Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Stubbedtoe18 t1_jaobo3t wrote

Reply to comment by mysteryweapon in Any development on 108 near Interchange of 29 and 108 (near Centennial Park)? by lnbp2022

Used to live there...the last thing that area and part of 108 needs is more traffic. I hate MoCo and HoCo for their propensity to overdevelop, especially in areas that are already at the cusp of overpopulation and at the expense of our woodlands.

9

mysteryweapon t1_jaq4x1y wrote

> the last thing that area and part of 108 needs is more traffic

I agree, and it's sort of a double-edged sword here

One of the best ways to combat urban sprawl, and traffic, is creating high-density housing, with good pedestrian accessibility, and good public transportation

Public transport in HoCo leaves something to be desired, to say the least

On every other side of the Dorsey Hall Village Center, there was already high-density housing instead of single-family homes with yards, and it has been that way for decades

On the bright side, it's near a center that has a number of essential needs, which increases walkability at least a little bit and could reduce traffic in that regard

> at the expense of our woodlands.

I agree 100%. The value of green spaces is often underrated IMO

It remains to be seen if the developer has any sense of respect for the value green spaces provide to a community

I think it's probably as responsible a spot as any to develop, but without improvements to pedestrian accessibility and better public transport, traffic will inevitably become more challenging to deal with

7

CookieMonster932 t1_japmll4 wrote

People move to these counties because that's where the jobs are. When you restrict development, housing becomes more expensive for everybody. It also just drives people to move to places like Carroll, which increases traffic and leads to even more sprawl.

3

bigjd7 t1_jar491r wrote

I think folks are upset that the developers aren’t in sync with the Rouse vision. Developers aren’t building villages anymore for communities sake. They are doing more houses in smaller areas for more profit.

4

CookieMonster932 t1_jar6bjv wrote

The villages created by Rouse were high density townhomes or even higher density apartments. The successor to Rouse's company Howard Hughes developers want to build these but people are blocking them from doing so thus leading to lower density housing units and a shortage of housing. Rouse's vision was to create communities with a racial and socioeconomic diversity and Howard County has become more and more segregated on both fronts.

4

bigjd7 t1_jard095 wrote

Curious if you have examples of it being more segregated. Maybe the mall development recently. River Hill does not have apartments like Oakland Mills or Long Reach do. We've always thought Columbia was at max capacity. The place OP is referring to is such a weird spot to build.

1

CookieMonster932 t1_jaroq8m wrote

Here's a Baltimore Banner article about increasing segregation. This is a more in depth report about the housing market in HoCo and the rising costs of housing due to lack of supply. Matter of opinion but I think that spot is a good place to put higher density homes. It's right next to the village, and there are vacant storefronts that could use the extra customers.

3

bigjd7 t1_jarvx8i wrote

"Today, Columbia is more diverse than ever. Census figures show the community is 49% white and 28% Black, with fast-growing Asian (13%) and Hispanic or Latino (9%) populations."

Diversity is there....

"The troubling thing we found was an increasing or creeping segregation that appears to be occurring in Columbia with the isolation of African Americans from the white community and decrease of exposure between racial groups in Columbia"

The only land available to build on is far way from Oakland Mills/Long Reach/Hammond/Wilde Lake which supports her claim of whites living farther from African Americans. I think we are in a catch 22. It's a zoning issue.

3

evergreenneedles t1_jbt8cye wrote

It’s a zoning issue but not in the way I think you’re saying. There is zero reason (aside from nimby-ism). There are houses in poor condition, why not allow homeowners to rebuild them into triplexes that are similar size to the houses near them (within a certain % greater), or convert their existing single family detached homes into duplexes? Or allow ADU’s on larger lots?

Most owners won’t do this, so it will be slow and gentle. Why not allow homeowners to allow their properties to work for their families?

2

evergreenneedles t1_jb13p3o wrote

They tried, Walsh jung yungmann on the council cut the funding that would have created affordable units (Bc affordability requires funding interventions). They put it in contingency and the developer had to do market rate because they wouldn’t allow it to be affordable.

3

bigjd7 t1_jar9s2b wrote

Yeah the morning commute the traffic leaving the Dorsey area between the two lights is bad. The distance between the two lights and those lights are out of sync to handle more people in that area. The townhouses I imagine would be a continuation of those brick ones behind it. What a god awful view of 108 for 500k lol

2

No-Organization6449 t1_japinbl wrote

This is what you get when you elect a County Exec. that is bought and paid for by developers.

0

CookieMonster932 t1_japnpij wrote

Did you build your own house?

1

bigjd7 t1_jaq09ey wrote

No, but I got a great deal on an acre of land during the Rouse era where my neighbor isn’t wall to wall to me for twice the cost.

The amount of money needed to run for county executive requires some wealthy people to be in your pocket in order to fund the race.

1