[RP TownTalk] Wachovia and the Field of Rubble

[Gerald King]

This is a second try. I have eliminated the original message from 
Heather fearing that it made my email too large for TownTalk. This 
message was originally sent at 3:51 pm.

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