|
Washington Post
July 5, 2007 Project Derailed In Ashton Planning Board Balks At Scale and Design By Aruna Jain
Washington Post Staff Writer Roger Bell has watched diligently as plans have unfolded for a commercial center at Route 108 and New Hampshire Avenue in Ashton, a rural enclave in northeastern Montgomery County. The 71-year-old retired University of Maryland astronomy professor, who enjoys the quiet of his nearby street, felt that the proposal, with its large grocery store, limited storefront access, and large blank wall facing Route 108, not only lacked aesthetic appeal but also was clearly at odds with the character of the area. "To be honest," Bell said, "it would remind me of a jail." So Bell was pleased -- and not a little surprised -- last week when the Montgomery County Planning Board voted unanimously to reject the proposed mixed-use Ashton Meeting Place, which would have brought a full-service grocery store, retail outlets, condominiums and offices to eight acres at the intersection. The board echoed some of Bell's thoughts and also cited zoning rule violations, a shortage of accessible storefronts and other characteristics inconsistent with the area's growth plan. "This flies in the face of what we're trying to achieve through better design and also the creation of a rural village area here," said Montgomery Planning Board Chairman Royce Hanson, referring to a large wall that would face Route 108 under the proposal. Michelle Layton, a member of the Sandy Spring-Ashton Rural Preservation Consortium, formed in 2005 to fight the proposed development, also was happy with the decision. "We're not opposed to a grocery store there, but we don't need a 48,000-square-foot grocery store," she said. Ashton, with a population of about 2,000, many of whom boast ancestral ties to the area, sits between Sandy Spring and the Howard County line. A bank now occupies the site of the proposed commercial center. The proposed development has elicited months of controversy, dividing the community between passionate supporters and equally outspoken opponents. William Britt, a Sandy Spring resident and a member of Citizens for Ashton Meeting Place, a group formed to support the project, was disappointed by the decision. He accused members of the consortium of a campaign of misinformation and character assassination against the project developer that fractured the community. "There's a lot of bad blood out there," said Britt, who owns a construction and engineering firm in Glen Burnie. "I feel like the scale of the project has been misrepresented." He had been looking forward to a pleasant gathering place where he could grab a coffee, pick up groceries and enjoy other conveniences. "I really think it's something the area needs," he said. "We need infrastructure to support the amount of residential use." Layton defended her group, saying the planning board did its own analysis of the development and formed its own opinion. "In any situation, you're bound to attack the group who is against your opinion," she said. "It's a shame that people feel like they need to do that." Fred Nichols, the project developer and a longtime Ashton resident, said that although he is disappointed by the board's decision, he is optimistic. "I feel positive that we actually know more than what we knew before," he said. "A lot of the ambiguity is gone. We know [there have] to be smaller buildings. We know the full-service grocer is not something we're going to be able to realize." And most of all, he said, the zoning restrictions, previously ambiguous, are now clear. So he is back at the drawing board, he said, and plans to work with supporters and opponents of the previous plan to come up with a new one. He hopes to get new drawings to planning officials by Aug. 1. "The board did not go in our favor," he said, "but what they did do is tell us some things that we can do." |