Skip to main content

Always Read the Fine Print

 



This morning I’m going to wade into an area where I generally express broad goals rather than getting technical or specific. Bear with me. 

You already know that I think that Howard County needs more housing, more housing at a variety of price points, and while we are at it, housing options that are accessible for those with disabilities. I’m also in favor of ADU’s (Accessory Dwelling Units.) So, when I saw an announcement from the County about ADU’s my first response was positive. “Oh good, ADU’s.” I’m here to sheepishly admit I didn’t do any further reading until yesterday.

Always read the fine print, as they say. A few things.

Here’s the announcement from the County Executive.

Here’s information about tonight’s meeting of the Planning Board which will discuss this. 

Here’s a recent article in the Baltimore Sun which I haven’t read yet because I no longer subscribe but I will try to access it through the library.

Accessory apartments are already allowed in Howard County. Residents fear a rise in density,  April Santana,  Baltimore Sun 

Well, I don’t fear a rise in density. I think that there are a lot of things that we need and want here that will only become possible through greater density. But, there is one thing about this I don’t understand.

I’ve always thought that the term Accessory Dwelling Unit applied to an owner-occupied property where the owner chose to build the ADU. You may have heard them called them Granny Flats. This proposal (called Petition No. ZRA-218 on the Planning Board website) does not require owned occupancy to build and to rent ADU’s.

I was surprised to see this. When neighboring Montgomery County examined ADU’s they chose to require owner occupancy. Why does this make a difference? Well, this means that in MoCo you can build an ADU but the owner still is in the house - - so it's like a granny flat or a place for your kids to live when starting out. The original structure remains.

In the language of the Howard County petition, whoever owns the land could, if desired, do a complete tear-down and reconfigure the parcel to include, say, a duplex and the accessory dwelling. They wouldn’t have to live there. This could be a great project for investors who have the money to make an outlay like this. Perhaps even undertaking multiple similar projects around the county. 

There’s nothing innately wrong with investors. It will change the nature of the outcome, however. Property owners would not necessarily be living in the community and/or invested in community life. More importantly, their goals would be different. The traditional model for building ADU is to provide an affordable place to live to someone who might not be able to afford one otherwise.

I could be wrong, but the business model for investors feels wholly different to me. I think the long term results of ZRA-218 as it stands could lead to higher rents which is exactly what we don’t need. 

Will this be discussed at the Planning Board meeting tonight? Probably. Can the Planning Board choose to add language (or recommend that it be added) which makes this proposal more like the one in Montgomery County?

And, the question you’ve all been waiting for: what do you think? 


Village Green/Town² Comments 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Teacher Gifts

Today is the last day of school before the Winter Break. It’s a good time to remember the far-reaching nature of our public school system. You may not have children. You may have sent your children to independent schools. It matters not. You will be impacted one way or another. Yesterday I read a long thread on Facebook about several waves of illness in the schools right now. There’s influenza A and norovirus, I believe. And of course there’s COVID. Apparently in some individual schools the rate of illness is high enough for school admin to notify parents.  When I was little the acceptable holiday gift for a teacher was one of those lovely floral handkerchief squares. (I don’t know what it was for male teachers. They were rare in my elementary years.) These days the range of teacher gifts is wider and I have fond memories of Target gift cards which I have written about before. I think it’s safe to say that giving one’s teacher Influenza, norovirus, or COVID is not the ideal holiday...
1 comment
Read more

F ³: We Are Not Entitled

  A college student went missing. His family and friends were distraught. The community was encouraged to be on the lookout and spread the word.  Days passed.  They must have been agonizing days for those who cared about the missing student. Thoughts that foul play had been involved cannot have been far from their thoughts.  Then, at last, the student was found. Alive. The news was shared with the public.  So. Much. Relief. A family had been reunited with their child. Even though we know that life is complicated, I think it is okay to accept this as a happy ending and leave it at that.  But the world of social media says no. For every expression of joy at the news came questions and even judgement. It became clear to me that some folks felt entitled to an explanation. They wanted the backstory. It’s as though they felt that, by enlisting the help of the public on social media, the authorities now owed them all the details. Television dramas often weave curr...
2 comments
Read more

Separate and Unequal

  Remember “Separate but equal”? Remember how that really meant that Black schools languished in  broken-down buildings without adequate heat or toilet facilities, with cast-off, ragged learning materials, underfunded and largely ignored? The Supreme Court struck that down in 1954. The evidence was clear that separate was not equal. Plessy v Ferguson had led to - - no, endorsed - - deeply unequal schooling and opportunities. We tend to think of Brown v Board as being purely about racial integration. It was not.  It was about the logical consequences of segregation. And they were not, not, not equal. The ruling in 1954 didn’t transform public education for non-whites into a land of milk and honey by any means. But it articulated some essential truths in a way that made including everyone a legal precedent which could be relied upon and built upon. It was better than what came before it but it rested upon unsteady ground. It did not necessarily change the hearts or minds ...
1 comment
Read more