Author: Emily Maurer

Join us for Better Buses, Better Cities: A book talk

Join us for Better Buses, Better Cities: A book talk

Join author Steven Higashide and local transit to discuss his new book published by Island Press: Better Buses, Better Cities: How to Plan, Run, and Win the Fight for Effective Transit. This event aims to help DC advocates learn from a national expert about how we can win the fight for better buses. This book talk follows Coalition for Smarter Growth’s release of the DC Metrobus report card and the region’s Bus Transformation Project’s recommendations. Sponsored by Smart Growth America, Coalition for Smarter Growth, Island Press and Georgetown University Urban & Regional Planning Program.

Where

Georgetown University School of Continuing Studies 640 Massachusetts Ave. NW Washington DC 20001

When

December 12, 2019 from 6 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

About Steven Higashide

Mr. Higashide is one of America’s leading experts on public transportation and the people who use it. As director of research for the national foundation TransitCenter, Higashide has authored groundbreaking reports that have redefined how decision makers and journalists understand transit. He has taken the bus in 28 cities around the US and the world.

Letter to Governor Hogan opposing I-270/495 expansion

December 3, 2019

The Honorable Larry Hogan

State of Maryland

Governor

100 State Circle

Annapolis, MD 21401 

Re: Capital Beltway and I-270 

Dear Governor Hogan: 

We are writing to share our strong and continuing concerns with your proposals for the Capital Beltway and I-270. We urge you to delay further action at the Board of Public Works and any steps toward a public-private partnership, until you conduct a comprehensive alternatives and impact analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

As we have noted before, MDOT failed to study an integrated transit-oriented development (TOD), transit and demand management alternative to your proposed toll lanes. This is important because your proposal will increase, not decrease driving demand, whereas a transit- oriented development approach that includes buildout of development at Prince George’s 15 Metro stations, Montgomery’s 13 stations, and selected MARC stations will reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled while providing the competitive placemaking environment so much in demand by people and corporations today. Transit components of this alternative include the Purple Line, Metro capacity expansion, MARC expansion, and bus rapid transit (BRT) networks. The Council of Governments recently determined that TOD, BRT, and Metro all performed best in improving the performance of our highways. 

If the Amazon decision to locate in Arlington near two Metro stations tells us anything, it’s that transit-oriented development (TOD) is our future. In fact, the WMATA Connect Greater Washington study shows that build-out of the DC region’s Metro stations would so shift travel modes and trip patterns that we would avoid having to add 1000 lane miles of new roads and thousands of parking spaces. At the same time, Metro would go from needing public operating subsidies to annual operating surpluses because the trains would be full in both directions and all day due to the amount of development at the suburban stations. 

Your proposed toll lanes will fail because of induced demand: the new capacity created by the toll lanes, especially through diversion from the general-purpose lanes, will not last. The general-purpose lanes will fill up again as people decide to live farther away from work to take advantage of the initial time savings or decide to switch to driving from other modes or to drive more often. At the same time, vehicles seeking to reach the new capacity will add to traffic on all connecting roads. Additionally, toll lanes have termini, and the congestion which occurs at these termini, where multiple new lanes merge into the regular lanes, is regularly substantial; the congestion is merely moved “down the line” by some miles. By fueling more long-distance living and commuting, toll lanes add to vehicle miles traveled, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, water pollution, and traffic. Last, but not least, they raise serious equity concerns. 

As the Virginia experience has shown, the 12-lane highways that result from adding four toll lanes to the Beltway and other highways are a massive, generational alteration of our landscape and come at high cost to homes and neighborhoods, people and health, and the environment. You have committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Maryland, yet the toll lanes will increase driving and emissions. In contrast, the comprehensive TOD, transit and demand management alternative will reduce vehicle trips, vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions. 

We have been extremely concerned about the process that has been applied to the toll highway proposals, as have the Comptroller and Treasurer, members of the legislature, the local community and local elected officials, and the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission. The failure to complete the NEPA process including full alternatives and impacts analysis, creates significant risks for the project, both legal and financial. 

The Comptroller promised the project would not be approved by the Board until the EIS is complete. Your proposed timeline assumes an agreement will happen in February of 2021 even though the NEPA process from the upper portion of I-270 has still not begun. Moreover, the Department of Legislative Services recommended that the P3 statute be amended to prohibit the submission of a pre-solicitation report prior to the availability of an environmental impact statement which has not yet been released. 

The Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) has twice decided unanimously not to concur with the alternatives for the project. To this date–the public and M- NCPCC still don’t have origin-and-destination data, stormwater management impacts, financial assumptions, toll rates and other critical information that is important for this solicitation proposal to be approved. 

For all of the reasons we outline in this letter, we once again urge you to delay further action at the Board of Public Works and any steps toward a public-private partnership, until you conduct a comprehensive alternatives and impact analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and to ultimately adopt the more effective and sustainable transit-oriented approach that we have outlined here. 

Sincerely, 

Denisse Guitarra | Maryland Conservation Advocate | Audubon Naturalist Society 

Brian O’Malley | President & CEO | Central Maryland Transportation Alliance 

Stewart Schwartz | Executive Director | Coalition for Smarter Growth 

Ed Rich | President | Greater Farmland Civic Association 

Lois Hybl and Richard Willson | Co-Presidents | League of Women Voters of Maryland 

Pamela Goddard | Senior Program Director, Mid-Atlantic Region | National Parks Conservation Association 

Josh Tulkin | Director | Sierra Club, Maryland Chapter 

Kimberly Golden Brandt | Director | Smart Growth Maryland

Testimony supporting Maryland Housing Impact Fairness Act

November 21, 2019

Montgomery County Council

Council Office Building

100 Maryland Ave.

Rockville, MD 20850

Bill 34-19, Taxation – Development Impact Taxes – Affordable Housing – Housing Impact Fairness Act (Support)

Testimony for December 3, 2019

Kimberly Golden Brandt, Director, Smart Growth Maryland

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager, Coalition for Smarter Growth

President Navarro and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Kim Golden Brandt, Director of Smart Growth Maryland, which advocates for a more environmentally and economically sustainable future that creates opportunities for all Marylanders through better development patterns. I am also speaking on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. 

First, thank you to the Council for your support of affordable housing, shown through your continued investment in the Housing Initiative Fund and recent adoption of the Council of Government’s housing targets. In addition to the legislation before us this evening, we welcome additional proposals that will help get the HIF to the $100 million per year goal and help double housing production to meet the COG targets.

We support the Housing Impact Fairness Act, given the existing and growing need for both affordable housing and school construction funding. This legislation ensures that all new construction contributes for its impact. 

For example, there was a $575,000 home from 1953 on Dickens Avenue in Bethesda. It was torn down and replaced with a 4,891 square foot, $1.425 million home. When this happens again and again in a neighborhood, middle-class households are replaced by wealthier households. Teardowns can lead to neighborhoods becoming more exclusionary over time, especially when “middle” housing types are missing.

On average, the additional impact fees would result in a newly rebuilt home costing $1.8 million instead of $1.75 million. As with all taxes, this is a statement of values. The HIF portion of the impact tax from just this one teardown would go a long way to helping provide affordable housing, for example, more than covering the rent of two very low-income families for over a year. Or it would meaningfully contribute to more room in our schools for students. For homes built after 1986, we’ve already made that value judgement to support these goals.

In addition to our support of the bill, we also offer the following amendments and considerations. First, to ensure that this proposal will be a net gain in revenue over time, we welcome additional economic analysis. The recordation tax and increased property taxes that come from teardowns also go towards affordable housing, school construction, and other investments.

Next, we recognize that some neighborhoods, especially those with older structures, need investment including improved housing stock, and that teardowns can offer that needed investment. Therefore, we welcome an amendment that exempts blighted or condemned properties.

Finally, we ask the PHED committee to strongly consider exempting properties if an additional living unit is provided. This policy could be modeled after Portland’s residential infill project. Replacing one home with another does nothing to address the county’s housing shortage. If we do not build enough homes to address demand, then older homes will just continue to become more and more unaffordable.

Thank you for your time.

CSG testimony in favor of Montgomery County housing legislation

July 12, 2019

Montgomery County Council

Council Office Building

100 Maryland Ave

Rockville, MD 20850

Bill 18-19 — Landlord Tenant Relations — Relation Expenses (Support) and Bill 20-19 — Landlord Tenant Relations — Licensing of Rental Housing — Fee Exemption (Support)

Testimony for July 16, 2019

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager 

President Navarro and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am here to urge your support for two bills, both of which advance the Coalition for Smarter Growth’s mission of creating more inclusive, livable communities. 

First, Bill 18-19 requires that if a tenant’s housing is condemned as unfit for human habitation, a landlord must make a relocation payment to the tenant and provide a tenant with right of first refusal. Given the current housing crisis, low-income tenants often have few choices but to locate in housing that is substandard but affordable. When that housing is condemned due to poor conditions for which the tenant is not responsible, the tenant must then face the expensive task of moving, possibly to a more expensive home. 

Further, the right of first refusal provision ensures that tenants have the option to return to their homes after repairs. To truly have mixed-income, inclusive communities, we must protect renters, especially those at the highest risk of displacement due to health and safety violations. This is common sense legislation that would make Montgomery County a more welcoming place for low-income renters. 

Next, Bill 20-19 is linked to a familiar issue: accessory dwelling units. CSG and partner organizations that care about providing a diverse and affordable supply of housing have highlighted the numerous benefits of ADUs. One of the greatest benefits is allowing individuals with disabilities to live closer to caretakers or relatives – whether that be parents, siblings, children, or extended family. Similarly, individuals with disabilities can also benefit from the lower rents often offered for ADUs. 

One of the biggest barriers to providing ADUs as a housing option for disabled individuals is the cost of licensing and constructing an ADU. Exempting the license fee for ADUs occupied by disabled individuals will help lower the overall cost of providing an ADU. In addition, we hope that the Council will pursue opportunities to assist homeowners, especially low-income homeowners, with ADU financing. Financing assistance can include partnering with banks, providing interest-free loans, and creating a financing guide. 

This is a population that stands to benefit the most from ADUs; therefore, I urge you to help incentivize ADUs as a housing solution for individuals with disabilities, while also enabling greater integration into neighborhoods and community life. 

Thank you for your time.

Testimony supporting amendments to Subdivision Staging Policy

June 7, 2019

Montgomery County Council

Council Office Building 100

Maryland Ave. Rockville, MD 20850

Resolution to Amend the 2016-2020 Subdivision Staging Policy (Support) 

Testimony for June 11, 2019 

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager

President Navarro and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am here on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. We support current efforts to lessen the negative impacts of the Subdivision Staging Policy’s (SPP) housing moratorium and echo the need for affordable housing. However, we ultimately urge the Council to replace the moratorium with policies that better address the County’s school construction, housing, and economic development needs. 

The 2016 SSP projected that the county would grow by over 200,000 residents between then and 2045, with 14 percent of land absorbing 82 percent of new jobs, 76 percent of new households, and 73 percent of population growth. Preventing new housing, especially mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented, and affordable housing in efficient locations close with good transit, stifles the county’s ability to meet the housing needs of current and future residents, as well as to grow the local economy and maintain the county’s fiscal health. We can have a county that has both good housing and good schools for all of our residents. 

Further, new medium to higher density development has not been a major contributor to student generation. Single-family homes countywide generate almost double the number of students that multi-family homes generate, and single-family home turnover is the primary factor driving school population increases. Finally, school impact taxes paid by new development provide more than the total cost for each projected generated student. Medium to higher density development also provides significant property tax revenue. It does not make sense to punish new development that the county needs for impacts it does not cause. 

For these reasons, we ask the Council go further to address the harm that the moratorium brings. Today’s resolution is an important first step to mitigating the harmful impact of the moratorium on affordable housing supply. However, the stringent requirements of the resolution are likely to help just one current housing proposal, the transit-oriented 850 Sligo Apartments in Silver Spring. Other important transit-oriented new housing developments, like Strathmore Square, are left in moratorium for at least another year, limiting the number of units that are being approved at this time. We’ve also heard that the uncertainty and potential limitation on buildout caused by the moratorium can put the private financing of projects like Strathmore Square at risk. 

There are many alternatives to the moratorium for the Council to consider, including: 

Reinstating school facility payments in overcrowded clusters, while maintaining the current school impact tax. This would allow development to continue, but impose a slightly higher cost to do so. As clusters and individual schools became more overcrowded, the county could require a corresponding increase in school facility payments. 

Aligning the timelines of the CIP and annual school test. While the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) includes projects six years into the future, the annual school test in the SSP only looks at the next five years. This means that even if there is a project in the sixth year of the CIP that would remedy overcrowding, that school or individual cluster could still go into moratorium. To address this, the annual school test should consider projections six years into the future. 

Taxing teardowns more substantially. Teardowns do not currently pay impact fees, even though they are new construction and new families moving in can be expected to generate new students. This might also reduce the “mansionization” of our communities, which turns formerly modestly- sized homes into much larger homes, housing a similar household size. 

Exempting Metro Station Policy Areas from the annual school test. Building more homes, especially affordable homes, near transit is necessary for a sustainable future. We cannot afford to miss out on opportunities to grow in a more walkable way. Businesses and residents are looking to locate in more transit-oriented communities. 

Redistricting school boundaries. Although education policy is not our specialty, we encourage those who are experts to make more substantive recommendations on this topic. Redistricting has the potential to relieve overcrowding, as well as further goals of socioeconomic and racial integration. 

Reviewing school design standards. If schools are designed to occupy a smaller footprint by being three stories instead of one, or integrated into mixed-use development, and if playing fields can be shared with recreational centers and parks, then it might be easier to find sites for new schools. 

Pushing forward the 2020 SSP effective date to June 2020. The current timeline for the SSP update is November 2020, well after the next annual school test in July 2020. Changes should be made to the SSP by June 2020 to avoid another year of moratorium restricting the housing supply and economic development. 

These are our suggestions to consider, but we strongly urge the Planning Department to offer other alternatives to the housing moratorium policy. Montgomery County can have great schools, plentiful housing, and a strong economy, but we must have policies that support that future. We look forward to being a part of these conversations throughout the 2020 SSP process. For now, this resolution is a first step. 

Thank you for your time. 

StreetsCamp 2015

StreetsCamp 2015

Advocacy knowledge + technical knowledge = power!

StreetsCamp was a one day summit held on June 20th, 2015 to provide participants with the tools to make our streets better: safer for walking and bicycling, transit-friendly, and more.

StreetsCamp includes both subject matter and advocacy skills workshops on everything from how to plan a neighborhood campaign, to safe street design for walking and cycling, to the ins and outs of zoning codes. 

How does it work?

You will hear from leaders in sustainable transportation and urban planning, but StreetsCamp is more than just workshops. Every attendee is a part of shaping and leading the day. Be prepared to get involved and meet people!

In the morning, local advocates and experts lead sessions on topics like campaign strategy, organizing, messaging and media, telling your story, safe street design, and more.

In the afternoon, StreetsCamp turns into an ‘unconference’ . That means session topics and activities will be suggested and organized by YOU and everyone attending!

Presentation materials

Not every session at StreetsCamp incorporated a PowerPoint presentation or handouts, but for those that did, we have compiled the materials here.

Telling Better Stories About Public Transportation, Paul Mackie, Mobility Lab

So You Think You Can Blog (Blogging 101), Aimee Custis & Abigail Zenner, Greater Greater Washington

Street Design Secrets Revealed, Dan Emerine, CNU-DC

Transit Today, Tomorrow, and the Future: There’s More to It Than Metrorail, Kristin Haldeman & Allison Davis, WMATA

How Safe Routes to School Are Driving Change in the Greater Washington DC Region, Matt Colvin & Keith Benjamin, Safe Routes to School

How Could We Get a Majority of People to Bike? Bike Infrastructure Best Practices, Jess Zdeb, Toole Design Group

Blogging 102, Dan Malouff & Aimee Custis, Greater Greater Washington

StreetsCamp 2015 was made possible by these partners:

Greater Greater Washington

Coalition for Smarter Growth

Georgetown University School of Urban and Regional Planning

Congress for New Urbanism, DC Chapter

Safe Routes to School National Partnership

Mobility Lab

Smart Growth America

National Complete Streets Coalition

Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling

Washington Area Bicyclists Association

All Walks DC

Sierra Club