Last night, I sent this note to the mayor and council of Riverdale Park and to the mayors of University Park and Hyattsville, among others.<br>
KK<br>
<br>
Good evening.<br>
<br>
Joe Kelly and I got home a little while ago from the Cafritz information
session, which the City of College Park sponsored for the residents of
Calvert Hills, a neighborhood that is adjacent to the northern end of
the Cafritz site. The hope is that residents will have learned enough
about the project to form an opinion, which they would pass along to
their elected officials, who in turn would develop a position to pass
along to the planning board and the county council.<br>
<br>
We were disappointed at the contrast with the process here in Riverdale Park, on several accounts, puzzled on others.<br>
<br>
Why was this expanded, single-issue format not part of the process in
Riverdale Park before our council went into executive session on this
matter?<br>
<br>
When is the next such meeting? If one is not planned in Riverdale Park,
how will the residents of this town--not just those who follow the email
list--weigh in? Is there sufficient interest in everyone's opinions for
the council to solicit them more diligently than has been the case so
far? Despite the reassuring nature of Vernon's note about the process
that was posted this evening on TownTalk, I do not believe everyone has
been heard on this matter.<br>
<br>
The Calvert Hills presentation was organized as a separate meeting with a
one-item agenda. It was not part of a work session or legislative
meeting. As a result there was more time and attention given to this
matter, which represents the largest change in this area--and certainly
for our town--probably since Route 410 was built.<br>
<br>
Far more detail was presented tonight than at the meeting last summer in
University Park or at the meeting last week in Riverdale Park.<br>
<br>
Terry Schum, the College Park city planner, opened the meeting with
about 30 minutes of explanation of the process and the project. Her
remarks were comprehensive and informative. The process is complex, and
she did a good job of explaining it. Our town planner did a decent job,
too. Where is his report for all to see?<br>
<br>
The developers' representatives (attorney, architect, traffic planner,
and site engineers) explained in slightly more detail their vision and
plans. Although most of the details were still sketchy, there was more
than we heard here in Riverdale Park, where the new businesses and
residences will be located. Did you know, for example, that part of the
traffic abatement plan involves adding new turning lanes heading north
on Route 1 from the eastbound lanes of Route 410? Or that part of the
traffic improvement would involve taking land on either side of Route 1
north of that intersection? I think I heard that, anyway. I would not
know that if I had stopped following the process and stayed home
tonight.<br>
<br>
Audience questions were taken after the presentation. No one was
subjected to a time limit; followup questions were permitted. For all
that, the same questions were asked and ducked. The answers were no more
satisfactory, to me at least, but some were more comprehensive than
what I heard last week.<br>
<br>
Then, after two hours, there was a "breakout" period during which
audience members were invited to put specific questions to the various
experts.<br>
<br>
I'm looking forward to Riverdale Park doing as much. But in the mean
time, I'd like to know when the site plans and traffic and economic data
will be posted on the town's Web site. I am also hoping for a full
public disclosure on tonight's executive session.<br>
<br>
Who's going to represent my point of view?<br>
<br>
Thanks for your time,<br>
Kate Kelly<br>
<br>
P.S. With 995 new residences in town, are we facing redistricting?