County planners last week gave a qualified thumbs up to General Growth Properties Inc.'s plan to redevelop downtown Columbia, citing the company's "substantial effort" toward achieving goals set by the county and hailing it as "bold and ambitious."

However, the planners urged that many of the promises made in the general plan amendment, which is not binding, be linked with the zoning regulations, which are binding, as a way of ensuring the company delivers on its promises.

In a lengthy technical report released Nov. 13, the county's zoning staff also urged that the plan be divided into five-year phases instead of the planned 10-year phases, with a list of projects that have to be completed at the end of each phase before the next phase can begin.

While the report found much to admire in the plan, which requires county approval, it also contained numerous concerns, some of which already have been raised by critics.

Among the report's concerns: building height limits that were deemed excessive in some places, traffic projections that were overly ambitious, a lack of information on how future development will pay for amenities and infrastructure, and worries about how village centers will remain compatible with retail downtown.

General Growth, the second-largest owner of U.S. shopping malls, owns the Columbia mall and six other shopping centers in Maryland. It also owns and develops planned communities and is the majority landowner in downtown Columbia.

On Oct. 1, 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. General Growth officials have said they hope to have the plan approved in spring 2009.

General Growth is reviewing the technical report and plans to make a presentation to the county Planning Board either in December or January, said Barbara Nicklas, vice president of marketing of master planned communities at General Growth.

Precarious time for GGP

The plans are being considered at a precarious time for the Chicago-based real estate investment trust. Stock in the company fell below the $1 mark last week amid concerns the company will not be able to refinance debt coming due by the end of the year and will have to declare bankruptcy.

Backers of the plan say General Growth's financial state makes it all the more urgent to put a plan in place for Town Center that will apply to any future developer if General Growth sells its stake in Columbia.

Critics, however, argue that the company's problems should make the county slow down and become more cautious.

Company spokesman Jim Graham said last week that General Growth wants to remain Columbia's developer, but regardless of whoever develops downtown, a plan should be put in place.

County Executive Kenneth Ulman said he is "optimistic" General Growth will be able to address the county's critiques. The company's financial troubles are not a good reason to postpone the plan, he said.

"Because of the uncertainty of General Growth Properties, I think it's important we continue to move forward," Ulman said. "If we pull back, it'll set us back a long way. I don't think we can afford to do so."

Ulman also lauded General Growth's plan, calling it "a reflection of the community coming together around certain values. I think we've come a long way ... Now we've got to roll up our sleeves and get this thing done one way or the other."

Emily Lincoln, a founder and spokeswoman of Bring Back the Vision, a group that supports the urbanized development of downtown, said her organization also favors speedy approval.

"We have a plan that any developer would need to subscribe to," Lincoln said. "I think that's critical. We can't take the chance of not putting a plan in place."

Critics: What's the rush?

But Alex Hekimian, who represents the village of Oakland Mills on the Columbia Association board of directors, said General Growth's financial state is a reason to slow down rather than speed up.

"Would you put your money in a bank that was going to fail?" Hekimian asked.

He said the technical report raised some valid points, and the county should allow General Growth to retool its plan rather than rush forward with hearings.

Alan Klein, spokesman for the Coalition for Columbia's Downtown, an organization that has been critical of General Growth's plan, noted the report raised some of the same concerns his group already had. He said he was particularly glad to see the county calling for shorter phases and a way to ensure promised amenities are made conditions of any approved development.

"That's, for us, the biggest single thing -- to ensure that this plan really is a plan, and that it be enforceable and required regardless of what happens to (General Growth)," Klein said.

A Planning Board hearing, without public comment, is scheduled for Dec. 11 at 7 p.m., at the Bain Center, 5470 Ruth Keeton Way in Columbia.

The first opportunity for public comment is Jan. 8 at 6 p.m., at the Bain Center. Additional hearings will be scheduled as needed.

After the Planning Board hearings, the County Council will set dates for its own hearings on the plan and ultimately make the final decision on it.

---

user comments (0)