Commission 2000 has designated revitalizing inside-the-Beltway
communities as the number two priority for Prince George's County,
second only to improving our schools. I heartily applaud this
sentiment, but wonder what the County Council thinks this means.
Landover Knolls is a pleasant residential area inside the Beltway that
is opposing the Michaels Company's plan to put an Amoco gas station
in
our midst. This is inappropriate development. This will
degrade and
destabilize our community, not help it.
Why is this happening? Some people are cynical enough to suggest
that
since the Michaels Company is a big developer and campaign contributor,
they can get anything they want from the County Council. But
with so
many council members coming to the end of their terms, this cannot
be
the case. Since they are not running for re-election, surely
they are
free as never before to do the right thing.
I am afraid that it is more a matter of the Council hearing "inside
the
Beltway" and "development" and thinking that means it must be good.
Not
in this case. In this case, the town of Cheverly gerry-mandered
one
house lot on the end of the 6500 block of Old Landover Road when they
incorporated the Giant shopping center into their town. They
agreed not
to oppose the Michaels Company's petition for a special exception to
put
a gas station there. In this way the town hoped to realize increased
tax revenues from the gas station, while keeping the stink and the
traffic on the far side of Landover Road.
So the Michaels Company had the fire department burn down the house
and
garage on the property. Then they bulldozed the locust grove
and oak
trees on the site, and dug up and carted away the little bluff the
house
had sat on, leaving a muddy depression somewhat resembling a lunar
crater. (Why they aren't in big trouble for doing this, I still
don't
understand.) Now they want to cram a 6-pump 24-hour gas station
and
convenience store on this 0.87 acre parcel right next to the houses
on
Old Landover Road. In their application they say that there is
no need
for a tree preservation plan because there are so few trees on the
site.
I was one of the 27 residents of the Landover Knolls area who came to
the hearing on S.E. 4345 on Monday afternoon, June 5. I was very
disappointed that the matter was continued, because I had hoped that
the
District Council would do the right thing and vote against allowing
a
gas station in our neighborhood. The presentation by Tom Lockard
was
completely from the developer's point of view, where residents are
mere
inconveniences In describing the area around the site for the
proposed
gas station, he talked about the Giant shopping center and mentioned
the
office buildings on Landover Road. He mentioned the apartment
buildings
across Landover Road from the site. He even mentioned some townhouses
that open on to Rte.450, Annapolis Road. The only single family
residence he mentioned was the house next to the gas station. All the
rest of the area between Landover Road and Annapolis Road is filled
with
single family homes. I felt that those of us who sat there–all
of us
from the houses in the neighborhood–were completely invisible.
Mr. Lockard did mention all of the "alternative compliance" proposals
(that is, proposals that do not conform to the legal requirements)
in
the Amoco plan. He cited various figures for the "supply" and
"demand"
for gasoline in the area, and accepted numbers that showed more "demand"
than "supply", supposedly indicating a "need" for a gas station.
There
was no consideration of whether this difference between supply and
demand, if accurate, was sufficient to support another gas station.
The
gas prices at the nine stations less than a mile from the proposed
site
are below average for the state, which is prima facie evidence that
the
supply is more than adequate.
Contrary to the impression given by Mr. Lockard's presentation, we have
a nice, residential neighborhood. The latest construction
here was
decidedly upscale brick houses on a cul-de-sac at the end of 64th
Avenue. Of five high school graduates on the street, four are
going to
college in the fall–two to the University of Maryland, College Park,
one
to Spelman College in Atlanta, and one to Pomona College in California.
We represent the kind of inside-the-beltway community that the county
should be supporting, not attacking with eyesores.
At a post-continuance meeting with residents, held supposedly to reach
a
compromise, the Michaels Company representatives threatened that if
prevented from building their gas station there, they would put in
a
pawn shop or a liquor store–apparently the only things they thought
the
community would detest more. This is hardly negotiating in good
faith.
What can we do? Because of the "Ex Parte Communications" section
of the
County Code, our council representative will not even acknowledge
letters from us on the subject. I'm just hoping that they read
the
paper!
Yours truly,
Judith I. Torgerson