Advertisement
You are here: Sun HomeCollectionsColumbia

Columbia Bill Still Up In The Air

Village Center Redevelopment, Affordable Housing Unresolved

July 19, 2009|By Larry Carson , larry.carson@baltsun.com

"Once you set density, it becomes a kind of target for developers," McLaughlin said.

Watson said she didn't want to see Columbia's retail centers turn into the sort of commercial jumble seen along U.S. 40, for example, in her district.

The issue arose because of the half-empty Wilde Lake Village Center, Columbia's oldest. It is one of six centers owned by Kimco Realty, which initially proposed to demolish it in favor of midrise apartment buildings and some retail convenience stores. Kimco officials now say they are not sure what to do with Wilde Lake until the recession eases.

Advertisement

Wilde Lake residents sharply objected to the first plan, and want the return of a grocery store. The small Giant at Wilde Lake closed in 2006.

The County Council was unable to agree Monday even on whether all village boards should be notified when a center property owner wants to redevelop one.

Greg Fox, a Republican, said that was duplicative and the boards could request information if they want it, but Councilwoman Jen Terrasa strongly supported wide notification.

Terrasa pushed an amendment that would require developers to give village boards at least 60 days to develop their own village center plan before the first community information meeting is held. That would allow residents to come up with a proposal before having to react to a developer's plan, she said.

McLaughlin suggested allowing minor changes in village centers, such as a store expansion, using the current process through General Growth and employing the new process for major redevelopment that introduces a new element, mainly substantial housing.

But that confused Ball. And Watson called it "hypocritical" to keep the old process when the effort had been undertaken to remove General Growth from the gatekeeper's role.

Others said the new process would have many more safeguards for residents and should be used in all cases.

Despite the lack of agreement, at evening's end, Watson declared it a "good discussion." She said members could propose amendments for public comment and a council vote.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|