When news broke over the summer that the property housing the Maryland Book Exchange was to be turned into a high-rise student housing complex, the sentiment among most non-student residents of College Park was clear: Hell no.
Since then, city residents have voiced their concerns in meetings, petitions and letters protesting the plan. They’ve earned the backing of state Sen. Jim Rosapepe (D-Anne Arundel and Prince George’s), the Old Town Neighborhood Association and smart-growth advocate Prince George’s County Councilman Eric Olson (District 3). And at Tuesday night’s College Park City Council meeting, District 3 Councilwoman Stephanie Stullich voiced her opposition to the proposed development, which would bring an estimated 600 to 700 new beds to the area.
Today, this editorial board joins in voicing our opposition to this proposed project, but for different reasons.
The university’s on-campus housing shortage first began in the 1990s, and since then the surge in off-campus housing construction has been fairly constant. The University View complex opened its second building earlier this year, with a third under construction; The Varsity at College Park and The Enclave are both apartment complexes working toward completion; Mazza Grandmarc has opened; and the new North Campus dorm, Oakland Hall, is set to open next fall.
It seems nearly every construction venture in College Park, especially those along Route 1, is slated to provide student housing. These projects combined are expected to bring nearly 6,000 new student beds to the area. And yet, despite that number and the many who consider the housing crisis to have subsided, developers keep building. Some justify this constant stream of apartments as a way to make up for no undergraduate housing being proposed in the East Campus project, or to satisfy the housing need that may arise after the Leonardtown Community — home to more than 600 beds — is bulldozed to make way for East Campus.
And although the site where the Book Exchange sits would offer students a more convenient option — as no developments already underway are as close to the campus — and developers Ilya Zusin and Josef Mittlemann have offered to make concessions to appease their potential neighbors, such as assisting the city in enforcing noise and code regulations and offering students car-sharing and bike options to mitigate downtown traffic congestion, it does not change the fact that another apartment complex specifically targeting students is utterly unnecessary.
However, it’s hard to argue that developing this plot is not a good idea. Certainly it would bring jobs to the city and boost tax revenue — the Book Exchange yields about $18,000 per year in property taxes, while the proposed development project would accrue $250,000 annually. When considering its position on the proposed apartment complex, the city council must navigate a path between the needs of residents and students alike and the calls for mixed-use developments.
And yet, for many who oppose the proposed development, this is not their main concern. Instead of worrying about whether the city really needs another apartment building, Stullich and others are worried about the ruckus students may cause in the neighborhood. They seem to believe that, like a barbarian horde, students will descend on Old Town College Park (where many already live), wreaking havoc on the lives of city residents.
This is asinine and demonstrates the continued hostility of some city residents toward their fellow residents — students.
As such, the city council should oppose the development of the Book Exchange property into another high-rise, but not because of a convoluted argument about student hooligans. Instead, it should do so for practical reasons. What the city needs is not more student housing but rather more local and independent businesses that cater to not only students but long-term residents as well. Restaurants and stores that are unique and lend themselves to a college town provide an outlet for all residents to mingle, shop and coexist.
Although many argue such businesses will arrive in the form of East Campus, little has been said about the project’ status or future since its new developer was announced in July. When it comes to smart growth, the city cannot afford to wait.
