Category: Prince George’s County

Two sites remain in running for Prince George’s regional medical center

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Two sites remain in the running for a new, $645 million regional hospital in Prince George’s County to replace the financially ailing Prince George’s Hospital Center in Cheverly and create a full-service medical campus.

The board of Dimensions Healthcare System, which oversees county-owned medical facilities, voted unanimously Thursday to send letters to Maryland health officials endorsing Largo Town Center and the shuttered Landover Mall as possible locations for the hospital.

The move buys officials a little more time to negotiate with representatives of the sites. The board’s chairman, C. Philip Nichols Jr., said he expects a final decision by September.

Plans call for the 259-bed hospital to be part of a full-service medical complex and trauma center, offering high-end specialities and general care. There would be offices for private practices, a parking garage and possibly classrooms for medical professionals who also might train at nearby Prince George’s Community College in Largo. The hospital, expected to open in 2017 as part of the University of Maryland Medical System, would serve Prince George’s and Southern Maryland.

Officials hope the medical complex will attract paying patients with health insurance and provide more primary care to residents of the majority-minority county.

Studies show that Prince George’s residents suffer disproportionately from diabetes, heart disease and obesity, and there is a shortage of primary-care medical practices.

The Dimensions board acted on recommendations from a search committee whose members include representatives from the University of Maryland Medical System, Prince George’s County and the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

Before choosing Landover Mall and Largo Town Center, the search committee examined properties around the Morgan Boulevard Metro station and Woodmore Towne Center shopping center, said Bradford L. Seamon, a Dimensions board member, search committee member and top aide to County Executive Rushern L. Baker III (D). But the committee rejected those sites because of their locations and because they had multiple owners, making it difficult to assemble enough land.

The committee’s deliberations are not open to the public.

Now the search committee is looking into cost, availability, the potential for future development, and whether roads, sidewalks and other infrastructure would be needed, he said.

“We are still continuing to negotiate, and we want to negotiate with two sites to come up with the best deal. At this point, I don’t want to talk numbers,” Seamon told the board.

Although officials of the University of Maryland Medical System had urged the search committee to find at least 100 acres, Seamon said committee members now believe that the hospital itself could be built on four or five acres of a 25-acre medical campus.

The two sites in contention each have advantages, Seamon said. The Largo site, at the Boulevard at Capital Centre, is on 70 acres of county-owned land next to a Metro station and close to the Capital Beltway.

There is an additional 30 acres in adjacent parcels owned by two private developers.

The 88-acre Landover Mall site is nearly vacant — only a Sears store remains. It is close to the Capital Beltway and about 11 / 3 miles from the Largo Town Center Metro station. Landover Mall is owned by the Lerner family, which also owns the Washington Nationals baseball team.

Cheryl Cort of the Coalition for Smarter Growth is pushing for Largo Town Center but said Landover Mall is ripe for redevelopment.

“It is crying out for something to happen at the mall,” she said. “But something as important as the hospital should not be so far from transit.”

Douglas M. Duncan, the former Montgomery County executive who is representing the Lerners, declined to comment.

Eventually, the University of Maryland Medical System is expected to take over Dimensions Healthcare but will not bear any of the costs.

Plans call for a new company — New Dimensions — to float $450 million in bonds, with its $200 million debt service paid by the state. Separately, Prince George’s would float $200 million in bonds.

Click here to read the original story>>

Testimony before the Hon. Andrea Harrison, Chair, Prince George’s County Council Re: Prince George’s CB 27-2013: Rental Conversion First Refusal

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Our organization works to ensure that transportation and development decisions in the Washington, D.C. region, including the Maryland suburbs, accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth would like to express its support for CB 27, with the amendment that “Sec. 13-1120. Designation” be deleted. We are concerned that this designation by resolution provision is unnecessary and inhibits the function of this tool. Overall, we support this bill as a careful tool to assist with the preservation of quality rental housing to better meet the needs of many Prince George’s residents who struggle to find decent housing they can afford.

It is a measured tool to allow the county to help preserve affordable rental housing either through direct purchase, or through assigning the right to a third party. It also allows for waivers if certain conditions are met. This approach offers the county the opportunity to protect affordable rental housing without unduly burdening the building owner. Thus this tool is likely to be used where there is institutional and community capacity to purchase and rehabilitate rental housing. We welcome this useful tool to help Prince George’s residents secure quality, affordable rental housing.

Like all Washington, D.C. area jurisdictions, a significant share of residents find housing costs too high for their incomes. Building a toolbox of policies that help more Prince George’s working families find suitable housing that they can afford is a critical task for public officials. CB 27 is one of the tools that the county should have to assist renters with the opportunity to preserve their homes as affordable. This should be one of many tools. In 2010, we published a policy paper examining Prince George’s housing needs and initiatives (summary attached). This effort followed extensive work we have done in other jurisdictions on affordable housing policy. Through our research, we found that Prince George’s uses few local policy tools, both in absolute terms and compared to surrounding jurisdictions (see attached Table 5). Thus we welcome CB 27 as an important contribution to a local housing toolbox we hope to grow over time.

Thank you for your consideration.

Cheryl Cort, Policy Director

Prince George’s tries to make TOD easier

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Prince George’s County wants to encourage growth in the right places by speeding up the approval process for transit-oriented development. The county council unanimously passed a bill last week that just might do it.

061313 pgtod

Developers have often said they don’t want to do business in Prince George’s because of its lengthy and unpredictable development review process. Bill CB 20 creates a fast-track development review process for projects within ½ mile of the county’s 15 Metro stations and the Bowie MARC station.

Projects are eligible for the speedier process if the Planning Board finds they meet best practices for urban design, like mixing housing with retail and making engaging streetscapes.

The bill aims to increase transit ridership, reduce auto dependency, and encourage walking for more trips. It’s one of several recommendations county planners say could draw more investment to the county’s Metro station areas.

Concerned about attracting unwanted commercial uses, the bill contains a long list of uses that are not eligible for the expedited review, including adult entertainment, liquor stores, pawn shops, strip malls, and drive-throughs.

An earlier version of the bill would have eliminated most requirements for public meetings or site plan review. This could have potentially rushed low-quality projects to approval without giving the Planning Board and the public enough time to review proposed projects.

Not surprisingly, many people opposed it, and the County Council tabled the bill last year before putting together a roundtable to discuss ways to improve incentives for transit-oriented development. The current bill combines 2 overlapping versions councilmembers Eric Olson and Mel Franklin submitted earlier this year.

The bill’s most important feature is streamlining the review process. It prevents the County Council from arbitrarily dragging out the process, a power they’ve abused in the past that creates uncertainty and discourages developers from working in the county. Developers say that the unpredictability of approvals in Prince George’s County often makes it not worth the time and money spent there.

While the current bill shortens the review process, it still gives the Planning Board and members of the public enough time to offer feedback. If the Planning Board approves a proposal, the County Council has a few days to decide whether or not to review it as well. Project applicants or residents can also use this time to appeal the board’s decision.

Bill CB 20 is just one of many actions Prince George’s County has taken to encourage investment at Metro stations. Recently, county officials have also reduced the impact fees developers pay to support schools and public safety. Economic analysts say excessive fees discourage investment altogether, meaning the county won’t even receive the fees it seeks to collect.

Another element of ensuring development goes at Prince George’s Metro stations is having a good countywide plan. There is a town meeting this Saturday, 10 am-1 pm at the University of Maryland, to work on a plan for the county’s growth over the next 20+ years. You can help push for a plan that works in concert with this legislation to encourage TOD at Metro station sites.

Photo Courtesy of Elvert Barnes on flickr.

Click here to read the original story>>

Prince George’s Council approves plan to speed development around transit stations

Posted on by Andrew Brown

The Prince George’s County Council on Tuesday took a major step to simplify and speed up development approval at transit stations, unanimously passing a bill that officials hope will spark new growth and create jobs.

The measure, crafted by Council members Mel Franklin (D-Upper Marlboro) and Eric Olson (D-College Park), could trim as much as a year from the review process for projects that are deemed high quality and that promote walkable communities. It also limits the council’s ability to stall projects indefinitely, a long-standing and controversial practice that has frustrated residents and developers.

Luring new jobs and businesses has been one of County Executive Rushern L. Baker III’s top priorities as he tries to expand the county’s commercial tax base to increase county revenue. Development has lagged in the county compared with the rest of the Washington region, but lately, there have been signs that the economic climate in Prince George’s is beginning to improve.

Prince George’s has 15 Metro stations and several MARC stations, but few have major development nearby.

“It is a significant statement,” said Derick Berlage, chief of the Prince George’s planning agency’s countywide review division. “It is a constructive move for the county to make.”

The bill gives preferences to developers who propose projects with federal tenants, a move that county officials hope will help them lure the FBI headquarters from downtown D.C. to Prince George’s.

The bill encourages a mixture of moderate and high-density development within walking distance of a transit station, with the most intense density and highest building heights nearest the station. The proposed developments would then be encouraged to scale down closer to surrounding neighborhoods.

The legislation, which was backed by the Baker administration, is a zoning measure, which does not require the signature of Baker (D). It takes effect in 45 days, Franklin said.

“We have tried to focus on a process that is simple, timely and predictable,” said Aubrey Thagard, a top economic development official in Baker’s administration.

“This presents a real opportunity to create a process for transit-oriented development that is exactly that. It helps make the climate for transit-oriented development more palatable to the development community,” he said.

Thagard said that no developers had said that passage of the bill would immediately result in new applications to build at transit stations. But the development community was closely watching the bill as it made its way through the council this spring, and several developers signaled support.

Olson earlier this year persuaded the Prince George’s delegation in the General Assembly to approve a bill that reduces the amount of school fees that developers pay when they build at transit stations.

Cheryl Cort, policy director for the Coalition for Smarter Growth, praised the bill for “creating a streamlined review process while still maintaining planning board review and public input. It gives a predictable timetable.”

Click here to read the original story>>

Testimony before The Hon. Andrea Harrison, Chair, Prince George’s County Council Re: Support for CB-20-2013: Expedited Transit-Oriented Development

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Our organization works to
ensure that transportation and development decisions in the Washington, D.C. region, including the
Maryland suburbs, accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel
choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

We wish to express our support for CB-20-2013, which is an important step to reducing an institutional
barrier to attracting new investment at Metro stations. CB 20 offers a public process that gives greater
predictably to the review of development applications while also preserving essential public accountability.

We ask the Council also consider creating an evaluation mechanism in the bill so that its performance can be
regularly assessed and reported out to the Council, Planning Board and public. This bill’s expedited
development review process, along with other incentives for TOD, should be regularly assessed so that the
County can fine tune incentives and procedures that are most effective at achieving the goal of quality
transit-oriented development.

While we believe CB 20 will be helpful in encouraging more quality transit-oriented development
applications, we suggest that this does not substitute for rationalizing and reducing the complexity of the
zoning ordinance. We urge the Council to pursue the longer-term and systematic recommendations of the
2009 report: Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations Streamlining the
Development Review Process.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Cort
Policy Director

PG planners propose bold new smart growth future

Posted on by Ted Van Houten

Prince George’s County has diverged from its smart growth goals, says the county Planning Board in a searing assessment. The board says residents have a choice: push for more transit-oriented development and walkable communities, or “be resigned to business as usual.”


Largo Town Center. Photo by the author.The board released a policy paper called How and Where We Grow as part of an update of the county’s 20-year plan for growth and development. It offers aggressive proposals to tame sprawling, scattered development and focus public resources at Metro stations and priority urban centers.

While official plans and rhetoric say transit-oriented development is important, land use trends show a different story on the ground. The county must recommit to managing its growth in a sustainable way by preserving open space and focusing development around Metro stations, says the board. Otherwise, the county will remain a place known for bedroom communities, underutilized Metro stations, and weak job growth.

Members of the public can offer their input on the county’s future at a day-long town meeting next month.

Prince George’s is at a crossroads

“Prince George’s County is at a crossroads,” the Planning Board states. “Will we choose bold action or business as usual?”

The document recounts how the 2002 General Plan vision for growth and land use fell short of its original goals over the years. Without commitment to a new direction, the county can expect more spread out development, continued failure to capitalize on the promise of transit-oriented development, and lagging investment to spark revitalization of communities inside the Beltway.


Tier boundaries from the Prince George’s County General Plan.Between 2002 and 2010, residential growth in the county departed from the General Plan by spreading out into over 6,400 acres of the “Developing Tier,” a rapidly suburbanizing area outside the Beltway. The lion’s share of the county’s development occurred there, including 73% of residential and 60% of commercial growth.

In the “Developed Tier,” inside the Beltway, growth lagged. It fell short of goals by capturing 25% rather the hoped-for 33% goal. However, what was built there consumed just 5% of the county’s land area.

Development in the pipeline, which has been approved but not yet built, promises more of the same. More than 79% of residential units in the development pipeline are single-family detached houses in the Developing Tier. Yet according to the Planning Board, demand forecasts show that more than 60% of the new housing units to be built should be multifamily units located in walkable communities at transit-accessible locations.


All photos by the author unless otherwise noted.How and Where We Grow points to the costs of these growth patterns: spread-out development at densities that are difficult to support with quality transit or retail services, long commutes, and a future as a bedroom community to the region. Over the past 40 years, a third of the county’s open space, agricultural, and forested land were converted to low-density residential development. The loss of open space has fragmented natural areas and undermined the agricultural economy.

Furthermore, the board notes that the county has attracted the fewest number of new residents of an area jurisdiction from 2000 to 2010. “Without recalibration of county priorities and policies that promote TOD [transit-oriented development] and high-quality, mixed-use development,” the paper says, “it is likely that the county will be at a continued disadvantage to its neighbors when it comes to attracting residents and employers who value the connectivity and amenities that other such communities provide.”

The county needs a unified vision

The board notes that the structure of county government undermines unity and fosters internal competition through the lack of at-large council members on the county council. “While the County Executive can focus and coordinate resources, the nine different Council members, oftentimes with nine different priorities, it is difficult to agree upon a single vision for the county,” says the paper. “In practice this means that public dollars get spread across the county, instead of being concentrated in a few places to make a truly significant impact.”

A “clear mismatch in stated goals and actual infrastructure investment” emerges when assessing the county’s transportation spending priorities, the board finds. There’s also far more commercial and mixed-use zoning than the market can support. The paper notes that the county’s weak commercial tax base makes it a challenge to compete for employers or have the financial resources to address community needs, like crime and poor schools.

Given these tough observations, the planners put forth a realistic agenda for the future with this set of specific recommendations aimed at leveraging existing infrastructure:

  • Define density targets and growth goals for the tiers to shift the focus of development to the centers and the Developed Tier.
  • Make a stronger commitment by targeting new growth to the Developed Tier and increase the growth objectives for the tier.
  • Locate the new hospital center and key government functions at a transit-oriented development location.
  • Reduce the backlog pipeline development (which can linger for decades). Prioritize and phase development by requiring bonding for infrastructure improvements. Also use the water and sewer process to more aggressively discourage greenfield development.
  • Prioritize and fast track building permits in targeted areas (County Council is currently advancing a bill to do this).
  • Revise surcharge fees for schools and public safety, encourage development in the Centers and Developed Tier by reducing fees, and phase growth in the Developing Tier through fee increases.
  • Adopt new zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations. Ensure they are supportive of the General Plan goals, including encouraging transit-oriented development.

The planning board’s honest, stern assessment of the county’s challenges and practical list of reforms offer the chance for Prince George’s County to change its ways. County leadership has shown some appetite for meaningful reforms. At the request of the county council and executive, the state delegation enabled the county to reduce fees for developments around Metro stations during the last Maryland legislative session.

The County Council is also advancing a bill to expedite development review for projects close to Metro stations. Meanwhile, the debate over where to locate the proposed Regional Medical Center has shifted away from expansive open sites to parcels around the Largo Town Center Metro station.

However, the county’s spending priorities still reflect business as usual, with a focus on building costly intersections for new communities like National Harbor and Konterra instead of investments to enhance access to transit stations or improve bus service. Expensive sprawl-supporting highway projects remain high on the county’s wish list for state funding, such as roads to support the 6,000-acre greenfield Westphalia development located outside the Capital Beltway and miles from the nearest Metro station.

Despite the mixed and sometimes contradictory priorities pursued by the county, the Planning Board and staff are making waves by pointing out the costs of continuing old ways that will allow the county to fall further behind.

Check out the Plan Prince George’s 2035 website, and plan to attend the half day town meeting on June 15 beginning at 9:30 am at the University of Maryland College Park.

Photos courtesy of Greater Greater Washington.

Read the original article here >>

Over 1,000 Prince George’s Residents Request Placement of New Hospital at Metro Station Petition Presented to County Executive Baker

Posted on by acustis

UPPER MARLBORO – Today, the Coalition for Smarter Growth delivered a petition to Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker, urging him to choose a Metro station site for the planned Regional Medical Center. Over 1,000 Prince George’s residents signed the petition. “The petition demonstrates how many people in our county want the new medical center at a convenient Metro site,” said Coalition for Smarter Growth staff representative and Cheverly resident Reba Watkins, who delivered the petition. “As a Prince George’s resident, this issue is important to me. Right now, without a car, I have to go to Bethesda or D.C. for quality, convenient care. We can do better.” The petition adds to growing consensus that the new hospital should be located at a Metro station site.

Westphalia developer floats bus plan to lure FBI to Prince George’s County

Posted on by acustis

A $3 billion Canadian real estate firm plans to begin work shortly on what may be Prince George’s County’s largest development since National Harbor, and it is pulling out all the stops to get the FBI to build a headquarters there as a focal point. The Walton Group, one of North America’s largest land developers, purchased the 479-acre Westphalia Town Center project along Pennsylvania Avenue near Andrews Air Force Base in February of last year, and says it will begin construction this month. The first phase of the project calls for 347 town homes, more than 400 apartments, 450,000 square feet of retail and a 150-room hotel. Under previous ownership, the project stalled because of the recession, loan defaults and a conviction on extortion charges for one of the project’s principals. But after buying the property for $29.5 million in February of last year, Walton chief executive Bill Doherty said he is three-to-four weeks from beginning construction. “This is a very real project. We’re moving fast. This is happening,” he said.

The Regional Medical Center belongs at a Metro Station

The Regional Medical Center belongs at a Metro Station

Posted on by Andrew Brown

All Prince George’s County residents have a vested interest in getting the decision right about where to locate and how to design the new county and state-supported $650 million Regional Medical Center with a workforce of more than 2000 employees. To leverage the most competitive healthcare benefits and economic development opportunities, we need state-of-the-art urban design at a Metro station.

Building a new Regional Medical Center at a Metro station means:

  • A regionally transit-connected center of medical excellence that can attract the best in class workforce using a walkable urban design that integrates into the surrounding context;
  • Less traffic, more access for workers, and more convenient access to quality healthcare for everyone, including individuals who must rely on transit;
  • Jumpstarting other quality mixed-use development, delivering a big economic boost for Prince George’s and the surrounding area.

Largo Town Center Metro station is the best option

  • Largo Metro has a vacant 20 acre site (old parcel D) just east of the entrance owned by PNG Schwartz that already has 1 million square feet approved for a federal HHS office building on just half of the site (Commons at Largo). 20 acres is plenty of room for a state-of-the-art hospital and medical office buildings. The 69-acre Boulevard at Capital Centre is on county owned land and could be part of a larger medical complex in the future.
  • Largo Metro station has ample vacant land, multiple roadway connections, rail & bus service, nearby retail, office and residential uses.
  • Combined with a pedestrian-friendly urban design, a hospital center could drive economic development as an anchor for a mixed-use destination and downtown district for Prince George’s.
  • The medical center can be sensitively located in the existing community around the Largo Town Center Metro station to manage traffic and ensure that existing residents will have improved access to the Metro, nearby services, offices, and new jobs.

Why the 2 non-Metro sites would be a major missed opportunity for the county

  • Both the Woodmore Towne Centre and the Landover Mall sites are located a mile and half from the closest Metro station – too far to walk & too far to leverage Metro access for more transit-oriented economic development.
  • Far from Metro, Woodmore Towne Centre is a sprawling 245-acre, automobile-oriented, outside-thebeltway greenfield site that hasn’t been able to attract the investment it promised.
  • Landover Mall needs reinvestment but its distance to a Metro station and lack of connectivity to a mixed-use district makes it a poor candidate for a competitive Regional Medical Center.
  • These sites would generate more traffic since it would be difficult for anyone to access the medical center without a car.

 

Coalition for Smarter Growth: Sign the petition & learn more at smartergrowth.net/PGmedicalcenter

Testimony before the Prince George’s County House Delegation in Support of PG 420-13: School Facilities Surcharge

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Our organization works to ensure that transportation and development decisions in the Washington, D.C. region, including the Maryland suburbs, accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

We urge you to support Bill PG 420-13 – School Facilities Surcharge, in order to take reasonable measures to catalyze transit-oriented development by removing unnecessary barriers to investment near transit stations. The bill lessens the burdens on multifamily housing construction near major transit stations which is exactly what is needed for Prince George’s to compete for the workforce and employers of the future.

Multifamily units, especially studio units, produce a fraction of the school-aged children that single family housing generates, thus the reduction in the school facilities surcharge will not overburden the county. It will, however, strengthen the tax base by attracting more of the largest segments of our population — young professionals and retirees seeking to live in a more urban, transit-accessible environment.

The recent assessment by the Prince George’s Planning Department in “Where and How We Grow Policy Paper,” urges the county to depart from its historic pattern as a spread out bedroom community. Instead, it urges the county to encourage development in Centers and the Developed Tier by reducing fees. It cites regional growth forecasts showing that economic development and workforce housing preferences will demand a major increase in multifamily housing near transit:

“[M]ore than 79 percent of units in the [County’s] pipeline are single-family detached units intended for the Developing Tier; however, to meet future demand, more than 60 percent of new housing units to be built should be multifamily units located in walkable communities at transit-accessible locations.

“Furthermore…between 2000 and 2010 Prince George’s County acquired one of the lowest numbers of new residents in the region. Without a recalibration of county priorities and policies that promote TOD and high-quality, mixed-use development, it is likely that the county will be at a continued disadvantage relative to its neighbors when it comes to attracting residents and employers who value the connectivity and amenities that other such communities provide.”

Again, we ask that you support Bill PG 420-13 – School Facilities Surcharge. Thank you for your consideration.

Cheryl Cort
Policy Director