The county planning board on Thursday gave a collective thumbs up to one Ripley District development, but a few details still need work.
The project — 1050 Ripley Street — drops 318 apartments and 7,500 square feet of retail space on Ripley Street near Colonial Lane, according to documents submitted to the planning board. Currently, that area is occupied by, well, nothing.
However, the planning board wasn’t ready to endorse the project completely because some issues were unresolved. First, the board said it wanted the developer of this project to put its head together with the guys building Midtown Silver Spring, another residential project on Ripley Street and Colonial Lane.
Together, they must cook up a plan for turning Colonial Lane into an actual street connecting Bonifant and Ripley streets, the planning board insisted at its weekly meeting. The new street — dubbed Ripifant Street — would extend Dixon Avenue southward through an existing county-owned garage.
The board also wanted the Washington Property Co., which is developing 1050 Ripley Street, to score LEED certification for the building. Certification shows that the place is somewhat eco-friendly, though there are ratings beyond certification for eco-friendlier joints.
And then there’s some crap about truncation. County code requires developers to shave off 25 feet from a building’s corner. Traffic engineers say it gives drivers a clear view at intersections, but developers say it shrinks a building’s footprint and overall size. Critics also argue that the 25-foot setback screws with the streetscape.
In this case, the Washington Property Co. and the county’s department of transportation previously agreed to shrink that setback to 10 feet. However, the DOT hasn’t responded to a request to waive the truncation entirely, the company’s reps told the planning board.
The board left that problem on the developer’s plate, but it has favored such a waiver in the past. In December, it gave the Midtown Silver Spring project a green light on zero truncation.
The 1050 Ripley Street project will go before the planning board again when all outstanding issues have been ironed out.
Embedded images courtesy of MNCPPC.
Oct 6, 2008
8 Comments at "Ripley project rolls forward, despite snags"
LOL Ripifant. They should actually call it that.
I thought they were fixing the regualtion about setbacks and streetscapes?
“County code requires developers to shave off 25 feet from a building’s corner. Traffic engineers say it gives drivers a clear view at intersections, but developers say it shrinks a building’s footprint and overall size. Critics also argue that the 25-foot setback screws with the streetscape.”
Thanks for your query, SS Lover.
Apparently, the matter of truncation is still an issue with the county’s department of public works and transportation (now called the department of transportation). However, the department seems to be giving free passes on a case-by-case basis. For example, they waived truncation for the Midtown Silver Spring project.
In the case of 1050 Ripley St, the department of transportation is willing to shrink that 25-foot truncation down to 10 feet. The 10-foot space would give the DOT wiggle room in case it decides to put up a traffic light. Both the planning board and Bob Dalripple, the developer’s rep, feel that traffic would never get heavy enough on Colonial Lane (aka Ripifant Street) to warrant a light.
Currently, westbound Ripley runs into a dead end at the CSX tracks. Ripifant Street would connect Ripley and Bonifant streets.
Seems like unless the county forsees a bridge over the trax there a traffic light is a pretty ridiculous consideration…. It seems like all these set backs and building spacing requirements are exactly why our “urban” district is failing to become very “urban”. Add on top of that these “public space” requirements that put stupid, unused, cement parks in front of every building in town and everything’s spaced so far apart we’re never going to get the density of a true urban environment… scrap the setbacks and requirements, scrap the cement pocket parks, require developers to contribute to a fund that will eventually build a REAL park.. with grass and all…. get better density AND actual USABLE green space. …. I;m ranting :-)
Thanks for your rant, Paul. ;-) You wrote:
A zoning amendment has been proposed that would allow developers in the central business district to offer entertainment venues in lieu of outdoor space as a public amenity.
Should entertainment venues (eg, music halls, museums) be allowed to qualify as public-use space? What about retail space — should that be allowed to qualify?
Should entertainment venues (eg, music halls, museums) be allowed to qualify as public-use space? What about retail space — should that be allowed to qualify?
Yes, I think it should.
I’d rather have a downtown with a more vibrant night life and commerce than a downtown with more “pocket parks” or “artist alleys” for homeless to sleep in.
The pedestrian bridge to East-West Highway is a great idea. There needs to be some connector to better integrate the two sides of DTSS. The street connection between Ripley street and Bonifant street is another great idea. The section of Bonifant street that goes under the Metro parking structure is both ugly and unsafe, this new street will give East Silver Spring residents an option going to the metro. Hopefully they can “lot” out the ground floor so the walk will be enlivened with several smaller shopes rather than a large retailer, but I’ll be happy with any retail.
I agree w ThayerD. Bonifant under the metro is dead.
Ripifant St? Is that u joking JenD?
PS: Deseo is such a cool family name. Is it legit or your blog moniker?
Editor’s note: Ripifant Street is the name used by the two developers in that neighborhood, as well as people with the planning department. — JD (Jul 19, 2008)
Holler back.