patching...
Update: Get FREE local headlines delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for the Riverdale Park-University Park Patch newsletter. »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

ACP Rejects Cafritz CSX Bridge Proposal

The developers are seeking an alternative bridge proposal across property owned by the University of Maryland.

 

In yet another blow to the Cafritz development team, the American Center for Physics (ACP) has decided not to allow a CSX bridge across its property.

In a letter to Jane Cafritz dated March 15, ACP president Beth Cunningham wrote that the organization opted to decline the developer’s proposal for the land required for the bridge, stating:

Our decision is based not on any defect in your plans for the bridge/roadway. Rather, our final decision is based on a judgement by ACP to maintain our current property with its extensive landscaped and treed environment. The ACP vision of a serene, verdant campus-like setting was established over 20 years ago. We are now reaffirming our hope to maintain that setting, but with enough land to give us flexibility in terms of modest future development opportunities.

Although this information does represent another delay for the project, the developers have also been having conversations with the University of Maryland about potentially having the CSX bridge cross its property.

“We are having ongoing dialogue with them we are hopeful that something might be able to be worked out with the University of Maryland,” said Bruce McLeod, a spokesperson for the Cafritz developers.

Riverdale Park Mayor Vernon Archer said he was also aware of the conversations between developers and UMD.

“Some alternatives through the university property certainly were decent back up plans so that is where we are looking now,” Archer said.

University Park Mayor John Tabori learned of the ACP’s rejection of the CSX bridge this past weekend. He said he is looking forward to seeing the developer’s plans for providing access to the site from the east.

"We feel they will have to make major changes in their plans," Tabori said. "Obviously, if they are putting the bridge somewhere else, we are essentially waiting for them to submit amended plans and then we'll see where we can go from there."

University Park Town Council Member Michael Cron (Ward 6), an opponent of the project early on, said that if the development is to go forward, it needs to have access from the east.

"If it's going to be built, it should be built properly, it should be built to be an improvement to the area, unlike an eyesore like the University Town Center, which has failed," said Cron. "If it's going to be built, I want it to be a success…. If they can't get the bridge over the CSX tracks, it will never be a success."

The bridge, which would connect the proposed development to connect the project to River Road, is one of several conditions on the property negotiated by the town in advance of last year’s zoning change from residential (R-55) to Mixed-Use Town Center (MUTC).

Without plans and an approved funding mechanism for the bridge, construction on the project cannot begin.

See also: 

Related Topics: CSX Crossing, Cafritz, and Cafritz Property

Carol

6:44 pm on Monday, March 18, 2013

That alternative is likely through the old ERCO property, which is of significant historical value, but would be prohibitively expensive to preserve. It will not be cheap to tear it down, either, since it almost certainly has plenty of asbestos.

Reply

Neighbor

8:58 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

University Park Town Council Member Michael Cron should keep his insults to himself. First of all, your elitist little town needs to stay out of Riverdale Park's business and while your at it, stay out of Hyattsville's business. Secondly, if you want to improve access to Cafritz, open up Queens Chapel rd. University town center is hardly an eyesore, so, on behalf of all the people who live, own business and shop there, keep your mouth shut.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Michael B. Cron

10:14 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Cafritz is our business. It may be located in Riverdale Park but it will affect University Park more. One more thing. I have noticed that we in University Park are a lot more civil to each other when we express our opinions unlike some of our neighbors in surrounding municipalities. Have a nice day!!

Comment_arrow

Farmer Joe

1:07 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

I too was a little perplexed about the "eyesore" remark. Mr. Cron did you see what the area looked like before it was turned into UTC? Or is this what you are referring to (The 60s/70s office buildings with empty parking lots)? Now the Cafritz property is a forest, and compared to that any development will be an eyesore. I think neighbor is just asserting a little civic pride when it seems that you went out of your way to insult the aesthetic of a part of their town.

Comment_arrow

Edward

2:09 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

I wonder if Mr. Cron recognizes the irony in congratulating himself and his fellow University Park residents on their civility while simultaneously insulting the "surrounding municipalities."

Scot Brown

9:09 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

You go Neighbor... I hear that!

Reply

Clay Gump

11:03 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

I question the historic value of ERCO. Truly it is an eyesore and should be removed. The history of ERCO is archived at the Aviation museum. That should be enough.

Reply

Michael B. Cron

2:55 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Empty store fronts and failed businesses at UTC makes it an eyesore. The same thing will happen to the Cafritz site if it is not thought out properly.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Neighbor

5:11 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Maybe the development wouldn't be so empty if people like you weren't slandering it. Do you ever consider that your words have an impact?

UTC is the beginning of something great in Hyattsville. We like it. We are happy to have the tallest building around. It's actually part of our city crest. In my opinion, UTC/PG plaza are only a tenth as built out as they should be, and once that happens, businesses in the area will have plenty of customers to keep them going. If it wasn't for UTC, I wouldn't have a movie theater, a Qdoba or a Carolina Kitchen to add to my neighborhood walkscore, which is 84 (Very Walkable). So keep on dissing us all you want, but we have the Target and the Home Depot and the tax revenues. Next time you enjoy our metro or our Bus Boys, I hope you appreciate how our city has the right to grow and make itself better.

John

5:07 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

I'm wondering how serene the ACP environment is being located next to the CSX rail lines.

It seems like access between River Road and the Cafritz property would benefit the UoMd technology park as well. There are a lot of vacant sites there.

Does PG County and/or the state of Maryland play any role in facilitating development like this? I don't get that impression.

I drive to Annapolis or Silver Spring to shop at Whole Foods Market. This location would be more convenient for me.

Reply
Comment_arrow

ACP employee

10:48 am on Friday, April 5, 2013

I'm an employee at ACP and a resident of Riverdale. It's actually quite serene. The noise from the train tracks is fairly minimal. The trees block most of the noise. If we tore down the trees the noise from the tracks and the increased traffic would be less serene. I'm not against the project, I do hope they can think thoughtfully about it. Now that the NOAA building is finally occupied, the only one empty lot over here is the ERCO building.

Neighbor

6:32 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Queensbury rd goes right over those tracks without a bridge. Who originated the bridge stipulation anyway? What the Cafritz family should do in order to coerce the local naysayers is threaten to cut down the forest and put a giant parking lot. What university park should do is transplant an endangered species onto the property and then it will be impossible to ever develop. Thousands of trees will be saved. Riverdale Park should acquire the property via eminent domain and turn it into a public park, and Hyattsville should nab the whole foods and all the rest of development and place it around Its metro stops.

Reply

Carol Cron

6:34 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

The University Park police will likely be first responders in many instances to calls at Cafritz because the Riverdale Park police are rather far away, unless there is a sub-station. The traffic from virtually the only exits, as currently planned, will dump thousands upon thousands of cars onto Rt. 1, bordering University Park, making it very difficult for University Park residents to get to and from their homes.

In terms of University Town Center, it had the potential to be the beginning of something great in Hyattsville, but the owners and landlords, who were clueless about how to develop and manage a retail center, never finished developing the area along East-West Highway. I believe the reporter from The Patch, who called Mr. Cron to solicit his opinion, focused more on the term "eyesore" rather than being a failed town center - and it is definitely a failed center - from the condos, the movie theater, the Safeway, the hotel, the box store, the non-existent Hyattsville police sub-station, and of course, the dozen restaurants, of which more than half have closed, and none of which are successful (including the one which was ours, in which we lost a million dollars.) Whole Foods should consider moving their location to UTC, which is probably shovel-ready.

Reply

Neighbor

7:05 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Wow Carol, I appreciate your explanation and I agree with you. I'm also sorry about your own personal loss associated with UTC.
I think we all really want the same thing which is to love where we live. It would be nice to see UTC doing more to fill in it's storefronts. Perhaps lowering its commercial rent until demand increases? It seems that allowing businesses to pay what they can is better than empty stores and no rent whatsoever.

Reply

Mr. Lobb

9:23 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013

This entire episode is a case study on how not to do an economic development project, from the developers to the local officials. And, we wonder why we have difficulty in attracting quality businesses to the county.

Reply

Pachacutec

9:19 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Good to hear that, unlike SOME local businesses and the politicians, American Physics cares about their surroundings. When they first built in that location, I tought it was great that they kept the trees and natural surroundings rather than just raze everything around as other businesses in that area have done. We've gotten along for years without Cafritz and we don't need them now. There's enough traffic and empty buildings, now.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Clinton Bradley

6:28 am on Thursday, March 21, 2013

Finally, a comment about development that makes sense.

Comment_arrow

Mr. Lobb

7:49 am on Thursday, March 21, 2013

Yes. This makes so much sense. If only the Cafritz site could return to the days when it was a pristine, unspoiled aircraft factory. Yes, those were the days. Or, I suppose, we should return to the days when no one lived in the area at all. How convenient it would be if we could just turn back the clock to whatever time period suited us so we could completely ignore reality. Because the reality is that this area is not Mayberry. We live in an area that is just a couple of miles from the District of Columbia and development will occur -- and needs to occur if we are to keep up with growing populations.

Pachacutec

1:08 pm on Thursday, March 21, 2013

to Mr. Lobb; I never said I was against development, never said the place should be Mayberry (and I remember back to the days when Riverdale Plaza was a farm, so I've been in the area a while). Responsible development is the key; as in my post, I didn't say I was against the American Physics building, in fact I said I thought it was good that they preserved their environment. However, I still say there are far too many empty buildings and areas which have had businesses that are now vacant around here; why do we need to tear down one of the few 'green' places left around Riverdale/University Park? Too, I haven't heard too many of the "powers that be" adequately address how the towns will handle the huge increase in traffic, the increase in usage of utilities, water supply, etc.; guess like everyplace else, they'll worry about that after the fact. But there I go again, being silly and trying to plan for the future....

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mr. Lobb

5:31 pm on Thursday, March 21, 2013

You raise some good points, and I certainly didn't mean to single out your comments. I meant to reply more generally. And, I fully agree that we need to plan for the future. I would also not necessarily be opposed to development of the site as a park. But we don't have much say on that because it is private property. We may be able to restrict its uses and make it meet certain requirements, but we can't make it be a park without the support/approval of the Cafritzes, and I don't see that happening, so that is a little bit of a red herring.

One of my biggest problems with this whole process is the unbelievable amount of time this has taken to essentially get back to square one. There is plenty of blame to go around and that includes the developers and the local officials. I remember one of the first public meetings on this occurred way back in 2007! And, here we are 6 years later with no real resolution one way or the other. This, to me, is the real problem for the area and the County. Fair or not, others are watching how this is being handled, and I have to say what they are seeing is not good.

Comment_arrow

Adelphi Sky

11:50 am on Tuesday, March 26, 2013

@Mr. Lobb

The same thing is happening to East Campus. After 9 years and 2 developers, we're back to square one and not one building has been built.

Comment_arrow

Adelphi Sky

11:54 am on Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Personally I feel we need more office parks. Places that only have traffic certain hours of the day, that generate tax revenue, and where workers cam leave and go someplace else. There has never been a good ratio of office to residential in this county. Unfortunately, there are high vacancy rates in the D.C. area with D.C. and NOVA having the lion's share of vacant office space. When companies do locate here, they would naturally grab the vacant office space in D.C. and NOVA as there is none here to speak of.

Comment_arrow

Scot Brown

1:06 pm on Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Good point Mr. Lobb. This type of unprofessional and poorly managed dealings of the local governments is the perfect example of how and why PG County is not of great interest to developers. Time is money and the more we waste as a community of neighbors the less profitable and desirable the development will be for all stakeholders. The ACP decision is selfish and stupid. To not have a connection between Rt. 1 and Kenilworth for almost 2 miles is dumb (410 to Paint Branch).

As this drags on the increase in our home values slow.

Peggy Anne

11:28 am on Sunday, March 24, 2013

I'm happy that the trees have remained unmolested for as long as they have. It's a miracle.

Reply

Michael B. Cron

1:29 am on Tuesday, March 26, 2013

When the Cafritz project reaches the construction stage, there is no mention of infrastructure construction of schools, fire department and a police sub-station. This project will add thousands of residents and daily visitors to this area. What about the increased road noise from the numerous tractor trailers that will be restocking the Whole Foods and other venues from route 1 at all hours of the day and night. If the CSX overpass is built, there is no guarantee that the bridge will even be wide enough to safely handle the over-sized delivery trucks. How about the ability of EMS and hook and ladder trucks to traverse the limited ingress and egress points of the project? All of these things need to be addressed before a backhoe uproots the first tree on that property.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mr. Lobb

6:54 pm on Friday, March 29, 2013

All good points, but what are you and other local elected officials doing to address and overcome these issues? Simply pointing out issues without offering solutions does not move this project forward. Is that your objective?

Comment_arrow

Scot Brown

11:08 am on Friday, April 5, 2013

Thanks Mr. Lobb. That has been my point all along but I've just been mean about how I've expressed it. University Park doesn't want the development in its current form, and I get it, but they are being obstructionist. They are the Mitch McConnell of local politics.

I’ve been trying to warn them that if they keep trying to stop it and don’t focus on the issues such as Mr. Lobb has pointed out we are all going to lose. They are going to build something! I’ve seen it a million times as a construction company executive. If the locals are too hard to deal with the land owners will change plans and we will get a subdivided piecemeal mess of low rent retail or the like….

Leave a comment