$1 billion casino at National Harbor proposed by Prince George’s Executive Baker (Bowie: buying, movie theater)

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by liliblu

I don't think the issue of a possible increase in crime has been discussed enough. Whenever you have a large influx of people into an area you can see an increase in crime. Theft, vandalism, prostitution, and drugs could become an issue. Then there are the people leaving the casino after a day/night of free drinking, hoping into their cars and heading home.

First, studies have shown that development in high density areas actually reduce crime. Here is one of them:

Mixed-Use Neighborhoods Reduce Some Violent Crimes, Study Says

Second, drunk patrons don't necessarily increase crime rates. If that was the case you could argue against any bar or restaurant that serves alcohol. Not much opposition to those establishments.

[liliblu]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

First, studies have shown that development in high density areas actually reduce crime. Here is one of them:

Mixed-Use Neighborhoods Reduce Some Violent Crimes, Study Says

Second, drunk patrons don't necessarily increase crime rates. If that was the case you could argue against any bar or restaurant that serves alcohol. Not much opposition to those establishments.

The studies I've seen have mixed results.

[EHCT]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Would any of you complaining about more traffic be willing to pay for new roads that will invariably mean the destruction of homes a businesses in order to widen these 2 and four lane roads? Should Oxon Hill Rd. be a 6 lane road? What about Indian Head Highway? Eight Lanes? That won't work. You know why? Because you can widen a road to 16 lanes if you want, you STILL run into choke points. You would have to eliminate choke points miles into VA and DC to make any difference. Look at the mixing bowl in Springfield, VA. You think that solved anything? You build an extra road, people will start to use it until eventually it is filled up with traffic. So, you widen the road or build another road. Wash, rinse, repeat. You can't eliminate every choke point.

The only solution, take people OFF the road. How do you do that? You certainly don't do it by forcing them to sleep where they live and do everything else 45 minutes from home. Build jobs and amenities here so they can either walk or take a short 5 minute trip. Then the need for roads won't be so bad. More roads is only a temporary fix until they too become congested. Once Whole Foods is built in Riverdale and East campus comes online, my longest commute will be to my job. Everything else will be within 5 minutes. That takes me off of other roads where I don't live adding to traffic in someone else's neighborhood. It's a chicken-egg thing really. Build more, hopefully at metro stations, to take more people off the road. Or, build roads, without revenue, and hope you have enough leftover to bring new development in. Revenue begets infrastructure. Not the other way around. Or, we can all vote to raise our taxes so we can pay for everything ourselves and not depend on development. Good luck trying to convince people to pay more taxes.

The complaints about traffic congestion in the southern part of the county point to a larger issue than the number of cars on the road. As far as I’m concerned, the lack of infrastructure in this part of the county has more to do with the county’s lack of proficiency in the fields of civic & developmental planning rather than how many lanes are on a particular road. When parts of Clinton, Brandywine and Accokeek were inundated with newer housing developments, it seems as if the roads leading to these subdivisions became an afterthought. Does it make sense to add thousands of new residents to those areas and continue to (more or less)have one way in and one way out? You’re correct in your assertion that additional lanes won’t help the current situation. But I’m sure that proper planning of these subdivisions beforehand would have negated any supposed need to destroy homes after the fact in an effort to improve the infrastructure.

Now, take this thinking over to the construction of a huge casino at the National Harbor. What good is building a casino in an area that cannot adequately facilitate the movement of potential customers in and out of the establishment? I don’t care how many metro-lines (if any) they would like to build to bring more consumers into the area, I don’t know of anyone brave enough to consider public transportation in order to get to and from a casino. This leaves one option that I can think of…improve the current infrastructure.

Your idea that “revenue begets infrastructure” is in essence putting the cart before the horse. This philosophy may work in some places as long as these places don’t have anything in common with the new subdivisions built in Clinton, Brandywine and Accokeek. My point is that without proper developmental planning (which seems to be the norm in the county), I fear that the casino project isn't going to be the great boon to the county as the board is making it out to be.

[pgtvatitans]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

You talk as if DC getting a convention hotel comparable to the Gaylord is imminent. How are you so sure they will get one anytime soon? It could be years before they even break ground - long enough for National Harbor to become a national destination by itself. Yes, just across the river from DC. There's nothing unnatural about people coming to DC saying, "Hey, let's check out National Harbor." And we're really splitting hairs about proximity to downtown DC. DC is like 15 minutes from National Harbor. It is not as far as Annapolis, Baltimore, Accokeek, etc. You can see the capitol from the Gaylord on a clear day. I don't think distance will be an issue here. And remember this hypothetical discussion is about AFTER National Harbor gets the casino and the outlets. The casino gives National Harbor a more compelling draw. And so what if DC gets a hotel? How different would it be from any other hotel in DC? Would they have a Dreamworks contract like the Gaylord? Would it draw Cirque Du Solei or the Dreamworks Ice Show? Something tells me DC's hotel will be your run of the mill 1500 room Hyatt or Marriott. D.C.'s attractions don't change. All DC will be adding is beds. They already have a convention center. That's essentially my point.

I guess you haven't heard the news....

As construction begins on convention center hotel, officials consider its future impact

Not saying the National Harbor won't draw at least some, but man it's going to be tough to compete against our nation's capital.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

First of all, National Harbor was not meant to be a community, but a destination within a community. Very few people will call National Harbor their home. Second, have you been to Atlantic City? Been on a cruise? Or any other resort area that has amenities for kids as well as adults? I fail to see your point. People won't be gambling in the streets. I've been to Atlantic City and I've seen kids IN the casino eating at the buffets. Are their parents horrible for allowing their children to experience the inside of a casino? National Harbor and this casino will not be like some "off the strip" dilapidated casino in Las Vegas with prostitutes on the corner. The Children's Museum and the casino can coexist just like every other resort that hosts the same.

Initially it started off as a destination, but now it really is a community. Why else would they put a grocery store, a pharmacy and row houses? Not to mention they are building apartments too. The whole tourist trap idea never flew. We had a huge thread on here about how the National Harbor was changing. They had no choice but to make it residential given how bad the economy was.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

ooooh. You'd be a good politician. I absolutely did not say that National Harbor may get an office park. I said, "There has to be a shortage of space before it would make sense to build more offices there." That hardly suggests an office park with 1 million square feet of office space in a multi-building site plan. It could be one 150,000 square foot building, or an office tower, not a multi-building office park. Make more sense?

I guess so. It just depends on how you look at it though. Semantics aside, the whole purpose is to at least have some jobs there, right? We can agree on that much, can't we?

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Gee. Then all those employees at all those restaurants, hotels, and shops must be friends of the owners who are volunteering their free time. Certainly no jobs there. Just volunteers.

Most of those individuals make service level wages. They are clearly not he clientele that the national harbor is trying to attract. How many busboys can you see going to shop at Jos. A Bank frequently for clothes? Restaurants, hotel and retail jobs do not pay the same amount as career professional positions, which is what it appears to be what the National Harbor is trying to attract there. Basically people who have a lot of disposable income.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Sorry to burst your bubble, but polls are already being taken. In a few polls, the majority has been for the casino. Even 52% of those who are religious and attend church approve. Gotta love those Baptists and their casino trips!

Really? What has to be so scientific about calling up registered voters and asking are they for or against the casino?

Prince George's voters favor, no wait, oppose casino | Washington Examiner

Again, how scientific are these polls? Asking a few churches is not going to represent the rest of the county. Polls, just like most statistics, can be used to manipulate number in order to paint a picture, which what your link proves. Let's wait to see what voters have to say.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

The classic NIMBY rant. ANY new development will bring new traffic. That's the point. More people, whether workers or residents will increase the daytime population. You can not have your cake and eat it too. People complain about the traffic in NOVA. Do you see them rushing to live over here to escape the traffic? No. They have traffic because that's where the jobs and the amenities are. And yes, because the jobs are there, they have the better schools, etc. So more people move there adding to the traffic. Wash, rinse, repeat. But noooooo. God forbid increasing the population over here. "We hate traffic but we sure do love commuting 30 minutes to an hour to work in DC and NOVA. Don't mess with my commute outside of my own neighborhood AND county to work, eat, shop, and play. I like not having those things here making my commute shorter thus improving my quality of life."

Yes, you are right, new development brings new traffic, new revenue, etc. etc., BUT at what point is this becoming unbalanced. You can't just build your way out of problems and inconvenience residents. The outlet mall took a long time to approve because of the existing infrastructure. In order to make it more attractive, the county had to propose road improvements. So now more people were okay with it, but then you go back and say okay now that we got that done, we're going to add a casino. Does that make sense? At what point do they stop and say you know what, we have to put more in place. Let me tell you, even with the improvements, Oxon Hill Road is still not big enough to handle all this. Oh did I forget to mention that they are also building a Walmart a half of mile from the mall!!!! You can't keep building and building and ignoring the infrastructure. We should be reasonable. I want development down here just like anyone does, but why keep building around an area that can't handle it? Why not at least do more to prepare it for expansion? The moment Oxon Hill Road improvement went from 4 lanes to 2, that should have been it as far as building anything down here. And it's easy for you to say that's it's not a problem, but I would love for you to go to the people who live less than a mile from where the mall is and say the same thing. I doubt they will be as friendly.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

I agree. But maybe you should ask your neighbors to get off their lazy buts as well and stop hindering every little development because their commute to DC and VA will become worse.

Is it wrong to demand some responsibility? What is the harm of someone asking to expand the road system? If they pay taxes just like us, what is the problem with them asking for something reasonable and practical? Should we just approve every development just because we are that desperate for money? What about critiquing and making sure that these projects are in the best interest of everyone involved? Is that wrong?

[2rock]

More money will fix PG and that is the same mentality of those families in financial trouble as discussed in another thread about high foreclosure in PG. Granted, certain minimum is required to run but what happened to all the money that poured in during the boom? Is all gone? To where?

Why can't financial discipline and fiscal frugality be required of the county and the state and the country for that matter?

As soon as more revenue comes in, it will be gone to where nobody knows without basically accomplishing anything.

Also, make it as high-end as anybody can imagine but what family wants to move in such an area? PG has enough trouble now attracting families to move in. This casino will have huge negative impact on home values.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by 2rock

Why can't financial discipline and fiscal frugality be required of the county and the state and the country for that matter?

After the deepest recession since 1929? Good luck. There has already been frugality. Ask all those county employees that got laid off. Look at the county services that have been scaled back. Look at the residences that need assistance through no fault of their own because of the economy. The county has a AAA credit rating. How much more financial discipline do you require in an environment like this?

[UrbanScholar]

Is it wrong to demand some responsibility? What is the harm of someone asking to expand the road system? If they pay taxes just like us, what is the problem with them asking for something reasonable and practical? Should we just approve every development just because we are that desperate for money? What about critiquing and making sure that these projects are in the best interest of everyone involved? Is that wrong?[/quote]

You know the county tried to propose expanding Oxon Hill Rd to a 4 lane over 10 years ago. Their justification was that as a secondary artery to 210, the road would become more congested. The residents at that time shot it down because they didn't want to reduce the lot size of their property. However they still complain about the road being to congested and dangerous. The unfortunate thing is that their are only so many ways to improve the road within its current footprint. Given the number of subdivisions in the area, the roads will remain congested regardless of if future commercial development occurs.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by meatkins

I guess you haven't heard the news....

As construction begins on convention center hotel, officials consider its future impact

Not saying the National Harbor won't draw at least some, but man it's going to be tough to compete against our nation's capital.

Difference of opinion. I think National Harbor, as a destination, will do just fine.

Initially it started off as a destination, but now it really is a community. Why else would they put a grocery store, a pharmacy and row houses? Not to mention they are building apartments too. The whole tourist trap idea never flew. We had a huge thread on here about how the National Harbor was changing. They had no choice but to make it residential given how bad the economy was.

The hotel room and commercial space FAR outweighs residential. That's like saying downtown DC is residential because of the few condos they have downtown. And there was always a plan to have condos and town homes at National Harbor.

I guess so. It just depends on how you look at it though. Semantics aside, the whole purpose is to at least have some jobs there, right? We can agree on that much, can't we?

Sure!

Most of those individuals make service level wages. They are clearly not he clientele that the national harbor is trying to attract. How many busboys can you see going to shop at Jos. A Bank frequently for clothes? Restaurants, hotel and retail jobs do not pay the same amount as career professional positions, which is what it appears to be what the National Harbor is trying to attract there. Basically people who have a lot of disposable income.

There is a glut of office space. There just isn't any demand. Especially with telecommuting becoming more popular. So, I'm not sure why they would build more offices now to draw more white collar workers.

Again, how scientific are these polls? Asking a few churches is not going to represent the rest of the county. Polls, just like most statistics, can be used to manipulate number in order to paint a picture, which what your link proves. Let's wait to see what voters have to say.

Dude, I don't design them. I'm just the messenger.

Yes, you are right, new development brings new traffic, new revenue, etc. etc., BUT at what point is this becoming unbalanced. You can't just build your way out of problems and inconvenience residents. The outlet mall took a long time to approve because of the existing infrastructure. In order to make it more attractive, the county had to propose road improvements. So now more people were okay with it, but then you go back and say okay now that we got that done, we're going to add a casino. Does that make sense? At what point do they stop and say you know what, we have to put more in place. Let me tell you, even with the improvements, Oxon Hill Road is still not big enough to handle all this. Oh did I forget to mention that they are also building a Walmart a half of mile from the mall!!!! You can't keep building and building and ignoring the infrastructure. We should be reasonable. I want development down here just like anyone does, but why keep building around an area that can't handle it? Why not at least do more to prepare it for expansion? The moment Oxon Hill Road improvement went from 4 lanes to 2, that should have been it as far as building anything down here. And it's easy for you to say that's it's not a problem, but I would love for you to go to the people who live less than a mile from where the mall is and say the same thing. I doubt they will be as friendly.

Where is the money going to come from then? We tell developers, no. We're not ready for your business right now. We have to build roads first. We have to improve infrastructure. Oh wait, that's right, there IS no money for infrastructure because we have no commercial revenue. "So, casino, walmart, outlet center, just hold on until we can find the money to improve this infrastructure." In addition, $1 million dollars today will be worth $800,000 5 years from now. So, it will be more expensive to build infrastructure while we continue to tell developers no, not yet. Find somewhere else to build, like NOVA and Montgomery and Anne Arundel counties. Does that make sense? Development brings revenue which brings money to improve infrastructure. But nooooooo, "don't inconvenience me with your jobs, revenue, and your amenities. " What was the figure they said would bring PG county? $70 Million? Hmmm. Let's see. $70 Million vs. raising taxes to pay for transportation, which is what is going to happen anyway. Sure, residents will love that.

Is it wrong to demand some responsibility? What is the harm of someone asking to expand the road system? If they pay taxes just like us, what is the problem with them asking for something reasonable and practical?

..and expensive.

Should we just approve every development just because we are that desperate for money?

YES! in this economy, you take what you can get. I don't think we are in a position to sit back and dole out funds for road projects while rejecting developers who want to build here just so people can "feel" like there's less traffic. That's a horrible business model for a municipality. Bring the jobs and services here first, then use the revenue from that to improve infrastructure. it's just that the economy is so bad that even the momentum of National Harbor is not enough to generate enough revenue to use for county-wide infrastructure improvements. Remember, there is more to the county than south county. Any new revenue will invariably be spread thin.

What about critiquing and making sure that these projects are in the best interest of everyone involved?

That's why a study was completed. The study showed that National Harbor would be the best location if PG were to get a casino.

Is that wrong?

Not at all.

[pgtvatitans]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

In my opinion that type of amenity would attract private sector companies. Especially those in the professional services or manufacturing industries. Typically it is those companies that will use that venue to entertain clients etc. and wouldn't be overly concerned with the appearances of being next to a high end casino. It would also lend to more retail and restaurants (both in and out of the Harbor.

On the flip side, some employers may see the potential of a place like that being a distraction to their employees and possibly promoting bad habits given the proximity to their jobs. Getting paid at the same place that you gamble seems like a disastrous idea. I don't recall tons of employers moving to Las Vegas.

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

I struggled with whether this was a good solution for the county also. However, I realized that the county and its leaders need to look at this as a component in a much greater plan. My thought is that the county needs to continue to go down the path of branding key areas within the county (e.g. U of M area being branded as a Research/STEM corridor; EYA being an arts district; etc.). Once branded they should push the envelop in establishing these areas under the designated brand and not deviate from it. That percentage was based off of the WP survey which was really not as comprehensive as it needed to be a true benchmark for what peoples feelings are. It provides a direction but, although I would like to think that it wouldn't, the percentage could change if the sample size was larger.

Branding is good, I agree. I'm not sure if branding the National Harbor as a casino site is a good thing or not. On one hand you will attract a large crowd of gamblers potentially but on the other hand, you will lose people who are concerned about the social stigmas that gambling sites tend to have. It's definitely a gamble (no pun) to brand National Harbor in that way.

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

I agree there is definitely going to be opposition from nearby residents but that happens with EVERY project that has been presented in that area. I recall reading all of the rants from people opposed to the harbor. They said that it would negatively impact the environment, increase traffic, increase crime and would be an eyesore (sound familiar). But instead it has been a boone for what PGC can do if they put their minds to it and has provided some credibility to the county. However, from what I have observed, they (the opponents) complain about not having enough development to not having enough. The general feel is that they want amenities without the increased traffic or change to the environment (which is a contradiction).

I personally think it's possible to build these places without compromising the infrastructure. My issue isn't the development, but just the way it is done in this county. Prime example, the Walmart that is about to be built. It is good to have one but the location, is extremely stupid. First, the entrance to the Walmart is not even at an intersection, so people who want to go to the Walmart will have to turn against on coming traffic just to get in there. Can you imagine how many people will turn into a Walmart? Second, Fort Washington has way, way more land and a lack of development and would have served as a better location. It's things like this that frustrated me. I'll give you another example. Accokeek only has two shopping centers and both of them have very similar stores. They both have a grocery store, a coffee/breakfast shop, chinese food restaurant, a fast food restaurant, and a cleaners among other things. Because we are so unoriginal in our planning, how about both chinese food restaurants have the name "Eastern". Why do we keep building redundant development? Did someone really think we need another chinese food restaurant in a town as small as Accokeek?

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

I agree he is very useless. I have really strong opinions on his tenure as a politician but that is for another string. Are they pushing it fast? Somewhat. Remember there was speculation that a casino was going to be a part of the NH build out as far back a 2005. Also Penn Gaming from the gate stated that they wanted Rosecroft to be a casino and that would predicate their future ownership of the property. So someone has been thinking about it for a while. As for the timing, my thought is that they are trying to take advantage of the interest of politicians and developers to expand the current law to include table games. That said, the proposed development itself is probably a few years down the road due to the process concerned with building permits etc. I really can't say how much thought has been given to the residents but since the Harbor has always been billed as a entertainment destination it provides a lot of latitude on how it will be developed within those parameters. I am sure if this project moves forward they will have some types of community meetings to solicit comment.

I don't think this was as thought out as you think. I think Baker may have been pondering this, but this seems like a last resort type plan. I listened to him on the radio this morning on of all shows, the Sports Junkies and it seems as though he doesn't have much to say about the naysayers of this plan. He is talking about how great it will be and how much money there is to be made, but he never really addressed the major hurdles (Anne Arundel County, local residents, civic organizations). He is going to have to convince more people if he expects this to pass in my opinion. Giving a political front is not going to make this look any better, people have real concerns about this.

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Yes I have seen it. To give the history, the proposed reconfiguration was finalized about 10 + years ago and some work was done at that time in preparation for the next phase which should begin this summer. After extensive dialogue with the community it was decided that they would adopt a plan that would be the least invasive to the residential areas facing OHR. From what I can tell from the detailed design plan, the area in front of NH (now including the Outlet frontage) will be four lanes that will narrow into two once past the Tanger site, there will also be bike lanes for the entire 2.5 mile stretch which ends and Fort Foote Road, as well as round about to easy traffic and increase safety. I definitely understand where you are coming from regarding the people who live on Oxon Hill Road but I also feel that you live on a widely used road that has been heavily used for decades. Just like buying a house next to an vacant privately owned land, anything can be built next to it. The same goes for living off a major road. You are at a higher risk of eminent domain and anything else that could change the landscape of an area. I was taught that when buying a property you never but off of a major road ( or at the bottom of a hill in a flood district) and you always pull the area plans to see what is proposed for that neighborhood because the future may not be what you are expecting.

Yes you are correct about the layout. And I agree buying on a main road is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean they will not fight this though.

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

That is not a defeatist viewpoint it is just the truth. With more people moving into the area there will be more traffic. I don't take offense to your position because I agree that infrastructure should be a top priority but typically (and I have never fully agreed with this) most places (counties, states,etc.) are reactive and would prefer to wait until an area has exceeded capacity before the make improvements to the infrastructure. Although I understand that you don't want to build the infrastructure and it not be used, I think that response need to be improved significantly. That said, economic development doesn't necessarily wait for infrastructure to be optimal. Often time you have to seize the opportunity when it comes because it may not come again. I think PG realized that when they were slow to create a business friendly environment which led to corporations going to NOVA and DC so not to deal with the headache. I would love for it to work in harmony but PG has not perfected that discipline yet.

Again if there was a balance it would be tolerable. If you are going to propose this why not give some proposal to infrastructure too. I think that would please some of the critics. The infrastructure, in my opinion, cannot be ignored. A two lane road to support a mall, restaurants and a world-class casino? Am I the only one that thinks that sounds insane?

[pgtvatitans]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Would any of you complaining about more traffic be willing to pay for new roads that will invariably mean the destruction of homes a businesses in order to widen these 2 and four lane roads? Should Oxon Hill Rd. be a 6 lane road? What about Indian Head Highway? Eight Lanes? That won't work. You know why? Because you can widen a road to 16 lanes if you want, you STILL run into choke points. You would have to eliminate choke points miles into VA and DC to make any difference. Look at the mixing bowl in Springfield, VA. You think that solved anything? You build an extra road, people will start to use it until eventually it is filled up with traffic. So, you widen the road or build another road. Wash, rinse, repeat. You can't eliminate every choke point.

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

The only solution, take people OFF the road. How do you do that? You certainly don't do it by forcing them to sleep where they live and do everything else 45 minutes from home. Build jobs and amenities here so they can either walk or take a short 5 minute trip. Then the need for roads won't be so bad. More roads is only a temporary fix until they too become congested. Once Whole Foods is built in Riverdale and East campus comes online, my longest commute will be to my job. Everything else will be within 5 minutes. That takes me off of other roads where I don't live adding to traffic in someone else's neighborhood. It's a chicken-egg thing really. Build more, hopefully at metro stations, to take more people off the road. Or, build roads, without revenue, and hope you have enough leftover to bring new development in. Revenue begets infrastructure. Not the other way around. Or, we can all vote to raise our taxes so we can pay for everything ourselves and not depend on development. Good luck trying to convince people to pay more taxes.

Can you do me a huge favor? If you have not done so already, I would ask if you would spend either tonight or tomorrow evening, maybe around 5:30-6ish and hit the road. Heck, take your wife with you too. Head down 95 and get on 210 south. Drive down to Accokeek. Tell us how long it takes you to get to Accokeek and also tell us what you think about the ride down. I think you might see things a little different.

The way I see it, they should add another lane and make that lane a HOV lane. That way they can use the park and ride lots that already exist in Fort Washington, Accokeek and Waldorf to push more people to use public transportation. But I think that plan makes way too much sense for it to happen. And the bottleneck isn't really that bad. Once you get pass the Palmer Road/Livingston Road intersection, the traffic reduces.