Rebuilding Main Street With a New Library

Should a new library be built downtown?  I believe it should.  A new library near Main Street will bring more people to Main Street, providing a solid anchor for increasing retail sales in our shopping district.  I also believe that a new library would become the foundation to revitalize downtown while enhancing recreational and cultural opportunities along Riverfront Park.

Building a new library near Main Street will also require unusual cooperation and collaboration from both our county and city governments.  Before I explain, let me summarize the situation.

• Prince George's County wants to rebuild the Laurel Library at its current location at Seventh and Talbot.
• However, the current location has challenges.  The property is not large enough to support a new building along with all the necessary parking spaces.
• The county would need to acquire additional land from the city to support the new building project.
• The need for a larger parcel opens up the opportunity to consider other building locations.  
• The City of Laurel has the old Police Station property at 350 Municipal Square.  It's one block off  Main Street and right along the river. The city would like to sell this 1.8 acre property and 19,000 square foot building for 2.5 million dollars.

"Bring Our Library Downtown," or BOLD, is a grassroots group advocating for building the new library downtown at the old Police Station location.  They have a slide show highlighting many of the benefits of moving the library downtown.

I agree with BOLD but I would like to go a bit further and suggest that the city simply give, not sell, the old Police Station property to the county for the new library.  The city has the most to gain from moving the library downtown.  While 2.5 million dollars is a lot of money that could be used for many other city projects, I believe that this is a small price to pay to help revitalize Main Street. 

This 2.5 million dollar gift should come with three conditions.  First, that the city and county would jointly appoint a dedicated planning commission to design the building and grounds of the new library.  Second, the city would get final approval of the county's site and building plan.  Third, the county would agree to buy the property on the northwest corner that sits between the old Police Station and the river, highlighted in red below.

By removing all of the existing buildings on the site, we will have a large parcel that opens north to the river.  With an open lot, we can build a large, innovative library and learning center that fully incorporates both the river and adjacent park land into its design.  This approach also opens options for increased parking for Main Street visitors.

This is obviously an aggressive plan.  It will cost both the city and county significant resources, not just money, but also time and attention.  The city has a long history of augmenting county services with city tax dollars.  For example, the city has contributed over $250,000 per year towards the county's fire and ambulance services.  I think it is entirely reasonable for the city to contribute funding that will lead directly to augmenting Main Street's revitalization.

This plan also requires that both county and city governments to work together on the project in good faith and for the benefit of all.  It will be difficult because governments rarely share the same priorities or have business and planning processes that are compatible.  But the enhanced library and learning center that could result from this cooperation will be so much better than what either government could possible accomplish alone.

Please see the sidebar to take our poll, "Should the Laurel Library Move Downtown?"

A Story Is Substance

The Laurel City Council did not approve any TIF money for Laurel Commons last week. They only approved the TIF map boundaries. The Gazette left their readers confused, incorrectly writing that the council had approved $14 million for public financing. The Leader got the story correct. Council members must still decide how much, if any, money will be invested in the project.

What do you think?
Would you vote to invest city tax dollar$?
Please add your comments below.

I don’t envy the council’s decision. It's a hot political topic. I’ve already received a surprising number of private emails and comments from neighbors strongly opposed to the TIF. I’ve only had a couple in emails in support. The opposition’s comments have included:

• “We should not pay for more retail. We don’t need it.”

• “Give a TIF to Main Street. They need it more.”
• “They [developers] didn’t say they wanted a TIF last year. Why now?”
• “Invest city taxes for a Burlington Coat Factory? No way!”
• “No more bailouts, bulldoze the mall and build a park.”

I’ve been wondering why so many Laurelites are opposed to the TIF. Why are there such strong emotions?

It might be a reaction to the bad economy and the billions in bailouts for banks and automobile companies. But this can’t be the reason because the anti-TIF drumbeat started long before the economy tanked.

Then, thinking back over the Laurel Mall story, I began to see that some of this opposition might be the result of how the rebuilding story was told. We tell ourselves all kinds of stories. Sometimes the story matches reality and sometimes it doesn’t.

When I start a round of golf with a shiny new driver, I tell myself a story that I’m going to shoot like Tiger Woods. Usually by the third tee I realize I’ve got the same clumsy game as before. It’s a shiny new driver but it’s the same old, fat, bald guy swinging the damn thing. I think that might be what’s causing the strong opposition to the Laurel Commons TIF. We bought the dream but then reality kicked in at the exact same time the TIF was mentioned. Of course we are feeling disappointed.

You have got to hand it to the Laurel Commons developers. They really pumped up the original story. Expectations were sky high after those early focus groups. We swooned over the dream of a reborn mall with historically accurate mill art, classy fabric swatches, and even an ice skating ring.

These story tellers were slick. Maybe too slick as everyone realized we were only getting common stores and the promise of a couple of restaurants and a new multiplex theatre. After buying the early story about a shining cathedral to retail consumerism, we woke up to realize that we are simply rebuilding a shopping center. It's really not Tiger Woods. It’s just the same old, fat, Wilson, but now he has a new toupee and wants the city to pay him $14 million for playing.

You need to sit in the dark to appreciate the light.
You need to fear the nightmare of hell to accept the dream of heaven.

Why do so many people oppose the TIF for Laurel Commons? Let me offer the following explanation for your consideration.

We sold the dream without first selling the nightmare of a failed mall. I think that we, all of us, city leaders, mall developers and even this bloviating blogger failed to fully explain the true cost of a failed mall.

• The Laurel mall was dead 8 years ago, and this was during the boom.
• What would have happened if the developers passed on the Laurel Commons project?
• How long would the mall have survived in today’s economy? It would have gone from death spiral to flat line. Tax revenues would have dropped to near zero.
• The downside of a dead mall is almost insurmountable for a town our size. We can’t absorb the loss.
• How many of you remember the dead Rockville mall? It decomposed for over two decades, not only generating zero tax revenue, but its blight was dragging down surrounding property values.

• The city wins when the Laurel Commons succeeds. We get 40% of the success. If we don't stop the bleeding, we will get 100% of almost zero.
• The tax revenue prediction with a derelict Laurel Mall in 2015 makes the city’s revenue split in the same year with a TIF look fantastic in comparison.

I support the TIF. We must save the mall property from its death spiral. The TIF combines a little bit of city money with a lot of other people’s money to keep the mall from certain death. We won’t get a Columbia Mall but we will get a refreshed mall that will be viable for decades. I would have paid a 40% TIF just to get a new movie theatre.

I encourage the Laurel City Council to approve a TIF for the Laurel Commons project.

There is nothing more important than a story to help us learn new things—or to appreciate common things in uncommon ways.

Getting the story right is one of the most difficult skills to master in business, politics, or life. I've learned to appreciate the mastery attained by the early Christian writers. They told their story and it included both heaven and hell. They got their story right and it has served to both define and renew us for over 2000 years.

Merry Christmas,

rick

Reader Suggests Oldtown Neglected

An anonymous commenter responded to my previous article about the TIF Tiff and suggested that our Oldtown Laurel neighborhood is being neglected by the city.

Anonymous wrote: "A million bucks for a pool, 20 million for the mall, and not a cent for old town! The police station moves, the Leader moves, it's like the city doesn't care about us."

This comment got some attention at Laurel City Hall and Mayor Moe asked his staff to compile a list of the recent investment projects in Oldtown. I hesitate to post the list because it's an embarrassment of riches and I really don't want to start a squabble with other neighborhoods.

But since you asked here is the Mayor's list of appox. $8.9 million dollars worth of Oldtown projects:

Parks and Recreation Projects

Pool Renovations, 2003-2006, $613,000.
Armory Renovations, 2004-2006, $200,000.
McCullough Field Renovations and enhancements, 2005-2008, $592,000.
Riverfront Park Playground, 2006, $40,000.
Riverfront Park Pavilions, 2005, $20,000.
Riverfront Park Bathroom, 2008, $12,000.
Emancipation Park Playground, 2007, $50,000.

Scheduled Parks and Rec Projects

Riverfront Park Extension, 2009, $100,000.
McCullough Field Pavilion, 2009, $20,000.
Mill Dam Ruins Renovation, 2009-2010, $325,000.
Riverfront Park Interpretive Signs , 2009, $22,000.
Armory Renovations, 2009-2010, $375,000.

Public Works Projects (Total approx. $5.5M from 2003-2008)

Repaved all of Main Street from the MARC Station to 7th Street

New brick pavers for the sidewalks from the MARC Station to 7th Street.
Route 1 SB & NB completely reconstructed and new sidewalks from the County line to Rt 198.

Various additional street improvements and repaving on Montgomery and 8th Streets

Installed 229 traditional lampposts on Main Street and Rt 1. ($750K!)

You gotta love living in a town where a blog comment is made on Tuesday night and the Mayor provides a detailed response on Thursday.

A Laurel Commons TIF Tiff?

Our Laurel City Council will soon be deciding if the city should invest in the Laurel Commons Mall project in the form of a TIF. It's a complicated issue and citizens have strong opinions. The TIF is creating quite a tiff. I'm sure council members are not taking their decision lightly.

A lot of us are talking about the TIF. Some folks are opposed to any form of public financing. There is a lot of public financing going around these days. From bailouts to buyouts and people are getting fed up. "Bulldoze the mall and build a park." "Why should my taxes be used to bailout a developer?" "We don't need anymore retail in Laurel."

Other people want to understand all the details, "Will the city be left holding the bag, if the mall redevelopment fails?" How can we be sure that the developer accomplishes what they promise, they still haven't even started to tear down the parking deck like they said 2 years ago?" "Why aren't we getting any high end stores like Columbia Mall?"

The Mayor sees the Laurel Commons project as necessary for the long-term economic success of our city. He believes that we need to redevelop the mall and use it as the engine that drives redevelopment along Laurel's Route 1 commercial core.

This is both a complex and often emotional issue. It's hard to explain and even harder for the experts, let alone laypeople to understand. This is not an envious position for any city council member. But don't fear, I think that our TIF tiff took a positive turn over the last few weeks. And it's because of the dedication of a couple of real Laurel heroes.

We often think that public heroes are like the brave firefighter who rushes into the burning house. But there is another kind of hero who rushes headlong into thorny, public policy debates. I'll get to our heroes later, but first let me recap our story.

A TIF is a form of public financing. A developer asks the local government to provide some of the funding for public infrastructure improvements associated with a project, for example, parking facilities, roads, or street lights.

The government borrows money (sells a bond) that is used to finance the infrastructure improvements. But there is a twist. Instead of the government directly paying off the bond over thirty years, like my mortgage, the government uses the development's property taxes to pay off the debt. The TIF concept is based on the assumption that the improved property's value will increase over time because of the new development. With TIF, the bond is paid off by using a part of the future "tax increment."

The Laurel Commons developers asked the county and the city to finance over $30 million of public infrastructure improvements. The Prince Georges County government bailed out of the deal early. That left the city to decide if and how much to invest.

Now our two heroes enter the story.

Jim McCeney went to the TIF public hearing a couple of weeks ago. Jim spent many years as a financial officer of a large corporation. He had a lot of questions about the TIF. He was trying to understand the deal in all of its details. He really wanted to know if the TIF was viable and if the developer failed at some point in the life of the deal, would the city need to pay more than we bargained for? Was this TIF the right deal for this city at this time?

At the public hearing, Jim pressed his TIF questions. City staff and consultants provided answers to the best of their ability at this point in the process. But Jim was not fully comfortable that he understood the details.

A lesser policy hero would've stopped at this point. It would have been easy for Jim to just drop it and move on. He is just a citizen. He has other things to spend time on. But Jim didn't drop it. He called around. He asked more questions. He asked for a meeting with the administration and their consultants. He spent a lot of his time. And at the end of the day, Jim got answers to his questions.

This is when Kristie Mills, another dedicated policy hero enters our story. Kristie is the city's administrator. She is the big boss, after our elected officials. Kristie is the day-to-day manager of the city.

I don't know if Jim inspired her to do it, but Kristie ran into all the confusion and fog of the complex TIF issue and she made magic. She wrote a briefing, in plain English, that we can all understand. You can read her briefing on the City's website. Here is a little bit of it.

• A TIF can only be used for public improvements.

• It cannot be used for any private purpose.
• The property owner is responsible for the remainder of the financing package.
• The numbers will be defined in the ordinance as "not to exceed".
• There is no financial risk to the City with the TIF Special Obligation Bonds.
• Payment of the TIF Special Obligation Bonds is derived from the real property tax revenues.
• The Administration believes this is the best package they can offer while still protecting the City now and in the future!

I recommend that you take a few minutes and read Kristie's whole briefing. It's very easy to follow.

The city council still has difficult TIF decisions to make. Council chambers are often frightening places. However, I think we all owe a debt of thanks to our public policy heroes Jim McCeney and Kristie Mills. They went above and beyond the call of duty and we will all make more informed decisions because they did.

Please add your comments and questions here.

Maryland Task Force on the Future of Growth and Development

City of Laurel Development Director, Karl Brendle sends along the following:
"Despite current economic conditions, an additional 1.3 million people are expected to move to Maryland by 2030. The Maryland State Task Force on the Future of Growth and Development is charged to re-examine development policies to try and minimize the effect on this new population growth. I represent the Maryland Municipal League planners on the Task Force. I would be happy to entertain any questions, or relay concerns about development issues at kbrendle@laurel.md.us" - Karl Brendle

It only took me 10 minutes to take the survey. And if you have questions, there is nobody better than the Professor Karl to answer.

Karl has 25+ years of experience in the development trenches here in the Mid Atlantic region working for both developers and governments alike. Laurel is very fortunate to have a man of his experience and reputation looking out for our city’s best interests. Karl doesn’t just work here...he also lives right here in the city. He is one of our Oldtown neighbors.

Regards,

rick

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Task Force on the Future of Growth and Development

The Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) announced the formation of the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development at the beginning of 2008 (see Press Release dated January 7, 2008). This Task Force was formed under House Bill 773 and was signed into law last year. The 21-member Task Force is charged with studying a wide range of smart growth and land use issues effecting Maryland. A final report is due by December 1, 2008. The term of the Task Force, however, extends through 2010, serving as an advisory board to the Governor’s Smart Growth Subcabinet.

Upcoming meetings, dates and locations (subject to change)
Monday, October 27th at MDP Office in Baltimore, 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Wednesday, November 12th at MDP Office in Baltimore, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Monday, November 24th, (Location TBA if needed)

Make a Difference in Maryland for Future Generations

You can help chart the future of growth in Maryland’s communities. The Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) and the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development in Maryland invite you to participate in a survey informing their work on recommendations and strategies for sustainable growth in the State.

Click here to take the survey!

Laurel Commons

The Laurel Commons redevelopers provided me with a few interesting drawings that show how the property will look when completed. See the Leader's recent story.

The TIF issue is still not resolved. The County does not appear to support a TIF. Either the County Executive or our local County Council Member, Mr. Tom Dernoga, must sponsor the legislation and neither has done so at this time.

The lack of County support for a TIF will make the City Council's support politically difficult. I don't hear a lot of support for a city-sponsored TIF from my Oldtown neighbors.

Please click on any graphic below for a larger image.

My thanks to Ms. Calista Black, Marketing Manager, Laurel Commons, General Growth Properties, Inc.

Hopefully the architects will soon provide their own web page with better graphics. These drawings are really worth seeing in high resolution.

Laurel Main Street Businesses Profiled

Renita Young is a broadcast student from Chicago who is finishing her degree in Washington. She recently produced a 2 minute video for Medill News Service about how Laurel’s Main Street businesses are dealing with the slumping economy.

Featured interviews include: Sherron Algarin of the Changing Faces Boutique, Jessica Emery of the Gallery, and Gary Haymes of the Take it or Leave it Consignment shop. Unfortunately, since the piece was taped the Consignment Shop has announced that they are closing.

This short piece is well done and it shows the power of a free blogging site coupled with solid video storytelling skills. Hyperlocal journalism at work.

Click here for the video: http://renitadyoung.blogspot.com/2008/10/kind-of-dragmain-st-businesses-slow.html or here for a bigger picture: http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/washington/news.aspx?id=100151

10/9/08 update - Turns out the Medill website has an entire multimedia package about Laurel's Main Street. http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/washington/news.aspx?id=100281

Laurel Commons Briefing

The Laurel Commons developers presented their plans for the revitalized mall tonight. I arrived late but here is what I heard:

- They have settled on the following anchors for the project, a Regal 14-screen cinema complex, a new Burlington Coat Factory store, the existing Macy's, and an 400 unit apartment complex located in the old Montgomery Ward's garage area. (My original number of 1100 was quite wrong. - grw)

- The developers are asking the city and the county to kick-in to help finance the project. This is called a TIF, or tax increment financing program. A TIF is a common tool for redevelopment projects. A TIF creates a public-private partnership for the purposes of obtaining public capital investment for infrastructure improvements.

The Storyline

The TIF story is pretty straightforward. For example, assume today that the mall owners pay $250 thousand dollars a year in city property taxes. This is based on the mall's value today. The developers are going to make investments in revitalizing the mall such that the mall's value increases along with the property taxes paid to the city.

Let's say that the mall reopens in 2010 and the owners now pay $1 million dollars in property taxes on the drastically improved property. Then the new increment in taxes would be $750 thousand ($1 million less the original $250 thousand we get today).

The developers want the city to use 60% of that increase (~$450 thousand) to pay off a bond that will be used for improvements. The city will still get the original $250 thousand plus the $300 thousand from the remaining increment ($750 - $450). The TIF is set at this 60% level for thirty years. After 30 years, all of the taxes then go into the city's coffers.

In reality, the developers are looking for the city and the county to pay for a $36 million bond ($18 million each). The bond money will be used to pay for infrastructure improvements such as road and utility enhancements and new parking garages on the property.

It will cost the city approximately $47 million over 30 years to buy the $18 million dollar bond at a predicted 7.75% annual interest rate. But keep in mind, the city is paying the off this debt with the property tax increase (increment). Another way to think of it is that for every dollar in new property tax, the city keeps 40 cents and 60 cents goes to pay off the infrastructure debt.

My Conclusions

I'm a little disappointed in the anchor stores, but I'm realistic. The developers were stuck with the legacy of the smallest Macy's in the world and a long term lease with Burlington. Neither of those stores are currently useful to me or my family.

But in today's market, Laurel simply can't support the same stores as Columbia or Annapolis. Maybe over time, we could grow into more high-end stores. Redevelopment now could provide us with that opportunity later. I think the new Mall will be an attractive addition to the city. I'm looking forward to walking to the movie theaters and eating in the new restaurants.

I also support the TIF. If we do nothing, the mall continues to deteriorate and our tax base continues to erode. The deal they offered us tonight is significantly better than any other option we have and we might just find ourselves in a very strong position 5-10 years out.

I also don't think of the mall revitalization as a single isolated decision. In my opinion, it's the first move in a long-term strategy involving scores of properties along U.S. 1 from the Patuxent river south to Contee road. I see these properties as chess pieces on the city's game board. We have to plan our moves well today if we are going to thrive in the future.

Today, there are powerful development forces blowing through our region like BRAC, Green Line extended, Konterra, ICC and skyrocketing energy prices. These forces are rapidly changing our commercial and residential environment. We can't afford to wait. Have you seen Konterra? Those are billion dollar footsteps pounding just behind us. If we delay our revitalization decisions, we will lose. We must be smart and courageous.

We must look to the long term and plan multiple, mutually supporting, redevelopment moves today. We must be prudent. We must doggedly ensure the developer and the county comply with their parts of the deal. We must ruthlessly verify every detail. But we simply cannot afford to remain frozen in place. Laurel must have innovative redevelopment in our commercial core.

My Bottom Line

I want to see all of the fine print, but I believe that the Laurel Commons redevelopment proposal is a very reasonable and exciting first step. I also encourage the Mayor, City Council and the Prince George's County Council to support the TIF legislation.

Sorry for the long winded post. The story is complicated and I had to do some math. My 30 year bond payment calculation was based on the following fixed rate mortgage formula: c = (r / (1 − (1 + r) ^- N))P *N

The comments section is now open for you. What do you think about the Mall? Do you support the TIF? Please take the poll on the upper left side of this web page.

Full Disclosure: I served on the City's 2006-2007 Master Plan Advisory Committee.

NYT Visual Pollution Police Raid Laurel

26 Dec Update: We seem to have started a bit of an alienation rumble. Be sure to see the comments section below.

The Sunday New York Times today takes the Laurel Shopping Center to task for the crime of visual pollution. I think they take very cheap shots. Here is an excerpt:

'The Laurel Shopping Center: a seemingly endless concrete U of shops that curves around the dominant aesthetic offering of a massive parking lot, where our car is now anchored like a small vessel in an asphalt bay.

The store lights call out. Dress Barn. CVS. Marshalls. Chuck E. Cheese. Ruby Tuesday. H&R Block. And, yes, Subway.

Sitting here, suppressing the urge to flee, you begin to notice how the shopping center’s off-white walls and copper-colored top recall a minimum-security prison, and how readily the layout encourages acceptance of small absurdities. For example, people who leave the CVS with a desire to shop at Marshalls pretty much have to get back in their cars and drive across acres of parking lot.

“It’s not surprising that American society is so alienated,” Mr. Fry says.'

Read the NYT article.
Hear and see the slideshow.

What do you think? Is the Times right? Do you feel alienated by the visual clutter in Laurel? Please add your comments below.

It's a Chili Night

It's been quiet on Laurel Ave on this beautiful fall Saturday afternoon. A pot of Chili is on the stove. The beer is getting cold.

I just finished reading Keith's post about "Renters, Skaters and Bus Riders" over at his Laurel2020 blog. Keith always makes a lot of sense concerning development in Laurel. I highly recommend his blog to you.

Enjoy,

rick

Your Turn

Have you been following our recent development discussions? Would you like to know more about redevelopment, density, parking, traffic, or creating a more walkable Laurel? Do you have an opinion about the future of Laurel?

The City of Laurel Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the City’s proposed 2007 Master Plan in the Council Chambers of the Laurel Municipal Center next Tuesday, August 14th at 7:00 p.m.

It's your turn to speak out. Serious policy wonks will want to prepare by reading the entire 200+ page Master Plan here in Adobe Acrobat format.

I also want to draw your attention to Laurel2020's interesting article about a more walkable Laurel here.

What do you want? In 2020, Route 1 through Laurel should look like: a) Bethesda, b) Silver Spring, c) Mayberry, or d) the way it is today? Please share your opinions in the comments section.

Full disclosure: I served on the committee that produced the 2007 plan.

Laurel 2015: Urban or Suburban

The following article is also available in our enhanced Laurel Connections Podcast format. My thanks to Karen Lubieniecki , Marlene Frazier, Councilman Mike Leszcz, Jim McCeney, and Michael Dyer for participating in our podcast.

There was a meeting tonight at city hall to discuss a new development called Hawthorne Place. Please see the Leader’s excellent coverage of Hawthorne Place here.

update: Please also see Keith's take on the meeting at the Laurel2020 blog here.

Tonight’s meeting was typical in many ways. About twenty people attended. The group included bedrock members of the Laurel community. They listened as developers described their dream for Hawthorne Place. The community listened carefully and asked polite questions.

But in many ways I think the tonight’s meeting was far from typical. I think we will remember tonight as an important moment in the history of Laurel.

I say this because I think Hawthorne Place represents the first step towards a new Laurel. The profound question our community must answer is as follows:

In 2015 will Laurel’s commercial core be primarily suburban or urban?

Today Laurel is a suburban town with a suburban feel. We have Main Street and a commercial core along Route 1. Route 1 has a handful of commercial strip shopping centers, a mall undergoing massive revitalization, big box retail stores, and a couple of car lots. Today Laurel is very much like thousands of other suburban towns across America.

Silver Spring, Bethesda, Rockville are examples of town centers with a more urban feel. They have more intense development, high rise buildings, and parking garages. While not Washington’s K Street, or Manhattan’s East side, Hawthorne Place has more in common with them than with say … Columbia or Bowie, or Laurel as it is today.

Hawthorne Place will bring about 2000 residents and 150 thousand square feet of office space and plant it all on 11 acres. It will obviously bring traffic, but also an awesome new tax base to fuel the city.

Most importantly, Hawthorne Place will cause similar development. You can bet that if Hawthorne Place is approved as explained tonight, the market will drive Laurel to a more urban development pattern in the future.

The questions at tonight's meeting reflected these concerns. People asked the developers about the density stemming from 20 and 16 story apartment buildings.

While people seemed to focus on traffic and building height, I think the real debate is about coming to a community agreement on a vision for Laurel’s future. Will Laurel remain suburban or should we become more urban?

This is an important moment in Laurel’s history. We must continue this conversation. However, I suggest we focus our conversation on the fundamental question of wanting a suburban or urban feel in Laurel's commercial core. Building heights, density, or traffic at Hawthorne Place are all leading indicators of a more profound decision. I suggest we look past these specific decisions about the Hawthorne Place project to focus more broadly on Laurel’s future.

Please share your comments about Hawthorne Place and the future here.

Click here to hear voices from tonight’s meeting. I’m also looking for feedback on the podcast format. Please let me know if you find it useful. -rick

Whither The Mall?

Architecture student and local blogger Dan sent me a link to his story about an very interesting concept for redeveloping the Laurel Mall.

This drawing shows a Bowie-like Open Town Center. It comes from a Woodbine, Maryland based, Seth Harry and Associates, an urban planning firm.

The drawing carries a 2005 date. I have no idea if the concept is now... or if it ever was being seriously considered. It's a very interesting concept nonetheless.

Dan's Just-Up-The-Pike blog is worth a visit.