Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 6 West Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer says moving Brady Center could cut millions in site costs, offers to fund replacement
Summary
At the College Park BID Authority meeting, PMG told the board retaining walls driven by steep on‑site grades are creating multi‑million dollar overruns and floated relocating the city‑owned Brady Center slightly south; the developer said it would increase its purchase price to fund a new center if the city supports relocation, and board members urged city council and broad community input.
Get email alerts on the 6 West Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PMG representative Benjamin Crespi told the College Park Business and Industrial Development Authority that engineering constraints built around the Brady Center — currently the high point of the 6 West site — produce “millions upon millions of dollars of retaining walls” that have generated substantial cost overruns.
“Right now…these retaining walls are millions upon millions of dollars,” Crespi said, explaining that the site’s topography forces extensive concrete and modular block walls to meet stormwater and grading requirements. Civil engineer Richard Breedlove described a drop of more than 100 feet between the Brady Center high point and the stream buffer across the site and said the grading issues are driving both the volume and height of the walls.
To address the budget pressure, Crespi presented a discussion proposal: if the Brady Center were relocated slightly south, the developer said, the resulting site‑work savings could be split with the city and part of that savings used to increase the developer’s purchase price for phase one and fund a replacement facility. "If the walls went away, this is the savings and we would split that with you," Crespi said, adding, "we actually wanna pay you more." He emphasized the suggestion was for discussion and that the developer would approach the city council and stakeholders if the board wanted them to do so.
Several board members and the mayor pushed back on process and ownership questions. A board member said, “we don't own the Brady Center. The city does,” and urged that any conversation about moving or replacing the facility be taken to the mayor and council. Mayor Motley Broom said changes to the Brady Center should be “inclusive of our entire community” and recommended a formal community presentation and outreach before any decision.
Crespi also reviewed changes to the project program and schedule: he said the team trimmed multifamily density after public input, bringing the proposal to roughly 300 apartments and about 250 detached single‑family homes, and outlined an approval timetable that would carry a planning‑board review in July, LDP review in August and a potential closing and groundbreak in November–December if reviews go as anticipated.
What happens next: the developer offered to meet with council members and hold community meetings; the board directed city staff and the developer to coordinate outreach and to bring more detailed cost and design options (including renderings and a refined budget impact) to a future meeting for formal consideration.

