>>> Riverdale
>>
>>> may have the only suburban bank with a building tent.
>>
>>>> Why are we letting developers just offer up development that isn't
>>>
>>>> right for the area? ESPECIALLY, since that piece of property is one of
>>>
>>>> the most valuable and visible that this town has.
>>>
>>> I question the view that the development 'isn't right for the area.'
>>
>>> Established businesses don't survive, spending money expanding into an
>>
>>> area that 'isn't right'. Their criteria may be different than your, but
>>
>>> I will bet before they spend millions of dollars they have spend
>>> lots of
>>
>>> time, and money, making sure the location is right.
>>
>>>>
>>>> If there is any redress on this development, it would be great to
>>>
>>>> know. Maybe we need to rethink how a development like this can get
>>>
>>>> through the council with a, "well...okay..."
>>>
>>> A review of the council meetings would indicate that is not what
>>
>>> happened. But then if more people attended council working and
>>
>>> legislative sessions maybe ...
>>
>>>>
>>>> Just think about Hyattsville - they stuck to their guns and are
>>>
>>>> experiencing PLANNED, gradual, steady and hopefully sustainable
>>>
>>>> development. There might be lesson's learned from our sister
>>>
>>>> communities as we go down the road of development.
>>>
>>> There may also be a lesson in that the development STOPS at the
>>
>>> Riverdale Park line. You can tell where Riverdale starts. Just look for
>>
>>> the defunk gas station.
>>
>>>
>>> The good news is there is an established process, developed with
>>> lots of
>>
>>> public input, for controlling the growth of Riverdale Park.
>>
>>>
>>> The bad news is there is an established process... I am a
>>> newcomer to
>>
>>> Riverdale (~1995) and have seen more businesses leave/close than open.
>>
>>> There is Rt 1/410 - Right we now have McDs. How about town center? Ask
>>
>>> the Dunn's. On the up side there is the Farmer's Market however.
>>
>>>
>>> COC
>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>> TownTalk mailing list
>>
>>> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>>> <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
>>
>>> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>>> <mailto: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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TownTalk mailing list
>> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>> <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
>> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>> <mailto: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
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date: 7/16/2008 6:43 AM
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/20080716/c3a076c5/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the TownTalk
mailing list