In his column “Shaping the City” in today’s Washington Post, Roger Lewis poses the following question about the future of Columbia’s downtown:“Thus, which choice makes the most sense: preserving the form and function of Columbia Town Center as originally envisioned in the 1960’s or embracing a vision to create a vital downtown for the 21st century?”
My vote goes to the latter.
3 comments:
Is there really a choice?
Move forward into the future.
Stand still and vegetate (at least you'll turn green).
What a slanted question! It implies that the current form and function is not vibrant. And, it implies that whatever new form is chosen will be automatically be vibrant.
This is the lamest of lame "reasons" for this whole idea of having to recreate downtown Columbia; because it's somehow not vibrant. Pure opinion and hogwash. And, on top of that, if vibrancy is what is desired, that can be acheived in many ways under the current, existing zoning regulations that govern Columbia New Town.
If you don't like Columbia as it is, then MOVE somewhere else. Duh!
PZ, vibrancy is a word thrown around a lot on ZRA 113. Completely agree. I think what it boils down to is opinion, like you said. Do you want to embrace a 30 year vision for downtown Columbia that grows the corporate space, provides more mixed-use development (and the units that come with it), and transform the street grid to reflect that of the city that Columbia should be? Or, do you like the setup we have now with its density and current offerings? It's a heated question. But to suggest that people who do not like it should leave is misguided, unfair, and a strawman argument against this proposed (big) change.
Post a Comment