General Growth's plans for downtown Columbia are largely what county officials and local activists said they expected, but questions remain about the project's timing and how the vision will be carried out.

Officials and activists who were asked about the recently unveiled plans raised a long list of concerns, including how to make sure General Growth does what it is promising, whether the roads and other public amenities will be adequate to handle the increases in traffic and people, and how the ambitious project will be phased in.

The company formally submitted its long-awaited, 30-year plan to redevelop downtown Columbia with 5,500 residential units, 5 million square feet of office space, about 1.25 million square feet of retail space and hundreds of hotel rooms Oct. 1.

The submission includes a general plan amendment that is about 70 pages long, along with a traffic study, design guidelines, a sustainability plan, an adequate public facilities amendment, a zoning regulation amendment and an environmental study.

Also see:

• Five neighborhoods with unique personalities
• Columbia plans on course despite General Growth's struggles
• Downtown plan emphasizes transit, housing, arts and the environment

While the general plan presentation sets up a vision for the future of downtown, the nuts and bolts are to be found in the zoning regulation amendment and other technical documents, county officials and activists said.

Alan Klein, spokesman for the Coalition for Columbia's Downtown, said the county needs a way to make sure General Growth follows the plan. He was among several people who said the general plan by itself is not a binding legal document.

"If there's no teeth in it, there's no teeth," he said. "Anything they agree to has to be independently enforceable."

Members of the County Council-- who must approve the plan-- said this week they were still reviewing the documents but that certain aspects would need special attention.

County Council chairwoman Courtney Watson said she would be taking a close look at the company's proposed amendment to the adequate public facilities ordinance to make sure the redevelopment can handle the anticipated level of traffic.

County Council member Mary Kay Sigaty, a Democrat whose district includes downtown Columbia and who submitted the paperwork on behalf of General Growth, said she thought there would need to be more discussion about the phasing in of the plan. For instance, she said, it would not be desirable to have all of the residential units built out before any of the public amenities were completed.

The general plan sets out various goals for the three phases, which are tentatively planned in 10-year time frames, and outlines the number of units that would be complete at the end of each phase. Some council members, including Jennifer Terrasa, recommended having certain public facilities ready as certain levels of retail, commercial and office space are completed.

"I see my role as making sure that there are adequate controls in the process," said Terrasa, a Columbia Democrat.

Council member Calvin Ball, also a Columbia Democrat, said he was "intrigued" by the environmental aspects of the plan and wanted to delve more into the proposal for mixed-income housing. He also thought a discussion should begin about the village centers and how the villages close to downtown fit into General Growth's overall plans.

"I think people are still digesting it," Ball said. "From what I've heard, there are those who think the broad strokes are definitely in the right direction, others who have concerns about details of the implementation."

Phasing is 'critical'

State Del. Elizabeth Bobo said she would be paying close attention to the project, in part because of the possibility that state money might be pursued for some transportation and environmental aspects of the plan.

Bobo, a Democrat who represents part of Columbia, said she was also concerned about the enforceability of the general plan and wanted to see guarantees about how the residential, retail and office space would be phased in over time.

"I think phasing is a critical element of whatever plan is approved," she said.

Jud Malone, president of Columbia Tomorrow-- a citizen's advocacy group that focuses on downtown redevelopment, among other issues-- said he was pleased with the overall plan, especially the effort General Growth made to address environmental sustainability and restoration. Columbia Tomorrow plans to consult experts in the community to get their critiques, but Malone said he thought any changes the company makes will likely be minor.

"It's largely reflective of what we've been discussing for three years," he said.

David Yungmann, one of the leaders of Columbia 2.0, said having the plan submitted was a huge milestone in itself. His organization aims to involve young adults in the planning process and has supported significant change for downtown, he said.

"We've done a lot of talking and had a lot of discussion, but now's the time to move it forward," he said.

The county Department of Planning and Zoning and other agencies are reviewing the proposals and will issue a report in about a month. It will then be another month before any public hearings are held before the Planning Board on the proposal.

The plan will eventually go before the County Council for approval, a process General Growth has said it hopes will happen in spring 2009, but Watson has described that time frame as "optimistic."

---

user comments (0)