Responsible Growth for Montgomery County
Please Consider signing our petition at change.org!
Overview
Radical Changes in Zoning
Right now, the Montgomery County Council and the Planning Board are considering plans (i.e., "Thrive Montgomery 2050" and "Strategies for Attainable Housing") that would lead to radical changes in zoning and land use in single-family zoned communities, with the stated goal of substantially increasing density. These changes would allow speculators/developers to purchase and tear down single-family homes and convert them into duplexes, triplexes, and in some cases, quadplexes. In certain areas, houses could be knocked down to make way for apartment buildings. Developers would be able to do this "by right", without any community input.
Working People Forced Out of Neighborhoods
The Planning Board initially claimed the goal is to create affordable housing options for 200,000 new residents over the course of the next thirty years. However, the planning staff has since admitted, on multiple occasions, that the resulting housing is not likely to be "affordable" in any sense. They have changed its name several times, from affordable housing to "Missing Middle" housing and, lately, "attainable" housing. More recently they have acknowledged that the resulting housing will be "market-rate housing." In other words, it would be out or reach for most people.
Affordable Homes Torn Down, Less Diversity
The truth is that the "Thrive Montgomery" and "Attainable Housing" proposals do not require developers to build anything affordable or moderately-priced. Without that, the Thrive proposals will almost certainly make housing less affordable and result in less diversity. Low and middle-income working families will be forced out. Developers will be able to tear down affordable homes and replace them with cramped, overpriced, high-density, shoddily constructed buildings, and community residents will have no say. Key targeted neighborhoods such as Wheaton, Glenmont, and Aspen Hill contain most of the affordable homes left in Montgomery County. Developers can't profitably build McMansions in those neighborhoods, so the Planning Board is going to let them tear down those homes (e.g., in the $300's to $400's) and likely replace them with dense rentals That would effectively knock out one of the most important rungs on the economic opportunity ladder.
Who Really Benefits?
There is nothing wrong with developers making a profit, but the County should not give them a free pass to tear down affordable housing to do so. The result will be anything but thriving communities. Instead, working people will be squeezed out of neighborhoods, and taxpayers will get stuck with the bill for the infrastructure to support this new construction.
More Information on the Way
Please check back soon for more information on what's happening, and how you can help shape this discussion. Or better yet, join in our Facebook discussions and collaborate with us so Montgomery County can have a real, workable plan for the future. Our Goal is to have the County Council to send the plan back for real community participation, which was limited by the pandemic and staff rushing to complete this new paradigm of growth.
And if this new paradigm of growth troubles you, please sign our online petition at change.org!
Radical Changes in Zoning
Right now, the Montgomery County Council and the Planning Board are considering plans (i.e., "Thrive Montgomery 2050" and "Strategies for Attainable Housing") that would lead to radical changes in zoning and land use in single-family zoned communities, with the stated goal of substantially increasing density. These changes would allow speculators/developers to purchase and tear down single-family homes and convert them into duplexes, triplexes, and in some cases, quadplexes. In certain areas, houses could be knocked down to make way for apartment buildings. Developers would be able to do this "by right", without any community input.
Working People Forced Out of Neighborhoods
The Planning Board initially claimed the goal is to create affordable housing options for 200,000 new residents over the course of the next thirty years. However, the planning staff has since admitted, on multiple occasions, that the resulting housing is not likely to be "affordable" in any sense. They have changed its name several times, from affordable housing to "Missing Middle" housing and, lately, "attainable" housing. More recently they have acknowledged that the resulting housing will be "market-rate housing." In other words, it would be out or reach for most people.
Affordable Homes Torn Down, Less Diversity
The truth is that the "Thrive Montgomery" and "Attainable Housing" proposals do not require developers to build anything affordable or moderately-priced. Without that, the Thrive proposals will almost certainly make housing less affordable and result in less diversity. Low and middle-income working families will be forced out. Developers will be able to tear down affordable homes and replace them with cramped, overpriced, high-density, shoddily constructed buildings, and community residents will have no say. Key targeted neighborhoods such as Wheaton, Glenmont, and Aspen Hill contain most of the affordable homes left in Montgomery County. Developers can't profitably build McMansions in those neighborhoods, so the Planning Board is going to let them tear down those homes (e.g., in the $300's to $400's) and likely replace them with dense rentals That would effectively knock out one of the most important rungs on the economic opportunity ladder.
Who Really Benefits?
There is nothing wrong with developers making a profit, but the County should not give them a free pass to tear down affordable housing to do so. The result will be anything but thriving communities. Instead, working people will be squeezed out of neighborhoods, and taxpayers will get stuck with the bill for the infrastructure to support this new construction.
More Information on the Way
Please check back soon for more information on what's happening, and how you can help shape this discussion. Or better yet, join in our Facebook discussions and collaborate with us so Montgomery County can have a real, workable plan for the future. Our Goal is to have the County Council to send the plan back for real community participation, which was limited by the pandemic and staff rushing to complete this new paradigm of growth.
And if this new paradigm of growth troubles you, please sign our online petition at change.org!
What's The Problem?
These are a few of the concerns that we have about the proposed changes, and how they are being pushed forward:
1. The County is proposing significant changes to our communities on an abbreviated schedule, which means few residents know what is happening or understand how it will affect their communities, and thus cannot play a role.
2. It makes no sense to make big plans for the future during a pandemic. We don't even yet know how the pandemic will ultimately affect how people live, work, shop, travel, etc.
3. Increasing density without any limitations or safeguards will drastically - and permanently - alter the character of communities, strain infrastructure, snarl traffic, increase property taxes, and degrade the overall livability of our county.
4. More density will affect our public schools, which already face a host of challenges. Without engaging all stakeholders, nobody can realistically say what those impacts will be.
5. Increasing the overall area of impermeable surfaces (e.g., streets, parking lots, and buildings) will cause even more runoff to go directly into our creeks and streams, making a bad problem even worse. It will lead to more erosion, water pollution, and ultimately harm the Potomac River and the Chesapeake Bay.
These are a few of the concerns that we have about the proposed changes, and how they are being pushed forward:
1. The County is proposing significant changes to our communities on an abbreviated schedule, which means few residents know what is happening or understand how it will affect their communities, and thus cannot play a role.
2. It makes no sense to make big plans for the future during a pandemic. We don't even yet know how the pandemic will ultimately affect how people live, work, shop, travel, etc.
3. Increasing density without any limitations or safeguards will drastically - and permanently - alter the character of communities, strain infrastructure, snarl traffic, increase property taxes, and degrade the overall livability of our county.
4. More density will affect our public schools, which already face a host of challenges. Without engaging all stakeholders, nobody can realistically say what those impacts will be.
5. Increasing the overall area of impermeable surfaces (e.g., streets, parking lots, and buildings) will cause even more runoff to go directly into our creeks and streams, making a bad problem even worse. It will lead to more erosion, water pollution, and ultimately harm the Potomac River and the Chesapeake Bay.
Sycamore Creek, slightly above its normal level after some rain
|
Sycamore Creek overflowing its banks (storm drains flow directly into creeks like this one)
|
More Information
County Executive Marc Elrich's Letter on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Citizens Coordinating Committee on Friendship Heights website on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Citizens Coordinating Committee on Friendship Heights Flyer on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Resolution by the Greater Olney Civic Association (GOCA) in opposition to "Thrive Montgomery" and the so-called "Attainable Housing Strategies"
The False Promise of Residential Infill Re-zoning and Re-development (A video about similar growth strategies in the Ballard neighborhood of Seattle, WA)
Looking at Minnesota Should Give California Pause in New Housing Bills (Views on Up-Zoning from a member of the executive committee of the Minneapolis Planning Commission)
County Executive Marc Elrich's Letter on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Citizens Coordinating Committee on Friendship Heights website on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Citizens Coordinating Committee on Friendship Heights Flyer on "Thrive Montgomery 2050"
Resolution by the Greater Olney Civic Association (GOCA) in opposition to "Thrive Montgomery" and the so-called "Attainable Housing Strategies"
The False Promise of Residential Infill Re-zoning and Re-development (A video about similar growth strategies in the Ballard neighborhood of Seattle, WA)
Looking at Minnesota Should Give California Pause in New Housing Bills (Views on Up-Zoning from a member of the executive committee of the Minneapolis Planning Commission)