Is CA taking over Villages, The revival of two blighted yet Legendary Columbia Landmarks, the Lakefront Library is back in the news, BGE set to remove 59 miles of trees, and a Restaurant Run-down
you & your MP are a 5* public service. Many, many thanx. Your analysis/informed skepticism about the redevelopment of the old PF bldg are spot on; wish more folks would. run numbers rather than mouths (CA reps are included in this, per your other assessment of CA management plans).👍
Why continue to operate the buildings controlled by the Villages? In their current form are they consistent with the goals of a homeowners association?
The village buildings are operated as event facilities,not community resources. The Villages rent them out the same way a commercial event facility would. The buildings host very few community functions because the Villages charge non-profits only 10 percent less than they charge anyone else. As far as I can see, the Village use them for little, if any, community programming of their own.
Rather than arguing pointlessly about control of the buidlings, CA and the Villages eithr divest themselves of these buidlings or offer space to community groups for nominal fees, so that the buildings can be community facilities.
I do not share in your elation over the prospects of a new lakefront library. I see it more as a vanity project by our CE. The lakefront has yet to recover from the loss of Clyde's. Lakefront properties should come with some economic stimulus for commercial development. A library is a burden on us taxpayers. (Re)build it next to the original library.
Thank you for your personal opinion on the CA Takeover of the Villages. However you failed to mention that 8 of the 10 Village Managers have asked for continued negotiations consistent with the original contract because they are not comfortable with the CA proposed changes. They have asked to continue to continue negotiations until September. Further information can be found by watching the recent CA Board meeting or the recent Baltimore Banner article.
You failed to mention that 8 of 10 Village managers are opposed and it’s not that it would take away a job function. You have significantly minimized their testimony at CA BD meetings and enters to Columbia
While I share your concern about where the funding will come from to support The Source project, I’m not too keen on your describing it as “… a hodgepodge collection of community amenities, including a gymnasium with basketball courts, fitness center, food hall, daycare, video game room, recording studio, food pantry, tutoring space, and more.” The word hodgepodge suggests these things were chosen/combined with no rhyme or reason. It’s a value judgement (and you are entitled to that) but it comes across to me as unnecessarily glib or dismissive.
I’ve always liked the word “hodgepodge” since it’s fun to say and didn’t mean any disrespect by it. As I wrote, I think the Source sounds great but it is a lot of different things all under one roof and I’m just worried that those fronting the $$ to build it may have unrealistic expectations of how much money these things bring in, particularly since the uniting aspect most of the things in the building share is their appeal to local teenagers. It will be a struggle if the organizations leasing space are required to make lease payments that cover monthly payments on a construction loan.
you & your MP are a 5* public service. Many, many thanx. Your analysis/informed skepticism about the redevelopment of the old PF bldg are spot on; wish more folks would. run numbers rather than mouths (CA reps are included in this, per your other assessment of CA management plans).👍
Thank you for this informative post! Such great information!
Naz’s Halal replaced the Halal Guys. And it’s Chadol Korean BBQ :) thanks for the great reporting. Love your articles!
The Corner Bakery space is becoming a Charles Schwab
Why continue to operate the buildings controlled by the Villages? In their current form are they consistent with the goals of a homeowners association?
The village buildings are operated as event facilities,not community resources. The Villages rent them out the same way a commercial event facility would. The buildings host very few community functions because the Villages charge non-profits only 10 percent less than they charge anyone else. As far as I can see, the Village use them for little, if any, community programming of their own.
Rather than arguing pointlessly about control of the buidlings, CA and the Villages eithr divest themselves of these buidlings or offer space to community groups for nominal fees, so that the buildings can be community facilities.
I do not share in your elation over the prospects of a new lakefront library. I see it more as a vanity project by our CE. The lakefront has yet to recover from the loss of Clyde's. Lakefront properties should come with some economic stimulus for commercial development. A library is a burden on us taxpayers. (Re)build it next to the original library.
Thank you for your personal opinion on the CA Takeover of the Villages. However you failed to mention that 8 of the 10 Village Managers have asked for continued negotiations consistent with the original contract because they are not comfortable with the CA proposed changes. They have asked to continue to continue negotiations until September. Further information can be found by watching the recent CA Board meeting or the recent Baltimore Banner article.
I did address in the article why village managers would be opposed to CA’s proposal (it would take away one of their job functions).
You failed to mention that 8 of 10 Village managers are opposed and it’s not that it would take away a job function. You have significantly minimized their testimony at CA BD meetings and enters to Columbia
While I share your concern about where the funding will come from to support The Source project, I’m not too keen on your describing it as “… a hodgepodge collection of community amenities, including a gymnasium with basketball courts, fitness center, food hall, daycare, video game room, recording studio, food pantry, tutoring space, and more.” The word hodgepodge suggests these things were chosen/combined with no rhyme or reason. It’s a value judgement (and you are entitled to that) but it comes across to me as unnecessarily glib or dismissive.
I’ve always liked the word “hodgepodge” since it’s fun to say and didn’t mean any disrespect by it. As I wrote, I think the Source sounds great but it is a lot of different things all under one roof and I’m just worried that those fronting the $$ to build it may have unrealistic expectations of how much money these things bring in, particularly since the uniting aspect most of the things in the building share is their appeal to local teenagers. It will be a struggle if the organizations leasing space are required to make lease payments that cover monthly payments on a construction loan.