commuting time, destroy affordable
housing, demolish homes & businesses
The "new" members of the "new" 2018 Montgomery County Council faced their first test of loyalties Tuesday, as they voted on the controversial and unpopular Veirs Mill sector plan. Well, as I warned everyone during last year's election, the "new" Council proved to be just like the old Council, but worse. Without Marc Elrich on the body, all nine councilmembers voted for the pro-developer plan.
Gabe Albornoz, Evan Glass, Will Jawando and Hans Riemer all received thousands of dollars in developer contribution in 2018. And their "Yes!" votes yesterday were a thank-you to their developer sugar daddies for the hefty election help.
The plan will allow demolition of single-family homes and businesses along the Veirs Mill corridor between Wheaton and Rockville. Changes to the layout of Veirs Mill Road, reduced speed limits, reduction of left-turn lanes, and longer stoplights are estimated to extend travel times for commuters up to 35 additional minutes on the already-congested road. Single-family home and public recreation properties are rezoned for mixed-use, "town-center" urban-style development in the plan.
 |
| The developer-driven plan will allow clearcutting of this wonderful green space... |
 |
| ...and demolition of several homes behind it on Robindale Drive, Adrian Street and Weiss Street, replacing them with a steel-and-concrete urban town center development |
This is the same thing the Council is allowing to happen on Battery Lane and Bradley Boulevard in Bethesda, where many people who can't afford market-rate single-family homes and newer apartments - but who make too much to qualify for MPDUs - currently live. They've already done it in Glenmont, where many residents of apartments like the wonderful Privacy World were forced out never to return to Glenmont.
 |
| The Council-approved plan allows this tree-lined green Montgomery County-owned property at 4010 Randolph Road to be redeveloped as a steel-and-concrete urban town center - and you can bet the Council will sell it to one of their developer sugar daddies at a sweetheart price! |
Even while failing to defend the interests of current homeowners, business owners and commuters who are paying record high taxes, the Council bizarrely found time to add a racially-charged political diatribe to the plan. To score political points, and create division among residents, the Council added a section that falsely claims racial covenants ensured the communities around Veirs Mill Road were white-only. In fact, enforcement of such covenants was banned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948.
The Veirs Mill sector plan as passed will displace thousands of residents, greatly increase traffic congestion, and radically transform the existing green, suburban character of Veirs Mill Road to a stifling corridor of vehicle exhaust and boxy steel-and-concrete Soviet apartment blocs. It was hard to believe that even some civic groups were fooled that the "new" Council would bring back residents' role in planning decisions, and not vote for this kind of pro-developer sector plan. Now it's just plan laughable.
You got steamrolled again.
You can't say I didn't warn you. And while media outlets like the Washington Post colluded with the Montgomery County cartel to prevent candidates like me from getting our message out, I certainly did notice the sheepish smiles of some "woke" voters who knew it was morally wrong to vote for Albornoz, Glass, Jawando and Riemer, who clearly did not represent the change they were claiming to seek in the planning process. Voting simply to ensure a sweep of all nine Council seats by one monopoly party was a really bad idea, now with tragic results for yet another Montgomery County community with this sector plan.
Next up: Aspen Hill. Fasten your seatbelts, folks.
Aspen Hill? You are wondering further from Bethesda. Aspen Hill has went to H E double toothpicks. What's the news from Aspen Hill? Vitro finally getting turned in to something?
ReplyDeleteThose 70-plus-year-old rabbit warrens along Veirs Mill are among the tiniest and worst SFHs in the entire county.
ReplyDelete"The Council added a section that falsely claims racial covenants ensured the communities around Veirs Mill Road were white-only. In fact, enforcement of such covenants was banned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948."
This is true. Most suburban communities that were built before 1948 had such restrictions. And the restrictions remained in the title deeds, although unenforceable, until 1972 when they were banned outright.
Which "public recreation properties" are being rezoned?
"The wonderful Privacy World"...said no one, ever.
Wow I didnt know Privacy World closed.
ReplyDeleteThe redevelopment could be good.
Doesnt county law require 30% to be affordable.
What? Where can I read the plans. Why are these neighborhood being destroyed?
ReplyDeleteSo
Spoken like a true socialist.
ReplyDeleteI skimmed through the Veirs Mill Sector Plan, and it seems like some very good ideas to improve the area, with enhancements for pedestrians and bike riders. I'm not sure where you are reading that this will pave over and ruin the area. Yes, a bit more density is possible, but with planned BRT, this should not really impact traffic in the area.
ReplyDeleteI don't see any neighborhoods being destroyed at all, just all good planning principles that should have been implemented many years ago.
You sure seem to look on the dark side of everything my friend.
Robert Dyer: "I certainly did notice the sheepish smiles of some 'woke' voters who knew it was morally wrong to vote for Albornoz, Glass, Jawando and Riemer, who clearly did not represent the change they were claiming to seek in the planning process."
ReplyDeleteLOLwut???
Privacy World is kind of naturally occurring affordable housing. I notice the older apartments tend to be larger square footage, so roomier for families.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how adding more residents and their cars along with slowing roads will help our current gridlock situation.
8:23: Here are the plans for Privacy World (which have been under construction already for several years):
ReplyDeletehttps://eastmoco.blogspot.com/2015/12/next-phases-of-glenmont-metrocentre.html
https://eastmoco.blogspot.com/2015/08/glenmont-metrocentre-plans-headed-to.html
7:56: Wrong. The Council tried to claim the developments built and populated along the Veirs Mill corridor were under racial covenants. That is false. Such covenants were no longer legally enforceable, as I clearly stated in the article. You are now joining them in claiming that these post-war developments were restricted to whites via covenants. Total BS.
ReplyDeleteThe recreation property is shown above and identified by street address. It will be redeveloped as an urban town center.
You obviously never saw Privacy World. Educate yourself with this firsthand account from the golden age of Glenmont:
https://eastmoco.blogspot.com/2013/03/glenmont-privacy-world-memories.html
9:58: You obviously need to read the plan more closely. The actual details will greatly add to traffic congestion. BRT will not have sufficient ridership to offset additional traffic at lower speed, with less capacity and throughput - all of which I outlined in my article (please read it again, as well).
ReplyDeleteThe changes, according to the County itself, will add about 35 minutes to a trip between Wheaton and Rockville. In what dimension is that going to "not really impact traffic in the area?" LOL
I see homes and businesses literally being demolished, and forest being clearcut - how is that not a neighborhood being destroyed?
"The Council tried to claim the developments built and populated along the Veirs Mill corridor were under racial covenants. That is false."
ReplyDeleteThey were at the time that construction started on those neighborhoods. That is true. And the covenants would have been in the deeds, though unenforceable, until 1972.
My parents lived in a house that was built after 1948, but in a neighborhood not far from there hat was subdivided before 1948. The title deed included a covenant that forbad "Negroes, Jews, or members of the Mongolian race."
ReplyDeleteDevelopers and their paid for local politicians are desirous of many of the post war neighborhoods. Large lots, small houses will be mentioned as a criticism.
ReplyDeleteTwinbrook is between two of the biggest routes in the county and will be under enormous pressure to redevelop SFH properties now that all of surrounding garden apartments are already being redeveloped. I expect eminent domain to be used, if necessary. For the greater good of affordable housing (and developer profits).
Remember when county employees were caught trying to annex Twinbrook into "White Flint" :)
8:07/8:32: Any such covenants were unenforceable by the time people were actually moving into these neighborhoods. The Council is trying to put a false narrative about white supremacy into a master plan for 2019 and beyond. Sick race baiting for craven political gain, and they need to be called on the carpet for it.
ReplyDelete9:53: Yes, it was very amusing when the elected officials in Rockville were apprised of the MoCo cartel's attempted hostile-takeover invasion of their municipality. They quickly put the kibosh on that scheme.
I remember when Robert Dyer tried to annex Pike & Rose into the City of Rockville.
ReplyDelete"The changes, according to the County itself, will add about 35 minutes to a trip between Wheaton and Rockville."
ReplyDeleteWhere did they say this?
The plan will allow demolition of single-family homes along the Veirs Mill corridor between Wheaton and Rockville. Single-family home properties are rezoned for mixed-use, "town-center" urban-style development in the plan.
ReplyDeleteDoes the plan say anything about taking of single-family homes by eminent domain, or will it simply allow the owners of these aging homes to sell them to someone who wants to put the land to a better use, rather than just building new single-family homes on the same lots, as is happening in much of lower Montgomery County?
Halpine View is such a wonderful place.
ReplyDeletehttps://wjla.com/news/local/naked-man-breaks-into-apartment-chokes-mother-snatches-infant-daughter-blames-shenanigans-on-bad-wee
"Without Marc Elrich on the body, all nine councilmembers voted for the pro-developer plan."
ReplyDeleteRobert Dyer loves Marc the Communist and hates private enterprise.
"The developer-driven plan will allow clearcutting of this wonderful green space...and demolition of several homes behind it on Robindale Drive, Adrian Street and Weiss Street, replacing them with a steel-and-concrete urban town center development."
ReplyDeleteThis is incorrect. That area is proposed to remain single-family-detached zoning.
See page 15 of the PDF document.
https://montgomeryplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Veirs-Mill-Corridor-Master-Plan-Planning-Board-Draft-single-page-layout-WEB-FINAL.pdf
In fact, there are only two areas where there are significant changes proposed:
ReplyDelete-The area around the intersection of Veirs Mill Road and Randolph Road, where the aging shopping strips on either side of Veirs Mill north/west of Randolph, plus the northeast corner including the current MoCo Department of Recreation offices, will become "mixed-use".
-The garden apartment complexes along Twinbrook Parkway, south of Veirs Mill Road, which are within the walkshed of the Twinbrook Metro station, will become "mixed-use".
The only other change is this:
-A very small area (just two adjacent single-family homes - 12607 and 12691 Veirs Mill Road) between St. Jude's Catholic Church on the west, and the curve of Adrian Street and Weiss Street. will become "multi-family". This is across from the Rock Creek Terrace high-rise apartment building and several hundred feet northeast of Robindale Drive.
Hugely unpopular? I was at the community meeting with the Council and citizens, and there was overwhelming support for the plan. Of the approximately 50 people who testified, only 4 or 5 raised objections.
ReplyDeleteI live along the Viers Mill Corridor and am incredibly excited about the plans for that area. Right now walking or biking along the road is risky, and can be deadly. Having wider sidewalks and separated bike lanes will be a huge improvement.
@ 9:29 AM & 9:56 AM -
ReplyDeleteHere is the total acreage for those five lots (per Zillow):
12607 Veirs Mill Rd. - 0.75 acres
12615 Veirs Mill Rd. - 1.1 acres
Together - 1.85 acres
12700 Robindale Dr. - 0.20 acres
4710 Adrian St. - 0.31 acres
4714 Adrian St. - 0.20 acres
All five lots together - 2.56 acres.
Saith Dyer: "replacing them with a steel-and-concrete urban town center development."
Nope, unpossible.
Robert Dyer: "The Council added a section that falsely claims racial covenants ensured the communities around Veirs Mill Road were white-only."
ReplyDeleteHere is what the report actually said about racial covenants in the neighborhoods covered by the Veirs Mill Corridor Master Plan - Resolution, April 19, 2019 - Page 7 of document, Page 8 of PDF, lines 290-308:
"The FHA programs [low-cost mortgages for homeowners] stimulated residential construction but further propagated the use of racial restrictive covenants. The FHA encouraged and often required racial covenants to meet appraisal standards prior to insuring low-interest loans for the property. While the Supreme Court ruled that racial restrictive covenants were not legally enforceable in 1948, these covenants continued to be written in deeds, and social enforcement sustained their effectiveness. The FHA did not amend their rules to deny properties with racial restrictive covenants for mortgage insurance until December 1949. However, private racial restrictive covenants continued to proliferate the language of segregation until the 1968 Fair Housing Act made the use of such covenants illegal."
"The Veirs Mill Village and Twinbrook subdivisions, as well as others including Connecticut Gardens, established racial restrictive covenants between 1947 and 1949 to prohibit the migration of minority groups into their neighborhoods. The covenant for Veirs Mill Village stated the following:
"'All lots are intended for use by the Caucasian race. No race of nationality other than those for whom the premises are intended, shall use or occupy any building on any lot, except that this covenant shall not prevent occupancy by domestic servants of a different race or nationality employed by an owner or tenant.'"
11:58: Wrong. The "restrictive covenants" were rendered moot by the Supreme Court decision and FHA action. The Council's claim that such convenants "prohibit[ed] the migration of minority groups into their neighborhoods" is demonstrably and definitively FALSE.
ReplyDelete11:45: You've left out all of the other adjacent land, including SHA, where those forested areas are. The total size of all that land is exactly why it has been rezoned for urban development.
9:10: What plan are you looking at? An old draft? The Council added language to existing draft that allows an urban town center mixed-use zoning across those properties.
4:53: "Better use" is only in the view of a developer. We have zoning to protect the character and quality of life in existing neighborhoods from developer bulldozers.
10:47: The plan calls for much more than separated bike lanes and wider sidewalks. I find it fascinating that we now have slower speed limits and more restrictions on drivers than ever before, and yet the pedestrian and cyclist deaths are higher than ever in MoCo and D.C. That's what happens when we put the "War on Cars" above traffic engineering best practices. Mandating speed limits lower than a road was designed for, and provoking rage in drivers, are known worst practices that lead to accidents.
Saith Dyer: "11:45: You've left out all of the other adjacent land, including SHA, where those forested areas are. The total size of all that land is exactly why it has been rezoned for urban development.
ReplyDeleteWhere is all of this "other adjacent land, including SHA, where those forested areas are"? How much acreage does it supposedly add to the 2.5 acres of those 2-5 lots? There appears to be an easement of about 30 feet fronting the road, which is typical, but that will remain public land. Why do you believe that it won't? In the unlikely event that it would actually be added to that site, it would increase the size of the site from 2.5 acres to no more than 2.8 acres. Hardly enough to build a "mixed use town center" - you'd need something closer to 25 acres for that.
Saith Dyer: "9:10: What plan are you looking at? An old draft? The Council added language to existing draft that allows an urban town center mixed-use zoning across those properties."
Well, let's see you find that "newer draft" that "allows an urban town center mixed-use zoning across those properties", rather than just townhouses, and post it here just as I posted the final version that was approved just a few days ago. The ball is in your court.
"10:47: The plan calls for much more than separated bike lanes and wider sidewalks."
Such as what?
"4:53: "Better use" is only in the view of a developer. We have zoning to protect the character and quality of life in existing neighborhoods from developer bulldozers."
ReplyDeleteExcept that in the Sector Plan, only 2-5 single-family detached home lots are proposed to be up-zoned. And those, only to townhouses, not "mixed-use town centers".
8:09/8:05: You must have an earlier draft - the Council inserted language to rezone those SFHs to mixed-use, not townhomes. See the Council staff report with underlined additions.
ReplyDeleteHans Riemer is currently proposing the same thing countywide in currently-SFH neighborhoods.
8:05: Of course the forested areas will be part of it - the new development will front Veirs Mill Road with ground floor retail.
Please read the above article again, as I clearly stated many of the approved changes that will lengthen commutes up to 35 minutes.
"You must have an earlier draft - the Council inserted language to rezone those SFHs to mixed-use, not townhomes. See the Council staff report with underlined additions."
ReplyDeleteThis is the final draft, and the Council staff inserted no such language. If there had been, Dyer would have posted and linked to it already. That 2-3 acre area is being up-zoned from Single-Family Detached houses to Town HOUSES. Not "Town Centers". And it is the only area that is currently Single-Family Detached houses that is being up-zoned. Dyer has a very serious reading-comprehension problem.
What Dyer posted earlier: "The changes, according to the County itself, will add about 35 minutes to a trip between Wheaton and Rockville."
A reader asked at 4:48 AM: "Where did they say this?"
Dyer responds: "Please read the above article again, as I clearly stated many of the approved changes that will lengthen commutes up to 35 minutes."
So it was Dyer's own claim, not an actual quote from "the County itself".
This is the only text relating to the site near Robindale Drive in the final report dated April 19:
ReplyDeleteOn Page 8 of the Report (Page 9 of the PDF), lines 334 through 340:
"Page 96: Amend the first sentence of the second bullet under "Recommendation" as follows:
"five properties: 12700 Robindale Drive, 4710 Adrian Street, 4714 Adrian Street, 12700 Weiss
340 Street and for the abutting outlot behind 12700 Weiss Street."
In other words, the only change made was to add one additional lot - 12700 Weiss Street, plus "the abutting outlot" behind it - to the five adjacent lots that were recommended previously for up-zoning from Single-Family Detached Homes to Townhouses.
12700 Weiss Street is 0.2 acres. The "abutting outlot" appears to be a very small area between 12700 Weiss Street and 12607 Veirs Mill Road. The addition of these two lots to the 5 that were recommended previously raises the total size of the area recommended to be up-zoned from Single-Family Detached Homes, to Townhouses (possibly with the option of adding one small store), to a total of 3.0 acres.
5:24/6:08: You just lied again! CNRF zoning is mixed-use town center, NOT townhomes.
ReplyDeleteHere is the ACTUAL text, and you can see where the Council added additional homes to make it a larger redevelopment, as well:
"Support a future application for the Commercial[-]Residential Neighborhood[-]Floating Zone 337 (CRNF) for [the single-family residential properties that directly abut 12607 and 12615 Veirs
338 Mill Road, bordered by Adrian Street to the north and Robindale Drive to the east] five 339 properties: 12700 Robindale Drive, 4710 Adrian Street, 4714 Adrian Street, 12700 Weiss 340 Street and for the abutting outlot behind 12700 Weiss Street."
CNRF /= "Town Center". It just means that they have the option of including a small store or similar with the townhouses. This was the same designation used in the previous draft. Note that this was NOT underlined.
ReplyDelete"Support a future application for the Commercial[-]Residential Neighborhood[-]Floating Zone 337 (CRNF) for [the single-family residential properties that directly abut 12607 and 12615 Veirs
338 Mill Road, bordered by Adrian Street to the north and Robindale Drive to the east] five 339 properties: 12700 Robindale Drive, 4710 Adrian Street, 4714 Adrian Street, 12700 Weiss 340 Street and for the abutting outlot behind 12700 Weiss Street."
4710 and 4714 Adrian Street had already been tentatively proposed to be added, as my previous comments show - this was merely confirmed in the final version. The only actual change in the final version was adding 12700 Weiss Street and "the abutting outlot".
Again, this change brings the size of that site from 1.85 acres (for the first 2 lots) up to 3 acres. - nowhere near the size needed for a "town center".
6:39: WRONG! Townhome developments do not have commercial. That zoning is for mixed-use, which is why it has the "C" on it.
ReplyDeleteSeems like St. Jude's could give up that parking lot which is on the east side of their property, adjacent to 12615 Veirs Mill. They have a much larger parking lot in the rear. That could expand the site by another acre, bringing it up to 4 acres.
ReplyDelete