City Council Covers Development Tonight at 8pm
February 6th, 2007 | by David Daddio | Published in 9909 Office Building, Housing, PDC Campfire Condominiums, Route 1, The Jefferson, University View Overlook | 2 Comments
Tonight, the city council will mull over 3 major projects (of the 20 or so that are coming) to College Park. We haven’t previously covered any of these, so here is a brief preview:
- Detailed Site Plan for Hollywood Station
- 22,000 S.F. office building (here)(poor schematic here)(conceptual site plan here).
- Presentation by developer on College Park West Detailed Site Plan
- Proposed 220 multifamily housing units & 25,00 S.F. of retail (Map) on the former site of Lasik’s Restaurant and Hillcrest Hotel. The lot is a huge 4 acres. Lasik’s was a locally run restaurant and liquor store which fell victim to arson in December 2004. Hillcrest Hotel reportedly rented rooms by the hour before it was closed by the State Attorney in July 2003 and torn down in October 2005.
- Review of Preliminary Plan of Subdivision for Branchville Road (PDC Campfire)
- 300 Condominiums and 7800 S.F. of retail (here)
On a seperate note, we’d like to commend the city on vast improvements to their website. If information is public, but isn’t online, it basically doesn’t exist. If information is online but inaccessible, it basically doesn’t exist. This much more logical layout will hopefully help the city government be more responsive to its citizens. Also, it doesn’t hurt so much to look at it anymore.
February 6th, 2007 at 7:36 pm (#)
Is Lasick’s Restaurant ever going to reopen? Will it be part of this new development? What will become of the liquor store?
February 7th, 2007 at 12:59 pm (#)
I don’t know the future of Lasick’s, either the restaurant or liquor liscense.
It is my undestanding Mr. Lasick will not be part of any commercial use of the property.
It may be that he will take his proceeds from the sale of the property and looks for another business opportunity in the area.
One thing that didn’t come up last night in discusing the project was whether the project , as proposed, would pass the APF (adequate public facilities) test for its traffic impact,without expensive road improvements that the developer would have to bear.