What’s happening with the old White Flint mall development?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they are having second thoughts on development since there's no more money in the county. They all left.

Well, affordable housing seems needed, right?

Yes, and this is the perfect place for it! Or, type of place, more generally.

You could have housing, everything from affordable to market rate luxury, a grocery store and other commercial, and other amenities that would be useful to county residents that don’t live on site, like an indoor turf field, community center, whatever.

Instead the county wastes time and money having the planning department work on some ridiculous amorphous plan to build quadriplexes in SFH neighborhoods. We could be a serious county, but it seems that the local government refuses to make that a priority.

+1

White Flint and the old Sears location at White Oak. Develop those sites and a lot of the county’s housing needs could be solved. Right now they are just huge eyesores.

Tell the property owners.

Also, no, this would not solve "a lot" of the county's housing needs. It would be more housing (depending on what got built), which is good, but the other housing proposals would also still be necessary.

Luckily, there are other plans and there is other housing in pipeline. There are also the corridor plans, though the outcomes of those are also unpredictable.

It would be convenient of the planning department would calculate how housing we need versus how much is planned to be built so that there we knew where we stood. Think of all the time they wasted on this ridiculous immeasurable attainable housing plan.

Similarly, maybe the agriculture department could calculate how many eggs we need versus how many eggs chicken farmers plan to produce? What you seem to be calling for is a planned economy, for housing.

To the extent that housing developers are getting approvals but then not building (aka "housing in pipeline"), that's a problem that can be solved. For example by adding a requirement that the housing developer needs to break ground within 3 years of the approval, or the approval lapses. I would support this requirement. I also support the rezoning proposal to allow multi-unit housing in areas where currently only single-unit detached housing is allowed.