The Cafritz Property will hold a community meeting to discuss revisions to its current plans Saturday, December 13, 2008 (9am-11am), at Riverdale Elementary School (5006 Riverdale Rd).

Rezoning of the Cafritz Property has not yet been applied for.  The Cafritz family may start to do so early in 2009.  Community support may need to be firmed before that could be done successfully.  The Cafritz website does not seem to have been updated in at least year.

At the end of October, the County Council authorized a new Route 1 Sector Plan update and planning process.  The update rescinded a previously proposed, controversial, southern amendment of area to add to the sector.  The amendment would have included Rt.1-fronting properties and the Cafritz Property.  The Sector Plan is a document of policies and recommendations to guide development, public amenities, and transportation within the sector’s defined boundaries.

Community charettes will be held in early December (see calander along top left column of this page, or MNCPPC website).  They will be the premier forum for affected residents and business owners to air opinions to planners and politicians.

The old plan (left) included the proposed southern amendment Rt.1-fronting residential properties from Pineway and Carleton Terrace south to East-West Hwy., as well as the Cafritz Property.  The updated plan (right) took out that southern amendment.  The proposed northern amendment of areas including Ikea, Cherry Hill Rd., and parts of the Hollywood neighborhood was kept.

State Highway Administration [SHA] financing for many improvements the Sector Plan recommendations (bus slips, sidewalks, bike lanes) is now shrouded in doubt.

**REMINDER** College Park US 1 Corridor Sector Plan community meeting:       Wednesday 7-9pm @ Lakeland/College Park Community Center [5051 Pierce Ave]

The updated Sector Plan, once initiated, will be a PG County Planning document containing legal stipulations and overall vision for development of properties within its boundaries.  There is currently in place, an older version of the Sector Plan.  It is thought to have problems since it has been around for a while and the Rt.1 mixed-use development it envisioned has not been realized.  A property’s ultimate inclusion in the Sector Plan will ensure its rezoning and development [both if any] conform to  specifications and vision of the Plan.

The updated Sector Plan is still in its planning stage.  Wednesday’s meeting is part of a public process where updates to the Plan will be discussed.  A public design charrette [interactive community workshop] will be held in December for the same purpose.  More information about the Sector Plan @:

• RTCP Library page on Rt.1 Corridor Sector Plan [RTCP library can always be found on the right-hand column of the blog under "About This Site"]

• M-NCPPC page on the Sector Plan

M-NCPPC proposed to amend to the updated Sector Plan, properties in two separate swaths north and south of the current Sector.  The northern swath includes parts of the Ikea, Hollywood, and Cherry Hill Rd. neighborhoods.

The southern swath includes Rt.1-fronting properties between Guilford Rd. and East-West Hwy. (including Cafritz Property).  College Park and University Park both oppose this addition.  County Councilman Eric Olson is planning to not include the southern swath in October when time comes for him to motion initiation of the Sector Plan amendment to voting by County Council.  Once he does that, no one can make a backdoor effort to re-include the controversial properties.

The Sector Plan will also be discussed at a tentative M-NCPPC Planning Board meeting October 2nd, and at a tentative County Council public hearing (where Sector Plan update/amendment is initiated) October 21st.

The fifth Cafritz Property meetings will be held this SATURDAY (Sept. 15, 10am-noon) and TUESDAY (Sept. 18, 7pm-9pm) at RIVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5006 Riverdale Rd, Riverdale MD).

Both identical workshops will present a concept plan for the mixed use development. The concept plans are to be based on design principles culled from previous workshops. There will be a new format without the familiar topic stations: A 20 minute presentation will precede a slated hour for open discussion.

See our previous posts on the Cafritz Property.

In this article we draw attention back to a concern aired in a previous post. Many citizens have spoken up for the Cafritz’s to keep their property undeveloped, or to not pursue changing existing zoning to accommodate mixed use. Up to the second (previous) round of meetings at the end of June, the development team had not adequately addressed these concerns to the public at large. However at the latest meetings those concerns were addressed head-on by the development team.

The Cafritz’s acknowledged that not everyone in the community supports development that is mixed-use. In explaining their choice for mixed-use over other development styles, they claim that they have received more positive than negative support for their mixed-use project. They purport that their development will abate an under-served market.

To demonstrate that the Riverdale and surrounding area market is under-served, the development team cited these comparative statistics from the Washington Post: In DC there are 24 square feet of retail space per capita, and one grocer per 9,700 people. In Riverdale there are 15.8 square feet of retail space per capita and one grocer per 18,000 people. Riverdale’s figures are less than half the national average and are clearly deficient when compared to DC. Cafritz Property development would conceivably close that gap by some amount by serving the local market. All concerned parties will not be appeased by the Cafritz’s answer for mixed-use development. But we commend the developer nonetheless for stepping up and explaining their reasons this time around.

It is worthwhile to note that comparing the Riverdale area to DC and national market averages assumes that DC and the nation as a whole are efficiently served by their retail markets. For example, are DC’s 24 square feet of retail space per capita all truly necessary? Could better planning reduce that figure while maintaining or even improving DC’s consumer utility from its retail market? Such planning is necessary in today’s age of urban sprawl, abandoned strip malls, and vanishing green space.