The Washington, DC region is great >> and it can be greater.

Public Safety

Prince George's picks Metro station site for new hospital

Prince George's County Executive Rushern Baker made the smart growth choice early this week, selecting the Largo Town Center Metro Station for a new $650 million, 259-bed regional medical center.

Photo by the author.

The decision caps a year-long campaign by the Coalition for Smarter Growth and community smart growth advocates to demonstrate the benefits of putting the new hospital at a Metro station. It will replace the existing Prince George's Hospital Center in Cheverly.

Operator Dimensions Healthcare will announce its official decision tomorrow. The organization's full board will vote on the recommendation for a new hospital site after its executive committee meets today.

With a projected influx of over 2000 workers each day, the new hospital will spur mixed-use development at one of Prince George's 15 mostly-underutilized Metro stations. Thousands of workers and visitors in this transit-accessible location presents a prime opportunity to create a walkable, mixed-use facility that could ultimately anchor a vibrant new downtown for Prince George's.

During the selection process, officials seriously considered rival site Landover Mall, which is over a mile away from any Metro station. From the beginning, placing the hospital at the shuttered mall seemed to be a given, especially considering that the University of Maryland Medical Systems Corporation was rumored to seek a site with 120 acres. In the end, a much smaller site with Metro access emerged as an important component for the winning site.

There are major economic, environmental, and social justice advantages to putting the hospital at a Metro station. While much hospital construction of the last 50 years has been increasingly spread out on large campuses, many new successful hospital centers take advantage of leading urban designs, compact footprints, access to transit, and mixed-use environments.

Area around Largo Metro considered for possible site(s). Map courtesy Prince George's County.

Smart growth advocates have pushed hard to encourage Prince George's officials to choose such a location for the medical center. Together with leading hospital design and construction experts, the Coalition for Smarter Growth released a series of case studies to encourage officials to choose the Largo site in February.

Building on the momentum of those case studies, the Coalition for Smarter Growth delivered a petition with over 1000 signatures and sent hundreds of emails to county officials asking that the hospital be placed at a Metro station. In February, a community meeting drew over 300 Prince George's residents in overwhelming support for a Metro-accessible medical center.

The path to a smart growth hospital is not over yet. Many decisions can happen during the design and construction phase that will advance or diminish the positive impact the medical center can have on the county. The IRS and Census Bureau headquarters at the New Carrollton and Suitland Metro stations are prime examples of "what not to do" when locating a major employer at a Metro station.

Despite future hurdles and a history of sprawl projects like Konterra and Westphalia, this decision shows the Baker administration's and state's commitment to smart growth and transit-oriented development. Putting the new regional medical center at Largo Town Center pursues the promise of real transit-oriented economic development with a more than half-billion dollar investment.

The effort offers Prince George's the opportunity to take advantage of existing transit connections not only to provide better access to quality healthcare, but to build the kind of mixed-use district that study after study shows is where people want to live, work, and play. This regional medical center can be a true catalyst for that kind of healthy smart growth development.

If you live in Prince George's and think this is a good decision, you can take a moment to thank County Executive Baker for his leadership and smart choice here.

Cheryl Cort is Policy Director for the Coalition for Smarter Growth. She works with community activists, non-profit groups and government agencies to promote transit-oriented development, housing choices, economic development and pedestrian safety, especially in less affluent communities. 


Add a comment »

Great news! But I read this that PG was going to ADD a metro station at a new hospital.

Interesting choice of language in the title. If they had chosen a site at a bus stop would you have written "PG chooses bus stop for new hospital?" :-) For some reason the wording just sounds wrong to me. Perhaps because it wasn't a contest between a metro station and a mall. It was a decision about how to best serve the residents of PG County.

by Tom A. on Aug 21, 2013 2:17 pm • linkreport

I'll play devil's advocate here, and wonder aloud if this is a good decision.

Hospitals don't necessarily need great transit access -- it's often a nice bonus at best.

Given that the hospital will be located at the end of a line, it stands to reason that a significant portion of its patients and staff will be traveling there from beyond the reaches of Metrorail.

Similarly, Metro's hub & spoke network works best for moving people in and out of DC. I also doubt that many people from within DC will be making the trip out to Largo for medical care, when more convenient options already exist.

Finally, schedules for medical personnel are long, erratic, and often span well beyond the hours that Metro is open. Given that Metro's schedules are highly optimized for 9-5 white-collar commuters, I've got to wonder how many employees will choose to ride transit to work.

Don't get me wrong -- this decision was made with the best of intentions, but I've got to wonder if this is the best use for a big tract of land near a transit hub. Hospitals have a huge footprint and tons of parking. I'm somewhat skeptical that this could anchor a new downtown...

by andrew on Aug 21, 2013 2:22 pm • linkreport

Great news for Prince George's County! I'm very excited that we are creating a job center near transit. Bringing people into the county for work is sorely needed to begin to balance out the huge daily exodus of people who live in the county and work elsewhere in the region.

by Brent Bolin on Aug 21, 2013 2:23 pm • linkreport

Doin it right.

by Thayer-D on Aug 21, 2013 2:28 pm • linkreport


Congrats to the County, congrats to you on your advocacy!


It's true, as an end of the line station there are not as many rail routes that make sense to get to the hospital compared to, say, a location at Metro Center. But:

a) better to have transit access for families and employees than not
b) ancillary development will be built that also will benefit from transit access (e.g., non-hospital medical offices)
c) town center retail will be strengthened and more appealing, more active
d) greater density of activity in the area will mean more benefits to/return on investments in bus transit service and bike/ped use

by jnb on Aug 21, 2013 2:31 pm • linkreport

Tangent: Do the tracks really go that far beyond the station? Why?

by Tim on Aug 21, 2013 2:32 pm • linkreport


Yes, they do. They are tail tracks, to allow trains to queue up there at the start and end of peak hours. You see similar arrangements at other termini without a rail yard, such as Vienna and Franconia-Sprinfield.

by Alex B. on Aug 21, 2013 2:38 pm • linkreport


there are also several buses that stop there.

with the hospitals arrival, the frequency, and the number of routes, could increase.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Aug 21, 2013 2:40 pm • linkreport

Andrew, the transit access is as much about attracting top employees as it is about patients and patients' families. By locating next the Metro and at a beltway exit, they could appeal to top talent who'd like to live in urban places in D.C. or in a car-oriented place outside the beltway.

Also, that many employees has some agglomeration effects for demanding goods and services at Largo Town Center.

by Cavan on Aug 21, 2013 2:42 pm • linkreport

Great news, and in my opinion this decision does have the potential to catalyze some additional transit oriented features in the central part of the county, which is currently dominated by drive-there or drive-and-park-at-metro transit only.

by Greenbelt on Aug 21, 2013 2:51 pm • linkreport

Tim, Alex: It's also interesting that there are stubs coming off the tracks just before the plunge underground for those tail tracks. Was there a plan to construct something more at some point, like a rail yard?

by Geoffrey Hatchard on Aug 21, 2013 3:03 pm • linkreport

Looking at the site I think there is far less room for the hospital and future expansion room than it seems. I don't see how they ate going to fit all of this plus massive parking garages on site. I still favor the mall site which has better road access and has space the hospital needs without resulting in unnecessary costs associated with a urban hospital in a suburban setting. Metro access is not necessary for this facility as the existing one is not accessible and most hospital staff have cars. I think this site is going to fall through once more planning is done by UMMS and the costs and space limitations become evident.

by Cyrus on Aug 21, 2013 3:06 pm • linkreport

@Cyrus -

I think "space the hospital needs" is a bit of a misnomer, considering the success of many new mixed-use hospitals on small footprints (see the case studies mentioned in the post).

The existing hospital isn't transit accessible - so the new one shouldn't be? That's like saying, "I'm building a new house, and my old one had a hole in the roof over the kitchen, so since I'm used to that, I'm just not going to build a roof over the kitchen in the new place." Most hospital staff at the current hospital have cars because they don't have a choice of getting there by transit. Isn't it more attractive to have the option, especially for people without cars?

by Aimee Custis on Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm • linkreport

Is the hospital taking all of the space in red? That doesnt leave much room for mixed use development around the metro station as there isnt much room left near the metro station...

by Richard B on Aug 21, 2013 3:13 pm • linkreport

Excellent news. As for Andrew's comment that hospital work are on erratic shifts, that's true. Just ask all the nurses, cleaning staff, and food service workers on the D6 bus to Sibley hospital how much easier it is to get to work since it's so conveniently located next to Metro station.

Seriously, when a family member was hospitalized at Sibley I took the D6 out there and was always shocked how many staff used the bus as their primary route to/from work. I can only imagine that Metro will be an important factor for employees at this new medical center and for all the other reasons jnb mentioned.

by Adam L on Aug 21, 2013 3:19 pm • linkreport

@Richard B
I was wondering that as well. The entire Boulevard at Capital Centre and all the surrounding land will be gone? Really? Seems a bit odd, I'd heard nothing of the sort before. Though, if that is the actual boundary, it's possible that that includes the areas they want to develop, not just the footprint of the hospital itself.

by ImThat1Guy on Aug 21, 2013 3:24 pm • linkreport

I think the area in red is the entire site owned by the Town Center group, and the hospital would only be built by my best guess on the area to the east of the station between it and the apartments.

Too bad a site on the Green Line didn't shape up better, it would have made that much more of the County transit accessible to the hospital, even if it meant taking the green line through the City first. Maybe we can start planning an extension of the Purple Line to the old Landover Mall, across through the Woodmore TC and then down to Largo, making that whole area more transit accessible.

by Gull on Aug 21, 2013 3:36 pm • linkreport

Clarification on the map shown here - this is the whole area that the county considered during the site selection process. Within this large area is the actual site that the county has secured. Since the official announcement isnt until tomorrow, we dont know the precise site or number of acres. We expect the site will include some portion of the Boulevard at Capital Centre.

by Cheryl Cort on Aug 21, 2013 3:48 pm • linkreport

That's what I thought it meant, it just seems weird to make the entire property bright red, even the parts not related to the hospital.

by ImThat1Guy on Aug 21, 2013 3:49 pm • linkreport

@Cheryl Cort
Oh, that's interesting. I didn't know that any of the Boulevard was even considered to be demolished for the site. Maybe the hospital will just get rid of some of the surface parking and either use it for the building itself or build a parking garage. That'd be nice.

by ImThat1Guy on Aug 21, 2013 4:00 pm • linkreport

This is great news for Prince George's County, and great advocacy by Cheryl and the folks at CSG! This is also absolutely the right move by County Executive Rushern Baker, who was under immense political pressure to choose a non-Metro accessible site. The County Executive's willingness to make more decisions like this in favor of TOD will truly be what makes the county move "from good to great"!

About 2 years ago, I began advocating for the Morgan Boulevard Metro Station as the site for the new hospital, and I'm happy that it received serious consideration in the process. (It was the only other Metro station site considered.) But hey - one stop down the line at Largo Town Center works just fine for me! The principle is the same: we need more employment generators around Metro stations!

Score one for PGC!

by Bradley Heard on Aug 21, 2013 4:19 pm • linkreport

They finally got it right.

by Dwight on Aug 21, 2013 4:23 pm • linkreport

Don't get me wrong -- this decision was made with the best of intentions, but I've got to wonder if this is the best use for a big tract of land near a transit hub.
Probably not the "best" but if you let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you end up with New Carrollton -- that is, nothing more than broken promises and wishful thinking.

by Falls Church on Aug 21, 2013 4:26 pm • linkreport

Don't get me wrong -- this decision was made with the best of intentions, but I've got to wonder if this is the best use for a big tract of land near a transit hub.
Probably not the "best" but if you let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you end up with New Carrollton -- that is, nothing...

My observation is that transit oriented development tends to grow organically out from existing development unless some strong incentive is created to transplant such development in a new location. Since the nearest station to Largo that might be considered to have existing TOD is Capitol South, it will take a very, very long time for development to grow out to Largo Town Center. On the other hand, the hospital, with its 2000 jobs should serve a just the kind of catalyst needed to transplant TOD to that location. If the hospital does bring additional smart growth development with it that starts to grow inward along adjacent stations, than yes, this is probably the best use of land on this transit hub.

by Dave S on Aug 21, 2013 4:45 pm • linkreport

If the hospital will spur anything to improve the disaster that is the Blvd. at Capitol Center ("Largo Town Center" is actually the Shoppers-anchored strip mall a half-mile to the east), then I'm all for it.

by ceefer66 on Aug 21, 2013 4:58 pm • linkreport

If this project happens, how many decades will it take to extend the Purple Line from New Carrolton to Largo? If the hospital triggers a wave of TOD around station, that would provide a destination for a roughly 4 miles extension of the Purple Line (after the current line is built).

by AlanF on Aug 21, 2013 5:43 pm • linkreport

I'm very pleased that a site in this area of the county was chosen for the hospital and hope it really does serve as a catalyst. Now the County needs to redouble their efforts on securing other mixed use projects at the Landover Mall location and near Morgan Blvd station. They also need to be thinking seriously about what will be done with FedEx field if and when one of the other jurisdictions (DC, VA) lures the Redskins away. Last thing we need is another large eyesore...

by RW on Aug 21, 2013 7:39 pm • linkreport

The idea of extending the Purple Line to Largo sounds like an "Outer Purple Line" which was rejected for MoCo.

I would think that an "Inner Purple Line" is needed that crosses the Blue Line somewhere from Addison Road to Morgan Blvd and generally runs in a Southwesterly direction to cross the Green Line at Suitland and then generally following Silver Hill, St. Barnabas and Oxon Hill Roads to National Harbor.

A direct bus between New Carrollton and Largo seems more likely, once the Purple Line is complete.

by JimT on Aug 21, 2013 9:06 pm • linkreport

@ Jim: Since the Largo Metro station is essentially adjacent to the Beltway, I think the Purple Line could still eventually reach it without substantial violation of the outer-Beltway principle. I agree with you, though, that any Purple Line extension beyond Largo should proceed along an inner-Beltway alignment and intersect with the Green Line before heading across the Wilson Bridge. Here's the route I recommended in my recent policy paper (at p. 20 of the main document):

The proposed inside-the-Beltway alignment would follow the same route as the Largo/Landover Mall/New Carrollton Transitway to Largo Town Center Station, then continue through the Boulevard at Capital Centre development to Arena Dr, then continue west on Arena Dr / Bishop Peebles Dr into FedEx Field, then continue south on Garret A. Morgan Blvd and west into the Morgan Boulevard Station, then continue south across the current Metro station parking lot, crossing MD 214 where it intersects with West Hampton Ave, and continue along West Hampton Ave to its intersection with West Hampton Place (at the center of a newly developed Transitway District), then continue generally south along available county-owned land and other vacant land between Ritchie Rd and the Beltway to Marlboro Pike, then northwest along Marlboro Pike to Donnell Dr, then south into the proposed Penn-Mar/Forestville Transitway District, then continue south on Donnell Dr, across MD 4 and across county-owned land to Suitland Pkwy, then west along Suitland Pkwy and south into Branch Ave Station, then continue southwest along Auth Way to MD 5 (Branch Ave), then north on MD 5 to Beech Rd, then southwest to the bend point (at the center of a newly developed Transitway District), then continue northwest on Beech Rd to MD 414 (at the proposed St. Barnabas/Marlow Heights Transitway District), then continue southwest and west on MD 414 (St. Barnabas Rd / Oxon Hill Rd) and to the Oxon Hill Center, then continue southwest and south to National Harbor, then continue across the Wilson Bridge and into Eisenhower Avenue Station.

by Bradley Heard on Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm • linkreport

@Dave S

I agree with your observation that TOD tends to grow organically out from existing development, but it doesn't necessarily have to start there. Silver Spring was arguably the first TOD on the entire eastern half of the Red Line in DC or Maryland.

Yes, it was an existing urban place, but spillover from there not only went further out into Wheaton, but into DC as well. Takoma and Fort Totten aren't redeveloping now solely because of their proximity to downtown DC - they're also drawing people who want to be close to Silver Spring.

It'll take a lot more legwork to make real TOD happen at Largo, but it can start there and grow inward, because it's the place on the Blue Line where the market could most likely support it for now.

by dan reed! on Aug 21, 2013 10:01 pm • linkreport

@dan reed!

I believe Silver Spring exemplifies my point. The county's investment in Silver Spring created the incentive needed to initiate TOD in a new location. As a Glenmont resident I can see the spillover from that initial investment in Wheaton and anticipate it coming up my way.

I think building the Hospital at Largo is probably the best option available to bring new TOD to that end of the Blue line.

by Dave S on Aug 21, 2013 10:44 pm • linkreport

This is excellent news! Baker has proven that he's serious about transit-oriented development in a county that has more potential TOD sites than any other in the DC Area. He's easily the best county exec PGC has seen in a while (not to mention much better than Leggett) and a polar opposite to his predecessor.

Next up: FBI HQ at Greenbelt!

by King Terrapin on Aug 22, 2013 9:31 am • linkreport

Getting the street cars to re-trace their old routs to places like Mount Renier and Hyatsville would go a long way. Hopefully DC's street car plan is seriously considering a coordinated plan with it's surrounding jurisdictions as it moves forward with it's plans. Silver Spring in the north and Arlington in the west.

by Thayer-D on Aug 22, 2013 9:43 am • linkreport

Too bad a site on the Green Line didn't shape up better, it would have made that much more of the County transit accessible to the hospital, even if it meant taking the green line through the City first. Maybe we can start planning an extension of the Purple Line to the old Landover Mall, across through the Woodmore TC and then down to Largo, making that whole area more transit accessible.

I think Greenbelt would have been the best location, as it is also MARC accessible on the Camden line right near UM Hospital in Baltimore. When the third track gets added and frequent all day service goes into effect this would be a boon to have the two UM hospitals connected by rail, and it would also make specialists at each hospital accessible from the other city.

It would be really nice to get the purple line built, then we can start extending it in both directions.

by Richard B on Aug 22, 2013 10:15 am • linkreport

Silver Spring was 'TOD' in a sense, but not because of the Red Line - it was a small railroad town on the B&O, along with Rockville, Gaithersburg, and many others. The Metropolitan Branch of the B&O opened in 1873.

This head start in urbanization gives Silver Spring a leg up on any other walkable urban development. You can see a little bit of it at other old railroad stops, but that dates back to the B&O, not Metro.

by Alex B. on Aug 22, 2013 10:22 am • linkreport

@ Gull & Richard B: The original mandate for the new hospital was that it be placed in the central part of the county, to serve Prince George's and southern Maryland. Central Prince George's County is generally considered to be south of U.S. 50 and north of MD 4 (Pennsylvania Ave). So the northern Green Line stations wouldn't have been in the running. Even New Carrollton (just north of US 50) would've been a stretch.

Also, I don't get how Greenbelt would've been any more transit accessible to the county than Largo. Both are on single Metro lines - although the Blue Line will eventually have the Silver Line. Also, Largo's easier to get to from the Orange Line (transferring at Statium-Armory) than is Greenbelt.

by Bradley Heard on Aug 22, 2013 10:49 am • linkreport

@Bradley Heard: Thanks for pointing me to your vision of an "inside the Beltway alighment", which is surely preferable to the outside-the-beltway version, assuming that it is light rail. (If it were to be heavy rail, then possibly the story would change, I just don't know).

I guess I must be a bit of an outlier (or in-lier), but I think we need to consider an inner Purple Line that runs closer to the District, connecting Addison Road and Suitland, rather than Largo and Branch Avenue. Your alignment would connect the two outermost Blue Line stations, which would certainly help to boost that area, but that approach has its costs.

Just to put a different alignment out there, I can imagine the Purple Line circling back to MD-410 and taking MD-410 to Pennsy, then through the industrial area to MD-704, and then following MD-704 to either Cabin Branch or Addison Road, and proceeding to the Addison Road metro station. Alternatively, or perhaps as well, a line from Cheverly, to Addison Road might make sense. Then proceed from Addison Road to Walker Mill Rd, to MD-458 to Suitland Metro, and then MD-414, coinciding with your alignment where it picks up MD-414.

If Largo really takes off, one imagines that a Largo-centric Purple Line as you envision might be the way to go. Alternatively, if develoment in West Hyattsville spreads to Bladensburg, the priority might be a light rail line that connects the old border towns, before eventually running through Oxon Hill and National Harbor in all cases.

by JimT on Aug 22, 2013 1:50 pm • linkreport

This could be very good. Workers using Metro. Visitors and outpatients using Metro. If they're lucky the hospital will draw some medical offices, a commercial lab, etc. the workers can use existing amenities as well. The good thing is that there will be a constant stream of people through the day and potential tributary functions, which could be the basis for more TOD. The main thing will be insuring that the new complex isn't a fortress that doesn't interact with its surroundings.

Re: upthread: DTSS is a poor comparison--it's an existing downtown that originally was built on a commuter rail stop and there's a lot of commercial property that's been ripe for redevelopment for years. In addition, it's a good example of poor planning--it would have worked better if the various functions were less segregated and if the newer hotels had gone up near Metro instead of several blocks away.

by Rich on Aug 22, 2013 2:04 pm • linkreport

I think this is great In order to serve the off peak metro hours they could just have a night bus that follows the same route from Largo to say Metro Center. Only operating between ~12am and ~6am or so at 20 minute headways it could be satisfied by existing stock as there are fewer routes operating at those hours. Maybe run it as a limited stop route as well since it's mostly going to be a replacement for Metrorail service.

by BTA on Aug 22, 2013 2:31 pm • linkreport

@ Jim: I do like your inner-inner-Beltway idea connecting the Orange (Cheverly), Blue (Addison Rd), and Green (Suitland) lines via light rail. Maybe that should be another of the proposed county-run light rail lines, leaving the state-run MTA Purple Line to connect the end-of-the-line Metro stations, FedEx Field, and National Harbor. I'm certainly hoping Largo will take off, and that it will ultimately become the new county seat - which would make the Purple Line connection even more appropriate.

by Bradley Heard on Aug 22, 2013 3:56 pm • linkreport

Why didn't they just move it next to the Cheverly Metro Station since its meant to replace the nearby hospital? There is plenty of cheap land or woods that could be torn down over there and replace with a hospital.

@ Rich

The hospital being at a metro station doesn't necessarily help them when its at the end of the line.

For example my father was a doctor and I have several family members that work in medicine. Most shifts start when metro is not open especially on weekends and end after it closes.

A typical morning shift starts at 5, 6 or 7am. You can forget anyone who has a shift starting at 5 or 6am taking Metrorail. Then there is also the same issue with late night shifts they start or end at 12am or about 3am Metrorail is not running. The last Blue line probably leaves Largo about 11:25 like some of the lines do; if you get off 12 or near 12 that 11:25 train wont do a damn bit of good.

Anyone who works on a weekend morning is just screwed cause you wont be getting there until about 8am.

With many of the closer end locations for hospitals even if you get off late you can still catch a train cause the last train that left shortly after 11 hasn't gotten to DC yet or they will all be stopped at Metro Center for about 15 minutes waiting for the other trains to get there you could take a bus to a location that has multiple transit options


If there was really a concern about that it would have already been done. There are many buses that end at 12:30/1am that are packed the ones I have seen for myself are the S lines, 80, 38B, x2, E2, 32,36 23a, 70, 90, 92, 96 etc.

I really think the best thing would really just be to extend Metrorail to 12:15am on weekdays as the actually time with the last train leaving each terminal at the time and open at 5:30 or 6am on weekends with the first trains depart soon afterwards. It could even be just running a train every 40 minutes to 1 hour after 11pm which would be better than nothing

by kk on Aug 23, 2013 1:26 am • linkreport

What is wrong with the current hospital that it needs to be torn down or abandoned? Was it beyond rehabilitation? Or does the county want a fresh start? I've never been to the other hospital but drive by it frequently. It's on a nice campus with room to grow. What were the issues?

by John on Aug 23, 2013 7:17 am • linkreport

@Bradley Heard: Thanks. I hope that all of these possible options are carefully evaluated in an open-ended MTA feasibility study on extending the Purple Line--but of course actual construction of the Purple Line should start before a study of future extensions gets underway.

A separate question is whether a line from Oxon Hill to Alexandria should have a higher priority than extending the initial Purple Line, given the expected development around National Harbor. Forest Heights has alot of potential, and A Purple Line accross the Wilson bridge would probably help to induce a cooperative effort to extend the South Capitol Streetcar to the DC Line and into Oxon Hill.

by JimT on Aug 23, 2013 8:53 am • linkreport

Most of the additional cost of building a hospital vertically comes from parking garages and for the higher cost of construction staging; even suburban hospitals are usually multi-story steel framed structures. There's enough land here to avoid those costs. Construction can be staged on an existing parking lot, and the shopping center parking mostly serves a movie theater that has a trip-demand curve very different than a hospital's (a 24-hour operation, but most medical staff and outpatient visitors are ~9-5).

Also a very smart location choice in terms of on-site dining/retail options, which Morgan Blvd doesn't have, and avoiding any potential ambulance/tailgate traffic snafus.

by Payton on Aug 23, 2013 4:22 pm • linkreport

I think this is a very very poor decision on the county exec and council members. I live in this area, and I am not in favor of this decision and have my home and trees disrupted for a large monstrous building that will bring god knows what to the area. I can't see why this area, when the Landover Mall area would be the perfect site. Besides Kaiser just extended their facility in the same area. THIS IS NOT A GOOD DECISION, NOT WANTED. No Mr. Baker is not a good County Executive, very disappointed in him. He either has no comment on serious issues and not visible enough for my take. Because of one ridiculous idea to cram a large Hospital center in a small space right at people back door, does not make a great leader.

by Della H. on Aug 26, 2013 5:28 pm • linkreport

How many of you who commented favourable, actually live near the proposed site? There is going to be an influx of traffic, given that there are several large venues and the shopping center traffic that we are already dealing with in the neighborhood. We have more than our share of traffic on 202 and adjacent streets. Largo has been a "dumping ground" since the days of Wayne Curry, who actually wanted to put an incinerator at Brown Station & White House Rds. We have an unsightly half-finished church that we have to look at, empty office buildings, too many hotels, a monstrous apartment building that was built to be condos, and poorly maintained streets to name a few of the social ills.
Please, give us Largonians a break.

by Joann on Feb 18, 2014 8:19 pm • linkreport

So, what will happen to the old hospital site? I'm very curious to know.

by RA on Aug 6, 2014 9:39 am • linkreport

Great news I'm very excited for the growth in my neighborhood.

by PAM on Mar 29, 2016 5:53 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

You can use some HTML, like <blockquote>quoting another comment</blockquote>, <i>italics</i>, and <a href="http://url_here">hyperlinks</a>. More here.

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.


Support Us