tl;dr: Merriweather Post Pavilion gets ready for the 21st century, and the Howard County Design Advisory Panel offers its advice.

I’ve previously written about the planned renovations of Merriweather Post Pavilion in downtown Columbia. Last week that renovation took two more steps forward, with a pre-submission community meeting (held at Merriweather itself) to present the plans to the general public and a meeting of the Howard County Design Advisory Panel to review the current design for the renovated pavilion.

To make a long story short, the Design Advisory Panel gave its overall blessing to the design, though with some advice given along the way. (This seems to be a standard practice of the Panel, at least based on the meetings I’ve attended.) I found the discussion of some aspects of the design to be fascinating. In order to understand why it’s best to take a trip back in time.

Most people familiar with Columbia know that the Merriweather Post Pavilion was designed by Frank Gehry (only a half-truth, as I’ll discuss below). Some of those people also know that Merriweather Post Pavilion was originally intended to be a venue for classical music, not the popular music mecca it later became. However what I didn’t know (until I did some research for this article) is that the present form of Merriweather Post Pavilion is an accident of history.

What became Merriweather Post Pavilion was originally supposed to be designed by an architect from California, Jim Lief.¹ However his design, a 3000-seat “free form tent structure . . . made of nylon material,” was ultimately deemed to be unbuildable, a conclusion that was reached only six months before the pavilion was supposed to be inaugurated with a gala concert to be attended by Vice President Hubert Humphrey and other dignitaries. The Columbia project managers then had to scramble to put together an alternative, and project architects Frank Gehry and N. David O’Malley created a new design that was then constructed on a fast-track schedule.

Due to the time constraints and the relatively small budget of $500,000 (about $3.5 million today), the design of Merriweather Post Pavilion turned out to be relatively straightforward and spartan: a flat pavilion roof (trapezoidal in shape when viewed from above), with the narrow end of the trapezoid also serving as the roof of the stage house, i.e., the portion of the pavilion enclosing the the stage. This latter feature meant that there was not a lot of room above the stage. This was made worse by the fact that the stage house walls were not vertical but rather sloped inward (continuing the trapezoid theme), so that the stage house was narrower near its top than at stage level.

This design was adequate for Merriweather Post Pavilion’s original intended use by a symphony orchestra, which did not have a need for elaborate sets and associated rigging above the performers. However the use of the pavilion for symphony performances lasted only briefly (its intended tenant, the National Symphony Orchestra, having gone bankrupt), and other “high culture” performances such as ballet lasted only slightly longer.

In the 1970s Merriweather Post Pavilion became a venue primarily for popular music acts, and remains so to this day. The focus of the Merriweather renovation is thus on better serving such acts, with their elaborate sets and larger audiences. This includes making the stage house higher, improving sight lines for audiences on the lawn, and providing permanent roofs (instead of seasonal tents) for audiences in the loge areas to the left and right of the main pavilion seating.

The proposed renovations (designed by JP2 Architects) improve sight lines from the lawn by raising the entire pavilion roof about 20 feet higher, as shown in the rendering above. (The lower edge of the current roof is only about 23 feet above the ground at the point where the lawn begins, as seen in the above photo.) The design raises the roof of the stage house even higher, so that it is no longer flush with the main pavilion roof but extends above it. (The permitted height of the stage house is 85 feet, but the current plan has it at just over 74 feet.) However the stage house roof is still low enough relative to the new roof so that it wil not be visible by audiences on the lawn (as shown in the rendering above and the comparison below). Finally, the design makes the stage house walls vertical, and adds two lightweight roofs to the loge areas.

The raising of the roof will also apparently present an opportunity to address some of the perceived issues surrounding sound levels at Merriweather Post Pavilion For example, having a higher roof will enable speakers to be configured so that sound is directed more down toward the audience than out toward the lawn and beyond.

So far, so good. The remaining issue is that although the higher stage house cannot be seen from the lawn, it can be seen to some degree from the sides, and will present a considerably higher façade than it does at present. How should this increased height be addressed from a visual point of view?

In the design presented at the Design Advisory Panel meeting, the “architectural concept for the stage house breaks down its scale by introducing a serrated edging in the top tier of the building where cedar paneling transitions into a cementitious paneling.” The serrated edging was described as echoing the treeline of the surrounding park. The cementitious or cement-like material on the upper part of the stage house exterior walls would then have a lighter color that would blend in with the sky.

This particular feature of the proposed design occasioned the most contentious discussion of the Design Advisory Panel meeting, partly I think because the architectural rendering of the stage house displayed at the meeting made the “cementitious material” look almost blindingly white, in sharp contrast to the cedar paneling below it (which would be the same color as the existing roof). Panel member Mohammad Saleem expressed his concern about the design as presented, and eventually made a motion that the “serrated edge of the stage house be simplified to reduce the height [of the edge] and that the top . . . be some type of gray metal,” and that “instead of [being] serrated, [the edge] be more horizontal and [plain] and simple to fit in the current, natural environment.”

Most of the other members of the panel disagreed with Saleem, apparently because they liked the serrated boundary between the lower and upper halves of the stage house walls and also believed that the wall colors as constructed would be more subtle than on the renderings. In the end Saleem’s motion was voted down by a 4-2 margin.

Though the motion failed, the discussion about the stage house design did highlight an underlying question some might have about the renovation, namely to what extent should the renovated pavilion retain the spare and spartan appearance of the pavilion as originally constructed. For example, in addition to the serrated design proposed for the stage house walls, the design also includes “light hole punch outs . . . introduced throughout the building façade for additional interest”. In other words, instead of being a plain cedar plank surface, the lower parts of the stage house walls would be periodically punctuated by lights of various colors, lending a more festive appearance to the stage house façade.²

Should Merriweather Post Pavilion continue to be as plain and unadorned as it was in the past? There are certainly no plans to do anything with the main pavilion roof, the wooden sides of which would be unchanged from their present appearance. That’s fitting since that roof is iconic, even to the point of being incorporated into the Merriweather Post Pavilion logo.

What about the stage house? Should it be instead clad totally in wood panelling in a natural color, similar to the main roof and echoing other venues in wooded settings, like Filene Center at Wolf Trap? At the Design Advisory Panel meeting Jamie Pett of JP2 Architects noted the desire to break up the stage house mass and not have it appear so monolithic. Some of the Panel members noted that this was in fact an entertainment venue, so some playfullness in the architecture was appropriate. Brad Canfield of I.M.A. echoed this, noting that they had originally considered doing an all-wood façade but had concluded that it reminded them of Wolf Trap, and that they didn’t want it to look like Wolf Trap.

It’s not a slamdunk case, but ultimately I’m going to go with Pett, Canfield, and the majority of Design Advisory Panel members on this one. As much as some people might like Merriweather to be “Wolf Trap in Columbia,” it’s not and never will be. Wolf Trap is a national park, the Filene Center is a much more self-consciously elegant and expensive³ structure than Merriweather Post Pavilion, and the (subsidized) Wolf Trap programming has much more of a high culture flavor than the unbashedly populist offerings at Merriweather. One Panel member said of Merriweather, “it is an entertainment venue, and we’re in the next century,” and Brad Canfield noted the “quirky” sculptures and other art that I.M.A. had placed throughout the grounds in effort to give the venue a more lively feel.

At the time of its creation Merriweather Post Pavilion was not intended as an architectural masterwork for the ages but rather as a quick and cheap solution to a pressing problem. In the current renovation I believe the goal should be to enhance what Merriweather has evolved into, by making the venue more fun, funky, and functional—and to add a fourth “f,” to do so in a relatively frugal manner. I think the proposed design for the new Merriweather could be further refined, but its heart is in the right place.

For further exploration

The chapter “Early Buildings: People and Projects” in the book Creating a New City: Columbia, Maryland contains an in-depth and entertaining discussion of the construction of Merriweather Post Pavilion, by project manager James Wannemacher. My two-part series on the planned Merriweather Post Pavilion renovations (part 1 and part 2) explains why the renovations are necessary and what is planned to be done; a followup post covers the schedule for the renovations. All three posts contain links to Howard County documents relevant to the renovation effort. The Design Advisory Panel meeting summary contains the recommendations by the members at the meeting on September 9, 2015, as well as the text of Mohammad Saleem’s failed motion. The Department of Planning and Zoning Technical Staff Report on FDP-DC-MSW-1A provides additional context on planning regulations affecting the renovation, including the 85-foot height limit for Merriweather Post Pavilion.

The Crescent development in downtown Columbia is going to be a (very) big deal.

As reported by Amanda Yeager in the Baltimore Sun, the Howard County Planning Board recently approved FDP-DC-Crescent-1, the final development plan for phase 1 of the Crescent neighborhood of downtown Columbia, a development of the Howard Hughes Corporation. Unfortunately due to family issues I was not able to attend the Planning Board meeting and see for myself the presentations of the plan. However I did find and review copies of the Department of Planning and Zoning staff report [PDF], the final development plan itself [PDF], and the accompanying neighborhood concept plan [PDF]. For anyone interested I here briefly review what’s going on with the development. (For additional background see my post from a year ago, “The Crescent development in downtown Columbia: Areas and phases,” although a lot of the information in that post is now out of date.)

In Howard County planning terminology a “final development plan” is not really the final plan; that role is filled by the “site development plan.” The final development plan contains proposed boundaries for phase 1 of the Crescent development, intended uses for the various parcels and associated square footages and building heights, and other information relevant to the plan. It does not contain detailed plans of the actual buildings to be built. However just the raw numbers themselves are interesting and informative. To quote the Baltimore Sun,

The approved outline proposes 2,300 residences; a 250-room hotel; 1.475 million square feet of office space; 313,000 square feet of retail and 225,000 square feet of civic and cultural uses spread throughout four development areas on the property.

The four development areas are known (rather unimaginatively) as Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4, with locations and proposed uses as follows:

• Area 1 includes Parcels A and B on the map shown, in the northwest corner of the Crescent development near the intersection of Broken Land Parkway and Little Patuxent Parkway. It is intended for office use along with a hotel, with some retail and restaurant space.
• Area 2 includes Parcel C on the map, south of Area 1 on the east side of Broken Land Parkway. It is intended for mixed office and residential uses, with some retail and restaurant space.
• Area 3 includes Parcel D on the map, south of Merriweather Post Pavilion and north of Broken Land Parkway. It is intended as the main “downtown” of the Crescent development, with office and residential uses, a much larger allotment of retail and restaurant space, and cultural and community facilities.
• Area 4 includes Parcel E on the map, east of Area 1 just south of Little Patuxent Parkway. It is intended primarily for office use, with a small amount of retail and restaurant space.

There is also a significant amount of space that will be left undeveloped , including Lots 1, 2, and 3 on the map shown. These will serve as natural open space for the project, and can be considered extensions of the western and southern portions of Symphony Woods.

The table below summarizes all of the uses proposed for Areas 1 through 4, including the associated square footage and related details (from page 1 of FDP-DC-Crescent-1).

The final development plan does not describe the exact nature of the 225,000 SF of “Cultural/Community” space in Area 3. However in the pre-submission meeting Howard Hughes representatives discussed building in Area 3 a new Central Branch library (100,000 SF), a conference center (50,000 SF), an aquatic center (50,000 SF), and an indoor concert hall (25,000 SF).

In the pre-submission meeting Howard Hughes representatives also discussed locating all 2,300 residential units in Area 3 along with the 250-room hotel; no office space was planned for Area 3. The final development plan moves the hotel from Area 3 into Area 1, moves 500 residential units from Area 3 to Area 2, and puts 400,000 SF of office space into Area 3.

One major omission in the final development plan (really, the major omission) is a detailed discussion of parking. The slides presented in the pre-submission meeting contained detailed information on the number of parking spaces to be provided in each area through either surface parking lots or parking garages (which would eventually replace all the surface lots). None of that is in the final development plan. Apparently the exact parking arrangements will be covered in the site development plans to be submitted for each area, including proposals for how to compensate for the loss of the current gravel lots used for events at Merriweather Post Pavilion.

Overall the Crescent development will make a major impact on downtown Columbia and Howard County overall. One good comparison is to look at Reston, Virginia, the other major planned community in the Washington/Baltimore area, and Reston Town Center, which is currently undergoing its final commercial buildout within its 84-acre core. Based on the figures in the Reston Town Center marketing brochure [PDF] published by its developer, here’s how Reston Town Center compares to the planned Crescent neighborhood:

When you factor in the office space just north of Little Patuxent Parkway (including 700,000 SF purchased by Howard Hughes Corporation from GGP) the downtown Columbia area will have roughly equivalent office space to Reston Town Center. When you add in the 1.438 million SF of leasable space at the Mall in Columbia the retail space will be significantly larger than in Reston Town Center. Finally, Reston Town Center has no equivalent to Merriweather Post Pavilion (or, for that matter, to the planned Merriweather Park at Symphony Woods). (However Reston Town Center does now have access to mass transit via the Metro Silver Line, as well as a much more vibrant office market in the surrounding area.)

As I noted in discussing the history of Howard County Council redistricting, on the tenth anniversary of Columbia former county commissioner and council member Charles Miller expressed regret that Columbia had ever been created. Now as Columbia approaches its 50th anniversary, current County Executive Allan Kittleman has promised that he will work to “[attract] large businesses to downtown Columbia so it may truly become the economic engine for our County.” The Crescent development will be the key to making that happen.

harry4columbia - 2015-03-22 19:55

The pre-submission community meeting for Parcel A is scheduled for Thursday, Mar 26, 6:30pm, at Oakland Manor Ballroom (5430 Vantage Point Road). The proposal lists “approx 360,000 sq of office/retail space; 1200 +/- space parking garage,” 301-421-4024 for more information.

hecker - 2015-03-22 20:28

I forgot to include a note about the pre-submission meeting; thanks for mentioning it! 360,000 SF is only a bit over half of the 600,000 SF approved for Area 1, so I presume there will be a second office building proposed later (along with the hotel).

Karen Gray - 2015-04-01 18:35

Thanks once again, Frank, for a great, readable summary.

hecker - 2015-04-01 20:44

You’re quite welcome, glad you found it useful. Unfortunately I didn’t get a chance to go to the most recent pre-submission meeting, so I don’t have anything to add beyond the published stories.

Enough random impressions of the proposed Crescent development—what’s actually proposed to be built? In the pre-submission meeting representatives of the Howard Hughes Corporation outlined their proposal to develop in four separate areas of the overall Crescent property, with construction to occur in three separate phases.

The overall Crescent nighborhood surrounds Symphony Woods on the west, south, and east like a giant letter “C” open to the north, hence the “crescent” name. On the west and south the Crescent is bounded by Broken Land Parkway and the exit ramp from US 29, on the east by US 29 itself. Within the Crescent development will be restricted to four areas, designated Area 1 through Area 4. (See the accompanying image; at the pre-submission meeting John DeWolf of Howard Hughes joked about the unimaginative naming.) The remainder of the Crescent will be retained as natural space, with no development planned except for the construction of a few paths through the woods. (Some of this natural space is currently not wooded, but will be replanted with trees as part of the overall development.)

Of the four areas, Area 3 is the most important in terms of defining the new Columbia downtown. As envisioned by the Howard Hughes Corporation it includes six residential buildings, a hotel and convention center, a concert hall (possibly named “Merriweather Hall” or similarly), an aquatic center suitable for competitive swim meets, a new Central Branch of the Howard County Library System, and lots of retail and dining space, for example occupying the first floors of the hotel and residential structures. At least some of the residential structures could be up to 20 stories tall; the remaining structures in Area 3 (including the hotel) could be up to 15 stories tall. Parking in Area 3 would be in the form of parking garages in the residential buildings and a parking garage behind the hotel, conference center, and library.

Areas 1, 2, and 4 are more conventional. Area 1 and Area 4 are proposed to contain general office buildings; in the pre-submission meeting DeWolf expressed a desire to have a single major corporate tenant occupy all the space in Area 1 (for example, a company like McCormick & Co. Inc., currently considering relocating its headquarters from northern Baltimore County, or a large Federal contractor). Area 2 is currently proposed for use as medical offices. All three areas are proposed to have small amounts of retail space as well, in total well less than 5% of the space in those areas.

The development of the Crescent is scheduled to occur in three phases. Based on John DeWolf’s comments in the pre-submission meeting, apparently Howard Hughes changed the originally-proposed schedule to front-load more construction in Area 3. If so I think this was a wise move: It more quickly brings the benefits of the various public and civic uses (which are of interest to people throughout Columbia, Howard County, and beyond) as well as bringing some initial residents to downtown Columbia to liven the scene and provide a local customer base for shops and restaurants constructed in phase 1. Without any Area 3 development in phase 1 the Crescent would simply look like another corporate office park.

The overall Crescent schedule then looks as follows:

Phase 1 would see initial office space in Areas 1 and 2, initial residential, retail, and dining space in Area 3, and the hotel, conference center, library, and aquatic center also in Area 3. Parking would be provided primarily by surface lots in Areas 1 and 2, and by parking garages in Area 3.

Phase 2 would add more office space in Areas 1 and 2, along with a small amount of retail, and more residential and retail space in Area 3. The surface lots in Areas 1 and 2 would be cut back in size to make way for office space and parking garages, and more parking garages would be constructed in Area 3 as part of the residential development.

Phase 3 would add yet more office space in Areas 1 and 2, along with a bit more retail, and more residential and retail space in Area 3. The surface lots in Areas 1 and 2 would be completely replaced by office space and parking garages, with more garages being constructed in Area 3 as well, again as part of the residential development.

Overall construction of office space would be spread roughly equally over all three phases, as would construction of residential units in Area 3. Most if not all of the restaurant and dining space would apparently be constructed in phase 1, with more retail space coming along in phase 2 and especially phase 3.

For more on the details of exactly what will be built and when see my next series of posts, beginning with a look at phase 1 development.

Edwin Baker (catslidefarm@gmail.com) - 2014-04-07 16:25

The Crescent and the Woods Frank, The model photograph of the Crescent development (above) makes the best possible case for preserving Symphony Woods and putting the Inner Arbor amusement park in some other location. Symphony Woods gives the Crescent its shape and character. With all of the activity scheduled for the Crescent, adding another activity center by tearing down the remaining woods is a terrible idea. I understand your enthusiasm for the creative (if untried) structures proposed in the Inner Arbor plan, although the “picnic table” and “caterpiller” seem silly, but the cost of building and maintaining them (construction estimated at $30 to $40 million), the destruction of the last large wooded open space in Downtown Columbia and the competition they will be to activities in the Crescent and the Mall makes their development unreasonable. Ted

hecker - 2014-04-08 01:16

Thanks again for stopping by! In response: Based on everything I’ve seen and read (and that’s a lot) the Inner Arbor plan is not going to result in “tearing down the remaining woods” or anything close to that; if anything it will likely result in fewer trees being removed than the previous (Cy Paumier) plan. However I think there is a valid distinction between the literal Symphony Woods (i.e., the CA property proper) and what people think of when they think of “Symphony Woods”. I may do a blog post on that topic.

Columbia is well on its way to becoming a real city with a real downtown. (This is not an April Fools’ joke.)

Last night I attended the pre-submission meeting at which Howard Hughes Corporation presented its plans for the Crescent area next to Symphony Woods and Merriweather Post Pavilion. (I arrived a few minutes late, missing the introduction of the presenters and the opening remarks.) For now I’ll leave a more complete description of the meeting to the professionals (see Luke Lavoie’s story today in the Baltimore Sun) and will just give some initial somewhat disconnected impressions.

The attendance seemed a bit less than that for the pre-submission meeting for the Inner Arbor plan. (Luke Lavoie concurs, citing 75 people attending the Crescent meeting and about 100 at the Inner Arbor meeting.) I find that a bit strange in at least one sense. In the case of the Inner Arbor plan people got exercised over what I consider relatively minor things, like identifying the exact number of trees to be removed from Symphony Woods, and presumably showed up at the meeting in force to make sure those concerns got on the record. To me this is a case of not seeing the forest for the you-know-whats, given that the Crescent development will change Columbia in ways far more radical than anything that might happen in Symphony Woods. In the immortal words of Vice President Biden, this is a big [expletive] deal.

Without really trying to I ended up sitting next to Jane Dembner of CA; the same thing happened to me at the Design Advisory Panel review of the Inner Arbor plan, and (if I remember right) at the Inner Arbor pre-submission meeting as well. I keep running into the same people at these events; I get the feeling that there’s a core group of perhaps a few hundred people at most who have influence over, strong opinions about, or (in my case) an abiding interest in what happens in Columbia and Howard County—call them the Howard County 0.1%.

The presentation itself was divided into two parts: One section on the site plan, roads and pathways, public amenities, design guidelines, sustainability, and related matters, presented by two Howard Hughes employees whose full names I didn’t catch, and a second section providing more detail on the actual buildings, presented by Howard Hughes SVP John DeWolf. This second part was apparently an adaptation of a pitch DeWolf does for investors and potential tenants, so it included a lot of high-level marketing stuff about the appeal of Columbia and Howard County, the desirability of a vibrant downtown Columbia, and the ability of Howard Hughes to execute on that vision. Due to time constraints DeWolf had to march through this second presentation in about 30 minutes, including interspersed questions and answers; this was unfortunate since this section contained some of the most interesting material from my point of view.

DeWolf was clearly enthusiastic about the project (as he himself said, the man likes to build stuff). He went out of his way to emphasize the importance of Merriweather Post Pavilion to the Crescent project, particularly as a way to “make Columbia cool” and attract a younger demographic. Whether the hip twenty-something with a lip ring depicted on one of his slides will actually want to live in Columbia (as opposed to just attending a Merriweather event) is an open question, but full marks to DeWolf for trying. DeWolf didn’t mention anything specific about Merriweather renovation or plans for Merriweather parking, but did make a brief aside about his tiff with Ken Ulman. He didn’t mention anything about the Inner Arbor plan. In general DeWolf is an entertaining presenter, though having done lots of sales presentations myself I think I can tell what’s unforced enthusiasm and what’s a bit feigned for the benefit of prospects. (For example, does DeWolf really think the lengthy multi-step Howard County approval process is a great thing for developers, as he seemed to imply?)

As Luke Lavoie’s story indicates, the possibility of 20-story-high buildings in downtown Columbia was a major theme and concern at the meeting. It reminded me of the controversy several years ago over the proposed 22-story WCI Plaza tower near the Columbia lakefront. For various reasons that plan eventually died an ignominious death, but by all indications thus far the Crescent proposal should escape that fate, 20-story buildings and all. For what it’s worth, I think 20-story buildings in the context of the Crescent development are appropriate to the setting. They don’t stick out as stand-alone structures, but appear to exist in the context of nearby buildings of somewhat smaller size. I don’t mind the contrast with the adjacent Symphony Woods either; it actually reminds me of the buildings next to New York’s Central Park, a juxtaposition I find striking and attractive. There’s an open question as to whether and how much those buildings will shadow Symphony Woods at various times of the day and year; I hope to see something about that in future presentations from Howard Hughes.

Speaking of “massing” (to use the technical term for defining the overall shapes and sizes of buildings), I think the Crescent plan actually works pretty well in relation to its site. One person commenting at the meeting was concerned about the implications of the Crescent area being relatively isolated, in the sense that it was hemmed in by Symphony Woods and Merriweather to the north and by existing roads and development to the east, south, and west—not to mention the areas within the Crescent development itself that are unsuitable for building and will remain in a relatively natural state. Far from being a bad thing, I think this might actually work to the benefit of the development. Among other things, the compact and constrained site forces a higher density of development and helps prevents the sort of “micro-sprawl” I’ve noticed in places like Tysons Corner and Reston Town Center, where large urban-scale buildings and their associated “structured parking” sit next to low-density suburban-style strip shopping centers with large open-air parking lots.

The compact site and relatively high density will of course lead to increased traffic, which was another major concern expressed, along with concerns about the implications of that increased traffic for pedestrian access to and within the Crescent area. I suspect that true mass transit (e.g., heavy or light rail) will be a long time coming to downtown Columbia, if it ever does, so I don’t expect any relief on that front. Nevertheless I’m reasonably optimistic about the traffic situation, based in large part on the advances occurring in automobile automation that will likely be widely adopted within the longer-scale time frame of this development. Even if we never get to fully-autonomous “self-driving” cars, I think increased intelligence in automobiles will go a long way to making cars more safely co-exist with pedestrians, as well as potentially speeding up traffic by allowing cars to intelligently cooperate with each other to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion caused by stops and starts due to humans’ poor reaction times.

Other thoughts: I was surprised by the interest shown in a proposed swim center (or natatorium, if you want to get fancy). I wasn’t paying much attention to the discussions over the future of CA’s swimming pools, so missed the fact that there is a fair size group of people actively lobbying for a high-end professional-quality swim center that could host local and regional swimming competitions—something Howard County currently lacks. It sounds like a worthy facility, and one which could attract lots of visitors to the proposed hotel and restaurants in the downtown area. There was also mention of locating a new library downtown, but not much discussion of that. For the record, I think the Crescent area would be a better location for a new Central Branch than near the location of the present facility. I for one am looking forward to the possibility of a large multi-purpose central library of some architectural distinction.

Finally, as implied above I didn’t really get a good feeling for how parking at Merriweather will be addressed as the various phases of construction proceed. However I did glimpse some slides that may shed some light on that question, and if I can find out more I’ll post again.

Musu Bangura - 2014-04-14 19:03

Wow, this is crazy. I haven’t been in Columbia for a couple of years now and it’s amazing how much has changed already. Great info!