tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post6125720306078510667..comments2024-03-28T19:53:08.899-07:00Comments on Robert Dyer @ Bethesda Row: DOUGLAS DEVELOPMENT SEEKS EXTENSION FOR BETHESDA APARTMENT TOWER PROJECTRobert Dyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comBlogger79125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-55380309120620381102014-12-15T23:28:38.554-08:002014-12-15T23:28:38.554-08:00G. Money, everything I've said is backed up by...G. Money, everything I've said is backed up by solid data. The 3758 cars estimate is based on the latest U.S. Census data. As you know, since those latest numbers were depressed by the recession and high gas prices, they are very conservative, lowball estimates. I'm being extremely fair by using those low numbers, to say the least. Imagine what the actual number might be with cheaper gas and a better economy.<br /><br />Again, for transit use, there was a survey done of residents only within about a mile of Westbard a few years ago which found that 91% of respondents commute by car in the morning and evening. Some of those might park at a Metro station, but their first leg is by car for 91% of residents.<br /><br />That can be backed up anecdotally by simply monitoring the bus stops on Westbard and Ridgefield - very few people are there, and even fewer are residents. Anecdotally, I personally have noticed a slightly higher number of residents near Massachusetts Avenue seem to use buses. Not sure why that is, but perhaps going into American University as workers or students?<br /><br />There's no doubt the CCT is there, but the survey was taken while it was there, and tells us that those of the income level who can afford housing in that area overwhelmingly use automobiles. They often are younger professionals with children, and have multiple school and errand trips to run besides their commute before and after work.<br /><br />The height and density of the Westbard plan need to factor in those trends, as well as the extreme demand for schools in the Whitman cluster.Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-30900392072179903862014-12-15T17:10:27.157-08:002014-12-15T17:10:27.157-08:00Dyer, you are making unsubstantiated assumptions a...Dyer, you are making unsubstantiated assumptions about the increase in traffic and congestion. Obviously it is possible that these will increase, but the question is by how much? For example, you estimated (rather wildly) a number for how many new cars would be added as a result of this development. But how much of an increase is that in percentage?<br /><br />You've also claimed that 90% of residents would drive to work. Do you have anything to substantiate that number? You seem to be basing this on an idea that people can't get to/from Westbard without a car. That is patently false. The CCT is heavily used as a route for both walking and biking between Westbard and Bethesda. Friendship Heights is actually closer than Bethesda, although less convenient - but certainly an option and and obvious target for increased bus transit options if development occurs.<br /><br />It should also be noted that Bethesda's metro station is overtaxed and literally falling apart right now, and both Bethesda and Silver Spring are already rapidly developing, so it's not like people are trying to argue for developing Westbard <i>instead</i> of those locations.<br /><br />And, again, I'm not even saying Westbard needs to be developed. Notice I've not gone after your claims re: Whitman. I'm just saying that you can't cherry pick potential problems, or rather you can but you'll get blasted for it by people who understand the facts.G. Moneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-19147370033478235932014-12-15T07:54:26.972-08:002014-12-15T07:54:26.972-08:006:15: Not if they're stuck in traffic. There i...6:15: Not if they're stuck in traffic. There is also very little offset of pollution by mature trees in urban areas.Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-44690075631548982092014-12-15T06:15:44.562-08:002014-12-15T06:15:44.562-08:00Robert, you make completely false claims. You have...Robert, you make completely false claims. You have to look at greeenhouse gas emissions on a per capita basis not the aggregate number. Obviously urban area emit more greenhouse gases than sprawling suburbs on the aggregate, but you must look at per capita emission. Each person emits much less greenhouse gas emissions in urban areas than does each person in sprawling suburbs. That's a fact.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-24220829247557222102014-12-14T19:25:30.016-08:002014-12-14T19:25:30.016-08:00G. Money, I think if you just compare the tree can...G. Money, I think if you just compare the tree canopy and green lawn space in the neighborhoods around Westbard to those in downtown Bethesda, the factual difference becomes immediately apparent. The developers can certainly offer more green space, given that they've apparently included essentially none at this point. <br><br />I would say the difference in bus service connections to Metro vs. being walking distance to Metro is substantial. That has been one of the tenets of so-called "smart growth," and I have to admit I'm somewhat entertained by this awkward backtracking by some "smart growth advocates" on this holy writ. TOD is out the window? <br><br />Increased traffic + more traffic signals on River Road + no projects proposed to increase capacity on River Road + 90% of residents driving to work + having to now drive to Gaithersburg for auto services = more auto emissions. That's an actual increase. <br><br />Let's stick to urban growth in urban areas, so we don't have kids taking gym class in the hallway at Pyle (which they are doing *now* before even adding the additional units you're advocating for) to subsidize the profits of out-of-town developers. Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-21704026520774694882014-12-14T15:28:32.157-08:002014-12-14T15:28:32.157-08:00You said, "Single-family homes absolutely are...You said, "Single-family homes absolutely are better for the environment than apartment towers." You didn't cite specific plans, you made it sound like a generic principle. Either way, the proposed plan may not contain significant green space, but who's to say that concessions to include more green space couldn't be forced in order to get the deal through?<br /><br />Likewise, your arguments about increased traffic rely on a large number of assumptions. Why can't increased Westbard development be contingent upon concurrent improvements to public transportation? One of the objections I saw previously was that the busses along River don't run frequently enough. Well, how about increasing that frequency? There are other options for transportation besides Metro and cars.<br /><br />And again, the whole point of increased density closer to the city is that people won't have to drive in from farther away. Those people don't have <i>any</i> public transit options. And while idling emissions are different than driving emissions, you'll have to produce some actual numerical analysis if you want to convince me that the proposed Westbard development will actually increase emissions.G. Moneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-79112102982201496602014-12-14T02:40:55.468-08:002014-12-14T02:40:55.468-08:00G. Money, first of all, I'm suggesting that we...G. Money, first of all, I'm suggesting that we would be reducing the total number of people being added to the county population by favoring single-family homes and garden apartments outside of our two edge city downtowns. Second, there will be no green space at all around the buildings under the current proposal. Just a postage stamp "town square," and a thin linear park along the Willett Branch (which may never be built at all). Where's the park that was promised 30 years ago, and ended up as houses instead?<br /><br />If the thousands of new cars the plan proposes to bring to Westbard are stuck in traffic, and the existing commuter traffic is slowed even further by them, that means much more auto emissions, not less. Emissions from cars idling in traffic jams (different from regular emissions during uncongested road driving) have been blamed for the deaths of thousands of Americans each year. So the current plan will not help air quality or public health at all.<br /><br />Then you add in the folks you're referring to who are coming from farther away, and the idling emissions picture gets even worse.<br /><br />There is no Metro station at Westbard, so planning urban development there is not smart growth. It is sprawl. <br /><br />My arguments are based on the proposed plan details, scientific data on emissions, thermal imaging that proves cities generate more heat than suburbs, the lack of Metro service at Westbard, and common sense - dropping thousands of people and cars into the equivalent of 2 city blocks is a pretty horrific piece of planning.Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-88205821453692918542014-12-13T20:25:18.738-08:002014-12-13T20:25:18.738-08:00Dyer, that is some truly absurd reasoning. Here...Dyer, that is some truly absurd reasoning. Here's why:<br /><br />Single family homes (SFH) house a single family (or maybe a few roommates if it's a rental). Apartment towers may have hundreds of units. Granted, not every unit will have a full family living in it, but you'd probably need on the order of 100 SFHs to house that many people. The typical apartment tower probably takes up no more than 10 SFH-sized lots. That leaves you with 90 extra lots with structures on them. If you build an apartment tower, you could completely devote all 90 of those lots to green space. Now, you could choose not to use those lots for green space, in which case you might lose the environmental benefits, but that doesn't make the apartment tower worse itself worse for the environment.<br /><br />Regarding heat islands, that is an area of concern, although the effects on the greenhouse effect are indirect. More importantly, there are known mitigation techniques that can and should be used in any new development (especially in an area like Westbard that can clearly afford it).<br /><br />Regarding emissions from traffic, building low-density housing just pushes the population further out, which is why we have people commuting to DC from WV and Frederick. Those people driving back and forth generate WAY more emissions that someone living in Westbard. So by increasing density close to the city, you may increase emissions locally due to an increase of local traffic, but you will definitely ease overall emissions by creating more options for people to live closer to the city.<br /><br />Don't get me wrong, I have no skin in the game as far as the Westbard plan goes, other than that I'd prefer the bowling alley to stick around. But you need better arguments than the ones you've presented, because they are (mostly) simply wrong.G. Moneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-68103115706189405492014-12-13T07:15:36.261-08:002014-12-13T07:15:36.261-08:007:33: Single-family homes absolutely are better fo...7:33: Single-family homes absolutely are better for the environment than apartment towers. They have natural green space and heavy tree canopies on all sides. That provides cleaner air, and less stormwater run-off. Suburban neighborhoods also generate less heat into the air to exacerbate the greenhouse effect than urban areas. Thermal maps from satellites clearly demonstrate that urban areas are heat islands. <br><br />The biggest sustainability benefit of single-family homes is that their low-density naturally limits the total population who can inhabit a particular area. That reduces exhaust emissions from idling vehicles caught in traffic. So single-family homes and garden apartments are clearly the wisest planning decision outside of downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring. Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-66820356322445471142014-12-12T07:33:03.593-08:002014-12-12T07:33:03.593-08:00"I would not have approved them at that level..."I would not have approved them at that level of density. Development beyond downtown Bethesda and downtown Silver Spring should be single-family homes and garden apartments. Much better for the environment, and the lower density curbs effect on roads and schools."<br /><br />You cannot be seriously saying that single-family homes are better for the environment than high-density development?!?! This is one of your most baseless claims.<br /><br />To house 100 families in single-family homes, you would consume far greater amount of land than would a 150-unit high-rise apartment. All the infrastructure: sewers, electricity and streets would use many more resources than a single high-rise building. Emergency services would have to travel much longer distances to reach every home than to reach one single high-rise structure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-8048539563044333632014-12-12T04:49:05.223-08:002014-12-12T04:49:05.223-08:00Anywhere or way the public can get involved in the...Anywhere or way the public can get involved in the review process past the first public meeting they had a while back?<br /><br />Any link to the letter? Thanks Robert. Simonenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-9850068361883277512014-12-12T04:08:00.143-08:002014-12-12T04:08:00.143-08:00Is there a source link we can see the letter?Is there a source link we can see the letter?Franknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-70503974802527541472014-12-11T19:27:28.995-08:002014-12-11T19:27:28.995-08:00Where can we see the letter?Where can we see the letter?Betty Annenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-51647011729183055802014-12-11T18:41:19.369-08:002014-12-11T18:41:19.369-08:00Wrol, I think we do have to change, and come to gr...Wrol, I think we do have to change, and come to grips that infinite development is not sustainable. We have two edge city urban districts in downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring. There is plenty of "old" property to be redeveloped there. But we are under no obligation to provide unlimited housing at the expense of quality of life for current residents, for that Rollin Stanley mythical idea that "They're coming." They're only coming if the luxury apartments are built to house them, and we're not under obligation to provide that. Arlington County is having a similar difficulty in admitting it is basically fully developed. They, like MoCo, are now trying to throw poor people out in the street to make room for Rich White People. Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-49583194328345728372014-12-11T16:15:28.971-08:002014-12-11T16:15:28.971-08:00So what happens when our population outstrips your...So what happens when our population outstrips your suggested density levels? As Bethesda now outpaces precious levels for example. Do we change? Or only allow Bethesda and silver spring to add density per your suggestion?Wrolnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-85262137710652141032014-12-11T15:12:06.093-08:002014-12-11T15:12:06.093-08:008:22: I would not have approved them at that level...8:22: I would not have approved them at that level of density. Development beyond downtown Bethesda and downtown Silver Spring should be single-family homes and garden apartments. Much better for the environment, and the lower density curbs effect on roads and schools. Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-40414678179899369602014-12-11T10:19:43.925-08:002014-12-11T10:19:43.925-08:00Yes please. Source link please! Thanks Robert. Lov...Yes please. Source link please! Thanks Robert. Love this kind of news. Jamie Dyernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-73049480735467814572014-12-11T07:40:04.984-08:002014-12-11T07:40:04.984-08:00Robert, I have not heard of any payment beyond wha...Robert, I have not heard of any payment beyond what is required. I don't think the jobs argument applies to this proposal, as it contains no new office space for high-wage jobs. There will actually be a net drain of income taxes in Westbard, as all of the new jobs will be baristas or folding jeans. We would actually lose a great number of higher-paying skilled labor positions such as auto mechanics and tradesmen who work there now. <br><br />Alas, the theory of the new tax base covering services, schools and infrastructure has been utterly debunked in Montgomery County. The county has added housing units at up to an 800% increase in some parts of the county over the last decade. Yet we are running a structural budget deficit as far into the future as can be projected! It turns out the new taxes are outstripped by new costs for public services and infrastructure to support the new development. <br><br />I think Mr. Starr might have some interesting stories for you about the MCPS budget problems, years after explosive growth of housing and "growing our tax base." <br><br />As far as improving the area, all that's on the table for now is daylighting Willett Branch, a good idea, but uncertain to happen and hardly worth the downsides of urbanization and losing necessary services residents count on. I don't see the concrete canyons as an improvement over what is basically a commercial shopping and services area - I don't think residents are asking for Rodeo Drive when just wanting to fill the gas tank or get a hamburger at McDonald's. <br><br />That far from Metro, I don't think higher density makes sense.Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-62631599159897115942014-12-11T06:09:43.625-08:002014-12-11T06:09:43.625-08:00It's pro business. Adds jobs. More tax base. N...It's pro business. Adds jobs. More tax base. Nicer area since it's so ugly now. If they do get to go higher that means they will have to provide concessions to improve other things in the area. More density in a fair location. Just some thoughts off the top of my head. <br /><br />Granted I agree they have to make sure the schools can handle it, etc. What's the analysis on tax base growth paying for the new students? Among other things more taxes will pay for.<br /><br />Also have they said what they would pay into to help the school situation?Robert Dillonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-6268819545600183382014-12-11T05:17:16.271-08:002014-12-11T05:17:16.271-08:008:21: Why would you want Westbard to be urbanized ...8:21: Why would you want Westbard to be urbanized as sprawl overdevelopment?Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-72363879992025697022014-12-10T20:23:08.300-08:002014-12-10T20:23:08.300-08:00So that sounds like the county needs to step up an...So that sounds like the county needs to step up and incentivize gas stations....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-58179449898997926342014-12-10T20:22:07.416-08:002014-12-10T20:22:07.416-08:00So all those places in your opinion should not hav...So all those places in your opinion should not have been built?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-30555085195497540442014-12-10T20:21:12.272-08:002014-12-10T20:21:12.272-08:00I am further away and I want it. That's not no...I am further away and I want it. That's not no one. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-72141208310852445072014-12-10T19:34:24.066-08:002014-12-10T19:34:24.066-08:005:29 I'm not sure what your question is - do y...5:29 I'm not sure what your question is - do you mean what if nearby residents don't want it, but further-away county residents do? Equity One's Michael Berfield has promised the new retail and restaurants won't be ones that are regional draws, so theoretically, further away residents aren't going to want it. But, obviously, the adjacent neighborhood's opinion takes precedence over outsider opinions. We're not talking about a critical highway, hospital or fire station for the public good here. Just luxury apartments and chain retail shops for private profit. Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28521945.post-73415402752911954012014-12-10T19:27:23.161-08:002014-12-10T19:27:23.161-08:005:33: Crown is not completed yet. King Farm was a ...5:33: Crown is not completed yet. King Farm was a bomb in terms of smart growth and economic development; much of the office space required to fulfill the "Live Work Play" boast is now being converted to residential. Watkins Mill has an empty space where the town center was supposed to be, as does Clarksburg. In terms of traffic, they've been a planning disaster, as I-270 commuters can attest. <br><br />I don't think jamming thousands more cars and people into the equivalent of 2 city blocks at Westbard could be deemed a success, unless your sole measurement is developer profit. There's a lot more to successful planning than private profit.Robert Dyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01975969463714952623noreply@blogger.com