More on the Savage MARC station development

As I said yesterday, I think the type of development being proposed is generally good: it makes use of an already developed site, it is integrated with transit, it has a viable mix of uses, it will have a non-negligible amount of affordable housing, it is land efficient, and it’s in an area already well-served by public infrastructure.

But what about this?

The plan calls for two high-rise residential towers containing a combined 260 apartments, 53,000 square feet of mostly retail stores, two restaurants, 145,000 square feet of office space in two six-story buildings, a nine-story, 200-room hotel and five parking garages for 2,000 vehicles spread throughout the site.

It is a preliminary, conceptual plan that, for example, shows two 13-story residential towers, even though county height regulations limit buildings to 100 feet or about nine stories, according to Marsha McLaughlin, the county planning director, who also attended the event.

Hmm. The proposal, although preliminary, calls for buildings that are taller than what is currently allowed by county regulations. It will be interesting to see what happens with that, no?

For me, the height issue isn’t really a big deal, especially at this site and when compared to all the other facets involved in development. Height actually seems like a rather trivial and mostly aesthetic thing.

That said, context matters. Buildings that are too tall can disrupt the character of a neighborhood, but probably not as much as an overall bad development project, which this isn’t (and in this case, the existing character of the neighborhood is, well, not one where a tall building is going to be a downgrade).

Speaking of context, I absolutely hate development like we’re seeing on the Eastern Shore. Today’s dispatch from the other side of the Bay is ostensibly about an office park, but it's also more than that: development on greenfields and another verse from the popular hit “The Exurbanite’s Lament.”

Many of the new arrivals who have snapped up about half of the 67 homes at The Preserve at Wye Mills, houses priced at $500,000 or more, say that commuting across the bay is the price they pay for getting more house for their money in a tranquil setting surrounded by farm fields. Not surprisingly, they are wary of more development.

"Our community is only 60-some homes, so I don't see we're making that much impact," says Matthew Watson, 26, who drives about an hour each way to the marine service company he owns in southern Anne Arundel County. "I would not want to see any businesses that would draw more traffic."

To be sure, the impact of one additional person isn't that great. But to think that this development isn't part of and contributing to the bigger problem of sprawl on the Eastern Shore is willful ignorance. Field by field, new residents are destroying much of what brought them there.

Tuesday Round Up: Choose my adventure...

I had hoped to write more today, but the best laid plans and all that. Instead, here's another lame Round Up.

Bobby Guv was in town today to announce plans for a major new development on the parking lots of the Savage MARC station. Details, from The Sun:

The project would put pedestrian-friendly, urban-style communities on the 15-acre parking lot and encourage train use in a corner of Howard County that has long been targeted for upscale redevelopment.

...If the Savage Towne Centre concept is accepted by state and county governments, the state-owned station parking lot would be the site of 260 apartments in two high-rise buildings, a hotel, two restaurants, 53,000 square feet of retail space, a 145,000-square-foot office building and a five-story parking garage for 1,000 vehicles, according to a state fact sheet.

Leaving aside the horrible name with its pretentious spelling and poor grasp of geography (the site is nowhere near the "centre" of Savage) the plan sounds interesting, if possibly overly ambitious. Although it is near Fort Meade, a highway and transit (good things), the site is currently surrounded by lots and lots of industrial buildings and the county wastewater treatment plan, making me question how appealing it will be to buyers.

Then again, with a development like this sprouting up, can we really expect the industrial character of the area to persist forever?

More info and maps here.

I don't want to pile on, but reading this story from yesterday's Sun made me realize (again) how silly the whole Lake Elkhorn tot lot fence process has been. For instance:

Almost immediately, parents called for a review of safety measures at the playground, and the CA board responded, allocating up to $20,000 for a study and $30,000 for a fence, if needed.

But the study - a six-page report from the National Program for Playground Safety - found "no compelling need to place a fence" around the playground at Lake Elkhorn.

Angry parents denounced that finding, and the CA board, convinced that some barrier was needed, agreed to build a fence or landscape buffer. As recently as March, CA officials were predicting that construction would be completed in time for summer.

In the intervening months, however, the board has:

• Reviewed seven design options, ranging from leaving the playground as it is to putting a fence around the entire perimeter.
• Made a motion to approve the perimeter fencing plan after two board meetings of discussion.
• Scrapped the fence plan entirely and voted unanimously to close the Lake Elkhorn tot lot and remove the play equipment.
• Reversed itself once again and agreed to leave the lot open - and unfenced - after a meeting at which members were berated by a standing-room-only crowd of more than 100 angry parents and concerned residents.

Got that?

Have you noticed the poll on the right? Republicans are far outnumbering Democrats. What, I get no love from my own party? Seriously. I'm feeling a little lonely. And what about the Libertarians? HoCo Exile, you out there?

Finally, choose my adventure. The way I see it, I have two options for tomorrow night and I'll let you decide what I do. The first is attending the first meeting of the BRAC task force at 7 pm in the county office building. The second is moutain biking.

Now, if I go to the meeting, I probably wouldn't write about it until Thursday or Friday. If I go mountain biking, I'll write about the BRAC meeting on Friday, assuming the Sun writes a story about it (I'm counting on you, Larry).

I think the meeting would be interesting, informative and worthwhile, but not as enjoyable as moutain biking, which I haven't done in a week (a week!). Since I'm bad at making decisions, I'll let you decide. If, however, there's an insufficient number of votes, I'll just do whatever feels right tomorrow evening (which, in case you didn't notice, is really just my ambiguous escape clause).

UPDATE: I was just reminded by a reader that our Gov also announced today that Route 108 will be dedicated to the late Senator James Clark, who passed away last Friday. He also formally announced the renaming of Route 175 to the Jim and Patty Rouse Parkway. I saw Patty today with a large street sign that had her name on it. So, I guess she was there for the press conference.

We are not alone...Part II

A new report by the Brookings Institution examines land use regulations around the country, classifying regimes employed by local government into one of four orders -- Traditional, Exclusion, Wild Wild Texas, and Reform -- with each order further broken down into several families.

Howard County falls into the "Containment Lite" family of the Reform order. Jurisdictions in the Reform order, Brookings says, "use tools beyond comprehensive plans, zoning, and subdivision regulation to manage and control land use." Among these additional tools are the use of containment (target locations for development, like Priority Funding Areas or urban growth boundaries), infrastructure regulation, impact fees and building permit caps.

From the study:

As suggested by the title, "Containment Lite" means a moderate level of containment among the Reform families...But it also involves a more modest commitment to other growth management tools and a more active growth control agenda...permissive high-density zoning is less common...

The nuanced difference between growth management and growth control, according to the study, is that management emphasizes infrastructure regulation (APFOs and such) while control makes use of permit caps.

Since metropolitan areas were studied as a whole, some of the differences between us and our neighbors are washed out of the analysis. Howard County, it should be noted, makes use of just about every tool mentioned. We have an APFO. We have permit caps. We have a (state mandated) Priority Funding Area. We have zoning. We have comprehensive plans. We have density limits. And we have impact fees.

And, still, we have problems.

Judging from the study's findings about the impact of land use regulations, however, that we have problems managing growth shouldn't come as a surprise.

[L]ocal regulations shape the built form and character of cities, towns, counties, and entire regions. Zoning, Comprehensive plans, infrastructure finance, urban containment, building moratoriums, and permit caps can foster low density development and metropolitan decentralization or promote a more compact development pattern. They can also directly affect the socioeconomic composition of the local populace by opening or closing doors for renters and low-income people. Together, local land use regulations and hosing programs can produce regional equity or inequity, safeguard or undermine environmental quality and public healthy, and create a more efficient or inefficient patter of public services.

In short, land use regulations can be good or bad. Or, as the study more succinctly says, "it depends."

We are not alone...

Bethesda seems to get some people around here riled up.

It's not really the town itself, but rather the the idea of it and the possibility that our Town Center would come to look like it. Sure, Bethesda's got traffic and tall buildings, the former almost no one likes and the latter is more debatable. But it's also a nice place to walk around and it has good (and plenty) restaurants.

Compared to other town centers in the Washington metro region, Bethesda's not all the bad. It certainly ranks above Tysons Corner, a suburban, parking lot oasis that, like Columbia's Town Center, is poised for some big changes. In advance of those changes, however, a debate, also like ours, is raging.

Is Fairfax County's hope of turning Tysons from a car-clogged, outsize office park into a vibrant, walkable downtown for Northern Virginia achievable?

While the idea of a subway extension to Columbia is discussed in future terms, in Tysons it's a looming reality. The concern there is not whether trains will run through town, but how.

The debate over whether to build a tunnel or an elevated track is partly tied to this vision and whether trying to achieve it is worth risking the extension of rail service to Washington Dulles International Airport.

The main argument for building the $4 billion rail line underground for its four-mile Tysons stretch is that it would enhance Fairfax's efforts to create a pedestrian-friendly downtown, similar to what Arlington has achieved along a Metro line in its Rosslyn-Ballston corridor. Tunnel proponents say that this, combined with less disruption during construction, justifies the extra cost, which they estimate at $200 million, in addition to a year's delay.

...More broadly, the tunnel's critics express doubts that Tysons is capable of the metamorphosis Fairfax leaders seek. Skeptics say Tysons might be too far from the District and too well-established as a suburban commercial center to duplicate Arlington's success.

...There are reasons for skepticism. To become a true downtown, both supporters and detractors of a tunnel say, Tysons would need a grid of streets to replace the winding office park loops that congest traffic -- no easy task with two large malls, Tysons Corner Center and Tysons Galleria, sitting in the middle of the area and the Capital Beltway slicing across it. To be more urban, the area would need thousands more residents to support more after-hours activity (about 17,000 people live there, compared with about 100,000 who work there).

And it would need to become much more developed, particularly around the four proposed Metro stations, to put more destinations within walking distance of a larger population. With 17,000 acres, Tysons is as large as downtown Boston, but much of it is parking lots and swaths of scrub and trees.

Though the scale of Tysons is much larger than Town Center, many of the fundamental issues being debated -- namely, density and people/car movement -- are the same in both places. Interestingly, one of the critics of increased density in Tysons is a developer.

Among those doubtful of an urban transformation is John T. "Til" Hazel, the veteran developer and land-use lawyer credited with helping transform Tysons from a rural crossroads into one of the largest business districts in the country. Hazel said he favors a tunnel in principle but questions predictions of growth.

"What needs to be done is to have a serious review of the argument that you can densify Tysons because you have a train," he said. "I don't share this theory that Tysons is suddenly going to become a new Manhattan Island because you put rail on Route 7."

The article lacks specifics about how many more residential units would be part of the redevelopment, but it does say that the "county's plans call for allowing about 65 percent higher building density, mostly around stations, after the rail's arrival, but that would still leave Tysons less dense than much of the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor and far less dense than many downtown areas."

If I had to take a side after reading just this story, I would tend to agree with Hazel, but primarily because of Tysons' size.

At less than 600 acres, Columbia's downtown is compact and centered, with well-defined borders, and yet creating a comprehensive, realistic plan for its future development has proved more difficult than we originally thought. Once the plan is approved, however, managing growth will be pretty straightforward, if not entirely smooth (as is to be expected).

Meanwhile, Tysons is 17,000 acres -- larger than all of Columbia itself. To plan for comprehensive redevelopment on this scale is almost unimaginable, especially since you have to work with (or around) complex existing conditions and infrastructure and a plethora of buildings and landowners.

Also, this story illustrates how important it is to integrate future transit plans into Town Center now rather than trying to squeeze it in after more development has taken place.

Sunday Round Up...

I've already annoyed my wife and dog by spending much of my morning in front of this lifeless vacuum of a computer. It's probably best if I just plow through these stories as quickly as possible...

Grocery store elitists. Like the unnamed writer of this article, I used to be one. Then I started shopping at a Food Lion. I actually wrote a long, snarky post about this story but decided against posting it (it's just a grocery store, after all). Let's just say those of us in low-rent Oakland Mills like our low-rent Food Lion just fine, thank you very much.

More on those campaign finance reports, with a focus on Harry Dunbar and District 13. Talking about money never gets old.

Yay Bloggers!

To outsource or not to outsource?

That is the question facing the Columbia Association.

A Columbia Association committee is calling on the association's board of directors to turn down proposed restrictions on the outsourcing of work to foreign countries. A board member is pushing such restrictions as a way to support the local economy.

Meanwhile, the oversight committee will review the homeowner association's acquisition policy to see if any changes should be made in the association's policy on outsourcing.

"The real issue was ... that we need to address the process and the issue of acquisition," said Cynthia Coyle, acting chairwoman at Thursday's meeting. "We will review the acquisition policy and address any issues which may include some levels of discussion about outsourcing, but not to cancel outsourcing."

Phil Marcus, board member representing Kings Contrivance, presented the board with a motion last month that would require the board to have a majority vote on all outsourced overseas contracts of more than $25,000. His motion could come up for a vote as early as Thursday's board meeting.

Although I don't think outsourcing is itself bad, I'm generally in favor of using (quasi) public money to help strengthen our local economy. The more money that we circulate through the system -- as opposed to shipping it elsewhere, even if not to another country -- the better, as this money helps create and maintain jobs for our friends and neighbors. That said, sometimes it's just not feasible, economically or otherwise, to spend locally.

I would support a policy that allowed CA to spend a certain percentage above the lowest bid (say 5 percent) for contracts with companies that are locally-owned or primarily use local labor. The county already has something like this in place for spending on "green" products. Both policies recognize the hidden benefits of spending locally or green, benefits that may cost a little more up front but may pay off in the long run.

Although this policy wouldn't always result in the lowest prices for citizens, their money would go farther by staying close to home.

"He was one of the last real gentlemen of Maryland politics. He was mild-mannered but firm, a person who stood for principle all his life."

Former state senator, farmer and Howard County icon James Clark Jr. died yesterday. If you don't know much about his life, this story is really worth a read.

Thursday Round Up...

On one hand, this post could be seen as entirely pointless. On the other, it's all about point(ing).

With only a small amount of time available for blogging this evening, I was inclined to not post anything. But the post-or-die mentality that infects all bloggers was too overwhelming. So, here is a list of HoCo-relevant stories worth reading, as if you, a reader of this semi-obscure website, couldn't find them on your own.

WaPo looks at voter registration and finds many Howard Countians are eschewing parties in favor of the Big-I. What does it mean for this election? Considering Ehrlich carried the county in 2002 and Kerry did the same in 2004, who knows? More background here. Also, let me know what your voter registration card says in the sidebar poll.

Plan for energy co-op OK'd by Public Service Commission.

The Flier/Times profiles the primary races for the District 2 council seat. Democrats. Republicans.

Howard County's sheriff deputies endorse their boss's challenger. I wonder if things are a little uncomfortable at the office now.

At a glance: Wallis is on the ballot, BRAC committee to hold its first meeting next week, African American Coalition endorses candidates in primaries, HoCo's Madame to sit before a jury, and some other stuff.

David Wissing breaks down candidates' war chests. Governor. General Assembly. Comptroller. Attorney General. He promises county executive and council races soon. Let's hold him to it!

More substance and style tomorrow!

Cha-Ching!

Money, lots of it, is flowing into the campaign accounts of our party-affiliated, non-single-issue candidates for county executive.

Democrat Ken Ulman raised nearly double the campaign cash collected by Republican Christopher J. Merdon this year, as both battle to become Howard County's next executive.

In campaign finance reports prepared for filing yesterday, both County Council members reported totals that far exceeded what was raised by outgoing County Executive James N. Robey in his last two campaigns. Ulman already has accumulated more money than Robey spent in both of those efforts combined.

Ulman reported raising $364,427 to Merdon's $186,181 from Jan. 13 through Aug. 8. That gives Ulman a total of $575,000 raised so far, compared with Merdon's $449,445. Ulman also had $413,495 in cash on hand, compared with Merdon's $304,402 - a 25 percent advantage.

So, already over one-meeellion dollars has been raised for this race, and we've still got a few months to go. Of course, the next logical question after "How Much?" is "From Whom?".

Most of the money came to both candidates from big contributors, including developers, lawyers and business owners, the reports show, with 96 contributions of $1,000 or more for Merdon, and 143 in that category for Ulman. Ulman also raised significant amounts from people outside Howard County, including $500 from singer Sheryl Crow, who knows Doug Ulman, the candidate's brother, through his work with the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

I'm sure someone's going to pour over the donor lists and tell us in whose pockets our candidates reside, but I don't think we'll learn anything of value from that exercise. The fact is both candidates have a ton of money that came from all sorts of places, many of which are related to development in this county. Trying to keep score on this is like trying to count fleas on a dog.

The bigger issue, I think, is how much money will actually affect the election. Here's what the paid commentariat has to say:

Although Howard is a small county in which candidates typically spend money mainly on mailings and signs, University of Maryland, Baltimore County political science professor Donald F. Norris said money can make a difference in a tight race.

"I would imagine that if you ask the average Howard resident to name the five County Councilmen, they couldn't do it," he said, something money can help remedy.

Herbert S. Smith, a political science professor at McDaniel College, said money spent for offices and staff pay doesn't help as much as direct advertising.

"There are three important things - voter contact, voter contact and voter contact," Smith said.

Money can also mean support, said Matthew Crenson, a political science professor at the Johns Hopkins University.

"Most people who contribute to campaigns are investors. ... Investors choose [candidates] not just because they like them, but because they think they're going to win," he said.

So, some, not much, or a proxy for the outcome. Take your pick.

Although I try, I can't seem to work myself up too much about money in elections. Maybe I'm too jaded, but it seems that all the money in the world won't turn a bad candidate into a winner. Sure, some people are going to vote based on who looked best on TV, but on the whole I think most voters are smart enough to find some other reason to justify their vote than snazzy commercials (and for some, the amount of money raised by certain candidates is a reason to vote against them). Also, with both candidates raising and spending roughly the same amount of cash, the net result is probably a wash.

Tax cuts for some, miniature American flags for others…

Several low income households stand to benefit from a targeted tax break…

Some of Howard County's oldest homeowners could see the metropolitan area's most generous property tax cut - a reduction of 25 percent for those 70 or older with incomes of under $75,000 a year - if a proposal by two County Council members proves as irresistible this election year as they predict.

The bill, allowed under legislation unanimously approved by the General Assembly this year, goes farther than measures enacted this spring by Baltimore and Carroll counties, which slightly expanded credits offered under the state's homeowner's tax credit program for low-income families.

If approved by the five-member Howard County Council, the proposal unveiled yesterday would freeze the lowered property tax bills for older homeowners until the home is sold.

So, as property assessments have risen dramatically over the last few years, senior homeowners on fixed incomes have had trouble keeping up with their increasing tax bills. And since they don’t have children in the school system – our county’s largest financial obligation – mitigating incentives to move through a tax break helps slow the growth of our student population. That, and is it really fair to ask people on fixed incomes to subsidize the education of other people’s children?

On the whole, it seems like a good idea. The county’s current “circuit breaker” tax deferral program for low-income seniors places a lien on the property, which many people likely want to avoid, and it requires repayment of the deferred taxes when the property is sold, meaning families may lose a home that’s been passed down for generations. When this measure passed last year, however, actual tax breaks, rather than defferals, for seniors were not legal under state law.

My only real concern, which is in reality a much broader concern about taxes in general, is our penchant for carving up the tax code for certain groups. To be sure, the power of the tax code and the benefit of tax breaks can be used for good, but eventually we’ll cross a point where the whole thing is too complicated, too fragmented. We lose a bit of fairness with every each additional targeted tax break.

But what about the timing of this proposal? After all, Democrats on the council have taken a lot of heat -- particularly from Councilman and bill sponsor Charlie Feaga -- for having the nerve to do their jobs during an election year. Yet, here they (mostly) resist the urge to follow suit and instead express support for this Republican-led proposal.

"I think it's ironic that every piece of legislation we've introduced this year Feaga has called a political stunt; however, I don't care where or when a concept comes from. If it helps people and it's affordable, I'll support it," said Democrat Guy Guzzone.

Ulman said that "it sounds interesting. Clearly, I believe we ought to be helping seniors on a fixed income when we can."

I’m glad to see the Democrats supporting this; but, how could they not, especially if it's price tag -- $2 million -- is reasonable?

Lemme ask you this...

So, I've had several conversations last week with several different people about the upcoming elections and the state of local politics in general. So, what?

I know, it's rather unsurprising that someone who spends so much time writing about local politics would actually talk it about it, as well.

But, really, I don't like talking about politics. I actually actively try to avoid political discussions altogether, and something I've said many times on this blog is that we would probably be better off in local elections if they were entirely non-partisan.

Anyway, back to these unusual conversations. The gist of each was that the tone of this election season is especially harsh. Divisiveness is to be expected, my companions have said, but this year it has soared to new heights.

Now, I'd be lying if I said I didn't agree with most of those I've talked to, but, then, just a low level of rigid partisanship rankles me, even if I occasionally fall into its inviting trap.

Since I followed the 2002 election as a casual observer -- local blogs didn't exist back then, the dark ages -- I really have no apt comparison to use when judging the polarization of this election. The only other election in which I've been intimately involved turned ugly after the polls closed, in large part because of a mistake I made as a cub reporter. But that's a whole other story.

With respect to blogs, we've provided a forum for opinions that may not have been heard in elections past, meaning that the vitriol may have been there, albeit muted.

So, shifting the conversation to the virtual world, what do you think? Is this election season particurlarly hostile? If so, does partisanship help anyone? Hurt anyone? Is it a sign of things to come, or just a small bump in an otherwise smooth road?

Sunday Round Up...

And an abbreviated one at that.

While the dewpoint plummeted and the temperatures hovered around 80, I spent yesterday inside, working. And not because I wanted to.

So rather than waste another near-perfect day, I'm using this brief amount of time to basically point out some articles that you probably already read.

Oh, well: The Columbia Association decided against donating money to a new arts center at Howard Community College. It's my opinion that CA -- which is more than just a sports and fitness organization -- should devote a little more of its resources to funding cultural amenities. All but one of CA's board members disagrees with me.

The District 2 council race: Democrats debate zoning, Republicans split on whether to be kinder, gentler or, um, not.

We don't need no stinking facts...

Or maybe we do.

In the only televised forum for Howard County executive candidates prior to next month's primary election, Kenneth Ulman said he wanted to continue the quality of life that recently earned Columbia and Ellicott City national recognition, while opponent Harry Dunbar focused on slowing growth in the county.

...During the forum, Dunbar characterized Ulman, who sits on the County Council, as a candidate who puts the interests of developers first.

He said that Ulman met "in a back room" with the builders of a controversial 22-story condominium project in downtown Columbia to "seal the deal" on the project's construction.

After the Aug. 8 forum, in an interview, Dunbar said that he had no firsthand knowledge of the back-room meeting he said Ulman attended but that Del. Elizabeth Bobo was quoted in the Columbia Flier as saying that such a meeting had occurred.

Also following the forum, Ulman, who represents west Columbia, denied that any such meeting occurred and called Dunbar's accusation "patently false."

A check of the Flier's stories produced no references to Bobo saying that Ulman had met privately with the builders of the high-rise. Bobo, a Democrat from west Columbia, has been critical of the high-rise project, The Plaza Residences, which is under construction.

In February, she filed a complaint with the state's Open Meetings Compliance Board alleging that the Howard County Planning Board, which approved construction of the Plaza, regularly holds meetings in a separate room with petitioners and developers prior to public meetings and keeps no minutes of those meetings.

The compliance board ruled that the Planning Board had violated open meetings laws by keeping no minutes of a meeting that preceded a public hearing on the high-rise.

Ulman does not serve on the Planning Board.

Bobo could not be reached for comment. However, Ann Goldscher, a Bobo aide, said she spoke with Bobo about Dunbar's allegation and that Bobo said she had never accused Ulman of meeting privately with the Plaza's developers.

Isn't it amazing what you can find if you spend a little time looking?

Flier reporter Nate Sandstrom has earned my respect for actually reporting the facts, rather than just repeating dubious claims verbatim. More like this, please.

I built this garden for us...

Of all the cities to inspire use as we think about the future of Columbia's downtown, who would point to Chicago as an example to follow?

Skeptics snickered 17 years ago when Mayor Richard M. Daley added flowers and trees to the city's honey-do list. They scoffed at the apparent folly of beautifying a sprawling, gritty urban landscape, figuring Daley for a modern-day Potemkin.

A few tulips, they figured, would be the end of it.

But the city-kid mayor raised on the rough-and-tumble South Side stuck with it. The greening project grew strong roots, giving Chicago a reputation as one of the nation's most committed environmental cities of any size. The company it keeps is not Newark and Detroit, but Portland and Seattle.

...Since Daley began investing tax dollars in greening the city, Chicago has planted as many as 400,000 trees, according to city spokesmen. It employs more arborists than any city in the country. There are 2.5 million square feet of green roofs completed or under construction, boosted by expedited permitting and density bonuses for developers who embrace the concept.

The ground in downtown Columbia today is mostly a asphalt drainage system meant to channel rainwater as quickly as possible into the lake and nearby Little Patuxent river. Rather than overwhelm the surrounding ecosystem, redevelopment, if done right, can actually help stem the ongoing degredation. I am heartened to hear that the Downtown Focus Group is pushing for a broader discussion of green building. If only this effort could be expanded to include all county development.

You're only a day away...

Since this was mentioned in the Business Monthly recently, I think it's now fit for publication here, a news outlet with a considerably smaller -- but more dedicated, I hope -- base of readers.
I'm writing now from a meeting at the EnviroCenter, a very green building in Jessup, where a bunch of us have gotten together to discuss sustainability and how we can bring it to Howard County. Sponsoring tonight's chat is a group/growing coalition I've been working with for several months, Howard County Tomorrow.

Although we're probably not quite ready for prime time, a foundation of guiding principles and policies is available on the website, including this mission statement: "The mission of Howard County Tomorrow is to engage our citizens and stakeholders in the work of building an ecologically restorative, socially just, and reliably prosperous Sustainable Community in Howard County and the Baltimore Washington Region that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

Also on the website is an extensive, interactive and in progress Plan for a Sustainable Community. I know several tree huggers like me read this blog, and I'd be interested to hear their takes -- and those of non-tree huggers -- on this still-developing framework, which covers far more than just the environment -- for instance, equity, transporation, arts, affordable housing and historic preservation.

Outfoxed...

Just some housekeeping stuff to get through today...

In case you haven't heard, the Gang of Four (Local Bloggers) will be sponsoring an on-line candidate forum for most local elections beginning in October. More details here.

As for live, in-person forums, mentioned below is tonight's League of Women Voters forum at the county office building in Ellicott City. Although I had considered attending, I need to make up for mountain biking time lost because of yesterday's storms. A healthy mind needs a healthy body, or something like that. I set the TiVo set to record the forum, however, and I'll probably have some comments on it later tonight or tomorrow. If you do attend, feel free to use this post as an open thread to share your thoughts.

Speaking of spending time outside...

While walking the mutt this morning, I encountered an interesting critter on the trail. Luckily, I had my camera with me and zoomed in to capture this shot:


Sorry about the blurriness. This photo was taken from about 70 yards away.

At first I wasn't sure what it was, but now it seems pretty clear that it's a fox. What confused me initially was the length of his coat, which is far shorter than any other fox I've ever seen. Is this just what they look like in the summer, or is there some other explanation for why it almost looks like he's been shaved? He also appears to be pretty big, though it's hard to tell from this photo.

Missing intrigue...

I'm a little upset that the Democrats are lacking a primary battle as bitter as that being waged by the Republicans (and turncoats) in District 5. Both of my Republican blogging peers feel very strongly about this race, with one urging party-mates to "stay on message" with a bulleted list of Wayne Livesay's Greatest Hits.

While the Democratic primary in District 4 is going to be close and hotly contested, it lacks the intrigue and visible acrimony of the fight in western HoCo. And if we let the Republicans beat us in in-fighting during the primaries, we've already lost.

And with that, I call on Joshua Feldmark, Mary Kay Sigaty and darkhorse UNcommon to turn tonight's forum into an all-out, steel cage death match.

Or at least they could start by spewing more invective. Extra points for working in a reference to Bentsen's "Jack Kennedy" quote ("I know Ken Ulman. Ken Ulman is a friend of mine. (Opposing Candidate), you're no Ken Ulman.") or even some random, poorly-placed reference to the sexual orientation of a family member.

UPDATE: I think we all hope our local campaigns don't come to this (I highly recommend watching the accompanying video).

Programming notice...

The League of Woman Voters will host a candidates forum tomorrow (Tuesday, Aug. 8) at 7 pm in Tyson Room of the George Howard Building. Only county executive and council candidates involved in primaries will be featured. For those of you who enjoy your county government at a comfortable distance, the forum will be televised on Gtv (Comcast channel 70, currently unavailable for any early adopters of Verizon FiOS TV).

Round Up: Oakland Mills Edition...

A bevy of news stories recently chronicled the redevelopment situation in Oakland Mills, home of the sweetest Coke in Columbia and the county’s Best Blogger Named after a Fictional Character. Ah, it is truly magical here on the east side.

Anyway, the trajectory of Oakland Mills – specifically its village center – isn’t really news. After the anchor grocery store left in the late 1990s, the center’s decline, which was already underway, accelerated. Other, smaller stores closed and the gas station disappeared, leaving a vacant slab of asphalt in its place. Then, the center was redesigned, losing practically all of its character while gaining (for a time) only temporary tenants. The symbolic low point was probably when the Columbia institution the Last Chance Saloon lived up to its name.

More recently, however, things have been looking up. The community is reenergized, in part thanks to the work of current councilman Calvin Ball, who worked for a year as the Oakland Mills Community Organizer. The village center has a stable anchor tenant, the vastly underrated Food Lion (not to ruin the secret for fellow OMers, but no lines, cheap prices and a nice selection of organic/natural foods turned me – a diehard Giant person since birth – into a MVP Club member). And in the last year, a new bar opened in Last Chance’s old spot.

Now, as reported in The Examiner last week, long underserved Oakland Mills is actually worrying about being over-served.

The Oakland Mills Village Board in Columbia is busy refurbishing its village center — but a new strip mall that may be built less than a mile away could take away some of the center’s business.

…However, its efforts may collide with developer Robert Bavar of Bavar Properties, who owns about 2.5 acres where Branch Banking & Trust is located at Thunderhill Road and Route 175. He plans to build a different bank and about 9,000 to 10,000 square feet of retail.

“We are doing everything we can to support our businesses. We want to make sure that having competition a half-mile away is not overkill,” said Barbara Russell, the Oakland Mills representative for the Columbia Association Board of Directors.

Bavar will present plans for the buildings to the Oakland Mills community at a meeting at 7:30 p.m. Aug. 29 in The Other Barn on Robert Oliver Place in Columbia. He didn’t say which businesses will be included in his strip.

Oh, the troubles prosperity brings.

I hope to attend the meeting, if for nothing else to see what the new buildings will look like. Since I live on the other side of the village, I don’t know if I’ll ever patronize this new convenience strip, but it’s good to see a long vacant building being put to use again.

Just as it’s good to see the redevelopment of an empty, asphalt lot.

The vacant lot of a former Exxon Mobil gas station may become an office building, potentially prompting development in the Oakland Mills Village Center in Columbia.

…Oakland Mills Village officials said Exxon Mobil and Baltimore-based Metroventures USA Inc. recently agreed on the deal to build a condo-style office building on the lot on Stevens Forest Road near Robert Oliver Place.

…Previous proposals for the land have fallen flat. About a year ago, a developer proposed senior housing there, but covenants restrict selling land which was used for a gas station for the development of residential units...

Well, I’m not particularly thrilled about office buildings; ideally, I would like to see them build a mini-golf/go-kart/rollercoaster fun town there. But given the complications of bringing so much fun to the area (not to mention the liability), I understand that an office building is probably a much wiser choice for the developer. But would it kill them to throw a little retail in there, too?

Finally, the last story involves the only pedestrian (and bicycle) link between east and west Columbia: the Route 29 footbridge. Although his rhetoric might be a little overheated, Oakland Mills village board member Phil Engelke does a good job of summarizing our connection problems.

“Route 29 is like the Berlin Wall between East and West Columbia,” said Phil Engelke, property and business chairman on the Oakland Mills Village Board.

The path, tucked behind Lake Kittamaqundi and linking the Town Center to the Oakland Mills Village, will be key as the Town Center is redeveloped into an urban area, he said.

“People are paying half of a million on the Town Center side, and we have fairly derelict apartments on our side,” Engelke said.

“If you could connect the two, it would wildly improve the property values in Oakland Mills,” he said.


He’s right. A stronger link would be very beneficial for our village and much of east Columbia. As for me, I’m strongly in favor of a better connection between Columbia’s halves for entirely selfish reasons: 1) I’d like to see my property’s value increase; and 2) I’d like my commute to be even easier, which already happened to some extent when the bumpy path leading to the bridge was recently (finally!) repaved.

There are plenty of ways of accomplishing these goals (that is, the broader community goals, not mine in particular). During the charrette, many people spoke of the need to reduce the barrier caused by Rt. 29, and it is heartening to see that some of the good ideas brought forth by citizens are now being considered more intently. Among them, according to the Examiner, are “widening the path, installing lights, improving signs, encouraging kiosk vendors to set up shop, creating a dog park adjacent to the path, planting gardens along the path, and lowering the grade to make it accessible for wheelchairs and bikes.”

Some have proposed even more ambitious ideas, including a road connection and commercial development around or on the bridge. Ultimately, such development may prove feasible and essential to creating a whole town center. But it will come in time if needed. For now, I’ll welcome any improvements to make the bridge more useful and Columbia more connected (and, of course, my life easier and my house more valuable).

Mixed up...

You can officially add "mixed use" to the list of buzzwords that once represented something but now seem to mean, well, whatever.

Like smart growth before it, "mixed use" has become the word du jour for developers wishing to show how enlightened their otherwise banal new subdivisions will be. The latest example: Shipley's Grant.

“We are people who believe in really trying to create a community,” said John Slidell, a partner with The Bozzuto Group, which plans to break ground next month.

The 58-acre planned community, called Shipley’s Grant, is between Route 108 and Snowden River Parkway, backing up to Route 100.

The Bozzuto Group, based in Greenbelt, has acquired half the land with the remaining land being developed in phases during the next six or seven years, Slidell said.

The developers wanted to create a “traditional village feel,” Slidell said.

...The Shipley’s Grant complex will include 396 town houses and condominium residences, 62 of which will be built during this first phase. It also will have 40,000 square feet of retail space, such as a food store, coffee shop, dry cleaner and other convenience retail, said Rob Bavar, vice president of Bavar Properties Group, which is developing the retail portion.

Oh yeah, throw "village" onto that list, as well.

I generally support the concept of mixed use but not the predominate practice of it. In theory, such developments encourage less driving, more efficient use of land and a stronger "sense of place." In realty, they generate just as much if not more traffic, use roughly the same amount of land and do nothing to actually foster community. They're just regular old subdivisions with a few shops on the side.

Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. Maybe Shipley's Grant is better than I'm giving it credit for. I can't say for sure since I haven't seen the plans. But looking at the mix of houses and commercial space, it's pretty easy to see that few of the neighborhood's future residents will be commuting or running errands on foot or bicycle. At least they'll be close to a highway!

Although I'm not, many people are opposed to growth and perhaps rightly so if this is the type of growth we're accustomed to; it's certainly not the type of growth I support, however.

When I think about growth, I try to look at it in two ways: 1) Inevitable, at least until we enact massive, macroeconomic changes; and 2) potentially beneficial.

Like diamonds, developable land in Howard County is both limited and extremely desirable, meaning people are willing to pay handsomely for it. And it seems to me that if we put these factors to work for us, rather than against us, we have the opportunity to generate significant benefits for current and future residents of this county.

Affordable housing and jobs are oft-cited examples of the benefits of development. So is the possibility of a stronger transit system. But what about the environment or schools or our infrastructure, three things typically considered to decline in quality with an increase in population? Could we actually flip that logic on it's head?

Could we pair development with mandatory set asides for schools, as opposed to the too low impact fees and occasional "proffers" we accept now? What if, instead of requiring the construction of silly stormwater management ponds, we required developers to engage in stream and watershed restorations at the same time we enacted stronger "green" building codes? What if we made developers pay for land preservation? What if we changed parking requirements in mixed use areas to create a disincentives for driving or forced integration of transit systems into subivision plans?

I don't want to get into making an even longer list of "what ifs," but it seems to me that our perspective on growth will dictate to a large extent the type of growth we get. If it's always perceived as bad/costly/undesirablereable, then, chances are, that's what it's going to be. If, however, we look past the challenges and focus on the opportunities, we stand a much better chance of realizing the benefits of growth, mitigating its costs and getting what we really want: a great place to live.