[RP TownTalk] Let's keep Route 1 Cafritz property Forested. Protecting the Green Spaces within the Beltway.

[Jonathan W. Ebbeler]

Hi Sue - 

 

I would respectfully disagree with the outlook presented that the parkland
will eventually be eaten up by development.  I do understand that one can
take the Cafritz or the Riverdale Plaza examples and extrapolate the logic
to arrive at the conclusion presented, but it would be an erroneous analogy.
A better example would be to evaluate Riversdale and the block of land
surrounding the mansion and what has happened there if anything over the
last 60 years.   Cafritz and the plaza were private land holdings that were
developed as would be expected, not publicly-held park land like Riversdale
(since 1949).  It might also help assuage concerns by taking a look or
providing input towards the M-NCPPC Department of Parks and Recreation's
draft plan for parks and open space for the next 30 years found here:
http://www.mncppcapps.org/pgparks/formula2040/narrated_pres.pptx

 

It is entirely normal for private land to be developed upon and the public
should hold a general expectation of that - i.e. what happened at Riverdale
Plaza and now Cafritz is not the exception but the rule.  It is entirely
atypical and abnormal for land dedicated as public park land to be developed
upon and the public should hold a general expectation of that.  If you look
at the Formula 2040 they recommend developer contribution to the Park System
through 'land dedication' and the expansion/addition of 200+ miles of trails
in the County, and most importantly maintaining the facilities they have.
The general strategy of M-NCPPC is to expand, not contract its land
holdings, we've seen this locally and throughout the County in recent
history. 

 

I may be one of those indicated that is kidding themselves, but I see no
will by developers, the County, or locally to ever touch the public land
holdings in Riverdale Park.  Ignoring public policy though, from a purely
economic POV (and this is my own analysis), there is so much other prime
real estate on our true commercial corridors along Route 1 and Kenilworth
that needs to be absorbed and would be developed prior to interior parcels
like our regional parks ever coming under consideration for the next 100+
years.  Additionally, the area has nowhere near the residential density to
support that kind of scenario even if all parties did actually desire that,
which we don't.  It has been difficult enough getting our existing
commercial framework viable, to ever contemplate adding significant land
parcels to our already under-utilized corridors.  Such contemplation would
undermine not only the County's Health and Wellness but basic Economic
Development goals.

 

Unfortunately we will all shuffle off this mortal coil long before either
opinion can be vetted against what future generations contemplate but the
non-development of public parkland is one area where I think most if not all
of us agree upon.

 

Best,

Jonathan

 

 

Jonathan W. Ebbeler | Councilmember - Ward One

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20130617/ba8f3668/attachment.html>