53 beers on tap

ZRA 113: building height, and a busy weekend for me!

I promised my take on building height within ZRA 113, and so here goes:

No recent single building in Howard County has garnered more feelings, good and bad, than the downtown tower.  For opponents, the tower represents a threat of more development to Columbia, development unchecked and unmanaged.  For proponents, the tower represents the promise of a modern Columbia, a symbol of a contemporary, upscale downtown, indicative of a place where residents can live, work, and play within an easy walk.

My view is, this project is all of these things, and more.  Moving forward from the tower, GGP has promised several buildings of greater than 20 stories in height.

Tall buildings are a relatively new phenomenon in Howard County.  Pre-Columbia, Howard County's tallest building stood a whopping four stories tall.  There was simply no need for tall buildings in rural, pre-development Howard County.  In fact, in many of Columbia's villages, covenants exist limiting building height to four stories.

Downtown is a different animal.  There is a vision in the current redevelopment plan of a high-rise, upscale apartment/condo building overlooking Columbia's "Central Park" in the crescent region.  There is the existing downtown tower and possibly a couple additional buildings.  Opponents to this portion of the plan call this a forerunner to greater development, including high-rises, in the villages.

Columbia was the civic entity in Howard County that brought tall building s here (I recall when Grande Pointe-- then Tor-- was marketed heavily for it's picturesque views of downtown from the top floors.)  Therefore, Columbia should be the entity to redefine tall buildings in Howard County.

I have no problems with the concept of building height in ZRA 113.  The existence of Grande Pointe hasn't started a skyscraper run here.  Nor has the downtown tower.  I doubt several additional buildings will either.

On another note:
If you read this week's fine Patuxent Publishing products, you know that the finalists for CA President are coming in this weekend.  As part of the Citizens Advisory Committee working on the search, I hope all will understand if I have to decline comment on the candidates at this time.  There are issues of confidentiality afoot and I don't want to steer into those waters, even accidentally.

However, I invite all to attend the public forum for the finalists, Sunday from 2-4pm at Stonehouse in Long Reach.  See you there!

More ZRA 113!

More thoughts come together on this whole ZRA 113 business:

4. There seems to be inadequate attention given to infrastructure in this petition.  Sorry, but I don't believe it's so hard to figure out how many people will live in the redeveloped downtown.  There should be projections that sholuld show how many people would come in during each phase  of redevelopment.  From there, the needs for schools and other public amenities could be determined.  I don't think the impact on public infrastructure has been fully fleshed out yet; it should be.

5. I think the mixture of affordbale housing in this petition feels just about right.  All the "Jim Rouse's vision" types keep going on about how The Great Developer wanted people of all socioeconomic classes to live together.  Great thing, that.  But the fact of the matter remains that since that time, affordable housing has become a problem to the development community.  Yes, it's because real estate remains overpriced, and the market is one where the goal is to sell as little land for as much as possible, but still-- the providing of affordable housing makes any developer blanche.  Ten to fifteen percent seems like the right number to me.

6. The transportation plan for Columbia should at this time, consider pedestrian and bicycle traffic ONLY.  A lot of well-intended people want to see some sort of little tramway system in Columbia.  Others want to see the Baltimore "yellow line" built out to Columbia, and Metro service extended to Columbia as well.  I will remind the well-intended that these little people-mover services don't make money, are highly subsidized by the local jurisdiction, and may be cute, aren't the most practical.   If these were different economic conditions I'd say, "Go for it"!  And I do think the plans should include upgradability of the transportation routes to include a low-impact, mass transit option like a people mover.  And a private company could establish a people mover from day one.  But not right now, when so many bigger issues need to be resolved.

Since I'm late with this post, a bonus thought:

7. Where the heck is the sustainability?  Greg Hamm and the powers that be at GGP, repeat after me.  "Downtown Columbia will be redeveloped in such a way so that, when complete, downtown will put as much into the grid as it takes out.  It will be carbon neutral."  My goodness, if he stood up and said that at a hearing, he could build a skyscraper in Columbia.

Building height?  A good place to start... next time!

Starting to put this ZRA 113 thing together...three thoughts

I've seen, witnessed, read, and otherwise absorbed a lot about ZRA 113-- the General Growth Properties petition for downtown Columbia redevelopment-- for some time now.  While I don't think my thoughts on this highly complex issue are fully thought out, there are some conclusions that come to my mind.

1. Some sort of plan has to be approved by the county, and soon.  Why?  Because while a plan for the sake of having one is a bad thing, no sort of blueprint to redefine Columbia for the next 40 years at all is unconscionable, especially in this region. 

2. While the petition is GGPs, the plan should endure regardless of GGPs involvement.  I admit, I don't know how "severable" zoning regulations are.  So should something happen with GGP's status, and their petition is approved, do the provisions of the petition fall to the successor?  What if there is no successor?  At any rate, given the considerable investment put forth by the county in the efforts to redevelop downtown, the county should approve a petition that the county would be happy to live with, regardless of who the developer is.

3. There needs to be a phasing plan put into place.  As Columbia was built in phases, so too does it merely make sense for downtown to be redeveloped into phases, underneath the general framework of the plan.

Tomorrow evening... more!  Affordable housing, transportation, infrastructure!