The board unanimously approved the Ourisman plan.
Perhaps the most entertaining aspect of the evening was watching "bicycle advocate" Chairman Casey Anderson vote to shrink the County's premier bicycle facility, singing the praises of Ourisman Honda all the while. He said his major concern was the appearance of the garage wall, suggesting a mural be painted on it. Given the murals recently painted around Bethesda, that's hardly something to be optimistic about, unless the image is related to the Georgetown Branch Railroad that the CCT replaced.
Earlier in the meeting, planner David Anspacher stated that Planning staff will propose widening the Capital Crescent Trail to 23' this fall.This would now require moving the actual trail out of its own right-of-way, simply to accommodate a private business that broke the rules.
In a gaffe late in the discussion, commissioner Natali Fani-Gonzalez told Ourisman's attorney she wanted to "make sure they (Ourisman Honda) have the space that they need." By officially codifying Ourisman's encroachment beyond its own property lines, Fani-Gonzalez certainly ensured there will be no problem in that area. With a straight face, commissioner Marye Wells-Hartley spun booting the trail out of its own right-of-way as a chance to "enhance the trail." The Board ignored a staff recommendation that the size of the new plaza be increased, a suggestion Ourisman opposed.
Residents expressed anger on social media at the Board's decision, mulling what their options are to protest the decision at this point.
18 comments:
I think it's great the opening gets flared out for the trail, especially given the traffic and congestion there, even at the expense of the encroachment. The problem is this sets a scary precedence to landowners, residential and commercial, that pushing the boundaries is worth trying for. I guess considering the CCT fence debacle already set that precedence though.
Where was the anger when the wealthy Chevy Chase residents built there homes in the CCT right-of-way? The county played nice with them, and paid them to remove their illegal fences, sheds, etc.
Dyer is such a hypocrite. He uses any and every pathetic excuse to attack the county council, and doesn't care who he trashes along the way, including Ourisman, a respected local business that has been serving Bethesda for far longer than Dyer.
Dyer has been serving as the Bethesda go to guy for years. I am with Robert and his brash, unapologetic stances. Keep fighting the good fight good sir.
Dyer has been serving as the Bethesda go to guy for years. I am with Robert and his brash, unapologetic stances. Keep fighting the good fight good sir.
Not wanting to be a grammar cop, but there's something wrong with this phrase " keep its garage encroachment into several rights-of-way," Dyer??
Good. This is the most sensible outcome.
Dyer, show Bethesda what a man you are and tear down this illegal structure with your bare hands!
Oh, look, another Dyer post of bitching and moaning w/o offering an alternative idea. What do you want, Robert? Do you want the county to spend ~$5-10M on a lawsuit to MAYBE get the garage demoed? Is that what you think? Or do you not have any goal other than to whine like a little bitch every day?
Dyer, why no mention that one of the terms of this agreement is to widen the trail from 14 to 16 feet at this location?
8:22: Is that even worth mentioning? I think only Ourisman and their shills in the County government are impressed by that. Don't forget I mentioned that widening means moving the trail, too.
Advocates should push for more permanent art work to cover the garage wall. Murals and paintings are hard and costly to upkeep.
I find it very funny how Dyer claims to be "pro-business" but he attacks the businesses we already have.
Carr Properties, Ourisman, Bainbridge, Novo, Equity One, JBG, Tastee Diner etc which have all invested hundreds of millions in Bethesda have been constant targets of Dyer's misplaced rage.
Dyer's comments on the previous article are a hoot.
"Don't forget I mentioned that widening means moving the trail, too."
More grasping at straws.
I can't believe a car dealership is growing at a location like this.
Should be a showroom with a few cars to test drive. Why store all the cars there?
8:39 seems to be unable to distinguish between investment, of whatever sort or level, and the rule of law. Investment in undermining orderly evaluation of proposals and violations seems to be praiseworthy in this commenter's view. To say nothing of the tax rebates developers receive while residents are subjected to tax increases that require a unanimous vote to exceed previously adopted restraints.
It's not an attack on business to advocate for their compliance with regulations, any more than an attorney general who observes ethical rules on conflicts of interest is attacking the president. This is a distinction you really need to understand, as a citizen of a republic.
8:12 seems to be unable to discern the difference between frustration at the author and in-depth analysis of the intricacies of building vs investment.
Where the "rule of law" comes in is anybody's guess.
Why not accountability for DPS? What happened here would have been avoided entirely if DPS hadn't issued the permits in the first place.
Post a Comment