tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16483028.post114747417668022649..comments2023-11-11T03:34:32.826-05:00Comments on HoCo Hayduke: Charrette update...Haydukehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09770056537577811703noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16483028.post-1147843113006591702006-05-17T01:18:00.000-04:002006-05-17T01:18:00.000-04:00I hope you are right about the mini-Central Park b...I hope you are right about the mini-Central Park being planned for somewhere other than Symphony Woods. Any pointers to additional info on this would be appreciated.<BR/><BR/>Traditional public transit systems have indeed been costly. Yet, desirable public transit systems can be done without lots and lots of money. (Ok, lots and lots may be relative here.) First, what are the attributes of a public transit system that would be welcomed and used? It should offer: convenience as close as possible to car travel, safety, energy efficiency, low environmental impact, minimal noise, speed, and economical construction and operation costs.<BR/><BR/>How about a system that has equivalent construction costs to a road, but has a much smaller footprint? A system that waits for you, not vice versa? A system that provides personal vehicles that drive themselves, chauffeuring you to your destination of choice? A system that quietly zips along on maglev rails at 100mph, 6x light rail speed, but costs 1/30th light rails construction costs? Is this <A HREF="http://www.skytran.net" REL="nofollow">system</A> something we should pursue?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16483028.post-1147815487665115442006-05-16T17:38:00.000-04:002006-05-16T17:38:00.000-04:00Aside from the school part, I think we pretty much...Aside from the school part, I think we pretty much agree. My understanding is that the plan for a mini Central Park involves a new parcel of land, and not Symphony Woods, which should and probably will always remain natural (to the extent that it currently is). The more active Central Park concept, I believe, would be placed somewhere amidst the future development. I also think we need a much better public transit system, but I'm not sure how we do it without lots and lots of money (which I would rather spend there than on expanding highways and other roads).<BR/><BR/>I'm writing a response to the school part now.Haydukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09770056537577811703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16483028.post-1147750341735553292006-05-15T23:32:00.000-04:002006-05-15T23:32:00.000-04:00Who can argue with more indoor artwork? Not I.Yet...Who can argue with more indoor artwork? Not I.<BR/><BR/>Yet, if General Growth wants to add many thousands of new residents to downtown Columbia, how can one imagine additional school capacity won't be needed in this area? And, if additional school capacity is needed, what is the alternative? Even more expansion of the nearest existing schools, furthering their departure from the neighborhood schools Columbia originally enjoyed and continuing their evolution into the educational/architectural equivalent of big-box stores? I don't believe town center can have a free lunch when it comes to adding lots more people without using some of the space for schools. <BR/><BR/>If General Growth wants more residential construction, ensuring nearby school capacity is a necessity. Otherwise, this remaining land in Columbia's heart should be stewarded perhaps in a manner more in accord with Rouse's agreement with the County when they last sought additional population density in the '80's.<BR/><BR/>Also, one slight correction, per the .pdf cited, elementary schools require a minimum of ~12½ acres (10 + 1 per 100 students), not 10. Interesting to note that that .pdf also mentions the ideal elementary school size is 510-660 students, but (per http://www.howard.k12.md.us/schools/enrollment2006_0430.pdf) we have several now near or over 800 students.<BR/><BR/>As to the parking lots accompanying schools, this can and should be addressed/reduced by getting serious about modern public transit. Columbia's original plan called for communitywide public transit. It is puzzling that a progressive community like Columbia hasn't more fully implemented cost-effective, environmentally-responsible public transit and instead continues to rely on 19th century technology for a 30-year transportation plan stretching into the middle of the 21st century.<BR/><BR/>Regarding a miniature central park, doesn't Columbia already have one - Symphony Woods (obviously along with the lakefront and CA paths)? It seems proposals in this incarnation of the Columbia town center vision will diminish the park that is Symphony Woods, not enhance it. Why remove mature trees in Symphony Woods to construct an ice rink that will only be used for a few months a year? I think a more appropriate location for an ice rink would be adjacent to the Mall (where one has been in recent years), where it will be more well attended, more accessible, and occupy existing paved surface.<BR/><BR/>Why replace Symphony Woods' natural woods ground cover with masonrywork, fountains, brickwork, etc.? There are many fountains to be found elsewhere in towncenter - the Mall, the Lakefront, near the buildings along Little Patuxent Parkway. <BR/><BR/>I just hope the 30-year plan's many references to creating "naturalistic" spaces (basically replacing true nature with managed artificiality) won't require Symphony Woods be renamed an unfortunately more appropriate Sym<B>phoney</B> Woods.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com