Friday, December 18, 2015

Westbard, Woodfield Commons approvals mark abandonment of smart growth in Montgomery County

Yesterday was a historic day for the Montgomery County Planning Board. Two unanimous votes by the body signaled authoritatively that the County is walking away from its self-proclaimed commitment to "smart growth." In approving the Westbard Sector Plan, the Board endorsed transit-oriented density for a location not served by any form of rapid transit. It is a plan with heights and density written as if the Purple Line was being extended to Westbard, but without actually extending it. And in rural Damascus, the Board approved what will be the tallest building in town, and with minimal parking spaces in an entirely-auto-dependent exurban town.

How do you know you have a dysfunctional Planning Board? When two agenda items on the same day both end with citizens interrupting and shouting at the Board. And the Board Chair bickering back and forth with them in response. How do things unravel to that unruly point? Maybe because in both cases, the Board just completely ignored the residents' opinions, and approved two items for which there was either 99% resident opposition (Westbard), or 100% resident opposition (Woodfield Commons).

If anyone still harbored any doubt as to whether developers literally control Montgomery County, that wishful thinking was quickly dispelled Thursday.

We no longer need to hold Planning Board meetings, or have a public Sector Plan process. Kabuki theater good cop/bad cop shows aside, everything has gone exactly as the developers wanted in both cases. Any public input unacceptable to the developers was simply disregarded.

Westbard passed with the excessive height and density, no enforceable protection for gas stations or mom-and-pop businesses, not a single highway capacity improvement, and a last-minute affordable housing dump on the Little Falls Library site. How much of the County's right-of-way plans, land grabs next to the Capital Crescent Trail, and intriguingly-vague plans for certain parts of the River Road industrial area south of the road relate to secret plans to extend the Purple Line - and perhaps even dump a rail yard there - should tax the minds of the greatest conspiracy theorists in Montgomery County for the next decade.

There's no point getting excited, of course. There will be absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. Call your Councilman? He or she is likely funded by the developer, and his or her Chief of Staff may have even tweeted approval of the developer before the public has even had a chance to weigh in (yes, that actually happened). Plead with staff? If the staff responds to resident concerns, the Board simply puts the offending proposal back into the plan prior to the vote. Testify at the Board? Sure. Talk on. But ask the folks who took off from work, and drove literally the length of the County through the rain to testify yesterday, how successful you will be.

Without the fig leaf of the Purple Line (Chevy Chase Lake) or even a MARC line (Kensington), the Board made history in ramming through high-density at Westbard, which is far beyond the consensus walking distance from Metro smart growth experts would recommend.

In Damascus, the Board not only approved a 55' building in a rural area, but one that will offer 89% affordable units. No, that's not a typo. In 2015, the Board approved a Great Society-style housing project widely discredited in urban areas today. In a rural area, where those low-income residents will find little (weekdays) to no (the sole bus connection, Ride On Route 90, doesn't run on weekends) transit, few job opportunities, and no social services. Makes perfect sense, right? Meanwhile, in downtown Bethesda, luxury condos "from the several millions" are rising in corridor previously set aside for affordable housing.

After getting more than an earful from residents, 100% of which opposed Woodfield Commons, several commissioners pleaded impotence. We can't do anything to stop it, they said, because the proposal is consistent with the current Damascus master plan.

Except, it isn't. That plan designated two properties in the "town center" for a development such as Woodfield Commons. But Woodfield Commons is proposed for neither of those sites.

The plan said that views of the surrounding rural and agricultural area could not be obstructed. Resident measurements found that Woodfield Commons will indeed obstruct views.

Resident Ron Turner noted that the zoning of the site permits 78 units; 84 have been proposed.

And, as Commissioner Amy Presley noted despite ultimately voting to approve Woodfield Commons, developments of that type were specifically required by the plan to provide some benefit or enhancement to the existing residents of Damascus, and help make for a livelier downtown. Woodfield Commons is all-residential, and contains no public amenities and no retail.

But wait, there's more.

Anderson stated that the only purview the Board has, is to determine that an application is compliant with not only the master plan, but also consider whether it will too severely impact road and school capacity.

But the data used by staff is clearly false. In a town where it can take several light cycles to get through an intersection, and where traffic snakes all the way out of the "downtown" during rush hour, the Planning Department's traffic gurus say no intersections are failing. It's pick-your-head-off-the-floor-and-screw-it-back-on-disbelief time here, folks. A chart shows that, for over 168 residents, only 30 cars will drive out in the morning, and only 26 return in the evening (should we send out a search party for the missing 4?). With stats like these, who needs laughing gas?

They also say the applicant for Woodfield Commons will only need to provide a school payment at the middle school level, despite the town's crowded, aging schools.

And what about the environmental issues? No issues, staff and the Board said yesterday. But neither they, nor the applicant, were able to produce a letter from the Maryland Department of the Environment yesterday to prove the state had actually washed their hands of oversight of the wetlands on the property slated to become Woodfield Commons. Did Anderson tenaciously pursue that lapse of documentation, and potential violation of the rules? Nope.
Steep descent from Route 27
into the shopping center;
stream valley lies in the distance
Being very familiar with the site, I am shocked at the assessment by both the Planning Department, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, that there is no significant environmental impact for this project. Just to give you an idea of the topography there, look how steep the drop is from the elevation at Route 27 (from which the above photo was taken) into the shopping center property. Now consider that beyond that shopping center, directly across the street from it, is another steep drop off into a stream valley. Wouldn't the runoff heading down toward that stream be tremendous and high in velocity during rainstorms? There are wetlands on the property, as well as wetland buffers.

You tell me. You tell me.

Or let the residents of Damascus tell you.

Jason Goldsmith testified that Maryland law says when you have a steep slope next to a wetland, there are certain things that cannot be done.

The broad consensus? This is simply more low-income housing than the town can bear. Damascus Gardens, one of two low-income housing sites in the Damascus area, generated more than 200 calls for police this year alone, said resident George Boyce. That "troubled community" has experienced shootings, homicides, sexual assaults, open-air drug markets and even prostitution investigations - all within 500 yards of Damascus High School (even worse, Damascus Elementary is diagonally across the street from the high school).

Jim Brown, a 20-year Damascus resident, said Damascus Gardens alone requires off-duty officers to patrol it 26 hours a week. Even after 200 police officers raided the Damascus Gardens complex (can you imagine this in "wealthy" Montgomery County?), and 18 suspects were charged with felony distribution, the level of police calls remains just as high.

I can tell you that, directly across the street from Damascus Gardens, the single-family home neighborhood has erected forboding Neighborhood Watch signage that says the tag numbers of all vehicles entering the neighborhood are being reported to the police. That level of crime and aggressive signage to combat it have to take a toll on property values.

A Metropolitan Police Department officer who lives in Damascus said she grew up in a housing project in Brooklyn, and saw the worst at an early age: murders, shootings and drugs in her own housing complex. "There is a relationship between low-income housing and crime. I've lived it," she said. She noted that she had chosen to live in Damascus, and drives two-and-half hours each day, to escape those kind of neighborhoods.

"You cannot deny that these types of developments often bring crime," argued Jim Mullally, who lives only a block from Damascus Gardens. Calling such public housing "an antiquated policy tool," he recommended commissioners take the Woodfield Commons proposal and "put it into a housing policy museum where it belongs."

Testimony became emotional at times. A Damascus High School student who had to miss class, and get a ride from a teacher, just to get to the afternoon public hearing, broke down in tears at the end of his testimony. "We are nothing more than a rock on the railroad tracks of your [proposal], just waiting to be shoved aside," he said. Planning Director Gwen Wright brought tissues over to the distraught young man as the Board moved on to the next speaker. "Damascus is our home, our community, our everything," said resident Gretchen Goldsmith, who described the connection of upcounty growth with the increase in crime, bullying and school safety issues since 2007. Already, school personnel are "gravely overtaxed" meeting the growing challenges, she said. Resident Patty Walker delivered a Powerpoint presentation highlighting the small town charm of Damascus, and how best to preserve it. Her daughter Kelly noted that numerous blended classes on her middle school schedule were reducing the rigor and quality of her education. Longtime resident Pat Fenati recalled her children's "idyllic childhood" growing up when many of the roads were still dirt. "People who move to the country don't want the city to follow them there," she said.

While the testimony was never angry in nature, residents were angered by the end of the meeting when the Board made clear that, despite 100% of testimony having opposed the project, it was going to go ahead and approve it.

If the Board didn't approve Woodfield Commons, "We will get sued, and we'll lose," Anderson predicted.

Jessica Zuniga, representing developer Conifer, which has partnered with the Housing Opportunities Commission for Woodfield Commons, defended her company's record. "We are an award-winning owner and manager of affordable housing," she said. "I do not believe that we are concentrating poverty with this project."

Anderson moved ahead to the vote. The crowd grew upset. "I'm sorry if that's not satisfactory to you," Anderson said.

"Vistas and the views must be maintained," quoted one resident from the master plan. "There is a specific...you're ignoring the master plan," that audience member said as Anderson tried to speak louder over it. "We took testimony for two hours," he replied. "You didn't listen!" someone shouted. "Don't say you're conforming to the master plan, so just admit it please!"

Commissioner Natali Fani-Gonzalez made a motion to approve the project; it and the site plan were approved unanimously.

Residents stormed out, stunned. "You just lost a lot of citizens from your county, damn it! I'm moving," one shouted at the Board. Some were in tears.

Surely an overwhelming turnout, with logical, fact-based opposing arguments, and not a single person testifying in favor of the plan, would have an impact and move the Board to postpone or address the concerns, right?

Right.

Anderson seemed to contradict his past arguments in two ways. First, in defending the Board from criticism by "Westbard" residents, Anderson had previously argued that he and the Board were indispensible, and able to make land-use decisions that residents are simply incapable of comprehending the longer-term value of. Now, in claiming impotence, Anderson presents us with a passive body that can only rubber stamp applications (notice every single one was approved yesterday).

Second, Anderson often chastizes people for getting too detailed at the sector plan stage. "This is more of a site plan issue," is the often-heard phrase. Yesterday shot that argument full of holes.

If indeed that idea is true, then it means the people literally have no recourse. We can't request a protection be put in at the Sector Plan writing stage. But if we let it go then, it turns out that when we go to the vaunted site plan stage, we can't ask about it, either. And the Board is supposedly powerless to stop anything at that juncture, Anderson made clear yesterday.

So where exactly does public input have any relevance? Why did residents in Bethesda and Damascus spend hours researching, attending meetings and testifying, only to find what they opposed sailing through to approval.

It's outrageous.

66 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dyer: if you don't like the changes that are coming you should move. Someone will buy your house very quickly and you'll probably make a good profit off of your increased property values. Win win and we get to stop seeing your barely factual rants. Win win win

Anonymous said...

We are thrilled that the Westbard eyesore is being 'revamped'! Can not wait to get my new post office with
parking!

Anonymous said...

it's long overdue. tear it down!

Robert Dyer said...

5:16: This article consists entirely of facts.

Robert Dyer said...

5:26: You do realize the shopping center could have been replaced 30 years ago, without adding 3000 new housing units to a 2-block area?

Robert Dyer said...

5:36: Yes it is overdue. So why do you reckon Dr. Tauber and Capital Properties intentionally decided not to for decades? I invite you to visit the brand new Osborne Shopping Center in Upper Marlboro. Fabulous. Not a single housing unit was part of the redevelopment. Just a new shopping center. It can be done.

Anonymous said...

The Planning Board should be destroyed, shut down, fired. The trolls on this site are unbelievably stupid. Nobody's against improving the Westwood Shopping Center but the long view would show anyone with a brain that Westbard Avenue is heading toward serious vehicular congestion and, since inadequate parking will be provided (costs too much for the developers), all the residents, retail workers, and shoppers will end up having to fight for and pay for parking. With no decent transit system there will be nothing to alleviate the problem...but we've been down this road so many times to no avail. The crime is that all the development near the Metro in Bethesda is "Luxury". The affordable/low-income housing is nowhere near. St.Paul's conversion by God's holy light on the road to Damascus(ancient) has turned into the modern Maryland Damascus being destroyed by a beam from the Death Star known as the Montgomery County Planning Board. What a farce. What a tragedy.

Anonymous said...

How can the planning board basically say their hands are tied? Isn't the fact it needs approval by the planning board means their hands are NOT tied? As I understand it, most development is by right, which means no approval needed.

So for these developments, they're trying to change the existing zoning and plans, and that's why they need planning board approval, correct?

Who gives these planning board members their jobs? Can we vote them out somehow? They're like the county council on the ending the alcohol monopoly thing -- they act like it's impossible to cut $30mln in spending, and are opposing a referendum to let the people decide. How about they work FOR the people instead of AGAINST them?

Anonymous said...

Robert, thank you for this invaluable reporting on the Damascus project. Appalling. The PB members are hypocrites to be sure. And the Council and PB and Planning Dept have long been owned by the developers. We see that in projects big and small all over the county, with the homeowner footing the bill through increasing property taxes for school construction and road improvements.

Anonymous said...

I just looked at a satellite photo of Osborne Shopping Center, then at one of Westbard. Within a 1 mile diameter, Osborne has a church, part of a high school, and a few dozen houses. Westbard has a church, a middle school, library, a few dozen businesses, and hundreds of houses. The existing density is completely different, so it doesn't surprise me that they didn't need to build densely packed housing. There's tons of empty space available to build new housing there without needing more density. That isn't the case with Westbard.

Anonymous said...

Dyer: Thank you for this excellent synopsis not only of the plans but of the planning board. Your astute discernment of the issues is appreciated by so many.

Anonymous said...

Developer's $$ contributions to the campaigns of our council members is money well spent.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Dyer, and his obtuse NIMBY's followers who fall for every word in his absurd diatribes, seem to be very displeased with the happenings in Montgomery County...yet they still choose to reside here.

Why not move to Virginia, Arkansas, Texas, or Tennessee? No more evil guvmint to tax you or tell you (or the developers btw) what you can and can't do. Sounds like paradise eh?

Leave us here to suffer in the urbanized People's Republik of Montgomery County/Maryland with our cultural diversity, low unemployment, #1 ranked school system, and highest median income--all a by-product of our "moribund" economy.

Trust me, no one is stopping you. It's a win-win for everyone.

Anonymous said...

5:36 here. Do you really hold that Osborne shopping center as the ideal replacement for Westbard? A ton of surface parking (one of that worst things about Westbard is the slopping parking lot with carts careening into cars crammed into tiny spots), a Bojangles, Subway, Taco Bell, Petco (big box everyone is so afraid of), Verizon store....My God, it might as well have a Piggly Wiggly. We don't live in the boonies. We're in an urban environment, like it or not. A serious redevelopment of the area will bring with it much more desirable retail than your ideal.

Anonymous said...

Where are the Smarter Growth groups? Oh that's right, the developer front groups never met a Montgomery plan they didn't like, no matter how dumb growth it is.

Anonymous said...

@11:20
"Why not move to Virginia, Arkansas, Texas, or Tennessee?"

Why don't you take your Social Civic Green and communal lifestyle and the shopping mall to Arkansas or Texas.. I was here first and you are just full of envy.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Dyer,

I also want to thank you for your excellent reporting.

Anonymous said...

Yet Dyer is perfectly OK with greedy developer like Bob Buchanan leading the MoCo Economic Development Corporation.

Anonymous said...

Westward is less than a mile and a half from Metro, and just 8 miles from the center of DC.

Upper Marlboro, by contrast, is so remote that PG County is seriously considering moving their seat to Largo.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for such an excellent report, Mr. Dyer. It really makes one wonder about the planning process and citizens'input in Montgomery County -- 2 years of so-called community planning in the Westbard Area totally ignored. There is only one lesson to be learned from this: the Planning Board has been bought by developers.

Anonymous said...

Now all the eyes should be on the County Council. If they vote for the Sector Plan the way it is make sure you vote them out in the next election.

Anonymous said...

5:16

Your house may just be a building and I am sorry for you. Mine is more than that. I don't look at how much it is worth in terms of dollars. It is my family home. I suppose my neighbors feel the same way and that is what makes Westbard special. It is a stable neighborhood with happy families.

Robert Dyer said...

3:24: 'Less than a mile and a half" is not "smart growth development. A quarter mile to half a mile is the universal standard for transit-oriented development.

Robert Dyer said...

11:22: Actually, they have a large new Safeway at the Osborne Shopping Center. The retail mix there is very good, but will likely be different in 20816. My real point, which you missed, is that the owner delivered the new shopping center without residential. It can be done. Having said that, the Westwood Shopping Center site proposal is probably the least of the problems with the sector plan. It's the 90'-110+ buildings across the street that will have the bulk of the residential on that street.

Anonymous said...

99% and 100% are facts? Validate that please.

Anonymous said...

What does luxury housing in Bethesda have to do with the planning board again?

Anonymous said...

Invaluable. Spoken like a true friend

Anonymous said...

Excellent. Astute discernment. Lol.

Anonymous said...

Ooh. What say ye Dyer?

Anonymous said...

I agree this much development will cause traffic and school and other issues. But everyone complaining acts like they own more than the land their house is on. And seem to forget that these potential residents are going to live somewhere no matter what and traffic and schools are a problem everywhere. So they just don't want it in their backyard.

Anonymous said...

So by Dyer's definition, the new high-rise buildings under construction or proposed along Battery Lane aren't "smart growth" yet you never see him ranting about those. What a hypocrite.

Anonymous said...

Dyer thinks that it's ok to use racial dog-whistles to oppose low-income housing in Damascus. Yet he gets all bent out of shape over the loss of low-income housing in Bethesda.

Anonymous said...

And yet he's against it at the Little Falls site.

If you want consistency of thought you need to go elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

I have the image of the house from "The Jerk" where Steve Martin grew up. LOL

Anonymous said...

Were people paying attention last election? Urbanizing suburban neighborhoods was an issue discussed. We voted in folks who fully want to urbanize our neighborhoods to the maximum extent.

Anonymous said...

Remember: this is the same Planning Board that allowed affordable apartments to be demolished next to Bethesda Metro to make way for boutique luxury condo buildings with a handful of units.

Anonymous said...

THIS ARTICLE IS FULL OF FAIL

Anonymous said...

Thank you for exposing the Planning Board for what it is, a total farce and colossal waste of money.

Anonymous said...

Mixing Christian and Star Wars metaphors...

May the Force be with you...

And also with you...

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...
THIS ARTICLE IS FULL OF FAIL

9:23 AM"

Our County Planning Board is full of fail. We will soon see if this same can be said of the County Council.

Anonymous said...

You should run for office.

Anonymous said...

The Montgomery County planning process is broken. As the Westbard and Woodfield approvals show, the opinions of community residents are not being incorporated meaningfully into the Planning Board's recommendations. I hope that citizens will make this into a voting issue in the 2018 county elections.

On Westbard: neighborhood groups agree with the planners that redevelopment is urgently needed. The issue is scale. The Planning Department has proposed and the Planning Board approved a plan that is inconsistent with surrounding single family uses and incompatible with existing road, school and mass transit infrastructure. Best practices in green development and urban planning match development scale to infrastructure capacity. That has not been done at Westbard, and the proposed density overwhelms the site.

Even worse, the Westbard planners paid lip service to soliciting community views, but did not meaningfully incorporate these views into the final plan-- indeed, the process was twisted to serve the views of planners and others. Examples:
-A 75 foot tall apartment building was first publicly proposed for the Massachusetts Avenue public library site on December 3, 2015, a mere two weeks before the plan was approved and well after the time for public comment had expired. Prior community input had overwhelmingly supported leaving the library site as is. Despite this, the final plan-- to the best of my knowledge-- included the new apartment building.
-A November 2014 public meeting attended by hundreds demonstrated overwhelming public opposition to the proposed heights and density of the Westbard plan. The meeting was covered in the local press. The planners' response was not to downsize the plan in any meaningful way, but rather to discontinue large public meetings on the plan.
-At a community charette (intensive planning session) in 2014, a Planning Department staff member inserted his plan for a new road into the recommendations of a citizen work group, without being requested to do so. The intent was to make the road proposal appear to have been originated by citizens, which it was not. Had I not witnessed this dishonesty, I would not have believed it possible.

In short, the Montgomery County planning process is broken. Residents' views are being ignored and discarded. Citizens should note this and take the process back.

Anonymous said...

I'm not familiar with the Damascus plan, but I can state unequivocally that an 89% affordable housing project is bad planning and contravenes best practices for affordable housing. Research shows that affordable housing is most effective for lower-income families when that housing is incorporated into a project dominated by market rate units. When that happens, the affordable units are not stigmatized and lower-income occupants benefit from a middle-income environment. By contrast, projects dominated by lower-income families are more likely to be stigmatized or to encourage poor socio-economic outcomes.

The solution for Montgomery County is to require affordable setasides (the norm is 12.5%) for all new apartment projects, including new development and substantial rehabilitation. That the Montgomery County Planning Board approved an 89% affordable project in Damascus while exempting luxury projects in downtown Bethesda (where lower-income families would benefit from plentiful mass transit) is unconscionable.

Anonymous said...

"Why not move to Viginia, Arkansas, Texas or Tennessee?"

Stereotype much? I favor the redevelopment of Westbard and the inclusion of affordable housing-- just not at the scale proposed by the planners and approved by the Planning Board.

A number of points:

-It is not the appropriate role of the Planning Department and the Planning Board to maximize potential square footage for a private developer. Rather, it is the role of planners to strike a balance between development proposals and community desires. The Planning Department and Board have not even attempted to strike a balance in the case of Westbard.
-Equity One, the owner of the Giant site, the Manor Care site, and most of the land along Westbard Avenue, has stated publicly that it could meet its return objectives while leaving the site as is. So high density development is not required to make redevelopment viable.
-Equity One and its partner, ERA, have been very successful with low-rise projects. There is no reason to think that they could not accomplish the same thing on the Giant and Westbard Avenue sites. In fact, ERA recently completed a low-rise town home project at the edge of the Westbard Sector site, just off Little Falls Road.

I am not against redevelopment. I am not against affordable housing. I am against excessive heights and densities on sites that lack the schools, roads and mass transit to serve them effectively. I am opposed to projects that are incompatible with surrounding uses, in the absence of adequate buffer zones.


Anonymous said...

I appreciate that Robert Dyer is reporting on the activities of the Planning Board and the Planning Departnent in such depth. The demise of the Montgomery Gazette has left a media vacuum on Montgomery County planning issues, to the detriment of County residents. Thanks, Robert, for your coverage.

Anonymous said...

Helpful article. It is clear that the Planning Department and the Planning Board are acting in the interests of developers, not in the interests of communities.

I fully support high density development on Metro-served sites, such as downtown Bethesda, White Flint and Silver Spring. But grafting urban projects on suburban sites is a bad idea.

Who is representing residents? Certainly not the Planning Department and the Planning Board.

Anonymous said...

Only A few hundred residents dislike this versus the how many folks living in the county? Sounds like the people were represented to a T. ;)

Anonymous said...

Shorter: "I am not against all development. Just this property near my house."

Anonymous said...

I am sure that many county residents would like to dump all low-income housing on the likes of Damascus, but it is horribly unfair of the planning board to not take their views into account, or follow the environmental requirements, etc. Casey Anderson should be ashamed of himself. They DO have a choice not to approve these proposals, they just have to explain themselves rationally and they would win the law suit. I, too, am ready to move.

Anonymous said...

Low-income housing without the proper transportation support is a project doomed to fail. Be it 5 miles from town or 25.

Anonymous said...

Shorter 11:45 AM: "Whereas we already got our fair share of coloreds and Spanish people in Damascus..."

Anonymous said...

Agreed with that.

Anonymous said...

Because, like every other neighborhood in MoCo is thrilled when low-income housing is proposed for THEIR area. Hah!

Anonymous said...

We need to take this to Hogan because no one ever listens to us and he seems to. Commute in the morning is terrible. We moved moving away from the rt 27 side of Butler's 15 years ago, after the huge farms were sold that are now ridiculously packed and increase the traffic on a two lane road. Who ever made that decision did not think about the outcome. HOGAN SAVE US

Les Bell said...

The answer is to vote the Montgomery County Council out to a man. If government does not respond to the people, replace it with one that will. The coucil is there to serve us. It is destroying our neighborhood and the school system as well. If you continue to vote the incumbents in, you must accept the consequences. Don't worry about party affiliation. Worry about the safety of your family and the quality of your children's' education and the quality of the environment you live in. You are paying top dollar to live here and pay top salaries to the politicians that are creating havoc In our community and being told to "stuff it" if we don't like it. If any member of the council is still sitting after the next election, and their appointed cronies still have jobs, the problem is us. Face up to the problem and clean house. If the state government won't support Montgomery residents in this fight, let's unload them too.

Anonymous said...

There are plenty of Westbard neighbors - or at least one - that support this plan to "urbanize" the neighborhood. We are just sitting back quietly because our elected officials are doing what we voted them in to do. And we are perfectly happy to ignore the complaints of the luddites who want to let the neighborhood age and age and allow the investment of $50,000 they made 30 years ago to continue to grow until they die. They should know their housing values rise because of improvements to the area. I'm sorry but there's a reason I moved a mile over the DC line rather than 15 miles out along one of the major thoroughfares in to Maryland or Virginia. I want an urban environment but with some of the benefits of the suburbs, like good schools and walkable communities (now if you want to start fighting for sidewalks, I'm happy to back you up). And to those of you who say this project is putting local businesses out of business, if there were any stores worth going to in that shopping center, I would agree with you. But I can't understand why you would fight for the Radio Shack, or whatever bank that is, or a state-owned liquor store, or yet another Starbucks. The only store of value there is the toy store. I'm happy to see the rest go.

Anonymous said...

@ 11:28 AM - do you seriously believe that you and a bunch of crazies from your neighborhood can singlehandedly vote out every single member of the County Council? Among other things, you suck at basic arithmetic.

Anonymous said...

There's a good point here about the opposing residents. Just because 100 loud voices speak does not mean that is the majority opinion. It seems the planning department recognizes this.

Anonymous said...

I grew up in this town and understand peoples frustration. This town doesn't deserve this and shame on you for simply dismissing frustrations by saying sell your house and move. This town is rich in tradition and to watch how it is slowly being dismantled is disgusting. I work for communities that rent low income housing to people and what comes with it is not pretty. I promise you crime and garbage is on its way into Damascus and that's sad to see.

Anonymous said...

Once again:

Low-income housing without the proper transportation support is a project doomed to fail. Be it 5 miles from town or 25.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Robert Dyer said...

12:08: If you were an actual "Westbard" resident, you would know RadioShack closed a long time ago.

Robert Dyer said...

Note to readers: I was asked by the author of the comment at 7:56 AM to delete her comment. That is why it has been removed, not because it violated any policy.

Anonymous said...

Robert - I was at the planning board hearing on 12/17 when the topic was Damascus. Your reporting is very accurate and will be useful come Election Day and is very much appreciated. Holding decision makers accountable is the only way to potentially change the grip that developers have on the process.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry to say that Casey Anderson is shameless. He is the official attack dog for a County Council who appointed him and can then let him do the dirty work.

I was also at the hearing and Mr. Dyers' reporting is very accurate.

Where is this silent majority of supporters?

PLEASE VOTE THE SAME OLD DEVELOPER INFECTED POLITICIANS THAT ARE ON THE COUNCIL. VOTE.THEM.OUT.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget to vote for term limits in the next election so we can start getting rid of some of these turkeys.