Category: Montgomery County

RELEASE: MetroNow Bus Transformation Project Progress Report

RELEASE: MetroNow Bus Transformation Project Progress Report

In response to the region’s critical transit needs, leading transportation coalition launches the Bus Champions Roundtable, a series of targeted discussions with regional leaders to align priorities and accelerate bus transformation progress.

TESTIMONY: Silver Spring Downtown and Adjacent Communities Plan

We support the draft of the Silver Spring Downtown and Adjacent Communities Plan, although we believe there is room for improvement to think more strategically, creatively, and boldly about certain elements. In general, we are excited that the plan embraces downtown Silver Spring as the right place to grow, and to grow in a way that supports diversity, connectivity, resiliency, and health. 

RELEASE: CSG Responds to Anti-Housing Protesters at Planning Board

Montgomery County, Md – “Montgomery County’s Thrive 2050 General Plan update is imbued with the progressive and creative spirit that has long been at the core of the community’s values,” said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth (CSG). “This is why we are so saddened to see the strident opposition to the county’s efforts to address a housing crisis through Thrive 2050 and a separate study of Attainable Housing Strategies.”

MEMO: CSG Comments on Thrive 2050 Housing Chapter

TO: Montgomery County Council Planning, Housing, and Economic Development (PHED) Committee

FROM: Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager, Coalition for Smarter Growth

DATE: Thursday, October 7, 2021

SUBJECT: Coalition for Smarter Growth’s Comments on Thrive 2050 Housing Chapter

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Prior to Monday’s work session on Thrive’s Affordable and Attainable Housing chapter, I wanted to reach out to share CSG’s recommendations:

  • Create a stronger vision for economically and racially diverse neighborhoods: While this chapter does discuss this goal, we believe it needs to be more of a priority and included in the text of the goals and policies themselves, rather than just the chapter’s introduction. If economically and racially diverse neighborhoods were a primary goal, the subsequent policies would more deeply discuss targeting higher income areas with more housing, including subsidized housing. Furthermore, Thrive 2050 should recommit the county to subsidized housing being mixed income. This was not always the case in the affordable housing industry and exacerbated segregation. 
  • Amplify the need for housing those with the lowest incomes: The chapter is called “Affordable & Attainable Housing: More of Everything,” but spends most of the text explaining the need for more market rate housing and diverse housing types. While this is correct and we are grateful for this focus, we would like to see the chapter go into more detail about the housing needs of those who the market is very likely to still leave cost burdened. To serve those of the lowest incomes, the county will need to beef up its existing affordable housing programs and think more boldly and creatively about new programs.
  • Don’t leave out tenant rights: Earlier drafts of Thrive 2050 had strong language declaring that housing is a human right — that language has since been deleted. We urge you to add it back in, and the ensuing importance of strong tenant rights and protections. The county must ensure that all households have safe, healthy housing that meets their needs and are not left behind by land use changes that result in higher property values and increased rents.
  • Think carefully about incentives: We support public incentives for desirable, transit-oriented development and subsidized, income-restricted housing. However, financial incentives, especially for market-rate development, should be carefully considered. Thus, we recommend the following edit on page 99: “Provide incentives to boost housing production for market rate and affordable housing, especially near transit and in Complete Communities.” Non-financial incentives can include adjustments in the development approval process.  

Here is some proposed language to be added, primarily under the third goal of “Promote racial and economic diversity and equity in housing in every neighborhood.”

  • “Ensure that every area of the county welcomes an equitable share of income-restricted and social housing, especially in neighborhoods with high incomes, a high concentration of jobs, or high-capacity transit.”
  • Add back language from staff working draft: “Continue to promote the policy of mixed-income housing development through the implementation of county policies, programs, regulations, and other tools and incentives.”
  • “Identify and allocate additional revenue for the Housing Initiative Fund (HIF), rental assistance program, and other housing programs to meet the needs of low-income households.”
  • It was also brought to my attention that the plan does not address the quality and safety of housing. We recommend adding “Enforce and strengthen existing housing code regulations and renter protections to ensure healthy and fair housing.” We’d also support adding back language from the staff draft of the plan: “Protect tenants’ rights, improve living conditions in rental housing, and ensure renters’ contributions to the community are emphasized and valued.”
  • Add back language from staff working draft: “Expand housing access through the elimination of fair housing barriers and enforcement of fair housing laws to protect residents from discrimination.”
  • Under the first goal regarding production of more housing: “As part of the commitment to the Housing First approach, develop strategies to build deeply affordable housing, provide permanent supportive housing, and legal counsel for evictions.”
  • We also concur with JUFJ’s recommendations to add eviction rates and housing cost burden for renters and owners to the metrics section of the chapter. It would be best to see housing cost burden and many of the other currently listed metrics broken down by either planning area or census tract.
CSG Testimony: Attainable Housing Strategies

CSG Testimony: Attainable Housing Strategies

We strongly support the direction of the Planning Department’s recommendations for more diverse housing typologies in Montgomery County, especially in places near transit, amenities, and jobs. Inequitable, unsustainable land use patterns are a systemic problem at the root of some of our most difficult social issues. Montgomery County should not be a place where your zip code can predict your future income, health, or other life outcomes.

Middle housing zoning reform will not change neighborhoods overnight or solve all our housing challenges. Rather, smart land use decisions will lay the foundation for a better, more just society where people can find a place to live that fits their needs, their income, and provides access to opportunities. It will help Montgomery County become a place where more people can choose to live car-lite or car-free and drive less; a place where more people can start a family or age-in-place.

CSG Comments: Draft Vision Zero 2030 Plan

CSG Comments: Draft Vision Zero 2030 Plan

We commend Montgomery County for its commitment to ending all traffic fatalities and serious injuries. Vision Zero is important for many reasons, chief among them to make our transportation system one where all users can safely move. We cannot create great places for people to live, work, and play in Montgomery County if people do not feel safe getting there. The county also faces other challenges, such as the county’s rapidly aging population who would like to age-in-place and combating climate change, of which Vision Zero is a critical component of the solution.  

CSG Testimony: Thrive 2050 to County Council

CSG Testimony: Thrive 2050 to County Council

We strongly support the Planning Board’s draft of Thrive 2050, although we urge you to further strengthen certain areas. Thrive creates a vital blueprint for a county that is more affordable, walkable, prosperous, resilient, and racially and economically integrated, and recognizes that the best way to achieve that vision is through embracing the principles of inclusive smart growth, urbanism, and equitable transit-oriented development. 

The decisions you will make in this document will have generational implications for how we live, work, and play. The world in 2050 will be very different no matter what — the question is whether we allow our communities to evolve in order to preserve what we value the most: diversity, sustainability, affordability, prosperity, equity, and social mobility. 

A big step toward ending Montgomery’s housing moratorium!

Yesterday, the Planning Board voted to update the county’s draft growth policy (aka the Subdivision Staging Policy), which seeks to time public infrastructure like schools and transportation with population growth. Among other changes, the Planning Board draft would eliminate the counterproductive housing moratorium throughout most of the county, while adjusting fees and taxes to ensure adequate funding to meet increases in school demand.

This decision is thanks, in large part, to you! CSG’s supporters sent over 50 letters to the Planning Board, and our supporters and allies showed up strong at the Planning Board’s public hearing. Check out CSG’s public testimony for more background.

This isn’t the end though — the County Council has the last say. They will review the Planning Board’s recommendations and vote on a new growth policy by November. We’ll keep you updated on actions you can take!

Until then, please consider making a donation to sustain our work advocating for more housing in Montgomery County!

Other changes proposed by the Planning Board:

  • Developers would be required to pay Utilization Premium Payments when a school’s projected utilization three years into the future exceeds 120 percent
  • Impact taxes would be lowered from 120 percent of the cost of a seat to 100 percent, and further lowered to 60 percent in certain areas with high-capacity transit and employment centers
  • Recordation taxes at the time of home sales, would be progressively increased to the to provide additional funding for school construction and affordable housing
  • Any development located in an Opportunity Zone would be exempt from impact taxes
  • Multiple updates to transportation tests would prioritize walking and biking as transportation modes and improve safety
  • And more! If you’re interested, you can find the most up-to-date information here.

Again, thank you to all those who sent in letters or testified! In September, we’ll update you on the Council’s review and hearing schedule so you can join us again in supporting this progressive update to the county’s growth policy.