[RP TownTalk] What grocery store?

Mon Apr 16 13:25:14 UTC 2012

Good points Bruce.

Regarding traffic, part of the deal that local officials and MNCPPC worked
out with the Cafritz developers is that they cannot break ground before
they secure the right of way for a bridge to cross the railroad tracks
between Tuckerman and the College Park Metro station. This bridge will
connect River Road with the Cafritz development. If they cannot secure the
right of way, construction cannot begin. I believe there are also funding
requirements before they can break ground, but I don't remember the
specifics.

I'm sure someone can find them here:
http://www.mncppc.org/page40173.aspxwhere the final conditions
approved by the planning board are posted.

Regarding the wildlife, I don't know what to say. The property is privately
owned and currently zoned for single family housing. It's going to be
developed one way or another, so the wildlife will be displace regardless
of whether it is MUTC zoned, or single family housing zoned. (I'll also add
that the single family housing development does NOT require a bridge
linking the east side of the RR tracks, and there will be a significant
traffic burden from that kind of development as well.)

Whether we like it or not, that property will get developed. It is not
owned by you, or me, or the Town, or the county. It is privately owned, and
as such, the owners can develop it within the constraints of the law. If we
allow the change to MUTC zoning, we actually have *more* influence
regarding the impact the development will have on the surrounding
community.

But there will be an impact regardless of the outcome.

-Sarah

On Monday, April 16, 2012, Bruce Wernek wrote:

> Folks
>
> There's alot more to this deal than Whole Foods.  This is just the
> carrot which is incidental as far as I'm concerned.  What matters to me is
> the affect this development is going to have on the traffic on Queensbury
> Rd and the surrounding area.   I'm already dealing with bumper to bumper
> traffic from the RR crossing to Rt 1 from time to time.  I don't want it to
> get any worse.
>
> What's the story on the RR crossing?  Have they committed to completing
> it by the time their commerical space is open for business?  Even
> if Cafritz commits to building it, they still have to acquire the right of
> way.  So what' the story on the right of way?  If there's a commitment from
> Cafritz, but they don't have the right of way, they can't build so their
> commitment doesn't mean anything.
>
> The other issue, which I consider to be much more important than Whole
> Foods, is the destruction of the wildlife habitat.  I'm guessimating that
> area supports ~12-15 deer not to mention fox, racoon,
> rabbits, squirrels, raptors, woodchuck, opossums, birds, snakes, turtles,
> etc.  What do you think is going to happen to them when they remove the
> trees and start preparing the site for construction.  Imagine an animal
> living in a burrow hiding there out of fear while the bulldozers are
> grading overhead.  Imagine the squirrels, opossum, racoons, birds, etc
> seeking refuge in the trees as they are being cut down.  All everyone
> seem to care about is Whole Foods.  What about these animals?  Do they
> matter at all to any of you?
>
> The question you have to ask yourselves is Whole Food or anything
> comparable worth the genocide of wildlife that will occur when they build
> it.  This development will result in the complete and utter sterilization
> of a rich ecosystem so that we can have another grocery store, more parking
> lots, more cars, and more density.  It's all good in Riverdale.
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On 04/15/12, Alan K. Thompson<twacks at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I firmly believe that, at this time, Whole Foods is committed to opening
> their planned store in Riverdale Park.
>
> I've spent a lot of time across a negotiating table from their lead
> attorney on the project, Chip Reed, and have found him to be very careful
> and precise in what he says.  He has stated on numerous occasions that they
> have a "lease" with Whole Foods, not a "Letter of Intent" as suggested by
> Mr. Currie.  So long as the Cafritz team keeps their side of the lease
> (building the store according to the terms of the lease) I believe that
> Whole Foods will come.  My reading of the Hyattsville CDC's recent market
> study suggests that this site presents a very good opportunity for Whole
> Foods; discussions I've had with Stuart Eisenberg about that study indicate
> the same.
>
> Ms. Avery started this discussion because Mr. Reed used the term "a
> grocery store" instead of "Whole Foods" in the presentation, implying that
> he knows that the occupant will not be Whole Foods.  I'm as certain as I
> can be, based on my interactions with him, that if that were true he would
> not have said what I quoted in my first letter, that the developer was
> under significant time pressure from "Whole Foods."
>
> It's still possible, of course, that the project will be killed by the
> actions (or delays) of the District Council.
>
> Alan
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Chris Currie <crcurrie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Beware the 'bait and switch.'
>
> Too soon to tell, but one thing's for certain: Once the rezoning is
> approved, the strength of Cafritz's and Whole Foods' negotiating positions
> with respect to each other changes dramatically.
>
> Up 'til this time, Cafritz has been almost completely dependent on Whole
> Foods' participation in the development proposal.  I wouldn't be surprised
> if the latter was offered a $1/year lease; certainly, some kind of
> sweetheart deal would have been necessary to lure Whole Foods so far away
> from its standard marketing demographic criteria.
>
> With the property rezoned, Cafritz doesn't need Whole Foods and might find
> another tenant willing to pay more to anchor its commercial component.  A
> Letter of Intent (as I'm presuming is the nature of whatever agreement the
> two parties have at this point) is never iron-clad.
>
> If we hear from Cafritz in the days ahead, particularly after final
> approval of the development plan, that Whole Foods' "demands" have
> increased or become more unreasonable, we should definitely take it with a
> grain of salt.
>
> Chris Currie
> Hyattsville
>
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Melissa Avery <m.avery at rocketmail.com>
> To: "towntalk at riverdale-park.org" <towntalk at riverdale-park.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] What grocery store?
> Message-ID:
>        <1334417276.62493.YahooMailNeo at web162106.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> So, Whole Foods has not?officially?announced?their?withdrawal?from the
> project
> From what I understand Whole Foods originally?put conditions on whether or
> not they would continue with the?development.
> I guess the truth will come out in the cross examination?process in front
> of the county council.?
> Melissa
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.riverdaleparkmd.info
>

-- 
Sarah Wayland
sarah.wayland at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20120416/087fc926/attachment.html>