Comments on: Mazza Saga Continues

By: David Daddio

David Daddio — Fri, 04 May 2007 00:06:29 +0000

I have no doubt that Mr. Dernoga is looking out for his constituents to some degree. I do question the way he has gone about doing this because it gives the appearance that this is more about proving his efforts to his constituents then allowing for practical time lines. Route 1 will be redeveloped extensively because the democratic process allowed a change is zoning code for higher density. I can’t imagine that the people in these neighborhoods are happy with what’s there now. We’re not talking big ugly development. We’re talking walkable, environmentally conscious, smart development.

Mr. Dernoga favors a reactive position rather than a proactive one. I think the majority of people have the same ends in mind for CP, there is just a difference of means here.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Pat Blankenship

Pat Blankenship — Thu, 03 May 2007 21:02:24 +0000

Did anyone think that Mr Dernoga is looking out for his constituents in North College Park. A fair number of the people living in Hollywood and off of Cherry Hill Road are not happy with the redevelopment of Route 1. Traffic is horrible now and adding more buildings will make it worse. The nit picking about the brick might be the only avenue left to try to mitigate size etc. The plans for the building now may be nestled in the woods, but future plans for that area are build build build. The previous council was very developer friendly. They pretty much gave them what they wanted and hell with the people. We now have a council that has at least 4 very green members, Mr Dernoga is one and Eric is another.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Asad Sayeed

Asad Sayeed — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:40:03 +0000

Bricks are the historic facade in our area–if we want to encourage the development of buildings that look like a community, as opposed to the random mess that currently characterizes Router 1

I don’t actually think that the “random mess” is what makes Route 1 what it is. What makes Route 1 what it is happens to be the overall dilapidation of much of the properties there. And the fact that the non-dilapidated ones aren’t very interesting, brick or no brick.

I came here and was first enamoured of the very pretty University of Maryland brick style, but it got old and boring real fast. Just my tastes. But I hear that people have criticized how artificial some of the (very nice) Downtown Silver Spring seems.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: David Daddio

David Daddio — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:50:05 +0000

Unfortunately you can’t hold people to unwritten laws. Most developments “circumvent” the sector plan in some way. Using brick on a completely unseen part of a building (the building doesn’t even front Route 1) is pretty unreasonable. The PG County planning board waived this requirement precisely because it doesn’t make sense for this project.

LEED certification is great, but the county should pass a law requiring rather than holding a project back a year (without any communication whatsoever) and then trying to strongarm a LEED certification after the building has already been designed.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Paul Barone

Paul Barone — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:59:19 +0000

If the developer wants his project to be approved, he should comply with the Sector Plan, including voluntary guidelines. Period. His attempts to circumvent these community established criteria is the reason this project was delayed last May and was not approved this week. Bricks are the historic facade in our area–if we want to encourage the development of buildings that look like a community, as opposed to the random mess that currently characterizes Router 1 for instance, we need to get back to bricks. And LEED certification makes all the sense int the world. Re-do the plans, and the council will quickly approve them.

Like or Dislike: 0 0