Five years of talks, proposals and hearings on plans for rejuvenating central Columbia are entering their final phase, but the Howard County Council will likely hold public information sessions before legislation is introduced, members said.
The two-part plan would become two separate bills crafted by General Growth Properties, Columbia's master developer, said council Chairwoman Mary Kay Sigaty, a West Columbia Democrat who represents the area most affected by the 30-year redevelopment plan.
The bills would be considered together, she said, and the council wants to give the public time to study the measures before they are introduced. Once submitted, the bills are subject to legal time limits.
"The goal is for them to prepare something by early October," Sigaty said. "That's what GGP wants me to do. Since they requested it, I'm not going to say no."
General Growth Properties would be well advised to include as many of the recommendations made by the staff and the planning board in the legislation as possible, she said.
Gregory F. Hamm, GGP's general manager for Columbia and a company vice president, said he agrees with the council's approach and that he expects the bills to be ready by early next month. The overriding issue, he said, is that the General Plan Amendment be enforceable through the zoning laws adopted with it.
"Obviously, it's a very complex piece of legislation," Hamm said. "We want to be as responsive as we can."
After a Columbia plan is approved, he said, it would be at least two years before ground is broken on the project's first phase, if economic conditions have improved enough to make capital available from banks.
The plan submitted a year ago calls for up to 5,500 new residential units, 4.3 million square feet of office space, 1.25 million square feet of new retail space, hotels, cultural buildings, plaza walkways and amenities in a more urban style that would create a real downtown around Columbia's central shopping mall.
However, General Growth Properties is under bankruptcy protection, so work on the ambitious project could be years away.
By Oct. 5, the council's new Granicus computer software system is scheduled to be operating, which would enable residents to view council meetings at home on their own schedule if they cannot attend or watch the sessions live.
"I see that as valuable," Sigaty said.
She rejected the planning board's request that the council adopt the conceptual portion of the General Plan Amendment and then allow the board to spend more time revising the technical language in the Zoning Regulation Amendment that would actually change county law.
"I am still of the opinion that the two pieces of legislation need to travel together. That was the original idea and plan," she said, and it's important that the public get the chance to see them as a package.
At a political fundraiser Monday afternoon in Columbia's Town Center, Sigaty gave a bit more insight into her thinking.
"It is our turn to grab hold of our city and take our city forward," Sigaty said. She asked whether current leaders have the "strength, sensitivity and courage" to make "tough decisions" and go forward, as the county's three commissioners did in 1964 when they embraced the original nine-page plan for Columbia submitted by its developer, James W. Rouse.
Although some disagree with considering the two measures together, most of the council members and County Executive Ken Ulman support Sigaty's view.
Alan Klein, spokesman for the Coalition for Downtown Columbia, a group that has questioned many aspects of General Growth Properties' plan, disagrees.
"You need the General Plan Amendment first - before you get into the ZRA," he said.
As the board's discussions continued over the past five months of work sessions, he said, "I was more and more impressed with how complex the whole thing is. It's way too big to bite off in one chew."
But the two other council members who represent Columbia agree with Sigaty.
"My preference is that the GPA and the ZRA be evaluated in conjunction with each other by the community," said Calvin Ball, an East Columbia Democrat.
Jen Terrasa, a Democrat who represents King's Contrivance and Owen Brown, agreed.
"It needs to stop being a moving target," she said. To separate the two "would frustrate people. They're so intertwined."
Greg Fox, a Fulton Republican, said the 30-year plan affects the entire county, so he would not simply defer to the members who represent Columbia.
"I'm still open on it," he said, though he expressed concern "with the amount of time the Planning Board is taking." With the recession still hurting the economy, he said, the county must be careful about slowing projects that could go forward and help.
Klein said he worries about whether the proposed 5,500 new residential units are too many, and if that number gets into the zoning regulations, what that would mean.
"We're still right where we have been - the impact on the community," Klein said. "The worst thing we can do is grant the entire density up front."
But Jud Malone, who heads another group generally supportive of GGP, agreed with Sigaty, Terrasa and Ball.
"As far as I'm concerned, [the planning board's] had their say," Malone said. "It's time to make decisions."
Ulman said he favors both bills going forward in tandem, giving the county a firm plan for whomever may emerge as the developer once the recession eases.
"This is the time when we should be doing the planning," he said.
