River Hill

Deteriorating safety in my neighborhood

There have been several incidents about car theft and tire smashing in my street. Last week my tire was smashed and I got a flat tire on Route 200, I feel more urged to write this post. Then during last weekend, my next neighbor told me that somebody tried to break into her car at midnight.

I have a feeling the safety in our neighborhood is deteriorating. I have not heard so much of this after I moved into this neighborhood until this year.  I filed a police report online and got approved. The approval letter starts:

To receive a copy of a police report, please submit your written request to the Howard County Department of Police – Records Section, 3410 Courthouse Drive, Ellicott City, MD 21043. There is a $6.00 reproduction charge for each report requested. Payment must be in the form of a check or money order (cash will not be accepted) made payable to HOWARD COUNTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.

It is just like when the neighborhood asked the state highway to set up a traffic light at the Route 108 and Linden Linthicum Lane, they told us there were not enough accidents to warrant a traffic light. Now there have been at least more than six property damages in just one neighborhood street , we still have not obtained any real help from the police.

I need set up a camera to catch those petty criminals.

protect-your-neighborhood

 

 

 

Meeting minutes on HCPSS Chinese/World Language Teaching

4 Comments

Summary of meeting on HCPSS Chinese/World Language Teaching

Recorded by Chao Wu

This summary is solely my recollection of the meeting. If anybody finds any discrepancy, please let me know and I will correct them. We really appreciate this opportunity to meet both River Hill and HCPSS staff to discuss this issue. Thanks for their time.

Time: September 6, 2016, 7:30PM-9:10PM. Location: River Hill High School Media Room (Information Center)

  • Attendances: around 45 parents,
  • River Hill High School Principal Mrs. Kathryn McKinley. Assistant Principal Napoleon Saunders II
  • HCPSS central office Gina Massella, Administrative Director of High Schools, Robert Cole, Coordinator of Digital Education, Leslie Grahn, Coordinator of World Languages
  • Some teachers from River Hill High School
  • Other staff; Dr. Roger Sandrain,  (Teaching synchronized online course of Differential Equation), Jennifer xx, Office of Curriculum (?), Evelyn Crown Office of Curriculum(?)

Mrs. Leslie Grahn introduced herself as an experienced world language expert from the beginning.

  1. She talked about “Distance teaching” program, which has been carried out for 8 out of 12 high schools now.
  2. The synchronized online teaching has the same curriculum as face-to-face teaching.
  3. HCPSS is hiring a new instructive assistant in Chinese language teaching.
  4. All the courses are based in Canvas, recorded.

I will not write down who raised the questions. All the questions answered by either Principal McKinley or staff from HCPSS central office.

Q1: any staff change due to budget cut

A1: Class size is set 33 as limit. Any class size below 15 has the following options:

  • Drop the class
  • Other options-convert it to other format such as synchronized online teaching: US history AP class (one student), differential equation class (from eight school)
  • Before Chinese AP was moved to synchronized online teaching, 11 registered Chinese AP. After that, eight dropped from the class. River Hill principal did not agree with the numbers, but she did not present her numbers either.

Q2 : combining Chinese class 3 + class 4. Why last day to announce cut teachers and change of class?

A2: Still less than 15.   It is a very difficult decision.

Q3: Why River Hill? Before the policy, 11 students registered, after the policy change, 8 dropped the class. What did not you think?

A3: More students registered at Marriott Ridge High School than River Hill. So we moved the teacher to Marriott Ridge, cut the teacher at River Hill.

Students dropped the class for various reasons, not just because of this class policy change.

Q4: Any research on the effectiveness of online teaching? If not, why make such change before any research was done?

A4:  this is a great invention from our county HCPSS. We are still improving it.

A mother spoke out that his son dropped off Chinese due to the synchronized online teaching after the first class, because it is very challenging to learn a foreign language in such environment.

Q5: 1) Hope the school could improve transparency when making the decision on the last days of school.  That will improve mutual understanding between schools and parents.

2) If some classes have to be changed to online teaching, can the school  try to keep relative low-level class as face-to-face?

3) Teacher-student relationship is very important for language class instruction.

4) Zoe Jordan’s mom shared her powerful testimony. She is studying in New York University-Shanghai Campus.

A5: no comments from staff.

Q6: when will the decision be revisited? How is the decision to cut staff be made?

A6: There is no plan to revisit this decision for this year. The classes will be reviewed year by year.

Q7: How about Vision 2018 Initiative? Is class enrollment  the only factor to cut staff?

A7: We value Vision 2018 initiative, world language is a priority. Enrollment is not the only factor for the school to make decisions.

Q8/A8: River Hill High School math teacher discussed many benefits of the online “differential equation” class. There is no any negative effect mentioned at all.

Bob Coale talked about Synchronized classroom. The class size limit is 24. They tried to improve the student experience using this system at the first class. He thinks students will love this online format.

Q9: (Audience commented) on the previous great benefits of “Synchronized’ online class. There will be no first class for the language class since when they hear the language class is instructed online, they just do not register the class at all.

A9: there is no class period change for the online instruction.

Q10: Will the decision to change class format be revisited?

A10: maybe not, but the classes are evaluated on yearly basis.

Q11: Are there any world languages taught in this way in HCPSS?

A11: We lost Italian, Latin program because of low enrollment number. They belong to “less taught languages”: could not find teacher and could not hold/retain the students.

Q12: The low enrollment number partially is because we started the language too late. Can we start some Chinese from elementary schools?

A12: No plan to start Chinese language from elementary school. Currently two middle schools have it. There are not enough certified teachers.

Some parents in the audience mentioned that there are several Chinese Schools in Howard County which can serve as resources for certified Chinese language teachers in HCPSS.

Q13/A13: Bob discussed the benefits of digital medium classroom. Parents said for the first class, especially language class, face-to-face teaching is very important to attract students’ attention and consequently retain the students in the class.

Q14/A14:  for Coleman. The first week was complicated with many technology issues. But that is not an issue at all for the teaching since teachers may have different class content.

Q15: (parent) We have scheduling issue between Atholton High School and River Hill High School.

A15: back-to-school night schedules were different at 2 schools. The schedule between different schools should be synchronized.

Q16: Will river Hill student meet Atholton teacher?

A16: Yes. Will plan for one-to-one support from teacher online for River Hill High School students.

Q17: Will Athlon teacher be available for River Hill ?

A17 Yes. Wednesday, after second period.

Q18:  Voice was distorted for online teaching. Students in Athlon may not use the devise as the teacher is in their classroom.

A18: Voice distortion was solved. Future technology improvement will make it better. Students in Athlon are required to use the device in classroom.

Q19: How about field trip for the language student?

A19: Open to all students from all schools.

Q20: One parent suggested we should have routine meetings in the future to keep the communication channel open.  It was asked if there are any blueprint (document) for this digital teaching.

A20: yes. possibly during the Nov. 2016 “American education week”.  There are no blue print, no research to back up benefits of  online teaching.

Q21/A21: HCPSS is on the cutting edge of 21st century education by moving it online.

Q22: What is the performance of expectation of online teaching? One parent shared his son’s experience with face-to-face teaching elevated the relationship between teacher and student because of teacher’s present. Mrs. Hui Liang’s class helped his son to register/enjoy/improve in the language.

A21: priority is the student.

Q23: Any update on the initiatives listed in HCPSS World Language Program Update dated March 2015?

A23: Chinese placement test has been implemented. Considering dual enrollment at HCC and other pathways to improve the Chinese language teaching.

Q24: Thanks for your interactions with us. Different teaching methods should be explored. Chinese schools would love to help HCPSS on the Chinese language education.

Audiences recommended the Columbia Association’s World Language Cafes for language learners. It is held on the fourth Tuesday of the month from 7 – 9 pm at the East Columbia Library’s 50+ Center (6600 Cradlerock Rd, Columbia).

Furthermore, River Hill High School Principal would love to meet us again in Nov. 2016 during American Education Week.

We need ask ourselves: Are we on the right track? The following is a slide from HCPSS presentation.

world-language-teaching-goal

http://slideplayer.com/slide/7055253/

CA public budget hearing starts

Columbia Association holding public budget hearing on Oct. 13

Columbia Association’s (CA) Board of Directors will hold a public budget hearing on Thursday, Oct. 13, beginning at 7:30pm at CA Headquarters, 6310 Hillside Court, located off Stevens Forest Road near the county vehicle emissions inspection station.CA’s budget process provides ample opportunities for input. This hearing is one of several opportunities for residents, representatives of village community associations, advisory committee members and others to weigh in on Fiscal Year 2018, the second year of CA’s two-year budget cycle. Earlier in 2016, CA’s Board passed the budget for Fiscal Year 2017 (which runs from May 2016 through April 2017) and a conditional budget for Fiscal Year 2018 (which runs May 2017 through April 2018).

Speakers are encouraged to provide written versions of their remarks. There will be time limits for each speaker: three minutes for individuals, five minutes for groups and 10 minutes for village community associations. Testimony also can be provided via email at Board.Members@ColumbiaAssociation.org or by snail mail to Columbia Association Accounting Department, 6310 Hillside Court, Suite 100, Columbia, Maryland, 21046.

The full schedule of budget work sessions and meetings begins in September and continues into February. These meetings are open to the public; each is expected to begin at 7:30pm:

  • Thursday, Sept. 22: A CA Board meeting providing an opportunity for village community association testimony, in addition to the Oct. 13 public hearing.
  • Thursday, Oct. 13: A CA Board work session including a public hearing for all stakeholders regarding additions and deletions to the conditional FY18 budget.
  • Thursday, Jan. 12, 2017: A CA Board work session for deliberation on stakeholders’ proposed additions and deletions to the conditional FY18 budget. CA’s Board will discuss the proposed changes and Board-approved threshold adjustments, as well as the annual charge rate and cap for FY18, and will take straw votes.
  • Thursday, Feb. 9, 2017: A second CA Board work session for deliberation on adjustments and inputs to the conditional FY18 budget.
  • Thursday, Feb. 23, 2017: A CA Board meeting that will include discussion of and voting on approval of the final FY18 budget revisions and annual charge rate and cap.

The approved FY2017 and conditional FY2018 budgets are online atColumbiaAssociation.org/budget.

About Columbia Association

Columbia Association (CA) is a nonprofit community services corporation that manages Columbia, Maryland, a planned community that is home to approximately 100,000 people and several thousand businesses. Additional information about CA is available at ColumbiaAssociation.org.

25th Birthday of River Hill and 4th Health Fair this Saturday

We are the newest and we are 25 now.

Saturday, September 17
11 a.m. to 2 p.m.
River Hill Village Center

Health awareness info
Obesity prevention tips
Vision, dental & blood pressure screenings
Wellness & holistic demonstrations
Kids’ nutrition games, scavenger hunt & much more

The Birthday Celebration will feature carnival games, face-painting, an inflatable, and a cake-cutting ceremony at 12:30.
Be sure to come out for this FREE event! Bring the whole family!

See you then.

Community meeting on Grace Drive of River Hill development from Simpson Oaks

The developer, Simpson Oaks CRP3, LLC, has announced a community meeting to discuss minor modifications to the approved Simpson Oaks Development Concept Plan. The modifications have been brought about by requested changes to the sketch plan in regards to the 184 residential dwelling units (103 single family detached units and 81 single family attached units) located along the north side of Grace Drive, west of the existing W.R. Grace facility. 
The community meeting will be held on
Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. at the Robinson Nature Center, 6692 Cedar Lane, Columbia, Maryland 21044.
If you are unable to attend the meeting, you may contact Sang Oh at 410-964-0300 to receive meeting minutes and follow-up correspondence.

 

Powerful statement of Chinese language experience at RHHS

During tonight’s meeting with River Hill High School and HCPSS on the Chinese language teaching,  our former River Hill High School student  Zoe Jordan’s mom shared her daughter’s email.

It is very powerful and moving. I asked her mom’s permission to share it here for your reference.

Hi, My name is Zoe Jordan and I am a 2014 graduate of River Hill High School. Currently I am a junior studying at New York University Shanghai with a major in Global China Studies and a  double minor in Mandarin and Interactive Media Arts.

I was a student of Ms. Liang’s at River Hill for three years, taking Chinese my sophomore through senior year. Taking Mandarin in high school, especially with Ms. Liang (I can’t emphasize enough her influence on me as a student), is probably the largest reason that I am able to live and study in China today. So, when I heard earlier this summer that River Hill was discontinuing most of its Chinese program and limiting existing classes to online, I was extremely disheartened and disappointed. I’m hoping to take this opportunity to express a few words about my disappointment with the school board’s decision.

I’ll start with why Chinese is so important to me. Currently, Mandarin is at the core of my studies. At NYU Shanghai, I study Chinese history, culture, and China’s present interactions with the rest of the world. Without a familiarity with the language, my understanding of Chinese culture and history would be vastly less nuanced. Not only that, but now some of my closest friends, teachers, and roommates are Chinese. In high school, Chinese represented something much more complicated. I was one of a few Caucasian students in a classroom of high schooler’s who either had some prior understanding of Mandarin or who spoke Mandarin at home. Admittedly, I was terrible at the language. I didn’t understand tones, I had an awful accent, memorizing characters was terrifying to me, and I was shy in class. At times, I felt completely hopeless about progressing when speaking Chinese seemed effortless to other students. But it taught me persistence. In retrospect, Chinese was one of the only subjects that I studied with the same rigor that I would in a college class. There were tangible rewards for my progress, I made new friends, I learned how to reach out for help when needed, and I learned that high school doesn’t need to be a typical conglomeration of English-Math-History-Science-Spanish. Chinese allowed me to individualize my high school experience even at a public school, and for that I now am studying at my dream school and making friends from all over the world.

My experience with Chinese may not be as typical as most high-school-language learners get through their language classes, but I hope it can emphasize how important Chinese is to the River Hill community and even more so to an ever-shrinking world. Although we are a large public school, we are comprised of a tight-knit community including many Chinese students and parents. I was able to participate in two programs: StarTalk (a government funded language learning program) and a teaching program in which I was an assistant teacher, due to Ms. Liang and her connections within the Howard County Chinese community. Even more importantly, River Hill prides itself on being a blue-ribbon, distinguished school with (and I’m quoting this from our school’s official profile)  “rigorous instruction and engagement at the center of continuous improvement.” I strongly believe that discontinuing Chinese is completely counterintuitive to a dynamic and evolving school curriculum.

If our school wants to continue its prestigious legacy, it’s crucial to prepare students for a world that is more globalized, more connected, and frankly — more Chinese. As I’m sure it will be mentioned sometime else this evening, Mandarin is the most widely spoken language in the world and China is the fastest-growing economy in the world. While these facts might seem distant to us in Howard County, to a high school senior contemplating entering the business, political, or legal world, knowing what opportunities await in China for foreigners or how invaluable of a skill speaking Mandarin can be is priceless. Being able to communicate with a population of one billion largely influential Mandarin speakers is again, absolutely invaluable in the 21st century. From an economic, cultural, educational, and a person-to-person perspective —  emphasizing Chinese in modern schools makes sense considering the trajectory of the future. I hope that my experiences learning Chinese can underscore how important Mandarin is to River Hill, and how big of an asset it could be to our community.

 

Thank you,

 

Zoe Jordan

 

Our Planned Community (The Villager 2016-9)

 Our Planned Community

This article will be published on the September 2016 “The Villager” of River Hill Community Association.

Recently our county was hit hard by natural disasters. A hurricane hit western Howard County. Then, there was the flash flood that hit old Ellicott City. The flash flood caused tremendous damage to the old, historical city which is located in a basin surrounded by hills. Some people blame the flood on too many developments uphill from old Ellicott City and the watershed management is not functioning as expected.  One Saturday I went to help clean-up the aftermath and saw the damage first hand. Some buildings’ basements were washed away and they are now supported by temporary structures to ensure safety. This experience made me think about Columbia’s future.

There is a heated community debate on the two different proposals for the Downtown Development Plan. See my August newsletter article “Columbia’s Downtown and Affordable Housing” (https://chaowu.org/2016/07/27/columbias-downtown-and-affordable-housing/) for more information. Some people are complaining we are losing control to developers. There are concerns that too large a concentration of affordable housing will be placed in the downtown area. Some people believe that the assumption that millennials will want smaller homes with less driving is unfounded.

Recently, I read a book by Joseph Mitchell and David Stebenne “New City Upon A Hill, A History of Columbia, Maryland”. The book gave me a complete and big picture view of how our city was formed and arrived at today’s unique situation. The diversity of villages, the village centers merging with the communities, the green space, the pathways and the parks, the less congested roads are the reasons I loved Columbia and moved here. If a planned community begins to grow unplanned, it will become a disaster eventually.

We should always be forward-looking when considering Columbia’s future. This community has been a planned community since the start. The community will grow. More people will move in. We would like more businesses to move in such that people living here can work here. Our population is growing older.

We have to properly plan to accommodate these changes. With proper planning, we will be better able to cope with new issues. We need all the community efforts to plan early, better and ahead.

 

Chao Wu, Ph.D.

River Hill Representative to Columbia Council

Columbia Association Board of Directors

Email: chaowu2016@gmail.com  Website: http://chaowu.org

Disclaimer: This letter only represents Dr. Chao Wu’s personal opinion. It does not represent River Hill Board of Directors nor Columbia Association’s Board.

 

 

Traffic Study by Donaldson along Clarksville Pike

Donaldson Funeral is trying to build a Donaldson Mortuary along Clarksville Pike ( Route 108). There have been strong  oppositions from the neighborhood, including several churches, schools and residents.

Last week, they are conducting a traffic study. The timing seems very odd. During summer when the school are closed and many people are on vacation, there for sure will be much less traffic. I am not sure how the authority agreed to conduct the traffic study during this time frame.

The traffic study result will not be convincing because of the flaw how the data was collected. Maybe they do not care too much since it is just a standard procedure and they need to push forward. Or maybe they are afraid to provide evidence which is not good for them if they choose to collect data in a normal working day.

Anyway, a large bulldozer is cleaning the hurdles now on the site.

bulldozer

Columbia’s Downtown and Affordable Housing (The Villager 2016-8)

1 Comment

Columbia’s Downtown and Affordable Housing

By Chao Wu

The article will be published on the August 2016’s River Hill Monthly Journal “The Villager”

The Howard County community is debating legislative changes impacting affordable housing in downtown Columbia.  The implementation of any changes will have a long-lasting impact on Columbia’s downtown and our county’s future. Therefore, it is important for there to be careful consideration by the decision-makers and for the community to understand the pros and cons of the changes being considered. The Columbia Association’s Board of Directors has been hearing presentations from all sides and will ask CA staff to testify in front of the County Council to relay the CA Board’s positions in August.

There are two proposals in front of the County Council that amend the current legislation governing affordable housing as Columbia’s downtown is further developed.

Joint Proposal

One is the joint proposal mainly developed by Howard County Government and Howard Hughes Corporation (Columbia’s master developer). In this proposal, the parking requirement is greatly reduced, the housing density in downtown will be increased (from 5500 total units to 6400 total units), and a public financing scheme called tax increment finance (TIF) of $170 million will be implemented. Tax increment financing (TIF) is a public financing method that is used as a subsidy for redevelopment. Through the use of TIF, the county government will divert future property tax revenue from this Downtown Development to Howard Hughes for its willingness to take responsibility for ensuring the development of affordable housing. Howard Hughes will have a 40-year binding rights under Development Rights and Responsibilities Agreement such that no future legislation can change this proposed Downtown development plan.

In the joint proposal, the affordable housing units are proposed for the following locations: 100 at the Banneker Fire Station, 100 at Toby’s Dinner Theater, 150 at the existing library site, 90 units at a temporary fire station and 60 at the transit center. These units will be mixed with market rate units. Since the 900 units in downtown currently under construction do not offer affordable housing, another 5,500 units (the original number of units proposed in the 2010 Columbia Downtown Development Plan) are being proposed. This will make the total number of units 6,400. The Central Library, currently under renovation, will ultimately be replaced by housing units. A new library location has not been determined.

Jen Terrasa’s Proposal

The second proposal has been submitted by Councilwomen Jen Terrasa (District 3). This proposal requires 15 percent of Howard Hughes’ or any other developer’s units to be affordable. It ensures that downtown Columbia develops with a full spectrum of housing options as envisioned in the Downtown Columbia Plan (2010).

Advocates for the joint proposal want to make sure the housing will happen sooner by giving Howard Hughes financial incentives provided by TIF and binding the company to an agreement that requires a specific number of affordable housing units are built. Advocates for the Terrasa proposal support the simplicity of the proposal and argue TIF is only used to help the revitalization of blighted or economically depressed areas, which Columbia’s downtown area is not.

Here are my thoughts on the affordable housing in downtown after reading and reading all available materials.

Total Units for Downtown

I believe there is a need to have a cap on the total units developed over the next 40 years. Columbia has been a planned community from the start when Jim Rouse envisioned this new city. Without a cap, we can not plan the infrastructure accordingly. Having a set number of housing units will require any proposed future increase be considered in an open and public process. This is a good planning tool and is needed to ensure Columbia remains a planned community.

The county has been waiving the affordable housing requirement (usually 10%-15%) for developers in other parts of Howard County. Developers do not like to build affordable units because they will make less profit. The 900 downtown housing units currently under construction have no affordable units built as originally proposed as part of the 5,500 total units. That is the reason the joint proposal will give another 5,500 units to Howard Hughes.  I am concerned that if this happens again, the developer will simply say we could not achieve the affordable housing goal after 6,400 units are built, and the county will probably simply agree to increase the total unit number.

Density for Downtown

I believe that increasing the density for downtown in order to achieve affordable housing is reasonable. It is in the best interest of our community to have people who work in Columbia and Howard County able to afford to live here.

Affordable Housing Distribution

Others in the community debate that there are too many affordable housing units located in downtown or Columbia. The following data were obtained from CA board chair Andy Stack’s paper shared on my website. Howard County has 1,337 Section 8 vouchers and of these 1,068 are located in Columbia, which is 80%.

Howard County has 1,260 units of Section 8 Project-Based Housing and 1,154 (92%) of them are in Columbia. (If Monarch Mills, which is located on Oakland Mills Road just outside of Columbia’s boundaries, is included, then 1,191 (95%) are in the Columbia area.

Howard County has 1,646 units that receive the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit ( LIHTC) and 372 (23%)  units, or 451 (27%) if Monarch Mills included, are in Columbia. So Columbia has 2710 units (Section 8 + LIHTC) of the total 4245 units of Howard County, which is  over 64%.

Considering that only 33% percent of the population of the whole county is in Columbia, I believe there is room for the affordable housing to be reasonably distributed around the county.

40 year Binding Agreement

I am concerned about the 40-year binding agreement with Howard Hughes. Yes, it ensures stability for Howard Hughes, but I believe it will be a problem for Columbia in the long term. It prevents our future legislators from making reasonable changes if needed. We must admit, nobody can accurately foresee Columbia’s development in 40 years.

Better Planning of Infrastructure

The Downtown Columbia Partnership estimated the following improvements to the infrastructure are needed to accommodate the downtown’s growth: a new elementary school ($30 million), a new fire station ($30 million), a new library ($40 million), a new arts center ($20 million), traffic improvement ($75 million), a new transit center ($9.5 million) and a new parking garage for Merriweather Post Pavilion ($50 million). The total is $254.5 million. Note, the TIF for Howard Hughes is estimated to total $170 million. I think more infrastructure should be proposed: another elementary school ($30 million), a new middle school ($60 million), a new high school ($180 million), a new hospital ($200 million). That is another $370 million. So total new spending for Columbia Downtown can easily top $1 billion.

Howard County Public Schools have been overcrowded and need money for upgrades and expansion. When we plan for the new Downtown, we should prepare enough schools, hospitals and roads to accommodate this change. It is always better to plan earlier, clearer and with careful financial considerations.

If you want to share your thoughts, please come to a CA Board meeting, county meetings, or email me.  The county council is expected to vote in September on the proposed legislation.

Chao Wu, Ph.D.

River Hill Representative to Columbia Council

Columbia Association Board of Directors

Email: superbwu@gmail.com  Website: http://chaowu.org

Disclaimer: This letter only represents Dr. Chao Wu’s personal opinion. It does not represent River Hill Board of Directors nor Columbia Association’s Board.

Columbia Downtown Future

Petition: MD 32 Expansion: Get A Sound Barrier

Please sign the petition for a new sound barrier along Route 32 in River Hill area.

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/md-32-expansion-get-a

The MD 32 Expansion plan between RT 108 and I-70 was developed without any plan whatsoever for sound mitigation to the existing homes along MD 32. The development will wipe out tree and vegetation buffers, increase the speed of vehicles, increase the volume of vehicles, and do nothing about the tractor trailer engine brakes being used. Sign this petition to tell the Maryland State Highway Administration and their supporters in the Howard County Government that the project should not move forward without a sound barrier as part of the plan.

Price Tag for Columbia Downtown Development

The following material was presented to CA board by Downtown Columbia Partnership last week.  Howard Hughes has 4 seats in the 7-seat board of this organization and is paying for its operation.

Besides $254.5 million infrastructure is needed, I believe there is an extra $470 million needed to support the growth of Downtown. Adding $170 for the TIF given to Howard Hughes, we need around 1 billion dollars at least.

Expected Downtown Columbia Infrastructure (from Downtown Columbia Partnership)
Infrastructure Price Tag
A new elementary school $30 million
A new fire station $30 million
A new library $40 million
A new arts center $20 million
Traffic Improvements $75 million
A new transit center $9.5
A new parking garage for MPP $50 million
total $254.5 million
TIF for Howard Hughes $170 million
What are missing( from my perspective. The number is pure estimation from my impression while reading HCPSS school budget some time ago. I did not double check it.)
Infrastructure Price Tag
Another elementary school $30 million
A new middle school $60 million
A new high school $180 million
A new hospital $200 million
Total $470 million

 

Page 1:

Downtown Columbia Presentation Page 1

Page 2:

Downtown Columbia Presentation Page 2

When we talked about infrastructure, we are talking about those students have been staying in the trailer classroom for 20 years in Clarksville. Is that insane how community/government planning and budget process works?

Columbia at 50

Just see this article from http://hocoapfo.blogspot.com/.  It is written by Len Lazarick, who have been living in Columbia for 47 years. He was the first group of people moving here. I had another opportunity to speak with another one of  the first group Columbians some time ago. She shared many interesting stories with me too.

It is a really good read. I am looking forward to the next article and more. As Columbia Association is preparing to celebrate the 50th birthday, it is good to see our past first. As Howard County is debating on a 40-year biding development plan for Howard Hughes (General Growth now), we should learn from our past too. Looking backward will teach us some lessons for looking forward.

The article link is:

http://marylandreporter.com/2016/07/11/how-the-garden-for-growing-people-got-planted-and-grew/

This is the first of a series of 12 monthly essays over the next year leading up to Columbia’s 50th birthday celebration next June. It ran first in The Business Monthly, with a circulation of 25,000 in Howard and Anne Arundel counties, and after that will be published here on MarylandReporter.com and by our partner website, Baltimore Post-Examiner. The copyright is maintained by the author and may not be republished in any form without his express written consent. © 2016 Len Lazarick

By Len Lazarick

 

Traffic Noise Barrier Request from River Hill Community (MD 32)

Residents in our neighborhood are requesting a noise barrier and the following is a copy/paste answer from SHA. Our community organization sent similar requests to state and county too.

Two flaws in the answer:

1) The car speed will go up dramatically after West 32 is expanded. I believe the noise will go up too.  SHA seems to keep a blind eye on this critical factor.

2) SHA should consider noise barrier while building/expanding new highways at the start. After those constructions are done, the money is used up. It takes another several years/decades to build a noise barrier. However, at the same time, many people’s life have been negatively impacted for a long time. Just see they are building one barrier after another along Route 29. It really affect the traffic for years while building the noise barrier.

Dear xxx,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding traffic noise impacts to your community of River Hill, located near the interchange of Great Star Drive and MD 32 (Patuxent Freeway) in Columbia, Maryland.  More specifically, we would like to address your concerns regarding traffic noise impacts to your residence at 6381 Morning Time Lane in Howard County.

The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) State Highway Administration (SHA) considers the need for noise barriers in two circumstances, designated as Type I and Type II.  In Type I situations, barriers are considered when a new highway is being built or an existing highway is being expanded to add capacity.  On May 5, 1989, when the relocation/expansion of MD 32 was originally in planning, a document (FHWA-MD-EIS-72-07-FS) was approved, which included noise impact studies of the undeveloped areas along MD 32.  These areas would become the future residential community of River Hill.  This document concluded projected maximum traffic noise levels for the adjacent noise sensitive areas would not reach the 66-decibel threshold for residential development, and noise mitigation was not suggested.  New development after the “Date of Public Knowledge” was not included in studies for noise abatement as part of project planning.  Our research shows the majority of homes in the River Hill community, in particular those along Morning Time Lane, were built in the mid 1990’s.

 

In July 1996, soon after construction of MD 32 and at the request of area residents, SHA performed noise measurements at 22 different locations along MD 32 in the area of Great Star Drive.  Measurements were taken again in October 1996, concluding traffic noise at those locations did not reach 66 decibels and, verifying the noise analysis, noise levels were not high enough to warrant noise barrier construction.  The SHA did agree to provide additional landscaping and earthen berms to address concerns about the view shed.

 

Your correspondence also mentioned the planned project to widen MD 32, from MD 108 to Linden Church Road.  Noise analysis for this project did not include your community and ended just south of the MD 108 interchange.  Additional construction and widening of the roadway to the north of your community will not increase the overall capacity of MD 32 in your area and, therefore, Type I analysis was not required.  In addition, SHA has no plans at this time to further improve the capacity of MD 32 south of MD 108, which would warrant a Type I noise barrier analysis.

 

Communities may also be eligible for our Type II, or Retrofit Noise Barrier Program, when a highway already exists and is not being expanded.  The intent of the Type II Program is to address areas of noise impact to communities predating either the original construction of the highway, or the inclusion of environmental analyses in the highway development process. Our records indicate the majority of homes in the vicinity of the MD 32 and the Great Star Drive interchange were built in the mid 1990’s.  Your residence, in particular, was built in 1996.  Based on this information, your residence is not eligible for our Type II Noise Barrier Program.

 

Thank you again for your interest in this important matter.  If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 410-545-8629, toll-free 1-888-228-5003, or via email at cbarmer@sha.state.md.us.

 

Sincerely,

 

Cornelius

 

 

Cornelius C. Barmer, P.E.

Assistant Division Chief

Office of Highway Development

State Highway Administration

Maryland Department of Transporation

707 N. Calvert Street

Mailstop C-102

Baltimore, MD 21202

410-545-8629

cbarmer@sha.state.md.us

Two Important Downtown Plans

While CA board is debating on two Downtown Affordable Housing proposals in the Council, I am looking for some old documents which tried to define and shape our downtown’s future.

  1. Downtown Columbia Plan, by Howard County, dated back to 2010. The county executive was still Mr. Ken Ulman. The county councils were Courtney Watson, Dr. Calvin Ball, Jen Terrasa, Mary Kay Sigaty, Greg Fox. So except that Courtney Watson was replaced by Jon Weinstein, all other four council members are still sitting there.downtown-columbia-plan
  2. Coalition for Columbia’s Downtown, dated back to 2007.Coalition for Columbia Downtown

We can see there have been some changes over the years.

Discipline your kids until others do

Recently, CA received complains that there were teenagers or pre-teenagers in CA pools whose behavior were really bad. They were rude, aggressive and used profane language in the presence of members and guests, many of whom are children. In some cases, the language and behavior were directed at members and guests. Even some girls were harassed.

CA will take every means to protect our visitors and remove those teenagers, even report them to the police.  We want to maintain a safe and enjoyable environment for each visitor.  Please report any bad behavior to the staff by yourself or encourage your kids to do so.

Then I see a post related to destruction of property in Blandair Park on Oakland Mills Road at Independence Day.  Some people suspect those were done by teenagers again.

Last month, we had some vandalism in my street and no offenders have been caught yet.

I personally don’t like to put those teenagers in jail even the property damage is very large. Jail time is a no-turn-back gate for their life.  However, I do wish their parents know how to discipline their kids. Otherwise, others will do and they will pay a heavy price for their families.

CA In Action (The Villager 2016-6)

This article was published on The Villager, in June 2016

The Columbia Association has a new Board of Directors for the 2017 fiscal year (May 1, 2016 – April 30, 2017). Andy Stack from Owen Brown is the new chair. Dick Boulton from Dorsey’s Search is the new vice chair. We also have a new Board member from Town Center, Lin Eagan.

This year, the Board Operation Committee (BOC) is running with a different structure. Besides the chair and vice chair, all other board members will take turns sitting on this committee. I will serve on the BOC in July. The purpose of the Board Operation Committee is to ensure the effective functioning of the CA Board and to oversee the Board’s relationship with the CA President/CEO. I am also sitting on the Risk Management Committee, which oversees CA’s general liability self-insurance program.

The Board has many new tasks in front of it:

  1. Continue improving customer service.
  2. Approve FY-2018 budget which will invest in our continuous growth and maintain fiscal health.
  3. Implement new membership/pricing structure
  4. Investigate the pond survey results, which will help us understand the cost of CA’s pond maintenance.
  5. Roll out a five-year Capital Budget plan.
  6. Enhance CA’s influence in planning and development of Columbia:
    1. Affordable housing in Downtown Columbia
    2. Redevelopment of Long Reach Village Center
    3. Redevelopment of Hickory Ridge Village Center
    4. Commercial covenants
    5. New Town Zoning
    6. New Welcome Center
  1. Develop an implementation plan to attract and retain young adults
  2. Prepare for the Columbia’s 50th Birthday Celebration

On a personal note, I have been working to establish Columbia’s China Sister City program. I will continue to devote some time to this effort.

Chao Wu, Ph.D.

River Hill Representative to Columbia Council

Columbia Association Board of Directors

Email: superbwu@gmail.com  Tel: 240-481-9637  Website: http://chaowu.org

Disclaimer: This letter only represents Dr. Chao Wu’s personal opinion. It does not represent River Hill Board of Directors nor Columbia Association’s Board.

Initial CA Facility Assessments Conducted – Capital Budget Increases Result (The Villager 2016-7)

(This article was published on The Villager, July 2016.)

Initial CA Facility Assessments Conducted – Capital Budget Increases Result

The Columbia Association (CA) Board requested that a facility survey be undertaken to understand the physical condition of all CA facilities and enable the findings to be incorporated into long-term planning. The purpose of the facility assessments is to create an inventory of the capital improvement projects necessary to maintain the facilities under their current program and use. General and monthly maintenance issues were also included as ancillary observations. After reviewing the initial results, I am very concerned that we have to spend so much each year just to maintain the existing facilities.

All CA buildings will be evaluated by FY2020. The assessments cover the following service areas: site/civil, structural, envelope (roof and siding), interior, mechanical & plumbing systems, electrical, accessibility (ADA) and aquatics (Athletic club only). The following CA facilities were surveyed in FY16: Athletic Club, Ice Rink, Stonehouse, Art Center, Teen Center, Other Barn, and the CA Maintenance Facility. The results of these building surveys are now available (Link: https://chaowu.org/2016/06/20/ca-facility-survey-result/ ) The initial surveys found that the buildings are structurally sound but showing their age aesthetically and  in the mechanical systems. Large numbers of HVAC components or mechanical systems have reached or are soon reaching the end of their American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineering (ASHRAE) estimated service life.

The results from these building assessments have been prioritized and the high cost items incorporated into CA’s Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The CIP was created as a component for the Columbia Association Economic Model and allows for better tracking of and planning for future major expenditures. Capital projects are those which are more than $100,000. In each year’s CIP, the expenditures cover several areas: community centers, aquatics, community service, sports & fitness, open space, IT, CAT I&II, CAT III. The CIP includes all previously planned and proposed capital projects:  Swim Center Phase I, II & III (FY17 – 19), Long Reach Tennis Center (FY17), Ice Rink (FY18), Athletic Club (FY18-19).

Projects identified in the seven building surveys as high priority items were added to the FY18 capital budget. Medium priority projects and low priority projects were added to the FY20 and FY22 capital budget estimate, respectively.  The cost for CA to maintain its existing assets, fund the capital projects already planned and proposed, and fund the projects identified by the initial building survey are estimated to be: $23.14M in FY18, $19.55M in FY19, $17.19M in FY20, $16.52M in FY21, and $17.45M in FY22. Please note, the current approved FY18 capital budget is $17 million. CA is projected to be short $6M if we fund the high priority capital projects identified in the initial building survey. Furthermore, the CIP exceeds planned capital expenditures over the next five years.

Unfortunately, there are some buildings which are not performing well and they are very expensive to maintain. The CA staff has been working actively with the village associations and other parties to revitalize them; but, viable plans have not yet been identified. I understand that many residents are emotionally attached to these facilities. However, the community and the needs are changing such that we should also think about the future. Some CA Board members, including myself, don’t want CA to be overstretched financially.

Enjoy the summer sun and fun.

Chao Wu, Ph.D.

River Hill Representative to Columbia Council

Columbia Association Board of Directors

Email: superbwu@gmail.com  Website: http://chaowu.org

Disclaimer: This letter only represents Dr. Chao Wu’s personal opinion. It does not represent River Hill Board of Directors nor Columbia Association’s Board.

 

 

Join CAPA Independence Day’s Parade

AmericanFlag

Following the vote for Independence in 1776, John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, “I believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival… it ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other…”

As envisioned by John Adams in 1776, we continue the tradition of celebrating the birth of our country with an Independence Day Parade!  Here CAPA is joining River Hill Community to celebrate the Independence Day.

欢迎大人和小孩子加入，请联系我或者徐菁或者Daisy Liu。这是我们作为一个团体第一次加入类似的游行，以后我们会继续这个传统。

Parade Start.  The parade will start at 9:00 am on July 4th at Pointers Run Elementary School.

  • All parade vehicles must be in place at their assigned location at Pointers Run Elementary School by 8:00 a.m. Staging the parade from Pointers Run means that many parade vehicles must fit within that relatively small staging area.  Because the safety of children walking through the staging area is always our top concern, parade vehicles must be in position by 8:00 am.
  • People on foot or riding on the vehicles should be in place by 8:30. Please see the “Child Drop-Off  Route” on the attached lineup map, and please share with parents.
  • Restrooms are available at Pointers Run Elementary School. Some parking is available at Clarksville Middle School for vehicles not in the parade.
  • Attached is the parade lineup with diagram showing the approximate lineup location.

 

Parade End

  • The parade ends at the River Hill Village Center. Police will direct all parade elements down Signal Bell Lane to the Clarksville Fire Department where a post-parade reception for parade participants will be held.  All parade elements can park their vehicles at the Ten Oaks Ballroom parking lot.
  • The post parade reception will end at 12:00 p.m.