CoFoCoDo Advocates Agenda that is Counter to Rouse

The kind, well-intentioned, leaderless organization has been railing against the GGP downtown plan. One of the primary criticisms has been what CoFoCoDo “spokesman” Alan Klein calls phasing. “Spokesman” Klein was quoted recently on the Explore Howard blog (Groups weigh in on plan for downtown Columbia):

Klein said his group would like to see GGP’s plan broken into five-year phases rather than 10-year phases, which he said would ensure that each development stage is not approved unless certain goals are met.

A few days later, Alan Klein expanded on this theme via the HCCA Yahoo-Group:

In addition, it is vital that the additional density which GGP is asking for be phased in, through separate votes by the Council over time, rather than being granted up front, as they are asking for now.

What is intriguing about this stance by the “leaders” of CoFoCoDo is its hypocrisy. On the CoFoCoDo website, the “organization” states:

CCD wants to ensure that a vibrant Downtown Columbia emerges from the redevelopment planning process and that the plan remains true to the founder's vision for Columbia.

But let’s go back and look at the beginning. When Rouse first proposed Columbia, there was opposition to the project:

Still worse from Rouse’s standpoint, the [Howard County] commissioners issued a set of “guidelines” to the Howard County planning commission that sounded like flat rejection of several indispensable ingredients of the new city. The commissioners declared themselves opposed to row-house development. They warned that they would not “in any case” rezone the entire site for the city at one time. The commissioners were, they reiterated, committed to low-density development of Howard County.
Columbia and the New Cities, Gurney Brekenfeld, pp. 267-268, Ives Washburn Inc, New York, 1971

Sounds familiar?

Another interesting passage relating to the same discussion appears in “Creating a New City- Columbia, Maryland,” edited by Robert Tennenbaum:

[R]ouse contended that it was necessary for all of the property to be rezoned in order to obtain the financing for the project.

When the Commissioners began to deliberate after the close of the hearing, there were strong inclinations by Commissioners Force and Miller to rezone only the Town Center and the first village in order to provide a basis for a trail period.
Creating a New City – Columbia, Maryland, Robert Tennenbaum, p. 101, Perry Publishing, Columbia, 1996.

CoFoCoDo – 1965 is calling…

As Rouse insisted it was essential, the [Howard County] commissioners voted to rezone the entire property at once. [Attorney for the Howard County Commissioners Lewis] Nippard explained to me why, “We’ve had extremely good relations with these [Rouse] people, even though we’ve had differences. If we zoned less than the entire tract at once, they being practical people could take the stand that the county had hedged its bet and ‘we would have to do the same.’ We decided to indicate complete faith and let them develop at the pace the market will allow. Besides, wherever we drew a line, it wouldn’t be the right place.”
Columbia and the New Cities, Gurney Brekenfeld, p. 272, Ives Washburn Inc, New York, 1971

So on one hand, CoFoCoDo declares their intention “that the plan remains true to the founder's vision for Columbia,” while taking a position that was flatly rejected by Rouse.

Hopefully the CoFoCoDo “leadership” will reconsider their position and have “spokesman” Alan Klein re-issue a statement that CoFoCoDo supports the vision and actions of James Rouse.

The 5500

5500. Sometimes, it’s a hard number to comprehend. I do not believe I have 5500 of anything in my house. (Blades of grass? Perhaps). My son has about 150 Lincoln Logs. Given how they look when spread out on the family room floor, I would loathe the thought of 5500 logs.

On the other hand, 5500 can, at times be put into perspective. Anyone who possesses a valid drivers license has certainly lived more than 5500 days. 5500 seconds passes by in just over 90 minutes. Most people will put 5500 miles on their car odometer in about six months.

The point here is that the number 5500 can seen as both a large or small number. In the recent past, we have heard some make outlandish claims about the perceived impact of 5500 units. Four times the size of Wilde Lake (uh, incorrect), more residential units than Wilde Lake and Oakland Mills combined (er, not quite). The largest project in Howard County since the approval of Columbia. Well, I’m not so sure.

Of the examples I have provided above, the odometer example is most telling. The 5500 miles could be characterized as driving approximately 20% around the equator. Or it could be characterized as six month of normal driving in this area. Both are valid, but each paints a different picture. What I believe is crucial in the odometer analogy (and the proposed housing units) is that both are described in terms of a magnitude and a time.

Moreover, if a temporal aspect is placed into the examples stated above, the 5500 pales in comparison; given that Wilde Lake and Oakland Mills were both 95% completed within ten years, and that combined both Oakland Mills and Wilde Lake are slightly more residential units than the proposed 5500. As stated, the 5500 time line is 30 years. So downtown development will create less units than Oakland Mills and Wilde Lake combined, and the proposed development will occur at a pace three times slower than that of Oakland Mills and Wilde Lake.

With respect to the largest project, this theory is on fairly shaky ground. Census data reveals that over 90% (92.43%) of the 92,818 housing units built in Howard County were built after 1960. So let’s compare. In the last 48 years, 85,790 housing units were built in Howard County (of which approximately 30,000 units are in Columbia). GGP proposes building 5500 units over the next 30 years.



Breaking this down by decade:

The entire downtown development proposal could have easily been accomplished during the 1960’s. Three downtowns could have been accommodated during the 1970’s, four downtowns in the 1990’s and five downtowns in the 1980’s.

Another way of looking at historical development in Howard County is by housing permits issued. I have charted data obtained from the Baltimore Metropolitan Council of Governments (Economic Outlook 2006) below:



To provide context, here are the terms of office of each of the Howard County Executives.

1969-1973 Omar J. Jones
1974-1978 Edward L. Cochran
1978-1986 J. Hugh Nichols
1986-1990 Elizabeth Bobo
1990-1998 Charles I. Ecker
1998-2006 James N. Robey

Certainly, each administration, since the creation of the Howard County Executive, issued enough permits during his/her tenure to allow for a downtown Columbia to be built.

In conclusion, 5500 as a number can appear to be very large. However, given its application over time, 5500 is not as big a number as some may perceive. Given the prolific construction of over 80,000 units in the last forty years, 5500 units in the next thirty is small by comparison. Moreover, each past administration has seen fit to approve housing permits well beyond the scale of the proposed downtown development.

Sometimes, you get what you ask for

As has been noted here and elsewhere, things have been somewhat quiet on the downtown development front. I believe this in part because the people at CoFoCoDo have been quietly popping champagne corks and celebrating a job well done.

The reason? In January 2007, CoFoCoDo set their terms for density.

From their position paper "Framing the Future of Downtown Columbia," page 5 [emphasis mine]:

We favor the continuing development of Downtown, but there are many models of diverse and vibrant downtowns. We offer Georgetown and Annapolis as examples of communities that do not rely on high density to provoke an exciting sense of place. These locations are especially interesting, and they exude excitement...

and on page 13, under the banner "Human Scale,"

We note that there are many models of diverse and vibrant downtowns. We offer Georgetown and Annapolis, not as models to copy – because Columbia does not need to copy anything - but as proof that communities do not need to rely on excessive density to have an exciting sense of place.

Well, a little research demonstrates how well informed the good people of CoFoCoDo are. According to the United States Census, Georgetown would fit nicely into the current downtown plan.

Georgetown:

• Area (acres): 676
• Dwelling Units: 4976
• Population: 8524

Columbia Town Center:

• Area (acres): 570
• Dwelling Units: 5500
• Population: 7000 - 10,000 (??)

Data for Georgetown was obtained from the US Census, District of Columbia Census Tracts 1 and 2.02. Columbia Town Center data obtained from the Howard County Government website and the GGP presentation.

Kudos to CoFoCoDo for leading the way on this issue. Sometimes it's so nice to get what you ask for.

...and Speaking of CoFoCoDo...

Our friends at our favorite coalition have once again put out some poorly researched information. Currently featured on their website under the banner "CCD's Response," is the following:

"We are quite concerned that he [Greg Hamm] is insisting on proposing 5500 new residential units, three to four times the size of Wilde Lake"

Let us look past the "insisting on proposing" construct and move directly to the math. CoFoCoDo states that 5500 residential units is three to four times the size of Wilde Lake. That would put the number of residential units in Wilde Lake somewhere between 1375 and 1834 units.

One problem...it's totally false. According to the Columbia Association's 2007 Public Information Guide (page 18), Wilde Lake currently has 2618 residential units. Given that half the CA Board of Directors (Alex Hekemian (OM), Evan Coren (KC), Cynthia Coyle(HC), Michael Cornell (RH), and Phil Kirsch (WL)) are members of CoFoCoDo, maybe one of them could supply a copy of the Guide to the rest of CoFoCoDo.

Beyond the math error, I wonder what is really going on at CoFoCoDo. When I hear spokesperson Alan Klein make a speech, testify at County hearings, or speak out a community meetings; he sounds so confident, so forthright. Why is it that other parts of the organization succumb to embellishment or exaggeration (Columbia is the 2nd best city east of the Mississippi, 5500 units is four times the size of Wilde Lake) to make a point? It seems if they were right, the truth would suffice.

What Happened?

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

In 2006, Money magazine put the Columbia/Ellicott City region as number four on their list of best places to live. Many of the CoFoCoDO/HCCA variety loudly proclaimed that Columbia was anointed the best place to live east of the Mississippi River. Although this error was brought to their attention (Naperville, IL is the best place to live east of the Mississippi), many continued to broadcast the fallacy at meetings and around town. Funny, they almost always talked about Columbia and not the Money magazine's marriage of Columbia/Ellicott City.

In 2007, the magazine looked at smaller communities and Elkridge was ranked Number 42 (where was the HCCA love for Elkridge?)

Now in 2008, small cities (Money magazine's nomenclature, not mine) are back in play, and the Ellicott City/Columbia area is ranked 8th. We are now 3rd or 4th best east of the Mississippi (I'm not certain where Plymouth, MN is with regard to the big muddy, but I will look it up later).

Click here for the rankings from 2006.

Click here for the rankings of small towns (including Elkridge) in 2007.

Click here for the rankings from 2008.

Anyone have any ideas why the precipitous drop? Compass eyes and ears would like to know.

Letters Place Political Spin above Community

By all accounts, the Columbia 40 celebration and city fair were a great success. It was a time and place to celebrate this special community; good food, great entertainment, a chance to reminisce with old friends and share experiences with new friends. Most of all, I believe it was a chance to put aside differences and enjoy each others company. As I began reading the Letters to the Editor in the Columbia Flier this week, I thought Lloyd Knowles had a similar remembrance:

For the past month or so the Columbia downtown has been jumping. The arts festival, the extraordinarily revived City Fair, Clyde's Thursdays, Mr. B's movies, bluegrass music, the fireworks! Hundreds of thousands of souls roaming around having fun, day after day.

But then he shows his true intent:

And all this vibrancy without a single dwelling unit having been added to Town Center. I believe this experience shows that a vital, exciting downtown can be achieved with events and destinations mixed in with a moderate residential expansion. If you give people reasons to come downtown, they will.

I think it is shameful to use the celebration downtown to further a political agenda. Beyond the politicizing of the downtown festivities, there are other problems with Lloyd’s letter. His assertion that “hundreds of thousands of souls roaming around having fun, day after day,” is wildly inaccurate. Just last week, Cynthia Coyle, a CA Board member, stated that the attendance over the city fair weekend was on the order of 50,000 – 60,000 people. Moreover the group-think eschewed by Lloyd and fellow CoFoCoDo member Alan Klein (scroll down) that the festivals are evident of a vibrant (vital, exciting) downtown is false. The Festival of the Arts and the City Fair were products of hundreds of thousands of dollars donated and hundreds of hours put in by scores of volunteers. Without that infrastructure, the “vibrancy” would melt away into the July humidity.

Another Celebration Marred

Just a few inches away from Lloyd’s letter, fellow CoFoCoDo member Rebecca Johnson weighed in on the Longfellow 4th of July parade:

Once again this year I attended the Longfellow Fourth of July parade, now in its 37th year. The charm and joy of a true neighborhood parade were everywhere. Families -- on bikes, pulling wagons, walking dogs decked out in red, white and blue -- all paraded by as I watched from the curbside.

After the setup, Rebecca lets loose:

The parade is well known for its tradition of addressing local community issues, and this year was no exception. All along the route, dozens of neighbors lifted homemade signs to County Executive Ken Ulman as he rode by. The signs carried statements such as "150 feet - YES! Tower - NO!," "We're with you, Ken!" and "Go Ken Go -- Block the Tower!" Neighborhood residents clearly wanted to take this opportunity to remind Mr. Ulman of his pre-election promise to enact height limits in Columbia and block (his words) the proposed high-rise Plaza Residences.

What these letters have in common is the use of an event intended to bring the community together by CoFoCoDo members to further their agenda. Thousands visited downtown Columbia to share in what is great about this community. Days later, we all celebrated what is great about this country. Apparently Lloyd and Rebecca chose not to join us.

Development Satire

Courtesy of the people at "the onion." Remember, if the quotes you read in this fictional account sound like what you hear in real life in Columbia, it just isn't funny.


"Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer"

An Honest Mistake (possibly)

Just like Hayduke and Evan, I have been going over “the coalition’s” position paper. I have much to comment on, both good (actually, really good) and bad. To get things started, I wanted to point out what may be an oversight, wishful thinking, or just bad research.

Paragraph two of the introduction (page 5), “the coalition” states:

Day One of the Charrette began with citizens spontaneously and overwhelmingly affirming the values that guided Columbia’s designers - and that have made this area what Money magazine has called, “the best place to live east of the Mississippi.”

The Money magazine reference is not sourced (which is a big problem, not only here but throughout the paper), so I assume “the coalition” is referencing the Money magazine article in which Columbia and Ellicott City were collectively named as the 4th best city. I do not have the hardcopy issue of the Money magazine article, but the Money magazine webpage associated with the city rankings makes no reference for Columbia or Ellicott City being “the best place to live east of the Mississippi. Moreover, a review of the list of “best cities” reveals that the city ranked No. 2, Naperville, IL is located here:

I would think that the fine, studious folks over at “the coalition” would vet their claims before publishing. I am hoping it is an oversight, and that a rough draft was mistakenly published. Otherwise, I am at a loss for why this error occurred. I can only wonder what “the coalition” response would be “the county” published an error of such magnitude.

The End of Co Fo Co Do

Last week I was approached by a gentleman for whom I have high regard. I do not know if he would want me to publish his name in this format, so I will refer to him as “Guilford Downs.” Anyway, Guilford told me that he was not pleased with my referring to the Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown as Co Fo Co Do. I believe the word he used was “juvenile.” I replied that the nickname was not meant to be taken as a derogatory term, just merely a truncation.

In addition, I believe Coalition member Alan Klein had (in his own, wry way) expressed displeasure with the nickname. He had remarked that Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown is a mouthful. I also contend that it is not that easy to type.

After much thought and reflection, I have seen their point. I personally will no longer refer to the Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown as Co Fo Co Do on this blog. Guilford and Alan, thank you for the valuable feedback.

Alternate View of the Charrette

Since mid-October, the Co Fo Co Do noise machine has been pushing their agenda, and I think it is time to start discussing alternative points of view. To be certain, their message discipline must be admired. I think we can all at least stumble through their mantra…Ken Ulman endorsed a similar plan…values from the first day of the Charrette…14 floor limit (with mandatory 20% green space allotment)…1600 residential units…etc.

Having read the Co Fo Co Do Executive Summary, the overall impression I get is that if downtown Columbia development were like a wish list for purchasing a car, Co Fo Co Do seems to want a car that gets the gas mileage of a Toyota Prius, the performance of a Dodge Magnum (with the SRT-6.1L Hemi engine), the people carrying capacity of a school bus, and the load hauling capacity of a Ford F-150 truck. This would of course be the ideal vehicle, but it does not exist.

Today, I would like to focus on the Charrette. Since the Charrette ended, there have been (for the most part) two groups talking about the Charrette: candidates for Howard County elected office (some won, some lost), and the folks at Co Fo Co Do.

Co Fo Co Do states in their Executive Summary:

On Saturday, October 15, 2005, a group of over 300 community members participated in the first day of a week-long Charrette process to discuss their needs, hopes, and dreams for the completion of Columbia’s Downtown. Their initial excitement and optimism were tempered, however, when it became clear that much of the citizens’ input was dismissed or ignored by County officials. Attention was instead steered into a plan many saw as pre-determined by the Charrette organizers. Participants who were without ties to the development community began to drop out. Not surprisingly, the plan that eventually emerged differed significantly from that envisioned by the original 300+ citizens on October 15th.

I find this description problematic on many levels. Yes, on a warm October afternoon, more than 300 people gathered at Wilde Lake High School. Many ideas were put forward, and a schedule for three more meetings was clearly communicated.

What I believe happened after that initial meeting differs dramatically from the Co Fo Co Do version. Rather than a conspiracy of pre-determined outcomes, I believe the folks running the Charrette looked at what people wanted, and tried their best to incorporate everything. The final plans showed increased density, but also more green space, and more public sculpture and art. Most of the problems with the Charrette outcome was in the conflicts between desires. An example would be that (in my opinion) most groups expressed a desire for more mass transit. One does not have to look very hard to determine that for mass transit (and funding for mass transit from the state and federal governments), medium to high density residency is required, and that is what subsequent Charrette plan reflected. Low density development does not allow for mass transit.

Said another way, you can’t tow a boat with a Prius, you are going to need a truck. It is my hope that Co Fo Co Do can come forward with an alternate funding program such that mass transit can be part of downtown Columbia. Otherwise, I would hope that they would reconsider their downtown density position; or in a worst case scenario, embrace low density as a priority and renounce mass transit.

As for citizens dropping out because of disenchantment, I would like to know where Co Fo Co Do found that data. I was at all four meetings, and I can say with certainty that the second meeting (which I like to call “open mike” night) was filled with people speaking out against the plan, including a passion-filled Barbara Russell (a Co Fo Co Do member) stating that amenities should be put in before other construction begins. During the third meeting (“break up in small groups” night), I was in a group with at least three people that became members of Co Fo Co Do. It seems to me that there were plenty people from all sides at all of the meetings.

I also wanted to address the idea put forth by Co Fo Co Do that people became disenchanted and dropped out, and that the voices of those that dropped out should have their idea reconsidered. I could be wrong here, but it seems to me that Co Fo Co Do is coming pretty close to saying that people that contributed less should have their voices heard more. To test the validity of this, let’s turn the argument on its head: if there were a group of people (and I am not sure there is) that were for the Bethesdification of Columbia, should the process be stopped to incorporate their views?

In closing, I do not think the Charrette was perfect. It laid out a framework to incorporate a lot of conflicting ideas. It laid out a means to increase density such that mass transit would be possible. It increased the amount of green space in downtown. It advocated for more public statues and art. For all the admirable work, it still had problems. So maybe we need to start discussing the tradeoffs. Do you want Metro coming to downtown, or do you want to drive out of the city (and possibly out of the county) for mass transit?

Co Fo Co Do

I have been busy trying to read and digest the Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown (Co Fo Co Do) Executive Summary and the reprint of the press speech delivered by Alan Klein (posted on HoCo Blog). I have great hopes for this group. I admire their dedication and energy. However, there appears to be a bit of cynicism in their writings that we could do without, and some of their statements are troubling. I want to address two issues tonight;

Using Georgetown and Annapolis as models for downtown Columbia.

The last paragraph of the Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown Executive Summary (obtained at the press conference) Introduction states:

We favor the continuing development of Downtown, but there are many models of diverse and vibrant downtowns. We offer Georgetown and Annapolis as examples of communities that do not rely on high density to provoke an exciting sense of place. These locations are especially interesting, and they exude excitement-even though their skylines rarely exceed four stories.

I agree that both areas are exciting (but did we have to use the verb excite twice? In two successive sentences?). However, the other characteristics of Georgetown and Annapolis contradict almost all of the other tentpoles that hold up the Executive Summary. Both locations have bad traffic circulation. Both are largely gentrified areas that offer little in the way of housing options. Both have little in the way of green building technology. Both have large paid parking facilities and little free parking. Mass transit is limited in Annapolis and virtually non-existent in Georgetown (remember, Georgetown residents opposed a metro stop).

To be fair, I have been one of those folks that gets up at meetings and derides the “culture of no” that has pervaded the downtown development issue. It is in this light that I would suggest folks take a look at Addison Circle, Texas (pdf) and Downtown Markham (under development), Toronto, Canada. These two are not “holy grails” for downtown solutions, but they do provide some interesting ideas that could be incorporated here.

Mort Hoppenfeld

It appears to me that the Co Fo Co Do group thus far has shown a strong affinity for Mort Hoppenfeld. I applaud this. Mr. Hoppenfeld had much to do with how Columbia was shaped and it is important to respect an honor him. However, Mr. Hoppenfeld did write an essay, A Critique of “Town Center Options” (pdf) in 1981. The essay appeared in the publication Little Patuxent Review and here is a sampling of his writings:

“Downtown can extend the Tivoli-like quality of the summer lake front…What is the next phase to be like? I hope not identical to the existing one.”

“One example of a downtown failure was putting the new county library in a park setting.’

“Downtown needs apartments and condos: At high density within walking distance – on top of things like shops and offices.”

Lay boards, volunteers, committees and the like are essential parts of a good community and planning process, but they are insufficient.”

And lastly, relating back to item 1 above:

“Typically, those small towns which make it have their own special characteristics, such as – uniqueness and distance from other major centers, as in Annapolis, Williamsburg, Aspen. Special historical-esthetic qualities are critical ingredients to beating the odds. Lastly, comes the accidental phenomenon of the benefactor – Paepke in Aspen, Rockefeller in Williamsburg, and state government in Annapolis.”

So let us take Mr. Hoppenfeld at his word, but let us consider both his early work and his later critique into account such that we can realize a great downtown Columbia.