More Retirement Communities, Please?

A plea for more retirement communities may seem a bit out of character to those who know me.

I'm better known for proposing revisions of housing code to allow for more and better "aging in place", including revisions which would both tighten and ease getting zoning exceptions for "accessory apartments" and "accessory buildings".

How would I ease the process? I'd make it effectively a "shall issue" process, provided certain conditions were met. And how would I tighten the process? I'd make those "certain conditions" include that accessory apartments and accessory buildings could be used to house only members of immediate family, and only for purposes of housing children, or housing elders.

Montgomery County has, in some neighborhoods such as Aspen Hill, suffered significantly as newcomers applied for permits for single-family homes on properties where already there stood a single-family home. This has led to doubling -- or more than doubling, in some cases -- of home sizes. Also, in many cases the occupants of the new space were members of extended families, in many cases with only the most tenuous degrees of relatedness, such as "second cousin twice removed of my daughter-in-law's sister-in-law". Yet by making any claim of relatedness whatsoever, the County code allows occupancy of over seven adults in a single-family detached residential domicile. This lack of definition of "relatedness" has allowed single-family detached houses in established neighborhoods to become worker barracks with paved yards on which are illegally parked the work fleets and incidental trailers full of equipment.

This is what MBAs might call a "horizontal" scheme of residential densification, though it is also illegally a conversion of exclusively single-family residential properties to multi-family mixed residential/light-industrial.

Many such schemes try -- after the fact and after long-term hounding by overworked code-enforcement authorities -- to legitimize themselves by applying for zoning exceptions as "accessory apartments" or "accessory buildings".

The zoning law should be clarified to prohibit such "horizontal" schemes, and instead should legitimize and speed "vertical" establishment of accessory residential zoning exceptions.

In this way, instead of having single-family homes occupied by one broad "family" all of working-age adults of about the same age, and all of their equipment as well, you would have single family homes which actually have only a single family in them. However, that single family might have separate domiciles all on the same property, with one residence for the parent generation, one residence for the child generation, and one residence for the grandchild generation.

Failure to adapt the County Code to allow for this will simply force the creation of even more retirement communities, rather than allowing people in the community to retire in the community.

An article from the Washington Post provides us with an analysis of population trends issued by the US Census.

Due to massive immigration, legal and otherwise, the population of the US is expected to increase from the present 302 millions to about 440 millions by the year 2050. By roughly 2040 "non-hispanic whites" will no longer be the majority. As the "hispanic" birth rate is very high among US-born citizens, and as the massive flows of immigration (legal or otherwise) from Spanish-speaking countries continues, by mid-century the population classified as "hispanic" is expected to at least triple. Non-hispanic "whites" will increase their population by less than 2 percent until about 2030 or 2040 and is expected to show significant declines in population after that time.

The vast majority of US citizens born during the so-called "Baby Boom" elected to reproduce at a rate which would have stabilized US population at about 290 millions around 2020 to 2030 or so, with significant population declines thereafter eventually stabilizing the population at around 150-200 millions, which is widely regarded as "sustainable" with renewable lifestyles and agricultural practices.

From the article:

Hispanics, including immigrants and their descendants as well as U.S.-born residents whose American roots stretch back generations, are expected to account for the most growth among minorities. That population is expected to nearly triple by 2050, growing from about one in six residents to one in three.

The black and Asian populations are each expected to increase about 60 percent, with the black share rising from 14 to 15 percent by 2050 and the Asian share jumping from 5 to 9 percent.

The number of people who identify themselves as being from two or more races is also expected to grow, more than tripling to 16.2 million, or 4 percent of the population.

By contrast, the non-Hispanic, single-race white population is expected to grow by less than 2 percent, reducing its share of the overall population from 66 to 46 percent. That group is projected to decline in the 2030s and 2040s, as more members die than are born in or move to the United States.

However, the 65-and-older population is expected to remain mostly white because of the number of whites born during the post-World War II baby boom. By 2030, all boomers will be 65 or older; by 2050, that age group will have more than doubled and will account for more than one in five residents, compared with one in eight today.

Similarly, the 85-and-older population is expected to more than triple, accounting for about 4 percent of U.S. residents in 2050, compared with fewer than 2 percent today.

The percentage of the population that is of working age will drop from 63 to 57 percent. As is the case with children, the working-age population is projected to become majority-minority before 2050. By mid-century, it is expected to be 30 percent Hispanic, 15 percent black and nearly 10 percent Asian.

With 1 in 5 people projected to be retired people, we need to either revise County code so that these folks can age in place, or we had better build an awful lot of retirement communities so that they can have someplace to live, or perhaps we could just drive them right out of the county.

Roads Should Come Before Development

The intersection of Cashell Road and Bowie Mill Road is the intersection of two small two-lane roads, with only a four-way stop sign to control traffic.

Yet there's an astonishing amount of traffic, even at 1:30 in the afternoon!

Here's why:



It's not just one McMansion, it's not just a small development of McMansions, it is



a couple of hundred McMansions, or McTownhomes, or McSprawl. Whatever you want to call this sort of thing,



there is about to be a lot more of it:



This is one of the last remaining stretches of undeveloped land to the southwest of Olney:



But it's not going to be undeveloped for much longer:



As you can see from the image above, MD Route 108 westbound towards Laytonsville is only two lanes wide. Built atop the roadbed of an extremely old farm-to-market road, and not significantly improved since about the 1960s (if that recently), it is still a very strong and high quality road suited for heavy traffic from tractor-trailers right up to large military vehicles.

As for the part of the development already completed, it -- along with the new development -- will have only four ways in and out, with two of them opening onto MD-108 and with two of them opening onto Bowie Mill Road. Bowie Mill Road itself ends at MD-108, if you are headed north. One of the exits from the community, at Cashell Road, offers a route almost directly south, but that is a two-lane road through an established community, and it will not easily be widened or improved. It has a 30 mile-per-hour speed limit along most of its length.

Like MD-108, Bowie Mill Road is also a rather old road which hasn't been significantly improved in about a half century.

One reasonably might presume that most of the residents work, and commute to those jobs, which one might reasonably presume are in Rockville, Gaithersburg, or points south such as Bethesda, Chevy Chase, or even Wheaton or the District of Columbia.

There is Ride-On bus service to the community, and I would imagine that those buses are packed at rush-hour. Yet how much Ride-On traffic can old Bowie Mill Road handle?

Bowie Mill Road is the only route out of this community which leads toward the I-270 Corridor, connecting with Muncaster Mill Road -- also very old and only two lanes -- and that road connects with Redland Road, also only two lanes wide and another old road.

If much more development is to occur here, very significant upgrades to existing roads will be necessary, unless you want to propose the currently unthinkable: a freeway spur into the community, running from the ICC up along the upper branch of Rock Creek Park.

The present County Council, in approving the long-planned Montrose Parkway East, might in fact be very likely to propose the unthinkable, and without any opposition, approve the proposal. This is why it's important to elect someone who will oppose the unthinkable.

As it is, by allowing all of this development, the Council and the planners are effectively forcing the issue.

By grossly overpopulating a hard-to-reach area, they create a captive audience who will scream for relief to the congestion. With all of the constant complaining -- that they themselves would have effectively created -- it will be easy for them to demand, and get, a freeway right up the length of the headwaters of Upper Rock Creek.

I will oppose overdevelopment of this area, and will oppose any freeway running up Rock Creek into Olney.

Rural Preservation v McMansionization

I was out yesterday, driving around and taking pictures in the northern part of District 4. That's such places as Brookeville, Ashton, and Sandy Spring.

Sandy Spring is one of Montgomery County's oldest communities, with the oldest Civic Association in the county. I happen to like Civic Associations, and was on the board of directors of the Aspen Hill Civic Association, Inc. Citizens organize themselves and can influence the government through such civic associations, and if you're a candidate hoping to connect with communities of activists and dedicated participants in the political process, that's where you want to go. I'll be at a candidate's forum on Sunday April 6th at 3:00PM at Sherwood HS, come and see and hear us!

Brookeville is a lovely place with a long history, as you can see from the plaques and architecture:



It's right at the edge of the Rural Heritage Preservation area. If you go driving through it, north on MD 97, you'll think that you're out in the country and that there's probably nothing around but farms and more farms.

There are in fact some farms, elegant established places full of history and representative of the historic pride of America in its productivity:



That's a lovely farm on Brighton Dam Road, east of Brookeville. But literally a stone's throw away there is the so-called "infill development", sitting cleverly out of sight of the main highway that passes through Brookeville, All along Bordly Drive and the other roads in the associated development, is an eruption of "McMansions":



Now, I have nothing against the wealthy living in such luxury as they can afford. However, my tastes are more traditionalist. Older homes that are well suited to and in continuum with the environment are what I prefer:



Astute observers of this campaign will have noticed that I do in fact see a crying need all over Montgomery for more Affordable Housing. Now, I am curious as to whether this structure below is a single-family home, or an apartment building?



This building is one of several of the same size and type which are located along Batchellor's Forest Road, not far from W.H. Farquahar Middle School, which I attended for three years in the very early 1970s.

I wonder, could it be possible to change zoning regulations and the affordable-housing or moderately-priced dwelling units ("MPDU") regulations to require: that if such large buildings are built on lands that previously were semi-rural or mostly undeveloped, one of six such buildings should be zoned for multiple-family occupancy? Thus, if there were six buildings of the size of the one shown above, one of those six could be home to rental tenants or condominium residents.

I do not at all suggest that such large buildings with MPDUs be subsidized at taxpayer expense to house the indigent amid the wealthy. I am proposing that such large buildings could house established small working-class families or families of young professionals just embarking on their careers.

Direction of Cities, Direction of County?

It was my great privilege to be invited to answer some questions for the Bethesda/Chevy-Chase Political Action Committee (PAC). I can't offhand recall the names of all of the people there, although they were identified to me as mostly very influential top level management or administration of many large and reputable firms and organizations.

Nor can I give the exact details of the questions I was asked, nor the answers I gave; that would be telling.

Yet one set of questions in particular involved policy matters regarding highly developed parts of the County such as Silver Spring and Bethesda/Chevy Chase.

This all reminds me of a piece I wrote almost ten years ago, which should give any curious person some idea of how I think about Urban Planning issues. Interested parties might search under Google Groups Advanced Search for key phrases and read some of the discussions I engaged in on the topic of Urban Planning, mostly in the context of the Revitalization of the District of Columbia.

This is mostly a review of Guinther's "Design of Cities".

Here's the piece, with the material to which I responded quoted with a preceding ">":

> Actually, there seems to be a backlash
> from the growth and traffic in the
> suburban areas, as congestion there is
> forcing companies to reconsider locating
> or remaining there. DC seems to be
> coming to grips with its economic
> disadvantages through changes in tax policy.
> The first-time homebuyer credit has caused
> the price of housing stock to soar, and
> in some neighborhoods it is rather scarce now.
> Downtown is improving too; there are
> cranes all over and some ghost streets
> are now reoccupied. Of course, there remain
> vast pockets of blight, but these areas are
> not going to improve by the construction
> of an outrageously priced freeway,
> which won't happen anyway. Freeway
> construction seems to do little to
> help neigborhoods in DC--some of the worst
> are right along the Southeast Freeway and I-295.
> Those freeways haven't brought them any
> real commerce other than the occasional
> truck terminal or gas station. Since
> an I-95 connector through DC is going to mainly
> serve long-distance truckers and commuters
> (excuse me, _would serve_, if it were to be built,
> which will not happen), I don't see
> how it is going to help. The existing
> urban freeways in the city are not
> helping neighborhoods at all as far as I can tell.
> Oh, and one other thing...why would this
> road have to be constructed through poorer
> communities like Brookland? Is it because
> it might be easier politically to
> ram this through those communities
> than to revive the proposals like the
> Palisades Parkway or the continuation
> of Rock Creek & Potomac Parkway to I-270?
> Resurrecting the latter might help revive
> Glover Park, Forest Hills, Kensington
> and Chevy Chase--areas just waiting for
> intermodal terminals and storage yards.

Actually, I think that if there were to be anything resembling an actual freeway built through DC, it would consist of already-planned enhancements to New York Avenue NE / Baltimore-Washington Parkway, and its connections with the Southeast and Southwest Freeways. In my opinion what's needed additionally, and which probably can't easily be built, are connections between the B-W parkway and I-95.

Note that construction has already begun, including a fairly major overhaul of bridges, on New York Avenue NE. For the last few years it had been an atrocious gateway to the city; one left the B-W Parkway and crossed over into the District and kaboom, it was like driving through Beograd after NATO bombed. Potholes ate busses. It was far from pretty. It's still not pretty now, nor will it be for about two years, but in the end it will be capable of carrying very heavy traffic. However, it will still be unlimited access for most of the distance from the B-W to North Capitol Streets.

This brings us to another issue.

In the Monday Washington Post Business Section, there was an excellent little spread detailing the current redevelopment of the once-hideous intersection of New York and Florida Avenues, roughly one long block east of North Capitol Street. This used to be one of the major eyesores any visitor to Washington could see, and there has been a lot of rhetoric thrown around by everyone from myself to then-candidate Anthony A. Williams, regarding development of this intersection into the "real gateway to the real Washington". Now that NY Avenue is getting a face-lift, getting to the gateway will be much less wear-and-tear on entering vehicles.

But what will they see once they _reach_ the gateway?

I just finished an excellent little book, _Direction of Cities_ by John Guinther, foreward by Edmund N. Bacon, author of the classic _Design of Cities_. Guinther's book is as much about politics as it's about architecture or city planning, and notes with some dismay the modern disconnect between the various disciplines which should be cooperating with each other in the development of urban spaces. He takes us through a nice little history lesson regarding population movements and urban revitalization and economic and political causes of urban decay and suburban overgrowth, but consistently returns to the theme (Bacon's seminal idea) of cities as a continuum of sensory experiences.

Certainly the continuum of sensory experience which was presented to recent visitors to Washington, who arrived through the NYA gateway, was one of decrepitude and blight. One came down the bridge over the railways and kabam, instant ugly smacks you in the face like stink off a rotten fish. But what can you do? The place is a transportation bottleneck, and simultaneously a passage. With the tracks on the east, it's an unnatural barrier between east and west. It's also the gateway, but to vehicular traffic only, to the northeast and southeast.

Guinther also returns to the theme of what he calls "direction" or "thrust". Also recurrent in the book is the concept of "vector", applying not only to the perceived exudation of artistic line in architecture, but also to the impartation of that line into the surrounding city, a sort of radiation of social force. There's an interesting contrast he develops, for instance, regarding how structures -- including open spaces -- are utilized. He notes, for instance, the contrast between the piazzas of the old world, and the sterile yet equivalently-large spaces which surround many skyscrapers, or for that matter high-rise Projects tenements. The difference, he seems to state, lies in the misapperception by many designers as to the desirability of the Le Corbusier proposition that the design of a structure should be independent of everything, including the land on which it is to be situated. This is certainly a form of purism, but it is isolating as well -- rather, it is essential for success, in any real longterm sense, to have integration, continuum, with the surrounding city.

Vectors as ideas are contrasted with solutions. A solution is the response, by an individual or committee, to some problem of comparative immediacy. The solution might be elegant, even as realized, but it is a temporary response to a temporary problem, and it may in fact be solely the work of one individual or a specific committee; once the planners have moved on, so does the solution: as times change, the solution may become either ineffective or contraproductive. Rather, what's needed is the vector, which is a freestanding vision which can be realized, perpetuated, by almost any individual or group.

The "Eastern Gate" as I shall call it, is presently set for re-development, primarily as a business gateway. Yet I believe we should note the wisdom of some of the cautionary tales Guinther brings us. For instance, the example of Detroit's Renaissance Center should be heeded. By the creation of a focus of inward-looking buildings, "vitality" was directed from the old downtown which had been intended to be revitalized; rather than revitalizing downtown, Renaissance Center became, according to Guinther and others, the final death blow to an already-tottering central city.

Let's compare, for instance, the neighborhood of Dupont Circle, and the high-rise blocks of Southwest Washington. Why, after sundown, is Southwest a deserted technical desert inhabited only by the lost and by skate-rats, where Dupont is a lively bustle? Dupont is a continuum, and Southwest is a Le-Corbusier hodgepodge of look-alike buildings each its own Purist ideal, plopped down with little care for how it blends with the neighbors. Also, Southwest is cut up into isolated blocks with little access from one street to the next. Dupont has wide avenues with appealing visual spaces, particularly to the north along Connecticut Avenue, and along all of the eastern prospect. It's a vital and living place where the business community, the neighborhood, and most-importantly the neighbors all come together and mesh into one fabric. Southwest, by contrast, is entirely built for one purpose and achieves total sterility as soon as people are not forced into it by their jobs. Unlike Dupont Circle, "there's no _there_ there".

Now let's compare the redevelopment at the "Eastern Gate". Drive around and look at what you see. Drive through late at night, and ask yourself, does this look more like Southwest with a little more trafic, or does it more closely resemble Dupont Circle? Outside of a few hangers on outside of the various restaurants serving the all-night traffic in and out of town, there's scarecely any nightlife.

Why? The only "there" that's there is the intersection. The place is being developed as a business park, not as a part of a continuum integrating business and the surrounding communities. There is no vector from the community leading to the centers of development, and there are no visible and popular avenues leading from the development into the community. Nor, other than the present vehicular routes, with their heavy traffic and inhospitable concrete aprons of sidewalks, is there any human space. Other than the interiors of the fast-food joints, there is no real place where anyone can sit and not feel one is some sort of a bug waiting to have something swoop down and gobble you up, it's all pavement. There's no community. Unless there is a very powerful effort made to add greenspaces which invite the passerby to sit a spell, no matter how many tenants can be attracted into the commercial space by day, at night the redeveloped buildings will simply be more sterile monuments to the disconnection, of Le Corbusier's purism, from the continuum.

I have to come out in support of "Save New York Avenue, Inc.", Ron Linton's $2 billion proposal, which includes decking-over the mammoth space-waster and continuum-buster of the railroad interchange east of the intersection of NYA and Florida Avenue, combined with the development of a Dupont-like Circle park, concurrent with efforts to enhance the hilltop neighborhood north of Florida Avenue and east of North Capitol. Also to be given consideration would be how to develop a greenspace axis between that hilltop and the land of Gallaudet University. It must always be kept in mind that whatever force, energy, or concept is vectored into this redevelopment, will radiate into the community. Will we choose to create something that imparts new energy into the surrounding comunity, radiating in all directions along New York and Florida Avenues? Or will we simply plop down a lot of concrete and turn this part of North Central Washington into another Southwest?

Whether or not Linton's exact proposal becomes a design goal in the District, still, I believe we must always keep in mind that the goal of urban design is not merely to package land to the greatest profit of the developers and the geratest advantage to politicians -- rather the goal of
urban design is to improve the utility of the city for the residents, its ability to let them live rewarding lives, and lives that are enjoyable.

Let us have no more discontinuous sterile landscapes such as in Southwest's office district. Let's design living neighborhoods like Dupont Circle, where attractive parks are contained as the focus of business development which rings them round, rather than placing a pittance of greenspace around monolithic real-estate that oppresses the pedestrian with their weight and grim artificial "purism".

Environmental Policy?

I like the environment. It provides me with air to breathe, and food to eat, and it used to provide me with drug-free drinking water, but recent tests by the Associated Press found that most major cities have trace amounts of drugs in their water supplies.

I don't just like to drink water, I like to fish for trout in healthy small streams. Let's for the moment not digress into the matter of whether or not the trout have all been eaten by Invasive Snakehead Fish. Let's talk about the sort of streams that trout need.

Trout need scrupulously clean streams that run at a constant cool temperature. Clearly, hot summer parking lots collecting and then discharging into streams, without stormwater catchbasins suitable to fully cool the water isn't going to promote trout. Therefor, I promote starting a long slow process of retrofitting all of our stormwater drain systems with cooldown facilities, at a rate that won't bankrupt the taxpayers. Let's also think about getting most of this done with volunteer labor, or ideally with student community-service hours. Also, we want to promote Riparian Forest Buffers to help our streams be good for trout.

I have some other thoughts on the environment, and also on the future in general -- dealing with issues such as over-harvesting the oceans, global warming, and overpopulation --
located on another site. It's something I wrote a few years ago for a college course.

In general, my ideas about the environment are "let's not Pave the Bay", and in fact, let's be pretty aggressive with anyone who wants to Pave the Bay. The State of Maryland and Montgomery County already have excellent environmental policies, let's keep what works and refine what needs refinement.

Let's tend to our smallest streams and our largest rivers may take care of themselves. Let's increase the county's promotion of "green" lifestyles, and let us carve into stone a responsible population growth policy.