It is indeed troubling that County officials can be given a free pass when breaking the law - and their own laws, to boot. In fact, one of the laws broken that required the Planning Board to measure the carbon and greenhouse gas emissions a plan would generate. That law was championed and steered to passage by Councilmember Roger Berliner, who did not call out the board for breaking that law when commissioners appeared before the Council during worksessions on the plan. Berliner, like the rest of the Council, voted in favor of the plan.
The Westbard fight is far from over, but the lawsuit was worth every penny. Attorney Michele Rosenfeld is arguably the sharpest land-use lawyer in the County, and one of the few who will represent residents rather than developers. Her efforts in research and litigation got results again in this case (which may not be over).
Developer Regency Centers had to scale back its initial plan. While the developer ultimately may be able to build as much as originally-planned (or more, using loopholes in the law), that construction will be staged over a much longer period - at least a decade. Instead of all of Ridgefield Road and Westbard Avenue being torn up at once in a maelstrom of dust and rat hordes, it will be a more orderly process.
Small business owners and workers at the Westwood Shopping Center will be able to stay in place longer, and continue to receive income, as a result of the lawsuit. Those folks have become friends and neighbors to the community over decades, and this alone made the lawsuit worth the modest cost. Regency has promised that, unlike the pre-lawsuit plan, it will leave the existing center in place until the first building of the new development is completed.
While the "civic green" at the New Westwood will still be laughably small, and right next to the main entrance drive for vehicles, only after the lawsuit did it get expanded to a "whopping" half-acre. Unlike the original plan, we'll continue to have one Citgo gas station for fuel and repairs on Westbard Avenue for either another nine years, or until Bowlmor Lanes decides it wants out of its lease.
Finally, unlike the pre-lawsuit Regency plan, there will be some surface parking available at the new center for those who don't wish to use a garage.
The lawsuit is a great example of how Montgomery County residents are forced to fend for themselves against urbanization of established suburban-scale residential neighborhoods from Bethesda to Damascus. Instead of the people we elected speaking for us and defending our interests, residents have to hire lawyers at their own expense. If elected to the County Council this fall, I will not only vote against the existing Planning Board commissioners who seek another term, but will fight to reestablish the Office of the People's Counsel to provide another tool for residents in development and zoning fights.
90 comments:
great reporting; thanks
"Montgomery County residents are forced to fend for themselves against urbanization of established suburban-scale residential neighborhoods"
Wrong. This is a shopping center. No single-family homes are involved.
Unless the judiciary is in cahoots with the County Council, which I really doubt, then this was a fair ruling. It shows the plaintiffs' claim was not valid, as determined in a court of law.
I await the actual decision with real interest. How the council can fail to satisfy its own requirements, including the emission/traffic review which, so far as I understand, was never performed, and have that substantial omission treated as inconsequential by the court, leaves me adaze. What's the point of council enacting such procedures if it doesn't follow them, and the courts don't require them to? Feels more like a Putin or Trump administration than a representative government, for honoring established legal requirements is a distinct issue from the eventual decision on density etc.
I wish this website did not allow people to post under "anonymous". It would raise the substance of the discourse. It certainly couldn't lower it.
To 1:18, you might have more faith in the local politics than I do. While the judiciary may or may not have been 'in cahoots' directly with the county council, the Democrat cabal in Montgomery County is wide and deep.
I also want to THANK Robert Dyer for providing this coverage, since there is so little other substantial coverage of local news items.
1:18: You are wrong. The sector plan area is right up against single-family homes on most sides. It is two miles from Bethesda and Friendship Heights Metro stations. You are just wrong in so many ways, so educate yourself before posting smug comments.
I bet if some investigation was done, all of these Anonymous supporters of the Developer would be discovered to be employed by them or others interested in making money on the development. I do not believe that any neighbor supporting the project would troll for the Developers like they do.
This is sad news of the judgment and shows why Montgomery County lags far behind the Virginia counties in so many livability aspects.
1:50: I agree. Why have rules if they can be broken? Why is the Council above the law, while residents are under it? It's just a fact that the Planning Board did not measure the greenhouse gas impact.
2:15: It's called "Astroturf," the attempt to create artificial "reader" comments favoring the Council/developer, depending which office the comments are being posted from.
Let's be clear - Astroturfing is outrageous!
More self-storage!! Hooray Westbard! #armpit
How could I forget! We should be clear about one more thing: This site has no comment policy other than the rules Mr. Dyer makes up on the spot. Which, of course, is his right; but he should not refer to a "comment policy" that does not exist.
"[T]he lawsuit was worth every penny."
Just like Dyer's blog. LOL
Thanks! :)
Roger Berliner is now moving ahead with a ground breaking ceremony- on the cemetery site - a final "fuck you" to his constituents.
Thank you for your great reporting on the issues involved in the Westbard devopment. I too am disappointed in the decision.
@ 5:10 PM - Source?
Let's be clear -- nobody here is being paid by developers, Bethesda Magazine, the MoCo Cartel, Council staff, or developer PR firms.
Lots of defamatory statements being posted by the County political machine. Even when they win their behavior is low class.
In an interesting turn of events, it seems Mr. Dyer is now deleting his own comments.
5:21: An anonymous comment is supposed to make us believe that? LOL
Quite the deleting spree this evening. Unsurprising in light of the fact that embarrassing Mr. Dyer by quoting him verbatim is in violation of Article III, Section 2.7 of the Imaginary Comment Policy.
5:30: I'm not embarrassed at all, but you shilling for the most incompetent County Council in the nation in exchange for pizza money - now THAT's embarrassing, bottom feeder.
"the most incompetent County Council in the nation"
Is there anything that you say or write that isn't ridiculous hyperbole?
Two things that don't exist:
1) Comment policy for robertdyer.blogspot.com
2) Resume for Robert Dyer
Thank goodness the court decided in favor of progress for cleaning up an absolutely horrible eyesore on Westbard that is a throwback to the last century. It is an embarrassment to our community, it brings down property values and needs to have been upgraded decades ago. The Save Westbard effort sounds the same as the crazy arguments against Cathedral Commons in WDC on Wisconsin. And look.at it now, No one is complaining including the naysayers who regulary eat, shop and do yoga there on a daily basis. And they are happier than they have ever been, Get over it SaveWestbard it’s 2018 people not 1972.
I've read the decision and have shared it with an attorney whom I trust (unaffiliated with the case.).
Reactions: cursory decision, very thinly substantiated. The ruling on the greenhouse gas assessment requirement (that is, whether the County followed the law on assessing a project's carbon footprint/greenhouse gas emissions) is especially tenuous and ignores the plain meaning of the statute.
I suggest that readers wait to pass judgment on this decision until they have been able to scrutinize it. My own view is that the decision leaves a lot to be desired with respect to analysis and research.
8:09: There was nothing stopping construction of a new shopping center. The property owner of the Osborne Shopping Center in Prince George's County delivered a gleaming new shopping center on the same site just a few years ago, with a wonderful Safeway store, restaurants and services like pet store and dry cleaning.
No residential or out-of-scale urban development was involved.
I don't think Cathedral Commons was a failure, but what were the nearby residents going to do once it was built? Boycott it? Personally, I find Cathedral Commons is a boxy, cookie-cutter development that is totally uninspiring and didn't create a sense of place at all. I could be anywhere in post-2000 America when I'm at Cathedral Commons.
6:43: My resume is all over the internet. What's your resume? Trolling from a dark bedroom? You're a nobody shilling for the Council for pizza money and a rundown free apartment. #goals
6:30: God, man, have you looked at their record since 2002. It's a complete embarrassment. Unless you consider corruption a skill.
Dyer @ 9:05 PM -
How is Upper Marlboro in any way comparable to Bethesda? It is in a remote corner of PG County several miles from the nearest Metro station and PG County is moving the county seat from there to Largo because of that.
I realize that you disagree with many or most of the Montgomery County Council's policies. But there are more than 3,000 counties in the United States - what is your basis for claiming that Montgomery County is "the most incompetent in the nation"?
"My resume is all over the internet. What's your resume? Trolling from a dark bedroom? You're a nobody shilling for the Council for pizza money and a rundown free apartment. #goals"
Where is your "resume"? Please link to it, don't just post an "anonymous" comment referring readers to your "About Me" page. You post most of your comments in the middle of the night, from your parents' house in which you have lived all but ten months of your life,, so your comment about "trolling from a dark bedroom" is laughable.
"the most incompetent County Council in the nation"" - Dyer, you made the claim, it's up to you to prove it. Real proof, not your self-aggrandizing fuzzy logic.
Always an excuse.
Truth: Google doesn't want your news because it's blatantly biased, makes unsubstantiated claims, is just chock full of your opinions.
Truth: You didn't appeal to enough voters to get their vote. No zombies, no massive fraud, no concerted effort of "people working against you."
My goodness, what happened to you in life to give you this crazy persecution complex?
Robert Dyer kinda reminds me of Nathan Landau in "Sophie's Choice".
@6:24 Hogan won MD and he's Republican. He has the 2nd highest approval rating of any governor in the US.
The issue in local elections like at the county level is people don't follow them at all. I bet if you walked up to people on the street and asked them to name 2 County Council members, they couldn't. Most people won't even know who the County Exec is. Their lives are just too busy to care.
So when they go to the polls in November, they just vote for whoever is democrat. The person who wins the democratic primary will win the general.
What we need is open primaries. 30% of MoCo voters have no party affiliation, so let them have a say and be courted during the primaries. Then we'll end up with more moderate candidates.
It's a total mess for the at-large council seats (4 of them). We're up to.... 36 candidates on the dems side I believe it is? Since the vote is spread so thinly, it takes just one of them to court a fringe group that likes to vote, and that person will win the primary. For example, court Chinese Christians or unionized bus drivers or whatever.. that's not really democracy.
7:37
Hogan won in 2014 in a GOP landslide, where the GOP swept governors mansions in deep blue states like Illinois, Maryland, and Massachusetts. So far it looks like the exact opposite will happen this year, with Dems making major gains in red states. If Hogan really doesn't align with the national party he would be smart to change his affiliation.
You have a point with the at-large seats though.
"when breaking the law - and their own laws, to boot"
Pretty sure the judge said they didn't break the law, but of course you know better than everyone.
"Attorney Michele Rosenfeld is arguably the sharpest land-use lawyer in the County"
If that's true and she failed, it just goes to show what a shoddy case the NIMBYs had.
Looking forward to Rance Hiemer, Dan Driemer and Jan Giemer winning the other three at-large seats!
So glad to hear this stupid lawsuit was handled properly. I don't work for the developer. It's my opinion and no one has paid me for it. Let's get this show on the road now that these professional protestors are out.
9:04 AM Agreed. I don't understand why residents are involved at all in neighborhood plans.
Leave it to the professionals in Planning.
Reamer toured Westbard from inside of a Ride On bus- that is wholly sufficient in my mind to make a decision on this plan.
@ 1:41: Don't be so sure that the judiciary wasn't in cahoots on this one... The decision is not well written, especially on the matter of the County's greenhouse gas law. The law says that the County must undertake specific actions, which the County has admitted that it did not do in the Westbard case. The judge decided that this is okay... even though the law plainly states otherwise.
I echo those thanks.
1.18--- The project is not just a shopping center. The sector plan allowed 1.8 million square feet of housing and 1 million+ square feet of apartment space can still be built between Regency and Capital Properties, the two major developers.
(The myth that this is just about a shopping center has been promoted relentlessly by the developer...)
I tend to marvel when folks cast up the Hans won by 50,000 votes thing. I recall that voting year in detail: Hans had major coverage in every media platform from tv to The Post. Robert aDyer’s tv spots were canceled, he was mostly unmentioned.
After seeing the profound discrepancy between in exposure to the public Combined with the fact that Robert ran Republican, the real question is:
How did someone do uncelebrated and ignored gain what, 70 to 80,000 votes?
If the spending and coverage had been equal, I cannot help but wonder if we might have had a different outcome.
Robert’s actual ideas and platform are original and compelling. He still has my vote if he decides to run.
Sorry for the deplorable typos and spell check interpretations. I’m on a plane trying to get that in before takeoff. Thanks for all you f your excellent hard work on the Westbard cemetery issue.
11:46: "Professionals in planning?" LOL! More like criminals. The amateurs on the Planning Board decided the allowable height for the Westwood Center II property using a distorted Street View image from Google Maps! What idiots.
7:50: The judge was wrong - it's an indisputable fact that the Planning Board never measured the greenhouse gas and carbon the plan would generate. That's what the LAW requires. They broke the law.
1:00: Racist much? Upper Marlboro is a wealthy suburban area not within the established distance of a transit station to qualify as transit-oriented development. Exactly like miles-from-Metro Westbard.
You know nothing about my personal, housing, or financial situation, so you end up sounding like the ex-con County Council troll you are, trolling the leading hyperlocal news site for pizza money and a dingy free apartment.
My basis for claiming we have the most incompetent County Council is a $200M+ budget shortfall, not a single major corporate HQ attracted in 2 decades, declining schools, skyrocketing murder rates, and the inability to even operate the 911 system or collect the trash for 3 weeks in Bethesda and Silver Spring last year.
So, you still can't provide real proof for your claim.
How does that equate to "the most incompetent County Council in the nation"? Just because you spout off something, doesn't make it true.
All you can say is that "nothing about my personal, housing, or financial situation" What kind of an attitude is that?
That's something a voter would want to know. Why be so secretive?
Seriously, would you vote for someone who won't answer the most basic of questions? Like work experience.
1:00 says: "How is Upper Marlboro in any way comparable to Bethesda? It is in a remote corner of PG County several miles from the nearest Metro station and PG County is moving the county seat from there to Largo because of that."
Robert Dyer @ 7:50 PM says: "Racist much?"
Wow, Dyer is such an idiot.
The Osborne shopping center is not only 12 miles from the nearest Metro station, it is also 4 miles from the nearest bus line.
It is in a thinly populated area in the southeastern corner, surrounded by thousands of acres of vacant land.
How Robert Dyer had the stable-genius notion that this is somehow comparable to Westbard is a mystery.
While it is a disappointment that the judge didn't rule in favor of the community and the environment, it doesn't take away from the fact that the developer, Regency Centers, is driving the train. Montgomery County elected officials, appointed official and civil servants should be taking a pro active role in designing Westbard. We need the county and state Departments of Transportation to accurately assess the traffic on River Road during rush hour. Ridgefield Road should not be co-opted by the developer, but rather the County should require them to acquire the American Plant parcel for a new road and create a new and better location for that business either on Westbard Road or behind the HOC building on the banks of Willett Branch. Why doesn't the county require energy sufficiency with solar collectors on all buildings and parking lots and geothermal heating and cooling for all new buildings? Why doesn't the County require a public parking garage with frequent buses to Metro? Why isn't the County requiring implementation of the Park's Department "Daylighting of Willett Branch Plan? Just because it seems easier today, doesn't mean we should shy away from a better outcome in the future. I live near Glen Echo so the development is not in my back yard, but I do care how Westbard turns out.
4:33am Dyer has an "about us" bio right here on this site.
So, yeah, readers know more about him than any other local reporters that I'm aware of.
His email is right there too if you have questions. Or would you rather just continue to spitball here anonymously in the comments?
Standard PR troll tactic- if you don't like a particular story, attack the journalist with lies.
Dyer will continue reporting on this insane Westbard plan.
Dyer not-so-anonymously calling himself a "journalist" again.
I am a resident and I was part of the process and I agree with the judge's decision. Stop painting everyone with your brush. Many other neighbors love the development and are hoping to live to see it.
I hope Robert Dyer gets run over by a runaway grocery cart in that miserable sea of asphalt.
9:45 AM That's cool, but the vast majority of Bethesda residents are firmly against the Westbard Plan. This comes from all of the feedback during the entire process.
Residents do not want this, they've protested and even sued to stop it. Our Council isn't listening. Support for this plan should be disqualifying for anyone running for office this cycle.
9:35 AM A journalist reports news, right? Exactly what Dyer does daily here.
"Many residents in the area around Westbard" does not equal "the majority of Bethesda residents". Please stop conflating one with the other. Be honest for a change.
I live in Bethesda in a neighborhood that is approximately two miles from the shopping center. I haven't heard any of my neighbors refer to the controversy even once during the past five years.
"Attaboy, Dyer!" says not-so-anonymous @ 9:25 am.
10:06 AM The vast majority of Bethesda residents who submitted testimony and input were firmly against the plan passed by the Council and their appointed Planning Board.
That's an inconvenient truth, but facts are facts.
I'm neither a supporter of the development or Regency, nor the Council or planning process. I testified at many of the numerous public hearings and meetings against the proposal(s) and specific aspects of them. That said, I don't share Robert Dyer's view of the lawsuit nor do I think this article is accurate in reporting on its outcome. The lawsuit accomplished little and sucked considerable money, effort, and energy out of local communities and community associations. Viewed favorably, its biggest success could be that it may have contributed to delays in the project moving forward, though concerns regarding the church and graveyard probably played a bigger role in this. The lawsuit was always likely to fail on legal grounds and even if it had succeded, it likely would have only delayed the project from moving forward a little more. Neither Regency nor Equity One ever proposed moving forward with development on all of the Westbard parcels at the same time. So claiming that the lawsuit kept all of the parcels from being development at the same time is patently absurd. The plan was always to proceed stepwise. What has changed is that they are seperating some of the parcels with respect to the planning approval process. This is not necessarily a good thing, as it may reduce requirements for amenities and complicate the Wiletts Branch naturalization process. Moreover, we could still end up with as much or more development as originally planned, only time will tell. The plan for the supermarket property is reduced and, in my view, somewhat improved, but I don't see how those changes can be linked to the lawsuit. Similarly, there is no evidence that the plight of local businesses have changed significantly, and certainly no evidence that this was impacted by the lawsuit. One aspect of this that is worthy of investigative reporting is why didn't the plantiffs attorney bother to respond to the defendent's request to dismiss the lawsuit as no longer being relevant due to their withdrawal of the initial proposal?
I will vote for you.
In all my years in Montgomery County, I've never seen a sector plan rammed through like Westbard that had zero community support. It was an unprecedented moment in Montgomery County history. Makes you wonder what these developers have on certain councilmen.
1) "The vast majority of Bethesda residents are firmly against the Westbard Plan."
2) "The vast majority of Bethesda residents who submitted testimony and input were firmly against the plan passed by the Council and their appointed Planning Board."
#1 and #2 are not the same. The population of Bethesda is approximately 60,000, and for #1 to be true, there would have to be at least 30,001 Bethesda residents who "are firmly against the Westbard Plan". Which simply isn't true.
4:19pm I specifically said of the bethesda residents who participated and weighed in, they were overwhelmingly and firmly against the plan. That is fact.
1:19: That is incorrect - the original plan called for a continuous, below-grade parking garage under all 3 buildings on the shopping center site. That would have meant total destruction of the existing shopping center in one swoop, instantly evicting all tenants.
Thanks to the lawsuit, those businesses get to stay until completion of the Giant building. That alone was worth every penny, to allow those folks and their employees to put food on the table a few more years.
You seem to have forgotten the original plan, which was humming along to approval until the lawsuit put a monkey wrench in the works.
4:33: So you haven't had any problem with Hans Riemer lying about and inflating his resume for 8 years, but you complain about a candidate who has an honest resume? LOL
By the way, no Council candidate has released tax returns in the history of Montgomery County. You might want to invest in smelling salts. Can we speak to "Wrol" now? LOL
1) The original plan called for a continuous, below-grade parking garage under all 3 buildings on the shopping center site.
2) That would have meant total destruction of the existing shopping center in one swoop, instantly evicting all tenants.
Really? How does the first plan eliminate the possibility of being built in phases? Why can't a "continuous, below-grade parking garage under three buildings" be built in phases, as each of the three buildings are built?
4:19: You seem to have a Dan Reed-esque view of the public process - the only opinions that count are those offered by those citizens who participate in said process. You probably expect to win Powerball without buying a ticket. Good luck!
5:57: Again, the Westwood Shopping Center redevelopment was a single phase in the original plan. Facts. Now it is multiple phases. Advantage: lawsuit.
Not to mention that, in 12 years of covering construction projects, I've never seen an underground garage built in 3 horizontal phases.. Sounds like something the Florida bridge designer might try.
Saith Dyer @ 5:59 PM: "You seem to have a Dan Reed-esque view of the public process - the only opinions that count are those offered by those citizens who participate in said process."
No, that is what @ 9:59/10:26 AM appears to believe.
6:23: You seem to have missed the dash separating the Dan Reed reference from my accurate summation of the public process. You have to participate to count. Dan Reed stated the large number of people who don't participate are a "silent majority" who should inexplicably trump the opinions of those who actually participate.
9:45: As I recall, hardly anyone testified in favor of the plan, and certainly not "many." I'm pretty sure most in the neighborhood will live to see the 3 boxes built with the usual chain sandwich shop, salad shooter tenants and cookie cutter architecture. Exhilarating!
4:58: You've obviously never been to Upper Marlboro. The only "vacant" land in that developed area is parkland.
@1:19 – Let’s clarify a few things, shall we? There's so much wrong with your post that we are going to clarify it over 4 posts.
Comment 1 of 4
1. “The lawsuit accomplished little and sucked considerable money, effort, and energy out of local communities and community associations.”
Whose considerable money, effort and energy? That would be mine and the financial donors; not yours. Unless you are a direct financial contributor, you had no skin in the game; and since you’re bravely “anonymous,” we’re going to assume that you never helped SW, ever, over the past two years. About civic associations: Westmoreland Hills and Sumner have been extremely generous (the best!) – fully recognizing that their financial contributions were made for the greater good, and we are greatly humbled by their support. Wood Acres and Springfield also contributed – but only after fighting their own residents – all of which sucked time, effort and energy from residents who had to fight their Board members in order to prove that a majority of residents supported the lawsuit. Moreover, let’s look at the “skin in the game” component for the Springfield “complainer-contingent” – which amounts to a mere $7.69 each (each members’ individual “share” of the $5000 contribution from Springfield). The complainer-contingent received untold hours of free work on their behalf for that $7 – and a better looking shopping center, to boot. Back to the original point – tell us who you are “anonymous” – and we will tell you whether you were “sucked” of “considerable money, effort, and energy.”
2. “Viewed favorably, its biggest success could be that it may have contributed to delays in the project moving forward, though concerns regarding the church and graveyard probably played a bigger role in this.”
The lawsuit’s biggest success was the wholesale revision of the shopping center plans; and the concomitant saving of the Moses African Cemetery from additional desecration via a planned HOC parking garage. It was the lawsuit, and the lawsuit alone, which uncovered HOC’s nefarious plans for the cemetery plot, and established the paper chain which showed that the planning department actively hid the cemetery information from the descendant community. SW and the cemetery advocates work together because we both believe in justice – an ideal which is in short supply these days. Gee, “anonymous,” it’s so easy to have a “sage” opinion now, don’t you think, as you pontificate from on-high with the “wisdom” of hindsight? Brilliant, I must say. Let’s review: The ugly, boxy Equity One shopping center structures would have been under construction in January, 2018 had the lawsuit not wrought its actual successes of actual delay and overall improvement in the design of the shopping center. As you note, the cemetery debacle was directly responsible for a one-year delay as well – and the cemetery advocates’ work is 100% responsible for removing the garish parking garage from the banks of the Willett – saving both the cemetery AND the Willett Greenway Park. BUT FOR the cemetery advocates, with the help of public information gained via the lawsuit discovery process, the naturalization of the Willett would have been extremely constrained and would not have resulted in the gift of Parcel 177 (part of the cemetery) to the Parks Department.
To be continued ...
@1:19 - Comment 2 of 4
3. “The lawsuit was always likely to fail on legal grounds and even if it had succeded [sic], it likely would have only delayed the project from moving forward a little more.”
Tell us, “anonymous,” how it is that you know that the lawsuit was “always likely to fail on legal grounds”? The law says that the county MUST assess greenhouse gas emissions. By its own pre-trial admission, the county did not do so. Unless you, “anonymous”, are personally greasing the palms of the judge and other county shills, and have some bizarre inside connection, how would or could a mere “anonymous” citizen not fully believe that when an applicable law says that the county MUST do “x”, then the county MUST do “x”? So, must does not mean must? What an interesting reading of the plain language of the statute. Further, jurisdictionally, the county council did NOT sit as the “District Council.” The facts don’t lie. That the judge didn’t accept the facts reflects poorly on the judge, not on the citizens who simply read the plain language of the statute and expect county compliance. Finally, review point number 2 above. The overall delay was critical in obtaining the revised shopping center plans. Do you really believe that Regency would have revised the shopping center plans “just for fun” when they could have been building the prior ugly, boxy Equity One plans as early as January 2018? Your proper response, at this point, “anonymous,” is “thank you” to the SaveWestbard movement for exerting pressure on the developer and the county – and at exactly NO EXPENSE to you, “anonymous” – to improve the overall shopping center plans.
4. “Neither Regency nor Equity One ever proposed moving forward with development on all of the Westbard parcels at the same time. So claiming that the lawsuit kept all of the parcels from being development at the same time is patently absurd. The plan was always to proceed stepwise.”
Who’s claiming that “the lawsuit kept all of the parcels from being development [sic] at the same time”? Show me where SW has ever claimed this proposition. Perhaps you are clumsily attempting to say (see number 5 below) that the Sketch/Preliminary/Site plans were all apiece, previously, before the lawsuit; and now, they are not, and will be dealt with separately? The piecemeal planning stages will assuredly delay the process, no doubt; and as even you acknowledge, delay is better for residents. Once again, “anonymous,” you’re welcome.
To be continued ...
@1:19 Comment 3 of 4
5. “What has changed is that they are seperating [sic] some of the parcels with respect to the planning approval process. This is not necessarily a good thing, as it may reduce requirements for amenities and complicate the Wiletts Branch naturalization process.”
What amenities? The road re-alignment was always a highly questionable “amenity” – as it is absolutely designed to facilitate flow of traffic for the developer into the new center, and on the other hand, hopefully insulate the Springfield neighborhood from excessive traffic. But, it’s expensive, and who’s going to pay for it? Road re-alignment will cost approximately $5 million – and neither the county nor Regency want to pay for it. We believe that additional density was gifted to Regency to incentivize Regency to re-align the road. Whether or not the “amenity” of road re-alignment is even realized will depend upon its active citizen proponents – let’s see if they can get it done. Further, the Willett naturalization is not any more complicated than it ever was, and in some respects, is actually easier now that the HOC parking garage is kaput (at least for now). You have other “amenities” in mind, “anonymous” – because we don’t see any?
6. “Moreover, we could still end up with as much or more development as originally planned, only time will tell. The plan for the supermarket property is reduced and, in my view, somewhat improved, but I don't see how those changes can be linked to the lawsuit.”
You’re right; we could end-up with as much development as before; no one knows at this point. You don’t see how the improved shopping center plans are linked to the lawsuit? Well, well, well. You’re quite sure that YOUR “work” (whatever that was, “anonymous”) would have improved the shopping center plans because …? We eagerly await your rationale as to why the shopping center would have been improved without the lawsuit pressure. Go on. We can’t wait.
To be continued ...
@1:19 Comment 4 of 4
7. “One aspect of this that is worthy of investigative reporting is why didn't the plantiffs attorney bother to respond to the defendent's request to dismiss the lawsuit as no longer being relevant due to their withdrawal of the initial proposal?”
What in the world are you even talking about? There is exactly no pleading in the lawsuit entitled “defendant’s [sic] request to dismiss the lawsuit as no longer being relevant due to their withdrawal of the initial proposal.” Stick to what you know, “anonymous” rather than randomly slandering plaintiffs’ attorney with crazy talk.
THE END
TL;DR
TL;DR
TL;DR
TL;DR
@7:24 Too Bad. You could've educated yourself.
You come off as a little unhinged, "SaveWestbard." For instance, under #6 -- you put the word "work" in quotes, as though you're quoting the post you've responded to. Anonymous 1:19 makes no reference to work.
The post by Anonymous 1:19 is reasoned and factual. Your response is made up of assumptions, opinions, and strawmen.
Regarding this issue of whether the county "MUST" assess greenhouse gas emissions -- I have asked in several forums for someone to provide a link to this statute. So far, nobody has. Will you?
It's rather hypocritical for Robert Dyer to deny that Global Warming/Climate Change doesn't exist, and then demand that the County assess greenhouse gas emissions.
https://robertdyer.blogspot.com/2009/11/global-warming-hoax-one-step-closer-to.html
http://robertdyer.blogspot.com/2018/01/redwood-watch-continues-on-bethesda-lane.html
@8:05 the statute
Chapter 33A . Planning Procedures.
http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Maryland/montgom/partiilocallawsordinancesresolutionsetc/chapter33aplanningproceduresnote?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$q=%5Band%3ASection%2033A%5D%20$x=server$3.0#LPHit1
Article 1. Master Plans.
* * * * *
Article 2. Components of the Plan.
§ 33A-14. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
As part of the factors and conditions outlined in § 7-108 of the Regional District Act and § 1.01 and § 1.03 of Article 66B, in preparing the Plan, the Planning Board must:
(a) assess the Plan’s potential impact on greenhouse gas emissions in the County, including a carbon footprint analysis;
(b) consider ways to reduce vehicle miles traveled in the County; and
(c) consider options that would minimize greenhouse gas emissions. (2008 L.M.C., ch. 11, § 1.)
Note—Former § 33A-14 is now § 33A-13.
Article 3. Growth Policies.
As for 1:19's "work" - quote- "I testified at many of the numerous public hearings and meetings against the proposal(s) and specific aspects of them." That the word "work" is in quotes intends to refer to the "work" to which 1:19 referenced, which is that s/he testified at numerous hearings and meetings. That is the "work" to which I refer. Put that "work" in direct contrast to two years of legal proceedings, testimony, protests, fundraising, community meetings, etc. That his/her "work" would've caused Regency to revised the shopping center plans is a stretch.
"Not to mention that, in 12 years of covering construction projects, I've never seen an underground garage built in 3 horizontal phases.. Sounds like something the Florida bridge designer might try."
So Robert Dyer is now an armchair civil engineer, in addition to being an armchair economist and armchair nightspot manager.
Individual neighborhoods are being done in one at a time by the county council and zoning officials, and while one neighborhood or another fights it, we all need to come together to throw out the council members who support dense development. Does anyone have a list of council members who take contributions from developers? Maybe we should focus on Berliner and this would send a message to the others who want to turn our county into a traffic jams, high rise buildings, pavement, and crowded schools. We should set up a political organization to collect funds and pay for advertising in the next election.
Bill - There's at least one - Elrich does not take contribs from developers.
4:58: Bill, Anna is correct - Elrich is the only current Councilmember who does not take contributions from developers. However, he is now running for County Executive. So if you want a Councilmember who doesn't get all weak-in-the-knees when a developer walks in the room, visit my campaign website at RobertDyer.net.
If Berliner is really going to have a ground-breaking ceremony as mentioned above, this would be a great opportunity for us. If we can get some media coverage and a large group of local citizens with signs, we could vary publicly give him the booing he deserves.
Post a Comment