Tonight’s City Council Meeting

Again, we have a full agenda for the Council meeting tonight.  There are a number of issues coming up that raise a lot of discussion and some controversy, so please let me know if you have any questions or comments on these.  Thanks!

First, we have a couple of public hearings scheduled:

1. HEARING ON A CHARTER RESOLUTION AMENDING ARTICLE VII, “POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL,” SECTION C7-6, “CONDEMNATION,” TO ELIMINATE A REFERENCE TO A STATE CODE PROVISION THAT NO LONGER APPLIES.  This is a proposed technical amendment to the City Charter provisions  regarding condemnation of property.  The Charter currently refers to Article 21 of the State Code to indicate the applicable State laws, but the State law has been amended and the laws regarding condemnation are in Title 12 of the Real Property Article of the Code.  Because the Charter does not need to reference the state law for it to apply, this proposed amendment would simply eliminate this reference. (PUBLIC HEARING STARTS AT 7:15)

2. HEARING ON A PETITION REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PERMIT PARKING IN THE 8100 BLOCK OF 54TH AVENUE.  The Washington Brazilian Seventh Day Adventist Church, located at 8108 54th Ave. has requested to remove permit parking from this block.  The church has a large parking lot and initially thought the permit parking, when it was instituted in September 2007, would be okay.  The church now has some special events, and has a larger turnout at its Saturday services than it had originally predicted.  The congregation has found that the permit parking prevents the overflow parking that congregation members occasionally need.  The church wrote in their petition that there are no households in the permit parking area.  I sympathize with the church, but I want to get a better sense of how this would impact the residents who live around the church, so I hope we hear from the residents at the public hearing. (PUBLIC HEARING STARTS AT 7:30)

AGENDA ITEMS:

1. PROCLAMATION IN SUPPORT OF THE 2010 CENSUS.  It is important for the City and for each of our neighborhoods that everyone is counted in the upcoming census.  You all will be hearing much more about this, including ways to get involved in making sure that College Park, and north College Park in particular, get an accurate count.

2. REQUEST FOR A DRIVEWAY APRON VARIANCE AT 5200 PADUCAH ROAD.  This came before the Council last month.  If approved, the City would allow the applicant to expand her driveway apron to allow for enough room for two cars to come in and out.  The Council had placed it on the consent agenda until a neighbor came to the meeting to discuss some concerns she had about the proposed variance.  Because the applicant was not at the meeting where the neighbor expressed her concern, we asked to postpone consideration of the variance to the first meeting in February, to allow the applicant to come to the next meeting and address the concerns. That meeting was changed due to the snow, so now this is up before us again.

3. AWARD OF CONTRACT TO AVRIO GROUP SURVEILLANCE SOLUTIONS, LLC, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500,000 FOR THE CLOSED CIRCUIT TV SYSTEM AND LICENSE PLATE READERS.  As I noted last week, the City applied for a $2 million grant to fund a city-wide network of closed-circuit security cameras in high-crime areas and license-plate reader cameras to detect stolen vehicles and possible criminals who drive through before or after a crime takes place.  Unfortunately, we received only $500,000 from that grant application, so we have to start much smaller than we had hoped.  Last week, we reviewed a proposal from Avrio, who currently provides security cameras in Hyattsville, DC, and a number of other places in the area and around the country.  Hyattsville had conducted a full search process for a contractor and determined that Avrio was the best.  Avrio has an impressive record.  I had some concerns last week about whether starting in a concentrated area in downtown College Park would set us up to move up to north College Park in the future, and our discussion last week helped resolve those concerns.  Avrio has been talking with the University of Maryland police to find the best locations downtown for these cameras, and we would be able to expand the network northward if we get more funding for additional cameras up north.  It may take a number of years and more grants to get us there.  Unfortunately, there is no way, with the funding that we have, that we could get a network up to north College Park.  I still have some concerns about how much this will cost the City of College Park above and beyond the grant, which is only paying to purchase the cameras and set up the network, and for maintenance for the first year.  After the first year, it will cost the City about $25,000 per year to maintain the cameras.  I also want to make sure that the contractor incorporates input not just from the U-MD police, but also from the Prince George’s County police, so that it is useful to them when we start installing cameras outside of the area where the U-MD police have jurisdiction.

That said, the grant has provided us a great opportunity, and if we don’t move forward on this, we’ll forfeit the money.  So I feel it’s best to move ahead with this now.  I will continue to encourage the City staff to work on this in the future to make sure that we get the closed-circuit cameras and license-plate readers up in north College Park, and so that they can be used to fight crime around the whole city, and not just in downtown.

4. CHARTER RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CHARTER PROVISION ON “CONDEMNATION” TO ELIMINATE A REFERENCE TO A STATE CODE PROVISION THAT NO LONGER APPLIES – see above for a description of this item.

5. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR DESIGN/BUILD SERVICES FOR A SKATEBOARD PARK IN SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TO GRINDLINE SKATEPARKS, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000.  The city has received a grant from Prince George’s County to construct a skateboard park in Sunnyside Neighborhood Park.  The City appointed a design committee to do an RFP to find a contractor to design and build a park.  Out of the six contractors, the committee selected Grindline Skateparks.  After reading Grindline’s proposal, it’s easy to see why – Grindline has significant experience building skateparks around the country, has a record of being able to work around challenging situations, and has an experienced team of designers and project managers.  Grindline has had specific experience constructing above-ground skateparks, and due to the number of trees in Sunnyside Park, that is the best option for building a skatepark there.  The skatepark will be completed in October, and the local design committee will continue to be involved in throughout the design and construction.

6. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO PURSUE THE INSTALLATION OF SPEED CAMERAS IN COLLEGE PARK.  As I mentioned last week, the City staff has been meeting with Optotraffic, a contractor specializing in installation of speed cameras, to find out whether we can install speed cameras in the City, and where would be best to install them.  Optotraffic has selected a number of areas with serious speeding problems – including Rhode Island Ave in north College Park, Greenbelt Road near Rhode Island Avenue, and Paint Branch Parkway near the trolley trail – where it would be willing to install speed cameras.  The city would not have to pay anything for these cameras – Optotraffic would receive money only from the revenue obtained through tickets.  This resolution would authorize the City Manager to pursue this further.  I know that speed cameras can be controversial, and I am interested in hearing what residents have to say about them, but I believe this could be a useful way to help resolve the ongoing speeding problems on Rhode Island Avenue, and improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers.  The problem became clear again this summer when, unfortunately, a speeder drove into oncoming traffic to pass another car, swerved to avoid an oncoming car, flipped his car over and died.  Although nothing can prevent these incidents altogether, many studies have shown that, at least in some areas, speed cameras are effective in reducing traffic.

7. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE 10-O-01, AMENDING CHAPTER 184, “VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC,” BY ADDING ARTICLE VIII, “SPEED MONITORING SYSTEMS,” SECTION 184-45, “SPEED MONITORING SYSTEM IN SCHOOL ZONES.”  In order to use speed cameras in College Park, we would first have to pass an ordinance regulating their use.  This ordinance is just up for introduction at this point, and will be set for a public hearing.  The proposed ordinance follows the restrictions of state law – the cameras can only be set up within a quarter-mile of a school, and the City must provide notice and have a public hearing before setting up the speed cameras.  The revenues from the speed cameras can only be used for the speed camera program itself and for traffic and pedestrian safety projects, and the City can only keep an amount up to 10% of our total budget.  Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about the speed camera proposal – I will let you know when this ordinance is before the City Council for a public hearing.

8. APPROVAL OF REQUEST BY COLLEGE PARK WOODS SWIMMING CLUB TO WAIVE THE BALANCE OF THE 30-DAY NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO ASSUMING AN OBLIGATION PER THE AGREEMENT AND CONDITIONAL GRANT DATED 11/28/05.  As I noted in my e-mail last week, the College Park Woods Swimming Club (CPWSC) is is looking to enter into an agreement with Lighthouse Pool Management, in which Lighthouse would manage the swimming pool in an effort to increase the number of members.  The City gave a grant in 2005 to the pool to keep it in operation, and as part of the terms of that grant, the pool has to notify the City and give us 30 days to object before CPWSC enters into any loan agreement that would put the pool as collateral.  They have to do this, because if they sell the property, the City has a right to get the grant money back.  Unfortunately, no representative of CPWSC was present last week to answer the many questions that the Council had.  Today, we received a copy of the draft agreement between Lighthouse and CPWSC, which states that CPWSC will pay Lighthouse an annual fee of $72,000 per year.  In exchange, Lighthouse will manage and staff the pool, including checking memberships and acting as a lifeguard.  If CPWSC does not get enough revenue to pay the $72,000, the outstanding balance will count as a loan, that the CPWSC will have to pay back over time at a 4% interest rate.  The City will have to make sure that its rights to the property are protected – that we have first dibs if the property is sold over any other debtor.  If that can be assured, I see no problem with agreeing to this.

9. APPROVAL OF A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF SB 598, PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES – UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK BUS SERVICE – MOTOR CARRIER PERMIT EXEMPTION – REMOVAL OF SUNSET.  For the past two years, College Park residents have been able to get a pass to use the University of Maryland shuttle for free.  We are able to do this, because the state legislature passed a bill a couple of years ago that removed the requirement that the Shuttle have a motor carrier permit, which limited the use of the shuttle to students.  The bill that was passed had a sunset clause, which meant that the ability of residents to ride the shuttle would end in 2011.  Our state legislative delegation introduced a bill this year to remove that sunset clause.  The city is considering a letter in support of this bill.

10. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

Please let me know if you have any questions!

Patrick

Tonight’s Council Worksession

Folks,
Tonight is our first Council meeting of the year! We have a couple of big things things on the agenda tonight.
http://www.collegeparkmd.gov/calendar.htm

PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SHOPPING CART ORDINANCE. First, we have a public hearing on the proposed ordinance regarding shopping carts. The ordinance would require that all shopping carts in the city of College Park clearly identify the shop that owns them and also require that all shopping carts use anti-theft technology. Any cart found outside the lot of the shop it belongs to would result in a $100 fine for the store.

This ordinance was requested by former Councilmember Mary Cook when she was still on the Council to address the problem of shopping carts from Shopper’s Food Warehouse being stolen and deposited on the streets and in the residential neighborhoods. This poses a safety concern and creates additional trash in our neighborhoods. To a large extent, this problem has been resolved, because Shopper’s Food Warehouse has installed anti-theft technology. MOM’s, which I believe is the only other store in the city that uses grocery carts, has never had a problem with this, because they carry out people’s groceries for them. The ordinance, however, is meant to deal with possible future problems, and imposes a fine on store owners for any grocery cart found off the property. It also requires that each store label the store name on the cart. I have spoken with the general manager of College Park MOM’s, who thinks it’s a good way to prevent stores from letting carts off their property, and is okay with the ordinance as long as it doesn’t actually require the use of anti-theft technology. Although the ordinance may not be necessary at this point, I don’t see any problem with having it in place to prevent future problems. I’m eager to hear if any other concerns are raised during the public hearing.

The public hearing starts at 7:45 at City Hall.

CONSENT ITEMS:

–a resolution in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. As I mentioned last week, this Saturday, January 16, at 2 pm at the Clarice Smith Center is the city’s annual tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr. I encourage you to come if you can make it – I’ve been the past few years, and it’s always inspirational, with a number of great choirs and speakers.

–approval of spring field use requests for the College Park Boys & Girls Club. The Boys and Girls Club typically uses our fields at both the old Friends school and at Duvall Field during the spring and summer to conduct their sports, and the city typically gives them priority use over other clubs.

–approval of two variances, one for a fence in the Berwyn neighborhood, and the other for a side yard setback for a carport in Lakeland.

ACTION ITEMS:
The following action items are up for discussion, in addition to the shopping cart ordinance discussed above:

COMMENTS ON THE AMENDED US 1 SECTIONAL MAP AMENDMENT AND SECTOR PLAN. I discussed this quite a bit in last week’s e-mail. From the worksession, the staff put together a letter with comments to the County Council, focusing on nine specific issues:

1. The US 1 street section. As I mentioned last week, the Plan currently proposes a recommendation for the street section (basically, the layout of the street, including lane width, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc). that runs contrary to the requirements of the State Highway Administration. SHA submitted comments to the Planning Board on this issue one day late, and the planning board refused to take them as a result. These issues need to be worked out, and the letter that staff has drafted asks that the County Council delay approval of the plan to work out these issues.

2. Undergrounding utilities. This is an expensive project that the city has been working with developers on for quite a while, to make power outages less likely and increase the amount of space available on US 1. The sector plan, as currently drafted, does not include a plan to accomplish this.

3. Parking standards. The draft letter requests further analysis on the issue of how much parking to require for new developments. I have concerns about this, because I’m afraid that a decrease in parking will lead more people to park in the residential neighborhood. The sector plan is inconsistent in different sections as to what it recommends as to the minimum parking requirement.

4. Walkable Nodes and Future Walkable Nodes. The draft letter suggests removing any consideration at the time being of possible future walkable nodes, because the sector plan does not state how these “new” nodes would be established.

5. Land use and zoning. The draft letter requests clarity on the use of MUI in the DDOZ as the proposed zoning for much of the corridor immediately along Route 1. The current draft of the sector plan is inconsistent in this regard – while the proposed land use maps and urban design strategy suggest a lower-density zone for the areas between walkable nodes, the zoning map suggests keeping the zone at M-U-I (which it is currently at). It may make more sense to focus the M-U-I zone in higher density areas and a lower-density zone for other areas.

6. Transportation Demand Management. The sector plan does not include necessary strategies for reducing traffic in the area, despite a College Park report that lays out transportation demand management techniques for the area.

7. Public infrastructure strategies – the draft letter states that the plan fails to identify strategies for coordinating new development with meeting infrastructure needs.

8. Development phasing and incentives – the draft sector plan doesn’t include real incentives for new development or strategies for phasing in new development, and the proposed letter would request this.

9. The Hollywood Commercial District. The city, in the past, requested that the sector plan rezone the Hollywood Commercial District as a Mixed Use-Town Center zone. This tool has been used in Mt. Rainier and Riverdale to spur investment in the area and redevelopment. It would allow the local community to work together develop a design plan for the area, so that we could take a look at what we want in the Hollywood Commercial District. It would then create a streamlined approval process for any developments that meet the requirements of that design plan. It would also include a local design committee that would have the ability to veto any project that doesn’t meet the requirements of the design plan. I support this, because I think it would balance a need for redevelopment in the area, with a lot of local control, which could prevent the redevelopment from having a detrimental impact on our neighborhoods. I understand that some residents, including my colleague, Councilmember Nagle, have serious concerns about rezoning the Hollywood Commercial District in any way that would allow more density in the area. I have proposed a compromise to limit any increase in density in the commercial district to 20% over what currently exists, but I also believe that we could use local input in the plan to prevent any increase in density that would add to traffic or have a negative impact on the surrounding residential areas.

Park and Planning rejected our initial proposal to rezone to M-U-TC, in part because they feel it would be difficult to implement an M-U-TC zone in the current sectional map amendment, and in part, because of public opposition to any possible increased density that might come with the M-U-TC zone.

The letter, as currently drafted, supports the plan’s current recommendation to keep the same zoning in Hollywood, which is commercial shopping center (C-S-C), with support for well-thought out economic development strategies for the area. Because I remain concerned that the C-S-C zone will not spur redevelopment in the area, I have proposed an amendment that we request Park and Planning to develop a study group to look into the M-U-TC zone as a possible option for the next sectional map amendment. That will also allow residents more time to consider the option and decide whether it is an appropriate option for Hollywood.

I know this is a lot to digest – please let me know if you have any questions or would like me to explain any of the comments we’ve drafted.

LIQUOR LICENSE FOR AZTECA RESTAURANT, 9505 BALTIMORE AVE. The city is considering recommendations on a liquor license application for Azteca restaurant, a new, sit-down Mexican restaurant proposed for 9505 Baltimore Ave., near the intersection of Indian Road and Route One. Although the city did not have any serious concerns about granting the license at our worksession last week, we will probably postpone consideration of the license in order to give the NCPCA an opportunity to discuss it at it’s meeting on Thursday. We will then consider the item at a special session next week, in order to get our comments to the licensing board in time for its hearing on January 26.

COMMENTS ON PROPOSED FORM-BASED CODE ORDINANCE (Title 27A). Based on our discussion last week, the city has drafted a letter to submit comments regarding the proposed form-based code ordinance, title 27A. Unfortunately, a hearing on this before the County Planning, Zoning and Economic Development committee is happening this afternoon, so, without objection from the Councilmembers, the staff will be discussing these recommendations this afternoon before they are approved by the full Council.

The ordinance is much better than it was when originally drafted, in part because of the comments that the city already submitted. Just as a matter of overview – the ordinance basically creates a different way for redevelopment in an urban corridor. It allows either Park and Planning or a developer, in consultation with local residents and Park & Planning, to develop a regulatory plan for an area, and then allows streamlined approval for developments that meet such a plan.

The current comments focus on having a more formal role for cities in the development review process by including city staff person on the committee that review development proposals. While the city supports streamlined review for developments that meet a development plan to the letter, the city objects to the fact that the current draft of the ordinance proposes use of the Zoning Hearing Examiner to review major departures from a development plan. The city also requests additional public involvement when a developer proposes a regulatory plan. The comments also suggest that the ordinance may be appropriate to help redevelop the Route One sector

APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMITTEES. Thanks to Joe Smith for agreeing to continue his work on the City Tree and Landscape Board. I have nominated Joe for a reappointment to be approved tonight.

Please let me know if you have any questions!

Patrick

Narragansett Run Clean-up Rescheduled for January 31

Folks,
As some of you may remember, due to the bad weather in December, we had tentatively rescheduled the neighborhood clean-up at Narragansett Run for this upcoming Saturday, January 9. Unfortunately, it appears that it’s going to be really cold this weekend – highs in the mid-20′s on Saturday – so we’ve decided to reschedule once again. We are (again, depending on the weather) setting the clean-up for Sunday, January 31 at 2 pm.

Hope you can come! The melting after the recent snowstorm washed a lot of debris into the Narragansett Run, so there’s a lot to clean up!

Patrick

Update on the University Board of Regents and the Admissions and Amusement Tax

I have an update on the Admissions and Amusement tax issue. It seems that the Board of Regents is not actually likely to be voting on the issue, but will be hearing recommendations from staff. The city has been discussing the issue with the Board of Regents staff, and we’re hoping to work something out. I still encouraged people to come Tuesday who are interested in helping ensure that we maintain our revenue from the university, but it seems that the situation isn’t as dire as we originally may have thought. I will definitely keep everyone posted.

Patrick

University Board of Regents Meeting on Tuesday morning re: A&A tax for the City of College Park

Dear neighbors,

I want to draw your attention to an issue that could have a real impact on city revenues this year. Unfortunately, if this comes out the wrong way, we could face a real hit in our budget, that could lead to a tax increase for residents, just to keep the current level of City services in place.

Currently, the City of College Park receives about $600,000 every year in revenues through the Admissions and Amusement (A&A) tax from the University of Maryland. This is a tax that cities across the state are allowed to place on ticket prices from entertainment events, including sporting events, movies, concerts, etc. Most of the money that College Park gets through this tax is through sporting events, including football and basketball games.

This revenue is especially important for the City, because it is the largest part of the small amount of revenue we get from the University. Because the University is state property, we don’t receive any property tax from this property – which means that about 30% of the City’s land is completely off the tax roles. Despite this, we need to spend City revenues on many things associated with the university – maintaining public safety, picking up litter downtown that is related to the university and students, handling code enforcement issues related to the university and students in our community, etc.

A recent court decision in the Maryland state Court of Appeals might allow the university to request an exemption from paying these taxes to the city. This Tuesday morning, the University of Maryland Board of Regents will be deciding not only whether to request an exemption from the A&A tax for all of its events going forward, but also whether to request a refund of A&A taxes from the past 4 years! If the comptroller were to grant such a request, College Park taxpayers would be stuck with a bill of around $2.4 million!

We need to show that College Park residents do not want the university to get a free ride, while residents have to pay taxes.

The meeting took place Tuesday morning, December 22, at 8 am in the main University Services Building at 3300 Metzerott Road.

Please let me know if you have any questions!

Patrick

City services over the next few days

Dear neighbors,

The City’s Public Works staff has been working hard over the past 48 hours to keep the roads clean and maintain access to our homes. Although they’re still out working and cleaning up the roads, please let me know if you see any problems or if there are any areas that have not been adequately taken care of, and I’ll pass it on to the staff to take care of. As a whole, though, I think our city’s staff did a tremendous job given the conditions, and should be commended. Many of our staff members have been putting in twelve-hour shifts all this weekend–please thank them if you have the chance.

I want to update you all on City services for this week. The City will be open for business as usual until the holiday. This means that there WILL be trash pick-up as usual this week, so be sure to put your trash bins out for pick-up. Also, please be considerate of the staff and try to make the trash bins as accessible as possible given the snow banks on the side of the road. I’m sure the staff will appreciate your patience and cooperation as they try to deal with these difficult weather conditions!

Finally – for obvious reasons – there will be no leaf pick-up this week. After the holidays, the staff will be considering how to do the final leaf pick-up for the season, and will post signs up around the neighborhoods to let residents know.

Please let me know if you have any questions!

Patrick

Neighborhood Clean-up: Rescheduled for Jan 9

Alas, due to the weather, only a few hearty folks came out for yesterday’s neighborhood clean-up. As a result, we only spent about a half hour before we get cold and wet and decided to call it a day. Thanks tons to Stacey King, our City’s recycling coordinator, who braved the cold and rain and drove all the way from Edgewater to help out!

We’re rescheduling for Saturday, January 9, at 10 am. Saturday is a better day for Public Works staff, and hopefully the weather will be better!

If you need reasons to come out and help, I’ve enclosed a few pictures – these should help show the amount of trash we have in the Narragansett Run behind MOM’s. We need people to help clean this stuff up!

Patrick

Work & Live College Park Orientation July 9

Do you work in College Park?

Are you interested in buying a home?

If so, you may be eligible to receive up to $35,000 in closing cost and down payment assistance through the WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK program. Administered by the College Park Housing Authority and the College Park City- University Partnership, the WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK program provides affordable home ownership opportunities for people working in College Park while minimizing the number of foreclosed homes in the area.

Through this program, you can receive financial incentives for purchasing a foreclosed home in College Park. With approximately 50 foreclosed properties throughout the City, there is a variety of homes from which to choose. Talk to a qualified local realtor to learn more about which properties would qualify.

To be eligible, you will need to meet the following criteria:

1. You (or your spouse) must work at least 20 hours a week for any employer in College Park (including M Square).
2. The home you buy must be a foreclosed property in College Park.
3. You will be living in the home you purchase.
4. You make less than $86,250 (1 person household), $98,600 (2 person household), or $123,250 (4 person household).
5. You must attend a WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK orientation and receive 8 hours of homeownership counseling by a HUD-approved counseling agency.

To learn more about the program, please join us:

WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK Orientation
July 9th at 4:30 PM
University of Maryland

The orientation will kick off a series of four, two-hour sessions (July 9th, 16th, 23rd, and 31st) of homeownership counseling to prepare potential buyers. Space is limited to 40 participants.

To register for the upcoming orientation and the home counseling sessions, please go to www.hiphomes.org/livework.html. For more information about the WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK program, contact Regina Stone-Mitchell of the College Park Housing Authority at 301-345-3600 or rmitchell@collegeparkmd.gov.

The WORK & LIVE COLLEGE PARK program is made possible by Maryland’s Department of Housing and Community Development, the College Park Housing Authority, the College Park City-University Partnership, the City of College Park, and the University of Maryland. Home counseling made possible by Housing Initiative Partnership and Freddie Mac.

Increase in Thefts from Automobiles: Update from Patrick Wojahn

I’ve been hearing rumors recently about an increase in thefts from automobiles in our area, and it was confirmed by a visit to www.crimereports.com.

In the past couple of weeks, there have been 5-6 reported incidents of theft from vehicle, mostly centered around the area near Rhode Island Ave. between Fox and Hollywood.

I want to take this opportunity not to alarm folks, but to remind folks about a couple of important tips for avoiding thefts from autos:

1. Remember to take any valuable items out of your car when you leave. If you must leave valuable items in your car, at least put them out of sight, such as under your seat or in your trunk.
2. Thiefs target cars with expensive-looking radios and GPS systems. If you have a radio with a removable face plate, remove the face plate when you are not in your car and either bring it with you or hide it. If you have a GPS system, remove the GPS system. If you have any indications in your car that you own a GPS system (such as the round disc on your dashboard), try to place it out of sight or remove it.
3. If you have a release lever for your trunk inside your car, try to disable it. It is easier for thiefs to get inside your car door than it is to get inside your trunk. Make sure you lock all your doors and close all your windows whenever you are not in your car.
4. If possible, park in a well-lit area. Also, if possible, park in your driveway rather than on the street.
5. If you have an alarm, always activate it when you are not in your car.
6. Lock your vehicle with the door lock button inside the car rather than your remote control. Thieves are sometimes able to pick up and copy the signals from remote lock controls.
7. Although it doesn’t prevent thefts FROM your vehicle, use a club or other locking device whenever you’re parked to prevent theft of the vehicle itself. Also, don’t ever leave your keys in your car or your car running when you aren’t in the car yourself, even if just for a second.

Remember, anything you can do to make it harder for a thief to get inside your car or get to your belongings will help protect you!

Patrick Wojahn on the Route One Sector Plan

The following are comments I am submitting to Chad Williams and the MNCPPC planning team in regard to the upcoming charrettes on the Route One sector plan:

Dear Mr. Williams:

Thank you for providing the charrette process this next week as an opportunity to provide public comment and discussion regarding the Route One sector plan. Please accept these comments that I submit in advance of the charrette. I submit these all on my own behalf, as the College Park City Council has not taken any positions as to date as to what should be included in the sector plan, other than to state its position on the boundaries of the sector plan. I also submit these comments with the hope that they will contribute to the dialogue this weekend. Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend the charrette sessions on Friday evening and Saturday morning, but I will be able to attend Saturday afternoon and next week in order to follow up on the progress of the sector plan.

First, I want to state a couple of general principles that I suggest the planning team should keep in mind when developing the sector plan. These are:

1. Low density. Our area cannot sustain much more density than it already has, at least until the State and County accomplish significant improvements in our transportation infrastructure. There are constant problems with traffic backing up on both Rhode Island Avenue and, especially, Route One. Although there are plans in the works to improve both of these roads and to add additional public transportation, any significant new development that adds additional density to the area should be delayed until those improvements are complete. Otherwise, the current problems on these two roads will become even worse. Even once Route One and Rhode Island Ave. are rebuilt, our infrastructure still will limit the amount of density that the area can handle.
2. Smart growth. In considering the what new development is to go into the area, this principle is paramount. The sector plan must look to accomplish development in such a way as to minimize the need for travel between work, home, and recreation or shopping. Given the limited capacity our area currently has for additional density, the sector plan should look to replace existing density with other uses of similar density that better accomplish smart growth principles. For example, the numerous residents in our area have a number of needs – shopping, recreation, work – that are, for the most part, not currently available within northern College Park. As a result, area residents typically have to get in their cars and often have to go a long distance for restaurant and retail opportunities, as well as jobs. On the other hand, our area is full of businesses, such as auto dealerships, which people drive long distances from around the area to come to. As a result, residents drive out of the area to get what they need, and people from around the area drive to College Park for discrete retail needs. Smart growth principles suggest that developers should pursue retail options that better satisfy the needs of the residents – things such as sit-down restaurants, coffee shops, small daily needs-type boutique stores – and try to replace some of the businesses in the area that only cater in limited ways to area residents. The sector plan could also pursue limited office space along the Route One Corridor that might offer area residents more opportunities to work close to where they live. As there are already numerous residents in the area with insufficient resources to fulfill daily needs within the area, the sector plan should limit residential development.
3. Walkability and better public transportation. These are important to allow people to utilize the resources that do exist in our area without getting in their cars or traveling long distances. Neither the street patterns, nor the current layout of the buildings in much of the area, encourage walkability. Instead of large buildings with large parking lots between the street and the building, the sector plan should pursue more of a “main street” approach, with buildings closer to the roads and only a sidewalk and possibly a biking/jogging path separating the businesses from the roads. The sector plan should encourage use of wayfinding signs and safe places for pedestrians to cross the street. On Route One, for example, there are currently areas where pedestrians have to walk a whole mile just to find a crosswalk and get across the street – as a result, many pedestrians jaywalk and cause a huge safety risk. The sector plan should continue to allow parking lots near businesses to discourage nonresident parking in neighborhood streets, but should require that parking lots be placed behind the stores in order to increase walkability and discourage use of cars. The sector plan should also build on ongoing efforts to increase accessibility to public transportation on both Route One and Rhode Island Ave.

   Regarding public transportation, the sector plan should encourage: 1) superstops, with greater public amenities and better route maps, including real-time displays of when busses are coming; 2) coordination between the various bus and metro systems in the area, to minimize headtimes and increase reliability; 3) developers to devote necessary resources to public transportation, such as a future shuttlebus system among the major developments along the Route One corridor; and 4) development of a trolley system or loop bus system (similar to the Circulator in downtown DC) along the Route One corridor and Rhode Island Ave. Such a bus could be coordinated with the express busses to allow for greater access in and around northern College Park.

   Finally, the sector plan should encourage safe development of bike lanes in appropriate places – not just along recreational paths or rivers, but along major thoroughfares, in order to provide avenues for people to get from the places where they live to the places where they work, shop, and eat. Bike racks should be placed in all major commercial and residential areas.

4. Locally-owned business. The sector plan should encourage locally-owned businesses that have a greater stake in the development of their surrounding community and can better cater to the needs of local residents. The sector plan should tie into College Park’s own buy local campaign and programs such as the Shop College Park website.

In regards to specific locations within the sector plan, I want to address them in three groups:

1. Along Route One itself in northern College Park. Given the current level of congestion along Route One, it is especially important to limit density along the Route One corridor, at least until Route One is rebuilt and public transportation along the corridor is improved significantly. There are also a number of blighted areas, though, where the sector plan should encourage redevelopment with low-density projects that cater to the needs of local residents. The entire corridor is currently unsafe for pedestrians and as a result is not welcoming to residents or to businesses. To the extent possible, new developments should include road and sidewalk improvements that enhance pedestrian accessibility along the corridor until Route One is rebuilt.
2. The “Four Corners” intersection of Rhode Island and Edgewood, and the surrounding commercial district. In this area in particular, the sector plan should encourage increased walkability and greater consideration of the needs of local residents. The sector plan should ensure that any new development fits in with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhoods by providing for strict noise and height restrictions, and ensuring that all businesses close at night. The sector plan should encourage development that creates a “main street” feel in this area, with businesses close to the streets as discussed above. New retail should tie into the existing stores, such as MOM’s and REI, to attract an eco-friendly, nature-oriented customer base – and should be built in a way that gives focus to green principles.
3. The residential areas located between Route One and the Four Corners. These areas should be kept residential, and zoned residential, with no exceptions, to ensure that they are kept residential for the foreseeable future.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and to participate in the sector plan development process. I look forward to continuing this dialogue with you and with area residents. Please feel free to contact me at 240-988-7763 if you have any questions or would like to discuss these ideas further.

Patrick Wojahn
Councilmember, District 1
College Park City Council