Contributor Opinion By Temperance Blalock: Clean Up The Old Giant Parking Lot

>The following contributor opinion is by Temperance Blalock:

Saturday night I sprained my left ankle in the “Old Giant” parking lot on North Washington St. Despite the fact that I live across the street from that parking lot, work right next to it, and walk through it or past it every day, I didn’t realize how truly dangerous it can be until I stepped into a pothole in a spot with no overhead lighting. While the parking lot looks merely run down during the day, at night it becomes a treacherous derelict.

The “Old Giant” building has been empty for many years now, and once that store closed the parking lot passed into a vague status. The lot is very large, and presents an “empty” break in the line of sight in downtown Rockville. It has become a heavily trafficked route for automobiles, since drivers like to use it as a short-cut between Hungerford Drive and North Washington, bypassing Beall Ave. That isn’t too much of a problem during the day, but at night it becomes very dangerous because the traffic lanes are not clearly defined, and thus drivers casually careen through the lot, choosing their own route regardless of parked cars or pedestrians.

The businesses that operate out of the “parking lot building” next to Gateway Tower have become increasingly popular, particularly Bobs 66 Noodle restaurant, which has a great reputation throughout the large Asian community. The Beer/Wine/Deli is also always busy, though it doesn’t generate the same volume as Bobs 66. Last Saturday night there were scores of cars parked near those businesses, which is what forced me to park in the center of the lot. When I stepped out of my car, into the darkness, I stepped almost immediately into a pothole in the asphalt, and painfully twisted my ankle.

The asphalt surface of the parking lot is in terrible shape, full of potholes. The parking lot is not lit at night, meaning that drivers and pedestrians are in danger of collision with each other. The entire place looks trashy and run-down, diminishing the attraction of nearby Town Center.

I started working at Gateway Tower in the summer of 2001, and the old Giant store was closed about a year later. Since then, the status of that piece of land has doubtless been the subject of great controversy and negotiation, of which I know very little. All that I do know for sure is that seven years is an excessively long time to allow such a large piece of real estate to crumble and deteriorate. There is no sign that it will be developed in the near future, but in the meantime there is the potential for physical danger to the people who walk and drive in that lot, and the customers who patronize those businesses. It’s time that the owners or managers of that lot be held accountable for its appearance and physical condition.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to contribute too! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By John Britton: State Of The City Reprise

>[Note: a draft version of this article was inadvertently published. Its content was the same, but formatting was not included. Here it is properly set-up. Sorry for the confusion.]

The following Contributor Opinion is by City Councilmember John Britton:

I am reminded of the old adage: “Never a dull moment in local politics.” Well maybe not so old and maybe not an adage just yet, but ever so true.

As you may have heard, Mayor Susan Hoffmann will not be in attendance at the public gathering scheduled for Wednesday, February 11th. Alas, I think it unfortunate as we will miss her contributions to the public dialogue and other musings that may occur; one less perspective for the mix. The public will have to corner her another time! But, as they say (a la Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland), the show will go on. Councilmember Marcuccio and I still intend to carry on and present our perspectives on all things past, present and future, well at least those things that may be within City jurisdiction and reflect on the state of the city. And we hope our discourse can have some positive effect on the public weal. So, same place – first floor meeting room, Rockville Library; same time – February 11th, 7 p.m.; same issues – anything. All are welcome.

Remember: Buy Rockville! Save your appetites that evening for dining in Rockville Town Center either before or after the public gathering. Think of shopping a bit as well. And by all means, just don’t stop at the first floor of the library. Go inside and take advantage of our beautiful flagship library and check out a book, CD or DVD, or just enjoy the people and the surroundings.

Councilmember John Britton

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion by John Britton: State Of The City And The Open Meetings Act

>The following Contributor Opinion is by City Councilmember John Britton:

A few points on the planned February 11, 2009 gathering and the Open Meetings Act:

1. As you may know, Mayor Hoffmann, Councilmember Marcuccio and I are proposing an open and public gathering on Wednesday, February 11th for a discussion of issues. This is not an official mayor and council meeting as there will be no business conducted nor will there be votes taken on any matter. Rather it is an open, public gathering to hear three perspectives (varying and probably divergent depending on the issue!) on the accomplishments (or lack thereof?!) of this mayor and council of the past year and of issues that the community members think the mayor and council may address in the next year. Although we may have brief introductory comments, the bulk of the time will be devoted to questions from the community members and, hopefully, thoughtful, relevant and insightful answers from us.

2. I stress that this is not an official meeting of the mayor and council. However, since at least a quorum of the mayor and council may be present, special rules and safeguards apply to the gathering as set out in the Maryland Open Meetings Act. These rules and safeguards implement public policy of the State and ensure public access to any gathering of a quorum. The Open Meetings Act requires that the public be provided with adequate notice of the time and location of the public gathering, that the location be reasonably accessible to individuals who would like to attend, and that minutes be prepared as soon as practicable after the public gathering.

3. Rather than make up rules as we went along, as has been alleged, we were constrained by a rigid set of existing rules under the Open Meetings Act. Prior to initiating the process for this public gathering, a thorough review of the Open Meetings statute (State Government Article, Title 10, Subtitle 5) and the Open Meeting Acts Manual (Sixth Edition, October 2006) was warranted. This review established the framework for the public gathering. I also confirmed the requirements of the law and compliance thereto with the City Attorney. Our recognition of and adherence to the rules set out in the Open Meetings Act resulted in the following to ensure compliance with the law:

(a) Notice of the time, date, place, participants and agenda was sent to the Gazette for publication this week and placed on the RockvilleCentral and RockvilleLiving blogs. The City also distributed a press release with the same information. This notice also was copied to the City Attorney.

Contributor Opinion By Joseph Jordan: State Of The City

>The following Contributor Opinion is by Joseph Jordan:

The proposed State of the City meeting scheduled for February 11th tells me this City Council makes up the rules as they go along. From what I understand, two Council members and the Mayor decide to have a meeting, but don’t invite the other two Council members. They now have a quorum and intend to discuss city business, policy, ordinances, etc. Isn’t this considered an official Council meeting? I believe it is, and there are rules governing such meetings. I’d like to see the City Attorney weigh in on this.

I pushed back on this Council when they wanted to have work sessions off-camera, when they voted to eliminate responses at Citizen Forum, when they wanted to have quarterly “retreats” that would be closed, off-site meetings. Now they want to have something as important as a report on the State of the City, and have it in a library conference room…with only three Council members….with no cameras or recording devices so that residents that can’t make the meeting can at least see a playback? Give me a break…something is wrong here. If elected officials want to meet their constituents, then do what Mr. Gajewski does…have your own Town Hall meeting. If you want to present and discuss the State of the City, then do it in City Hall, with all council members and the City Manager present, with the cameras and recording devices rolling.

Joseph Jordan

Contributor Opinion By John Britton: Another Inaugural Observation

>The following contributor opinion is by Rockville City Council member John Britton:

It was not difficult to make the decision whether to stay at home and enjoy the inaugural events from the comfort and warmth of our living room or go to what promised to be a too-crowded, too frigid Mall to view the Inaugural events. A no-brainer; It was go from the beginning for all of us – Katherine, Eric , Anna and myself – to hear the Inaugural address directly, to see the people, to breathe the same air as President Obama and the other dignitaries, to insert ourselves into a moment of history. We did not have tickets to anything, so we were full into the common man thing which kept our expectations at a manageable level. To our great surprise, these expectations were exceeded.

We decided to head into downtown on Monday evening to spend the night in my office located within the security zone. Think camping without s’mores and mosquitoes; hotel without the beds! Apart from being in a room with a hyperactive motion detection light system, the accommodations were, well, accommodating. Being there gave us the strategic advantage of leaving the office in the morning by foot, destination anywhere on the Mall (with a quick stop in Starbucks for breakfast). We quickly learned of the mass of humanity travails at the east end of the Mall and worked our way from 7th Street, NW to 18th Street, NW before finding our access to the Mall. If nothing else, the trek across downtown DC – devoid of automobiles save for the occasional emergency vehicle — was worth the moment. Along the way were ad hoc vendors selling everything imaginable, restaurants with their offerings and urns of coffee set out on tables in the street and spontaneous celebrations at nearly every turn – as one pundit put it, “a block party of historic proportions”. By the time we encountered the snaking conga line led by someone dressed in a polar bear outfit singing tunes to Obama, we were no longer surprised by what downtown could offer that day.

After a minor stand-off with the National Guard who were woefully outnumbered by the masses (power to the people!), we worked our way onto the Mall and stood in the shadow of the Washington Monument. We arrived in plenty of time for the swearing-in ceremony, with a view of a jumbotron and clear, crisp audio projecting from the Capitol Building platform. There was an ever so slight but detectable disconnect between the movement of lips on the screen and the words that we heard – akin to watching one of those old B-rated, 1960’s era Japanese horror films. But certainly no distraction from the solemnity of the moment. After its obligatory booing and hissing in the beginning each time President Bush or Vice President Cheney appeared on the screen, the crowd fell into an incredible hush. To the dilemma of how to silence nearly 2 million people, evidently you need only a Barack Obama on the stage in front of them. And what a crowd – the mood and diversity made the scene the mother of all Pepsi commercials.

At the risk of being hyperbolic – actually there is no such risk in this situation – the experience was exhilarating, majestic, stunning, breathtaking [insert superlative here]. Put simply, it was awesome. Even through the slightly harrowing situation of 1.8 million people implementing the same exit strategy at the same time (when even the words “yes we can” presumed herculean efforts!), the day’s experience could not be diminished. We now proudly carry the right to say for all time, “We were there!”

John Britton

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By Susan Hoffmann: MHP Worked With Community

>The following Contributor Opinion is by Rockville mayor Susan R. Hoffmann. It is a reprint, by permission of the author, of her email response to this message sent to the Mayor and Council.

With all due respect, I believe that [Larry Giammo is] omitting one very important fact: [Montgomery Housing Partnership] has been working with the community, represented by the West End Citizens Association, since 2006. It is only very recently that the opposition started paying attention and that we began to hear from them. That does not diminish their right to be concerned, but it is simply not factual to claim that the steps . . . laid out weren’t followed. The steps were followed and WECA offered no objection. In point of fact, WECA welcomed and endorsed the project, writing a letter in support. I hope that everyone will continue to discuss Bealls Grant II in good faith and that we can find a good outcome for all involved.

Susan R. Hoffmann
Mayor, City of Rockville

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By Larry Giammo: Differences Between Beall's Grant 2 And Other Successful Developments

>The following Contributor Opinion is by former Rockville mayor Larry Giammo. It is a reprint, by permission and suggestion of the author, of a message he sent to the Mayor and Council on November 26, 2008.

Mayor and Council,

I watched the segments of the most recent city council meeting having to do with the proposed Beall’s Grant II development and related matters. I think the question of how the Beall’s Grant II development has ended up at the center of what is a troubling situation is worth serious thought and discussion.

If you look back at some of the most significant development projects approved in Rockville over recent years, there are at least several that had the potential to become sources of widespread concern and intractable opposition – but, instead, stand out as having in the end garnered widespread support among nearby residents. Examples that come to mind include Legacy at Lincoln Park, Twinbrook Commons, and Chestnut Lodge – to name a few.

Why did projects like these not end up in the unfortunate situation that we, as a community, now face with Beall’s Grant II? Three fundamental differences are apparent:

1 – Process: In each case, the developer engaged nearby residents in a series of multiple meetings to discuss the potential development. The series of meetings began well before a date had even been set for the development application to be formally considered for approval. The meetings were inclusive, interactive, substantive, constructive and productive. In each case, the result of the series of meetings was a project plan that a) had evolved significantly from what had originally been proposed, and b) both the developer and most of the nearby residents were comfortable with. By the time the actual development application came up for formal consideration for approval, any question of community opposition had, for the most part, already been addressed and put to rest.

2 – Developer’s Attitude and Intent: In each case, the developer made a good faith and significant effort to inform, engage and work collaboratively with nearby residents. And, the city government’s expectation was made very clear to the developers: unless and until they did in fact make a good faith and significant effort to inform, engage and work collaboratively with nearby residents, their project was highly unlikely to be approved.

3 – City Government’s Role: In each case, the city government monitored the progress of the discussions between the developer and nearby residents, in order to be able to informatively and independently assess whether both sides were truly making a good faith effort at collaborative problem solving. At the same time – and this is critical – the city government stood ready to step in at the appropriate time to represent the interests of nearby residents, based on the premise that it would be inappropriate and unfair to put the residents in a position of having to “negotiate” completely on their own, since they lack the resources and experience with zoning, planning, design, etc. that each developer has at their disposal.

So, back to Beall’s Grant II. Objectively speaking, what’s transpired in regard to Beall’s Grant II bears little, if any, resemblance to what was experienced with those other development projects, especially in regard to the three points outlined above.

The question for you now, most fundamentally, is whether you believe it’s worthwhile to move the process for Beall’s Grant II back a few steps so that there’d be the opportunity to apply what’s outlined above to Beall’s Grant II. If you do make that choice, it’ll likely take a couple of months to potentially achieve a positive outcome similar to that of the other projects, in terms of developing a project plan that is much more widely accepted and supported. At that point, the letter of support needed by the developer could then be put to a vote.

If, on the other hand, you’d rather not slow the developer down and choose to put the needed letter of support to a vote now, the numerous community members who already feel concerned, frustrated and disenfranchised will only feel even more concerned, more frustrated and more disenfranchised as a result – and arguably legitimately so, given how other development projects with potentially significant community impact have been handled in the city in the past.

Sincerely,
Larry Giammo

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By Tim Gilday: Beall's Grant Embodies Core U.S. Values

>The following Contributor Opinion is by Tim Gilday:

It’s been my privilege living at Beall’s Grant over the past year: the residence provides warmth, exceptional convenience and a decent, welcome atmosphere. Certainly no place is perfect, but the management team noticeably strives to maintain and continuously improve the facilities, all while keeping an admirable rate of communication with its residents about changes and issues. I’d go so far as to say that the most expensive neighboring apartments and condos would do well to have such an active team tending to them. My (relatively) wealthy friend complained about the difficulty of obtaining service on a leak under his sink for 6 days. I don’t recall seeing more than one or two business days pass for my requests here.

What prompted this letter, then, was a feeling that there exists a certain lack of awareness and a few unfortunate misconceptions held by local community members about the quality of the residents at Beall’s Grant. The only vague truism that could honestly be thrown is that those living in non-free-market-rent apartments likely earn less than the average community member (myself included). And I grant there is little doubt that a meta-study focusing on income and its relations to crime would probably reveal statistically significant results; so that being said, I have empathy and no ill feeling towards those opposing Beall’s Grant II. Nonetheless, it is a broad leap to some of the assumptions I’ve heard made about us and about what will occur to the neighborhood if Beall’s Grant II is successfully constructed. The only desire I have is to allow them to see through my eyes what Beall’s Grant and its residents truly represent.

Thanks to the careful selection of Cliff Bailey and team, the residents of Beall’s Grant are composed of an extremely diverse cross-section of individuals. I’ve met people from all walks of life, some with thick accents and the aroma of their country’s food wafting through their door. If a thick accent and an exotic smell are indicative of anything, I’d say it’s progress. If people want privacy, they close their doors and keep to themselves. But if they care to associate with others, then all I’ve ever met are people working their way through life: some in continuing education, some working tough evening hours, even one woman with a baby who has to travel two hours each way by mass transit to get to her nursing job in Baltimore and back to study and take care of her child. If you want to put it poetically, I see a lot of inspiration.

So, to make a long story short: if one desires to maintain a strong, healthy neighborhood, they need not exclude those who exhibit the core values that the United States was founded on. The only thing we need to do is make sure we check ourselves from time to time to make sure WE are still upholding those values while enabling the betterment of others.

My appreciation,

Tim Gilday

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By John Britton: Collective Action Can Help Achieve Environmental Goals

>The following contributor opinion is by Rockville City Council member John Britton. (Hyperlinks have been added.) This Friday’s Rockville Central Radio show will focus on sustainability and the environment, so this piece is particularly timely!

On November 12, 2008, the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) adopted the National Capital Region Climate Change Report. The Report offers recommendations and voluntary commitments for the local, county and state jurisdictions in the metropolitan Washington region for the reduction of our region’s carbon footprint and greenhouse gases. It is a Report that focuses on the macro trends of housing, land use, transportation and energy generation and their profound impacts on the environment and, by extension, our public health. The COG staff presented a few weeks ago a briefing on the Report to a joint meeting of the Rockville and Gaithersburg mayors and councils.

The Report is a worthwhile, albeit possibly daunting, read. There is one section in the Report that should be of particular interest to our residents and businesses — Table 5 “Household/Business Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” It identifies no cost, low cost, medium cost and high cost activities that we can undertake to achieve certain greenhouse gas reduction benefits.

The no cost activities include such things as: recycling; change thermostat settings in both winter and summer; set computers to energy-saving setting; drive 10 fewer miles per week; set water heater thermostat no higher than 120 degrees; wash clothes in cold water. A low cost suggestion: change incandescent lighting to compact fluorescent (maybe Rockville should sponsor a change-your-light bulb day). A medium cost activity is to conduct an energy audit of your home. Such an audit could reduce greenhouse gases, create green jobs and, in the long term, put dollars back into the pockets of our homeowners.

The above may seem like trivial activities but if you believe, as I do, in the efficacy of collective action, then they become a significant contribution to our environmental goals.

Councilmember John Britton

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion by Mark Pierzchala: My Mongoose Is Loose

>The following contributor opinion (and true story) is by Rockville Central friend Mark Pierzchala:

On Saturday November 1, I purchased a Mongoose. On Wednesday, November 5 it vanished. I swear it was locked up properly. Its disappearance is mysterious and foul play is likely.

The reason I bought a Mongoose is because on Friday, October 31 someone stole my bicycle from a bike rack at Rockville Metro Station. Now before you pull all your children inside, I should explain that a Mongoose is a bicycle brand and that the Mongoose I purchased on Saturday was a used bike from a reputable area bike shop. The reason that the Mongoose vanished on Wednesday is that it too was stolen from the same bike rack at Rockville Metro.

The first stolen bike was cabled properly to the bike rack. I assumed that someone picked the lock on this cable because it had a key lock. After losing that beloved bicycle, you can be sure that the Mongoose bike was even more carefully and fully cabled to the rack. This cable had a combination lock. I think someone has a cable cutter.

I rode the Mongoose back and forth to the Metro exactly 1½ times. Even though it was used, by the time I added a few basic accessories such as a thick cable, it cost $263. If I continue to lose bikes at this rate, this clearly would not represent a cost-effective transportation solution. This poses a dilemma since we share 2 cars between 3 drivers and being able to cycle to the Metro is a key part of this arrangement.

A few months ago, I broached the topic of bike parking at Metro at Citizen’s Forum. I noted that all bike lockers at the Metro were rented and that there was at least a year’s wait. Since then, the City expressed a willingness to purchase more bike lockers for the Rockville stop. Metro said it would accept them but is concerned about the expense of their maintenance.

Along the way I learned that Metro has little money for bike security, that it is replacing some of its 1600 bike racks, that more people are biking to the Metro, but Metro needs to focus on its core business. All I wanted at the time of my presentation to Mayor and Council was a few bike racks inside the tunnel out of rain and sun and within range of security cameras.

Anyway I’m back on my unicycle after a 15 month hiatus after I fractured my elbow a week after I bragged to a neighbor that I had never broken a bone in my life. Maybe one day I’ll get good enough at unicycling to ride it to the Metro and perhaps Metro would let me take it on rush-hour trains. But my skill level is minimal and it’s going to be a long time before that happens if ever. What’s a guy to do?

P.S. The following is from Carl Henn: The county runs a bike registration system that sends you a decal with a number on it, so that if it’s recovered they know who to send it back to. It’s here. I had a bike stolen years ago from a Metro station, but it was registered through NIH. The cops caught the thieves and returned my bike.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By Carl Henn: Slot Costs Outweigh Benefits

>The following contributor opinion is by Carl Henn:

Choosing our president won’t be our only task when we go to the polls on November 4. We also must decide if Maryland should bring slots back. Maryland had more slots than Nevada until 40 years ago, then banned them based on the observation that they left a trail of wrecked lives in their wake and left gambling interests in control of many counties. People would spend their kid’s lunch money on slots and some turned to crime to feed the machines as they become addicted to the one-armed bandits.

The slots plan for Maryland is supposed to raise $660 million for schools. This sounds like a lot, and indeed it is. But that is the gross increase in funds, not net. Money spent on slots isn’t spent at restaurants or clothing, so we’ll be short on other tax revenues. We will need to pay more for police and social services to deal with the harm that gambling addiction causes. Studies show that over time the cost of gambling exceeds its revenues. Further, $660 million is now conceded to be an overestimate. It’s now $500 million at best.

I am troubled by the ‘something for nothing’ attitude that pervades slots. We won’t need to make tough decisions because slots will save us. Likewise on a personal level slots undermine sound decision making. It’s hard to save money. It’s harder still when you think each quarter you plug in a machine may solve your financial problems. Worse, when you do get a payout, folks are likely to think of it as found money. Found money is likely to be spent frivolously rather than saved. Slots undercut sound decision making both for governments and individuals.

A focus on energy and transportation brings other insights to the slots issue. We are now at or very near the peak of global oil production. The current downturn in the price of oil is temporary. High prices will return shortly and go higher still than we have recently seen.

This undercuts the argument that we need slots because the money will otherwise leave the state. As the price of oil rises, we will have less discretionary income to gamble away and driving to West Virginia or Delaware will recede as an option for most Maryland residents.

As the price of oil went up, it took asphalt, steel and concrete with it, causing a $100 million over run in the first part of the first ICC construction contract. Governor O’Malley then cut all of the construction funds for the Purple Line and Corridor Cities Transitway in order to keep the ICC on schedule.

The over run they have admitted to so far is just the beginning. The ICC will continue to over run and more money will be needed to keep the ICC going. That’s where slots come in. O’Malley has already said that slots will help us to avoid budget cuts. So here is the plan - Pass slots and provide the proceeds as promised to the gaming sites, horse racing industry and education. Then reduce state support to education and use that money to fund the ICC.

Most of the people supporting slots have said that we need it for the additional money it will raise. But we should be honest about what we are raising the money for and that there are better alternatives. It isn’t too late to cancel the ICC. O’Malley could cancel it tomorrow with one phone call. This would go a long way toward solving our temporary funding problem. In the long run, the costs of slots exceed its benefits.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

(Image from Baltimore City Paper)

Contributor Opinion By Temperance Blalock: Beall's Grant II Opposition Based On Fears And Assumptions

>The following contributor opinion is by Temperance Blalock:

As a resident of Bealls Grant I, it is distressing to see the proliferation of signs opposing Bealls Grant II, and it is impossible not to take it personally. That is especially so when one has watched the notorious Planning Commission videocast, as I have, and saw the anger of the opponents.

For the opponents to say that their campaign against Bealls Grant II is not based largely on fears of and assumptions about “those type of people” who live at Bealls Grant I is disingenuous.

I moved to Montgomery County in 1973, and have lived/worked within a 10-mile radius of downtown Rockville ever since. I’ve worked at the same job for 19 years, and lived at my last rental for 14 years before moving to BG-I. I am the antithesis of the “erratic, unstable” type that the opponents claim is the norm at BG-I, but I feel that I actually am characteristic of the residents there, who are average, hard-working people who just want a decent place to live.

The most inflammatory fear is of crime, and I have seen no evidence of it as a resident of BG-I. I recall that, when my job first moved to Gateway Tower in the summer of 2001, we were apprehensive about walking to our cars in the parking garage during late night hours, but that fear has since diminished due to the nearby development of Town Center and the Fitz apartments. The management of BG-I has done an excellent job of maintaining the building as a controlled-entry environment. As a resident, I have walked around downtown Rockville in the evenings and even late at night. The new Town Center is certainly safe, since the large number of people patronizing the restaurants and movies is conducive to deterring a criminal presence. I have also strolled through the West End residential areas at night, but feel less safe there due to the lack of a pedestrian presence. Finally, police statistics verify that BG-I does not now, nor has it in the past,
been regarded in any way as a place that generates or condones criminal activity.

The residents of BG-I, and renters in general, are labeled by the opponents as “transient” and “unstable”. Again, though, the actual facts belie this, as BG-I has a very low turnover rate. The previous resident of my unit was there for ten years, and several of the other residents whom I’ve met have also been there a long time. In all of 2008 I have observed only a handful of moving vans in the parking lot, whereas I would see them constantly at my previous apartment unit in Gaithersburg. I fully intend to stay at BG-I as long as my circumstances remain the same.

The opponents claim that the presence of BG-II would somehow “violate” the nature of the neighborhood. However, the proposed location of BG-II is at the corner of an intersection where the three other corners all house four-story or higher buildings that are largely businesses.

As for traffic, that is already a tremendous problem in downtown Rockville that would be much more affected by the addition of a gourmet supermarket than by an apartment building. Who is opposing the supermarket, or the possible relocated courthouse? Many residents of BG-I either don’t own cars, or, like me, don’t drive theirs. I moved to BG-I because it is within walking distance of my job at Gateway Tower, and the parking lot of BG-I is evidence that the residents are not frequent drivers. The opponents should instead be more concerned about other sources of traffic.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to contribute too! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion By Christina Ginsberg: Important Steps On In-House City Attorney

>The following contributor opinion is by Rockville Central friend Christina Ginsberg. The report to which she refers was prepared by Drew Powell:

On Monday, July 28, the Rockville City Council took an important step to bring the City’s attorney function in house. The City was contracting with the firm of Venable, LLC, a very large law firm with many clients including developers such as FRIT that operate within Rockville City limits. For example, in last year’s discussions regarding the COPT property that borders King Farm, Venable attorneys represented the City of Rockville, while other Venable attorneys represented the property owners. As agents of the City, Venable attorneys wrote the GDA (general development agreement) for Rockville Town Center, that governed Rockville’s development with the property owners FRIT and RDI.

I’m glad to say that the City Council voted 5-0 to discontinue its service contract with Venable.

Please keep this issue on your minds - I’m sure it will be discussed this fall.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Contributor Opinion by Ruth Hanessian: Of Mixed Use And Mice

>The following contributor opinion is by Rockville Central friend Ruth Hanessian:

The proposal that is being pushed by the new zoning ordinance currently being reviewed by the council seems a backward step to me. Mixed use, as it is called, takes me back to my days as a child in the Bronx when one of my friends lived over the candy store. It looked like a great idea until I visited and realized that I had a much cleaner apartment in a Met life development. Sure there were lots of apartments, but very little commercial and consequently, no mice and other visitors that were drawn to the store trash.

Rockville’s new downtown seems to not be filling the apartments very fast. That may be price but I am already hearing of folks moving out because of late night entertainment below them that interferes with their sleep. There is also concern about the restaurant dumpsters odors and what they attract. I was pleased to see rat bait boxes in the garage adjacent to CVS but what self respecting rat would not head for the gourmet food adjacent.

Urban living does have it’s plus side, but I for one am glad that I live in an area that benefits from the old wedges and corridors concept. Mixed use is a nice name but it does not reflect the reality of the outcome.I only hope that those property owners blessed with this new designation will think twice about their civic responsibility and not just the bottom line.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

Article continues. Click to expand and read more…

Contributor Opinion by Joseph Jordan: Planning Commission Behaved Poorly

>The following contributor opinion is by Rockville Central friend Joseph Jordan: