Mitigation Mirage: Loss of Parkland and Urban Forest at North Chevy Chase Park

This week the County Council will take up the "Disposition of Land at Germantown Town Center Urban Park." What does this land swap mean? And what does this have to do with Bethesda?... It means instead of providing meaningful local mitigation for the loss of parkland from North Chevy Chase Park, this disposition is merely a distant "mitigation mirage." 

Documents: Council Packet Discussing Park Land Disposition

*Already* existing parkland at
Germantown Town Center Urban Park....

....is proposed as replacement for loss of parkland and 
urban forest at NCC Park in the BCC Planning Area.

Why is part of the forest and park being lost? After a long and controversial process, the County approved a new road - Platt Ridge Road Extension - to be built through North Chevy Chase Park. It will impact approximately ~1 acre of forest, ~1.5 acres of parkland, and ~18 specimen trees. The area also has a very steep slope, making the project complicated. The residents in the adjacent neighborhood along Spring Valley Road feel blocked in and so - as part of BRAC (Walter Reed) - a new signal was installed at Spring Valley Road several years ago and then this new road was proposed. It is unclear from the DOT/SHA studies how much of a difference this new road will make in terms of safety and traffic flow, but I am sympathetic to the residents' situation and need for easier access. 

Why does it matter? The forested areas in this satellite view are DARK GREEN - and as you can see there is already very little remaining urban forest in the area (both downtown Bethesda and the BCC Planning area are considered to be low in parkland and tree canopy; and high in impervious surface). The arrows show where acres of ADDITIONAL scarce and valuable urban forest will be lost all along the Georgetown Branch Trail and at North Chevy Chase Park. This area of forest is considered "relatively high quality, mature, mixed deciduous forest...that supports a variety of wildlife, has aesthetic appeal, and provides significant air quality and stormwater management benefits." 

What is the history? In April 2014 - Park and Planning was initially opposed to the plan for this road for a number of reasons - and did not approve it. Documents: Project NOT recommended for approval. 

Park Description; Low Park Acreage/Preservation of Woodlands; Relief from Concrete and Asphalt

In July 2014 it was then determined that if the project was to move forward there would need to be park replacement - "preferably 4 acres of MATURE FOREST adjacent to an existing Local or Neighborhood Park in the SAME PARK SERVICE AREA and SAME WATERSHED."

 It was indicated the project must also provide invasive species removal and meet Tree Save and Specimen Tree Mitigation requirements. 
Documents: Project Approved BUT Needs Mitigation

Park and Planning considered several properties that could be purchased as replacement parkland that would fit all or most of those criteria. One possibility included a forested part of the Audubon property immediately down Jones Bridge and Jones Mill Road - BUT the County did not want to spend the money to acquire it (even though it was also very close to where other local forest will be clear cut for the Purple Line). 

Then - a memo appeared in 2016 stating that there could be a fee-simple land swap and "the County" could simply give the County-controlled part of already-funded-and-constructed Germantown Town Center Urban Park to "Parks"....and that would settle the park replacement requirement. This site is in a DIFFERENT park service area, DIFFERENT watershed, NOT forested, and ALREADY (for every intent and purpose) County parkland. An earlier Parks and Planning report had noted that a no-cost land transfer would set a bad precedent....but that is essentially just what is proposed now. In addition, this site had never been discussed as part of the lengthy Mandatory Referral process.

This begs the question --- if it was so important for the "Montgomery County" parcel of land THAT IS ALREADY NOW DEVELOPED AS A PARK between the Parks (M-NCPPC) parcels of land at Germantown Urban Park to be transferred to the Parks Department...why would they need the loss of parkland and forest at NCC Park 20 miles away to make that happen? 

This land swap seems to be simply giving land from the right hand to the left hand and counting it as a net gain (even though the exchange doesn't even meet "fair market value" requirement). And, as the Executive Order states, the County had no need to retain its portion of the Germantown parkland anyway. 

From the Executive Order

Documents: Full Memo County Proposed Land Swap - June 2016

County Park Service Map: Proposed Park Replacement is in a DIFFERENT PARK SERVICE AREA. 

County Watershed Map: Proposed Park Replacement is in a DIFFERENT WATERSHED AREA. 

County Recreation Map: Proposed Park Replacement is in a DIFFERENT RECREATION AREA. 

Video of Planning Board hearing in 2014: "DOT wants money to spend on asphalt; instead of improving parkland." DOT (fortunately) unsuccessfully argued against also having to provide invasive species removal at NCC Park as part of mitigation. Disturbing and fragmenting a forest can lead to more invasive species entering an area. It was determined they do need to provide invasive species removal. 

After the new Bethesda Plan recently promised more green space, tree canopy, and parkland - this land swap is moving in the wrong direction towards a continued net loss of parkland for the local area. So why not contribute to parkland back in the local area (where many parks have been identified as needing expansion and improvement)?  This story will be updated following the Council discussion and decision. 

UPDATE: The Council determined more local mitigation should be provided and agreed to additional stormwater management improvements, invasive plant removal, and tree plantings in an area of North Chevy Chase Park! These improvements will happen in 2018 and 2019! 

Germantown Town Center Urban Park is wonderful!
But is should not count for loss of urban forest
and parkland 20 miles away.

1990 Bethesda Chevy Chase Plan

Wild Abandon: The Story of "Reed Street"

Should the County abandon some of the most needed and valuable right-of-way land - and what has been called some of the "last best" open space - in Bethesda???

Many people are familiar with the problems caused when the Lot 31 development did not leave sufficient space for a Capital Crescent Trail head plaza and decent trail shoulders. Those problems were then compounded by Ourisman Honda's further encroachment on the trail easement. If you don't know about that situation, we'll cover it in another post. But what is happening across the street???

The space outside MonAmiGabi and the Landmark Theater (and possibly soon to be Dean and Deluca) is supposed to contain the Purple Line "tail tracks," the Capital Crescent Trail, AND a new public Civic Green Park. Though, as can be seen from this slide from the Apex building hearing, they have not quite figured out how all of that will really fit. (Yellow=trail; Purple=train tail tracks)

But lets back up......We are lucky this space even still exists today. There was a very contentious and controversial decision in 2009 when JBG and Federal Reality requested the County abandon "Reed Street" to them to develop it into a mixed use development called Woodmont East II --- and despite extensive community testimony that it would be needed for continued public use and access --- it was given to the developers. Read: 2009 Controversial Decision about Reed Street

But the development didn't proceed, the abandonment expired, and the land reverted back to County right-of-way. And it turns out community members were right to question the decision..... 

The new Downtown Bethesda Plan has now designated the general area for a Capital Crescent Civic Green AND also the Capital Crescent Trail. Additionally, in July 2017 "Reed Street" was also franchised to the MTA for Purple Line access.

However, JBG recently entered into an agreement to be able to landscape and hardscape "Reed Street." JBG then requested for the land to be abandoned to them - AGAIN - based on the fact that they had invested landscaping and hardscaping in the location and felt it wasn't needed for "highway" purposes - even though part of it was designated to be the trail. The Planning Board meeting for this abandonment was supposed to occur this week but was cancelled - and postponed indefinitely - until there is future coordination between JBG and DOT.

The Planning Staff - knowing that at least part of this land is needed for public use and access (with 854,945 trail users in 2016!) - did NOT support the abandonment this time. Read: Staff Report - Does Not Recommend Abandoning Reed Street

The County is also working to acquire the land adjacent to Reed Street (the rest of the slice). They need it for the Civic Green and the Purple Line easements. It appears funding would initially be coming from ALARF.

UPDATE: The County approved the purchase of the .4 acres of land next to Reed Street for $8.5 Million...
Bethesda-Beat/2017/County-Parks-System-Looks-To-Buy-Bethesda-Property-For-Capital-Crescent-Public-Park/

Bethesda-Beat/2017/Council-Approves-Purchase-of-Bethesda-Row-Land-for-Future-Park-Use/

JBG is currently continuing to landscape / hardscape the area (though the plans and the current plantings don't include shade trees like in the renderings). It will be important to watch whether the abandonment of this valuable land comes up - yet again....

• Will the County abandon Reed Street again? What would they get in return if they did? 
• Will JBG treat the Trail area better than Lot 31 or Ourisman have? 
• How long until this "LAST BEST" open space is actually transformed into the attractive public park that has been designated in the Downtown Bethesda Plan.

Welcome to BeMoCo

Welcome to BeMoCo: Planning for a Better Bethesda 

and Montgomery County. 

The new finalized Bethesda Downtown Plan was published this week. It will guide development, design, parks, and amenities in the downtown Bethesda area for the next 20 years. 

The last 20 years have brought some highs and lows when it comes to planning and implementation in our County. And lately it can be hard to keep up with the pace and scale of development. The term "smart growth" is frequently used to describe density near transit - but development is only truly "smart" if it offers good, safe, and functional design; balances compatibility; and includes needed schools, parks, affordable housing, transit, and amenities. 

Neighbors will have to watch development proposals and be involved in the planning process to make sure the new Plan "promises" are actually delivered --- on the ground, not just on paper. 

http://montgomeryplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/BDP-COUNCIL-ADOPTED-MAY2017_SMALL-FOR-WEB.pdf

Bethesda Downtown Plan - "Approved and Adopted."
The Plan provides for a development cap of 32.4 Million Square Feet. 

Approved heights for buildings in the Plan area.

Proposed Parks and Public Spaces

Plan Goals - Including Units, Parks, Tree Canopy, Bike Lanes, and Energy