Chairman CitaraManis and members of the Planning Board:

The League of Women Voters appreciates the Planning Board leaving the record open for additional comments on proposed ZRA 90.

From our point of view the key elements of this proposal are granting to the Howard County Housing Commission as a matter right the opportunity to develop housing in a number of Howard County commercial, retail or employment zones. Given the testimony of the other night, the commercial, retail and employment zones designated as a matter of right were changed. The League stands by its August 9 testimony requesting the Planning Board to limit the Housing commission matter of right status to only the Planned Office Research Zoning District. We add an additional reason for our request. During the most recent comprehensive zoning the County added new mixed use zones to the Route 1 corridor which had MIHU components and offered major opportunities for housing, retail, commercial and employment uses. In addition, an overlay zone was proposed for the Route 40 corridor. During the Comprehensive Zoning process there were numerous opportunities for public comment. The Route 40 Task Force discussed housing in the corridor but never proposed imposing housing on the two business zoning district parcels that line the corridor. Instead, the focus was on opportunities for the older Rt. 40 shopping center zoned properties.

Both the Department of Housing and the Department of Planning and Zoning stated in their testimony that there are numerous opportunities for public comment on Housing Development Housing. The Housing Department also committed to holding more than the required community pre-submission meeting. We certainly applaud that good faith proposal. The reality is a matter of right allows the Department of Planning and Zoning to review and approve, possibly with modifications, but not denial that which would be submitted by the Department of Housing. The only opportunity for public comment would be the presubmission community meeting. Public County Council hearings on Council Resolutions for tax credits are not the place for specific comments on a subdivision plan filed with the Department of Planning and Zoning. To assert that the County Council hearings on the Department of Housing's capital and operating budget are a nother time for public input on a specific housing project is disingenuous at best. The reality could be that no Department of Housing project would be known at the time of the budget hearings. Or at worst, land would be given or purchased immediately after the County Council budget adoption action.

Another key element of ZRA 90 is to allow the Department of Housing to partner with others for tax credit purposes to develop housing. The League supports the idea of partners in the development of affordable housing be it for tax credits or management or actual development. The Department of Housing criteria should be a willingness to involve the community, both residents and business, in the discussion around all housing proposals. This means that even without tax credit partners, the Department should actively engage the community.

A third key element of ZRA 90 is the proposed bulk regulations. The statement made to the Planning Board was that the proposed bulk regulations provide protections for the community. The proposed bulk regulations are the same as the Planned Office Research Zoning District bulk regulations for attached and apartment units but increases the minimum for passive, recreational and /or amenity open space from 20% to 25%. How will Planned Office Research bulk regulations work on business local or manufacturing light zoned parcels? An existing Planed Office Research parcel of 3.39 acres, with some floodplain gives 1.23 acres to open space forest conservation and yields 106 units of senior housing.

The League suggests another approach to enable the proposed Housing Development Housing and enabling a public process. Development in the Residential- Environmental Zoning District (R-ED) requires Planning Board approval. The R-ED Zoning District has established criteria for approval. The Planning Board has the power to approve, approve with modifications and/or conditions attached or disapprove stating the reasons for the Planning Board action through a Planning Board public meeting process. The Planning Board may also at the time of the preliminary sketch plan require subsequent approval by the Planning Board of the site development plan. Given the objections to the idea of a conditional use for Housing Development Housing in the Planned Office Research Zoning District, adopting criteria similar to the R-ED model for approval by the Planning Board would provide both a public process and certainty for the Department of Housing.

The League believes that a Planning Board process is essential for all Housing Development Housing in all the allowable zoning districts of the County. Such approvals will enhance the proposals and provide public notice to the community at large and County reviewing Departments assuring that necessary infrastructure supports are in place or are planned for. The authority of the Housing Board and the Housing and Community Development Board to develop Housing Development Housing should have a requirement of Planning Board review and approval, which enables the community to have the opportunity to support, propose modifications or object.

The League appreciates the additional opportunity to comment and thanks the Planning Board members for their thoughtful questions on ZRA 90. The League urges the Planning Board to support amendments to ZRA 90.

Grace Kubofcik
Co-president

Cc: Marsha S. McLaughlin, Director
Department of Planning and Zoning