# General plan documents — howard_county-maryland Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 4 documents.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: circulation, conservation, economic_development, general_plan_implementation, general_plan_introduction, growth_management, housing, infrastructure, land_use, public_school_facilities, urban_design. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-29. --- ## Land Use — Chapter 2, Growth and Conservation Framework - Source: https://www.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/Chp2.pdf - Pages: 22 - Covers: land_use # CHAPTER 2 # GROWTH AND CONSERVATION FRAMEWORK # Introduction This chapter presents several elements: an assessment of existing land use conditions and current land supply in the County; a strategy to meet demand for growth and conservation, given the limited amount of undeveloped land remaining in the County; an organizational framework for future growth and preservation; and a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) made up of 18 detailed, design-oriented character areas. These elements provide intent and direction for shaping preferred development and conservation initiatives in Howard County for the 20-year planning horizon, 2020-2040, including guidance for future development regulations. Information presented in the Supporting Infrastructure chapter of the Plan provides general guidance for future investments in the community to support the FLUM. The County and other partners will use more detailed plans and growth management tools to implement General Plan policies. These plans will address the type, timing, and magnitude of new infrastructure needed to keep pace with the preferred uses, locations, patterns, and intensities of development depicted in the FLUM. <
> # Trends In Growth And Conservation Howard County became Maryland’s 21st county in 1851 and remained largely rural and agrarian until the Rouse Company broke ground on Columbia in 1966. In response to rapid development within and around Columbia in the 1980s, the County’s Agricultural Land Preservation Program (ALPP) was established in 1984. The effects of the ALPP are apparent by the rural-urban divide that developed by 1990, whereby the eastern region of the County experienced development while the western region remained predominantly farmland. This division was reinforced by the establishment of the Planned Service Area (PSA) in the 1987 Master Plan for Water & Sewerage, which was later incorporated into the 1990 General Plan. Over the following decades, growth has been concentrated in the eastern portion of the County. Today, Howard County is largely built out, with most land in the County now considered either developed or preserved via open space, parkland, or agricultural, environmental, or other easement. Howard County has reached a critical inflection point. Efforts to meet the high demand for new housing and commercial growth, paired with a need to ensure affordable and attainable housing for all who want to live and work in the County, are challenged by a limited supply of undeveloped, greenfield land. Careful and proactive planning is therefore critical to meet this demand in Howard County, as the County’s economic success has historically been tied to its residential appeal, high quality of life, and convenient location. This relationship suggests that, to sustain the economic growth that Howard County has enjoyed in the past, the County must continue to invest in housing, infrastructure, placemaking, and preservation—elements that make the County a desirable place to live, work, and recreate. ## Land Supply In 2020, the HoCo By Design project team prepared a Land Use Assessment, which evaluated existing land use conditions within Howard County. Map 2-1 shows developed, undeveloped, and open space and preservation areas in the County, identified as part of the Land Use Assessment. The project team used the Department of Planning and Zoning (DPZ)’s land use database and CommunityViz modeling software to evaluate the potential for future growth and conservation. Development status for parcels was primarily based on DPZ’s land use database. Other topic-specific geographic information system (GIS) data sets, including zoning districts, preservation easements, environmental features, roads, and others, were used as part of the land use assessment. The major land status categories include the following: 1. Developed land; 2. Land committed for future development; 3. Downtown Columbia; 4. Land with further resubdivision potential; 5. Undeveloped and unprotected land; and 6. Preserved land and open space. A brief description of each category is provided starting on page 7. MAP 2-1: DEVELOPMENT & PRESERVATION <
> * Developed * Open Space & Preservation * Undeveloped Source: Howard County Departments of Public Works, Technology and Communication Services, and Planning and Zoning, 2022 Developed Land Developed land includes land with permanent buildings and structures, roads, surface parking lots, and small undeveloped parcels whose size, shape, or access limitations would generally keep them from developing in the future. It is important to note that development does not equal density. For instance, in the Rural West, the developed land shown on the map mostly consists of single-family homes on large lots. Committed Land for Future Development Committed land for future development are areas where development is proposed or recently approved, either by subdivision or site plan authorization. These are sometimes referred to as “pipeline development.” County service providers monitor committed development to prepare for near-term service requests and required infrastructure. DPZ inventories and monitors new development in the County using a spatial and tabular tracking system. New development is tracked through four phases: 1) subdivision and site plan review; 2) recorded lots and approved site plans; 3) issued building permits; and 4) construction completion. As of September 30, 2020, the DPZ tracking system for residential development reported 3,966 dwelling units under plan review; 2,377 dwelling units approved or platted with no building permit issued yet; and 737 dwelling units with building permits issued and under construction. For the same date, the DPZ tracking system for nonresidential development identified 1,409 employees—or workers who will be accommodated by planned future development—in plan review. The HoCo By Design project team considered the total number of dwelling units and employees assumed in the development pipeline—7,080 new dwelling units and 1,409 employees—when developing recommendations for the General Plan. <
> <
> <
> Planned Development in Downtown Columbia The Downtown Columbia Plan (DCP) was adopted in 2010 and provides a 30-year framework to guide future development and conservation initiatives throughout the urban center. Topics covered in the DCP include land use, transportation, environment, community conservation, and housing. The 30-year planning horizon for the DCP aligns with the planning horizon for HoCo By Design, both of which end in 2040. The DCP is incorporated by reference in HoCo By Design. The DCP calls for 6,244 new residential units, 4.3 million square feet of new office space, 1.25 million square feet of new retail space, and 640 new hotel rooms. The number of remaining dwelling units and employees envisioned for Downtown Columbia, less what has already been built since 2010, were considered when contemplating recommendations for HoCo By Design. This remaining total amounts to 4,596 new dwelling units and 20,782 new employees. Resubdivision Potential Many developed areas of Howard County are zoned for single-family detached homes. Some of these neighborhoods include homes on larger lots that could, under existing zoning regulations, be further subdivided into one or more additional lots to accommodate a separate home (or homes) of similar size alongside the existing residence. This process is referred to as resubdivision. DPZ studied residential resubdivision potential in the County to identify lots or parcels in existing residential neighborhoods that are large enough to accommodate one or more home sites of similar size without a change (or variance) to the rules or requirements under the current zoning designation for the property. All single-family neighborhood zoning districts were included in the analysis. It is estimated that the full residential resubdivision potential of the County in these zoning districts could accommodate 3,100 new dwelling units under the current zoning requirements for the properties. However, this potential depends on the interest of individual owners to subdivide in the future. For purposes of future projects, HoCo By Design assumed a moderate interest of residential property owners to resubdivide in the future—1,500 new dwelling units. There is also limited opportunity to resubdivide large parcels for nonresidential development under the current zoning requirements for the properties. Approximately 1,600 new employees could be generated from nonresidential resubdivision without a change to current zoning, also depending on the interest of individual owners to subdivide their lots in the future. When contemplating recommendations for the General Plan, it was assumed that all 1,600 employees through nonresidential resubdivision would be accommodated. Undeveloped, Unprotected Land The wide distribution and relatively small size of undeveloped parcels in the County—approximately 2% of all land in the County—means there are limited opportunities to alter their intended impact on the landscape beyond what is planned under current zoning district assignments. Unless they are purchased or placed under easement for permanent preservation, it is likely that undeveloped land in the County will develop and look very similar to existing adjacent properties. However, a significant amount of the undeveloped and unprotected land in the County remains undeveloped due to capacity constraints, including parcel shape and size, as well as environmental features, such as streams, wetlands, floodplains, and steep slopes. Given the higher proportion of environmental constraints on remaining undeveloped parcels, their potential for development will be limited. If fully developed, these parcels could accommodate 2,024 new dwelling units and 4,210 new employees. The project team considered the limited capacity of this undeveloped, unprotected land in crafting recommendations for the General Plan. <
> Undeveloped Land <
> Open Space Land Preservation: Parkland, Open Space, and Farmland Howard County has proactively preserved open space and farmland for decades. Today, about 39% of all land in the County is protected. Over half of this land is permanently preserved through environmental and agricultural preservation easements. The Agricultural Land Preservation Program has preserved over 23,000 acres of farmland through a combination of preservation easements purchased by the County, the dedication of agricultural preservation parcels as provided by the County's Zoning Regulations, and preservation easements purchased by the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation. Over 9,000 acres of environmental preservation easements have been placed on land in the Rural West through the Zoning Regulations. Additionally, about 25,000 acres of state, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC), and county parks and open space make up over a third of preserved land in the County. Columbia Association's 3,600 acres of open space comprises an additional 6% of preserved land in the County. The General Plan retains all preserved parkland, open space, and easements in the County existing today, and presents opportunities for further conservation of environmental, agricultural, and open space land. # Demand For Land: Twenty Year Market Potential Despite a limited supply of available undeveloped land, Howard County continues to see a high demand for residential and commercial growth. RCLCO Real Estate Advisors conducted a Market Research and Demand Forecast (the Forecast), published on October 1, 2020, to inform HoCo By Design. The Forecast found that the County has reached an inflection point, whereby land constraints and affordability challenges could impact the ability to accommodate future residential and commercial growth. It also found that the economic vitality of the County is directly tied to its desirability as a place to live and work, which must be maintained over time. Most high-paying and fast-growing industries are booming either in response to population and job bases (like healthcare, education, and publishing), or as a result of national economic and industry trends (like technology, professional services, and food services). To sustain the economic growth that has been historically enjoyed and to maintain a competitive edge over other markets, the County must continue to invest in housing, infrastructure, placemaking, job creation, and other activities that make it a desirable place for people and employers to call home. Market Demand Projections The Forecast projected market-driven demand for new retail, office, industrial, residential, and hotel room space in the absence of land, regulation, or other constraints. It concluded that there is a strong market in Howard County for commercial uses, with potential to add up to 59,000 jobs between 2020 and 2040. Additionally, there is a future demand for 31,000 new homes to accommodate the 28,000 new households associated with that job growth (allowing for a vacancy factor). <
> **Housing** Current Total 116,000 Homes Projected Demand 31,000 New Homes <
> **Employment** Current Total 223,000 Jobs Projected Demand 59,000 New Jobs <
> **Commercial** Current Total 12.2M Sq.Ft 4,000 Hotel Rooms Projected Demand 16.5M Sq. Ft. 1,000 Hotel Rooms Source: RCLCO Market Research and Demand Forecast (2020) <
> ### Job Demand vs. Existing Capacity There are 656 acres of undeveloped nonresidential land in Howard County (including land zoned for office, retail, flex, industrial, and warehouse uses) which could accommodate about 28,000 new jobs. Over 20 years, this equates to an average of 1,400 jobs per year. Over the 10 years, the County gained about 3,000 new jobs per year, with much of this growth attributable to the most recent Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) and the associated expansion of Fort Meade. The 59,000 new jobs estimated in the Forecast represent an average annual addition of 2,950 new jobs per year over the next two decades. This growth is more than twice what could be accommodated within existing land use constraints. To meet this future demand, land use changes will need to occur in the County. ### Housing Demand vs. Existing Capacity The current estimated land use capacity for new housing in Howard County, as outlined in the various land use categories above, is only 15,200 units. Land use changes will also need to occur in the County to accommodate this residential demand. The findings in the Forecast establish what is possible—a ceiling—in terms of market demand. To determine the optimal growth targets HoCo By Design should assume, DPZ evaluated the findings against the General Plan’s vision, the FLUM, the timing and location of infrastructure, and budgetary factors. ## Future Growth Potential By The Numbers | HoCo By Design Future Development Potential (2020 - 2040) | | | :--- | :--- | | **Residential** | **Employment** | | 27,000 units | 35,000 jobs | *Source: Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning, 2022* An estimated 27,000 total units may be built between 2020 and 2040 if the envisioned Future Land Use Map (FLUM) is implemented through the comprehensive re-zoning process and if market conditions allow for development. | Residential Development Pipeline as of September 30, 2020 | | | :--- | :--- | | **Plan Review** | 3,966 units | | **Approved or Platted, with no Building Permit Issued** | 2,377 units | | **Building Permits Issued** | 737 units | | **Total** | 7,080 units | *Source: Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning, 2020* Units in the development pipeline are a part of the County’s future development potential from 2020-2040. Many of these units have already been granted housing allocations under the PlanHoward 2030 Housing Allocation Chart and are therefore expected to be built in the early years of the HoCo By Design planning horizon. | HoCo By Design APFO Housing Allocation Chart (2026 - 2040) | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Residential** | **Set Aside Incentives (Affordable Housing)** | **Total** | | 19,194 units (1,280 units/annual average) | 5,100 units (340 units/annual average) | 24,294 units (1,620 units/annual average) | *Source: Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning, 2023* The APFO housing allocation chart is the legal tool that is used to cap and pace residential growth that can be built annually in character areas identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). See Chapter 10 for additional information about the APFO chart. Up to 24,294 units could be built using HoCo By Design Housing Allocations between 2026 and 2040. Out of the 24,294 units, 5,100 units are set-aside specifically for the proposed affordable housing incentive programs. **Growth potential for Gateway Regional Activity Center not included. # WHAT INFLUENCES DEVELOPMENT The General Plan is only one element among many that influences how and when development takes place and what it looks like. Development found in Howard County—both patterns and intensities—are generally driven by five growth factors: 1) market demand; 2) local economies and growth outlooks; 3) property owners' willingness to participate; 4) government regulations and policies; and 5) the availability and capacity of infrastructure. These ever-changing variables affect one another and impact the location and type of development that occurs. Therefore, actual growth may differ from what is planned, depending on fluctuations in these factors. Market Demand, Available Capital, and Developer Interests The demand for different development types, patterns, and intensities is driven by the availability of buyers or renters in the area and their purchasing power. Developers and private parties decide where and when to pursue a project based upon several considerations, including their own interests, market demand, available financing, and the probability of success. Private land development is financed by banks and other institutions that establish the minimum lending criteria. To justify capital investment, these organizations must have reasonable confidence that a project will be accepted by the community and regulators. The Local Economy and Growth Outlook Future development is directly influenced by the strength and resilience of the local and regional economies. The private sector takes into consideration projected employment rates, population forecasts, and the general demographics of an area before investing in new development projects. <
> <
> Willing Property Owners Property owners in Howard County decide whether land becomes available to develop or redevelop, or if land is proposed for permanent open space. New growth in the community is the result of property owners' willingness to sell real estate, whether for development or conservation purposes, or even to develop the land themselves. Government Regulations and Policies To keep growth aligned with the community's overarching vision, development can be promoted or restricted through government policies, like zoning and land development controls; environmental policies, programs, and protections; and the application of regulations by local land use boards. Zoning and land development regulations control permitted uses in particular areas and allowances for height and density, and they may also include design standards or considerations. While the government has an important role to play in development, it is limited by the tools at its disposal—namely, applicable ordinances, regulations, and legal precedent. The County cannot restrict or promote a project beyond the powers provided in law. Available Infrastructure Capacity The delivery and location of available infrastructure capacity is an important component for development. If the infrastructure cannot accommodate the impacts, some projects must wait until available capacity exists from either government or third-party service providers. There are opportunities, in some cases, for developers to fund certain on- or off-site infrastructure investments themselves to unlock available capacity and begin their projects on an accelerated timeline. Joint-funding agreements may be used by governments and third-party service providers to potentially expedite infrastructure projects where there is shared need and benefit. HoCo By Design is responsive to the five growth factors, creating a guide for future growth and conservation initiatives to support and strengthen the qualities that make the County a desirable place to live, work, and play. # STRATEGY FOR GROWTH AND CONSERVATION With continued strong demand for new housing and nonresidential growth, but a limited supply of undeveloped land, the County must optimize land use so that it can sustain a strong economy while maintaining the high quality of life to which county residents and businesses are accustomed. ## Scenario Planning To assess potential strategies for growth and conservation, and evaluate their effects, the HoCo By Design process included a scenario planning component that allowed stakeholders to evaluate several alternative futures for the County. Participants were asked to share their reactions to impacts and evaluate trade-offs for different themes and values voiced by the community. This scenario planning exercise generated future alternatives while considering emerging trends and the community’s desires for growth and conservation. To create the growth scenarios, HoCo By Design used information and data from land use and other physical assessment documents on existing conditions in the County. This data was combined with thoughts, ideas, and opinions collected from community outreach events to prepare four distinct scenarios. Building upon the assessment of existing land supply in the Land Supply section on page 7, the project team used CommunityViz software to model potential future year growth and conservation patterns, and measure potential impacts of each scenario. In addition to scenario development, the HoCo By Design CommunityViz model assessed specific impacts and issues that arose during the General Plan process. These included an evaluation of opportunities and constraints related to expanding the Planned Service Area, and potential impacts and opportunities to preserve environmental features, such as the Green Infrastructure Network. <
> The HoCo By Design Scenario Planning Guide and a series of Growth Choices Workshop events held in March and April 2021 presented these four alternative futures for feedback. The four scenarios contemplated various growth and land use choices and analyzed their potential impacts. Each scenario illustrated different land use patterns, such as, maintaining the status quo, scattered development throughout the County, and concentrating growth in targeted strategic locations. Specific to residential development, the scenarios included: Scenario A with 18,762 units, Scenario B 23,707 units, Scenario C 28,897 units, and Scenario D 36,585 units. The HoCo By Design Future Land Use Map (FLUM) is most closely aligned with Scenarios B and C as it proposes to target [^p8-1]: A copy of the Scenario Planning Guide is available from the Department of Planning and Zoning. growth in strategic locations to generate a critical mass of residential and employment opportunities that may support various multimodal transportation options. HoCo by Design refers to these strategic locations as Activity Centers. The FLUM assumes approximately 27,000 new residential units. The 27,000 new units includes 7,080 units currently in the development pipeline which will be built under current regulations and land use policies. Gateway has been identified as a Regional Activity Center. Its development potential could yield thousands of new residential units, all of which is to be explored through a future master planning process (please see the Economic Prosperity chapter for more information). A fiscal impact analysis was also conducted to determine the long-term impacts on the County’s budget for each of the growth scenarios and the FLUM. More information on these specific analyses can be found in the HoCo By Design Scenario Planning Guide.[^p8-1] The FLUM focuses new growth into redevelopment areas, which account for approximately 1.5% of the County's already-developed land. This approach addresses high demand for housing and commercial growth. More information on growth management, including growth targets and potential infrastructure demands, can be found in the Supporting Infrastructure and Managing Growth chapters. ## Planned Service Area and Tiers The Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012 (Senate Bill 236), adopted by the Maryland General Assembly, required local jurisdictions to adopt Growth Tiers by December 31, 2012. These Tiers designate certain areas for different types of development depending on specific characteristics such as sewerage service, agricultural use, forest and green space, and locally designated growth areas. SB 236 required local jurisdictions to classify land into one of the following four Growth Tiers, as defined in the legislation. * Tier I: designated growth area served by public sewer * Tier II: designated for future extension of public sewer services * Tier III: not planned for sewer service, not dominated by agricultural or forest, and planned for large lot development * Tier IV: not planned for sewer service, dominated by agricultural and forest land planned for resource protection The intent of the legislation was to protect the Chesapeake Bay and its associated rivers and streams by limiting the amount of development served by septic systems. Accordingly, major subdivisions in Tier IV areas (five or more lots in Howard County) are prohibited. While SB 236 established Tier definitions, the final land designations and the development of a local Growth Tiers map were left up to local jurisdictions. To meet SB 236 requirements, the Howard County Council adopted a Growth Tiers map in April 2013 as part of PlanHoward 2030. The County intends to maintain the Tiers map and used it as a basis for the FLUM. In coordination with Growth Tiers, the Planned Service Area (PSA) outlines the areas of the County served by public water and sewer services. The PSA is also important because it serves as Howard County’s designated growth boundary, or Priority Funding Area, per the State’s Smart Growth Act. <
> Expansions to the PSA for water and sewer service since 1990 have been very limited. In 1993, the County Council voted to extend water service to include the area around the Alpha Ridge Landfill. This extension was done solely out of concern for potential future groundwater contamination that might originate from the landfill; therefore, only water service is provided in this area. No sewer service is allowed and no change from rural land uses or zoning was authorized in this location. Throughout the planning process, many community members expressed a desire to expand housing opportunities, especially for affordable housing, west of the PSA. The Housing Opportunities Master Plan recommends the County explore strategic locations in the Rural West (and other undeveloped, non-preserved areas of the County), where it may be feasible to accommodate increased development for more affordable housing opportunities while balancing other priorities such as water and sewer capacity, historical context, and agricultural preservation goals. HoCo By Design used CommunityViz to evaluate parcels outside the PSA that could accommodate higher-density residential development if zoning changes were made.[^p9-1] County agencies explored a wholesale expansion that moved the PSA to the western edge of the Rural Residential zone, since most of the land immediately adjacent to the PSA is already either preserved by easements or subdivided into smaller lots accommodating homes under separate ownership. Additionally, the scenario planning process looked at an expansion west of Maple Lawn, where there are fewer acres of permanently preserved land west of the PSA, so there is land that could accommodate residential development requiring water and sewer infrastructure.[^p9-2] [^p9-1]: More information on the CommunityViz model methodology can be found in the CommunityViz Methodology for Scenario Planning document, which is available from the Department of Planning & Zoning. [^p9-2]: More information about the PSA wholesale expansion can be found in the Planned Service Area Expansion Report: Growth Choices Workshop, March 2021; more information about the Maple Lawn expansion can be found in Scenario D in the Scenario Planning Guide, a copy of which is available from the Department of Planning and Zoning. In both expansion cases, moving the PSA presented several challenges, including: * **Delivery of public services** – Given that most of the available parcels are not adjacent to the PSA line, additional development at higher-densities would take on a scattered geographical pattern, which would not allow for efficient delivery of public services. Schools, fire, police, recreation and aging services, transportation, and public utilities would need to accommodate a larger and more dispersed population. This type of service delivery is counter to Smart Growth efforts where such services have been planned for in a more efficient and economical manner within the existing PSA. * **Environmental impacts** – Significant development, especially that which would require new roadway construction, would have detrimental impacts to water quality and stream health in the Rocky Gorge Dam watershed in the southeastern portion of the County. This would run counter to the County’s participation in an interjurisdictional agreement designed to protect WSSC drinking water supply reservoirs. More information on the interjurisdictional agreement can be found in Technical Appendix A: Environment. * **Limited multi-modal transportation options** – Disbursed development patterns would be difficult to serve with transit, which generally requires housing developments to be clustered in nodes or hubs accessible to transit riders. Additionally, due to rights-of-way (ROW) acquisition challenges, there are limited opportunities for bike and pedestrian infrastructure. * **Fiscal impact** – The cost of expanding the PSA is significant. The estimated cost of new water/sewer infrastructure is approximately $2 million per mile. This cost estimate does not include the cost of ROW acquisitions or the cost of new treatment plants and other water/sewer infrastructure that would be required to accommodate the significant new growth in this area. * **Land preservation in the Rural West** – The County has a 50-year history of preserving agricultural and environmental land in the Rural West through the Agricultural Land Preservation Program (ALPP) and the Zoning Regulations. Much of the land west of the PSA is now permanently preserved or already developed in a low-density residential subdivision context. Throughout the Rural West, residential and agricultural land abut or are within proximity to each other. A wholesale expansion of the PSA could fundamentally change the rural character of the West and exacerbate land use conflicts between farms and nearby residences. Given these implications, the County will maintain the public water/sewer boundary in its existing location and small incremental changes can be assessed on a case-by-case basis if supported by General Plan policies. HoCo By Design proposes one minor expansion of the PSA—adjoining the Board of Education property on Route 108. Because of its location at the interface of the Rural Residential zone and the Planned Service Area, this property should be designed to establish a transition that is compatible with and enhances surrounding communities. Additionally, one property proposes an expansion to the water service only area of the PSA, located at the intersection of Frederick Road and Triadelphia Road. Map 2-2 outlines HoCo By Design’s proposed Growth Tiers and PSA boundary, including a minor expansion for a future school site adjoining the Board of Education property along Route 108. MAP 2-2: HOCO BY DESIGN GROWTH TIERS <
> Planned Service Area Water Only Expansion Site Howard County Public Schools PSA Expansion Site Water Service Only Area Tier I Tier III Tier IV NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 In the future, there may be situations where minor PSA adjustments may be appropriate. A PSA revision requires a General Plan Amendment. Any requests for a General Plan Amendment for expansion of the PSA should be denied unless: * The proposed expansion of the PSA is intended to provide for a public or institutional use such as a religious facility, philanthropic institution, academic school; or * The proposed expansion of the PSA includes a zoning proposal that is consistent with the General Plan. Public sewer and water infrastructure capacity and costs of the above must be analyzed to confirm the feasibility and availability of scheduled capacity. Expansions of the PSA boundary are limited to the following: 1. Properties adjoining the existing PSA boundary without including an intervening privately owned parcel; 2. The minimum area necessary to serve the proposed use. Development of the parcel consistent with the PSA boundary amendment is required after approval of the General Plan Amendment and prior to the inclusion of the parcel into the Metropolitan District; and 3. The particular use proposed at the time of expansion with a deadline for the completion of the improvements for the proposed use and connection to the public water and/or sewerage system. If the proposed use is not actually constructed and connected to the public water and/or sewerage system by the deadline specified, the PSA expansion shall be null and void, and the PSA automatically shall revert to its pre-existing location. ### GCF-1 Policy Statement Provide limited and predictable Planned Service Area expansions. ### Implementing Actions 1. Planned Service Area expansions should include a development proposal that is consistent with the General Plan. 2. Any Planned Service Area expansions shall establish a transition that is compatible with and enhances surrounding communities, and provides an environmental benefit. 3. Any Planned Service Area expansion shall meet the criteria above. <
> ### Ecological Health Elevated as a Priority Throughout the planning process, HoCo By Design elevated equitable and sustainable growth and conservation alongside a desire to meet market demand. The General Plan's policies and implementing actions seek to sustain and improve the County's ecological health by emphasizing climate change mitigation and adaptation in addition to preservation and conservation of natural resources. More information on ecological health, climate change, water resources, and other natural resources can be found in the Ecological Health chapter. Fiscal Impact Assessment An analysis was conducted to measure the fiscal impacts of the potential growth scenarios and the FLUM. General Fund operating and capital costs and revenues were projected based on the residential and nonresidential growth for each land use scenario. Based on the current cost and revenue structure and service levels in the County, the fiscal study determined that new growth would generate more revenues than costs for services and infrastructure, partly due to the fact that in Maryland counties multiple key revenues are directly tied to new development. As the amount of residential and nonresidential growth increases, the net revenues to the County also increase. Thus, growth has a positive net fiscal impact to the County. The largest revenue sources to the County are property and income taxes. Combined, they generate about 90% of total operating revenues. The Maryland tax structure allows counties to assess both property tax and local income tax by place of residence. This tax structure is unique, as most counties in the United States do not have a direct local income tax and instead rely on other sources such as a local retail sales tax to raise revenues. Howard County’s authority to assess both property and income tax locally is a leading reason new residential development is fiscally positive. Different land uses require different levels of service and infrastructure needs. For example, single family homes, with greater numbers of students, require more in school service and facility needs compared to multifamily homes, while non-residential land uses require no school services at all. These differences have been accounted for in the fiscal analysis. A significant reason why new growth is a net positive to the County budget is because of the multiple one-time revenues collected from new construction. These revenues include transfer, recordation, and road excise taxes, as well as the school surcharge, and are used to help pay for new capital facilities and operating costs. For example, the school surcharge is collected at the time of building permit issuance for each new home built in the County. The school surcharge rate was recently increased from $1.32 per square foot to $7.50 per square foot beginning in 2022. Road excise taxes are collected on both residential and nonresidential development. <
> ### SAAC FY2023 RECOMMENDATIONS In its Fiscal Year 2023 report, the Spending Affordability Advisory Committee (SAAC) urged the County to focus on promoting and developing the diversity of its long-term tax base. The report emphasized the importance of commercial-base development to rebalance expenditure needs and fiscal resources—and recommended that the General Plan encourage redevelopment and commercial growth in defined employment centers. The SAAC also described how redevelopment, and more dense and multi-family-driven housing development, would become more important over the long-term, as the supply of greenfield parcels dwindles. The Committee suggested the County allow for more commercial development, reexamine height restrictions, and reassess parking ratios. <
> Besides the need to build new infrastructure capacity to accommodate more people and jobs moving to the County, including new schools, roads, parks, and public safety facilities, there is also an increasing need to maintain and rebuild existing infrastructure. Much of the County’s public infrastructure was built in the 1950s and the decades following as suburban growth patterns emerged. A significant portion of this early infrastructure was funded with the assistance of state and federal funds, which are no longer available to the same extent. The County uses a variety of sources (general obligation bonds, pay-as-you-go funding, school surcharge, transfer taxes, and road excise tax revenue) to support infrastructure on an annual basis. However, infrastructure needs are increasing as many roads, schools, and other capital facilities reach the end of their useful lives. The fiscal analysis shows that new growth generates positive net revenues for the County. So as growth continues, these additional net revenues can help pay for the rebuilding and maintenance of existing infrastructure. As new growth slows, however, these surplus revenues will diminish, creating challenges in the years ahead. Furthermore, and independent of new growth, the cost to maintain and rebuild roads, sewers, schools, and the like will only increase into the future as this existing infrastructure continues to age. Regardless of Howard County’s growth trajectory, government will face challenges in the years ahead in maintaining its existing infrastructure. It is clear from the fiscal analysis that new growth generates net positive revenues for the County, with more growth generating more in net revenues. However, more growth will also require more infrastructure that will eventually need to be replaced. The County will be best served in the future if it prioritizes maintenance of existing infrastructure in future budget decisions. # Organizational Framework ## (Preserve-Strengthen-Enhance-Transform) The following organizational framework guided the overall direction of the Future Land Use Map. Land uses in the County were organized into four high-level categories: areas to preserve, areas to strengthen, areas to enhance, and areas to transform (P-S-E-T). Each category is described below with a general objective, important considerations, and targeted treatments summarized for moving things forward in the General Plan. As shown below, following the P-S-E-T category order, expectations generally follow ‘less change’ to ‘more change’ and ‘lower-intensity growth’ to ‘higher-intensity growth’ expected over the 20-year planning horizon. The icons associated with each of the P-S-E-T categories below reinforce how specific recommendations support one or more of the Plan’s organizational framework categories throughout the document, and whether concept drawings, maps, policies, and text in the General Plan refer to areas to preserve, strengthen, enhance, or transform. ### Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Process The HoCo By Design Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) worked alongside the project team in May-August 2021 to establish the organizational framework (Preserve-Strengthen-Enhance-Transform, or P-S-E-T) and develop the preferred hybrid scenario—the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). An initial organizational framework (P-S-E-T) map was created from community feedback on the four scenarios presented during the Growth Choices Workshop in March and April 2021. PAC members used an ESRI online mapping application to propose and respond to the organizational framework (P-S-E-T) designations and to develop a final organizational framework (P-S-E-T) map of places to preserve, strengthen, enhance, or transform. Following the development of the organizational framework (P-S-E-T) map, PAC members helped identify activity center locations and transform areas on the Future Land Use Map and provided valuable input on the character area designations that make up the FLUM. More information on character areas can be found below and in Technical Appendix B: Character Areas. <
> <
> ### Areas to Preserve Areas to Preserve safeguard rural and environmentally sensitive lands and provide meaningful opportunities to link residents with parks, recreation facilities, and nature. Future development in these locations is designed to protect open space, natural areas, farmland, and rural viewsheds in the community. It is limited to homes on very large lots scattered throughout the countryside or smaller lots clustered to preserve surrounding open space, park-related activities, and cross-county trails or greenways. Areas to Preserve also include historic communities—areas of particular historic or cultural significance—where protection of historic integrity is paramount, and new buildings are sensitively-designed for the area's context. ### Areas to Strengthen Areas to Strengthen represent places that may need support to overcome specific hurdles preventing them from reaching their full potential. They may include certain village centers in Columbia, or rural crossroads in the West, or places that reflect Howard County's character and aspects that make it special. Physical improvements in all Areas to Strengthen should build upon, and contribute to, the continued success of these unique locations. <
> <
> ### Areas to Enhance (Residential or Nonresidential) Areas to Enhance include existing developed areas—established residential communities, employment hubs, or retail centers—that are now stable but should consider long-term improvements to keep up with changing economics, technologies, consumer preferences, or age-related wear and tear. These areas are not likely to witness wholesale redevelopment but could benefit from strategic infill development or precise, tactical improvements capable of meaningfully enhancing the quality of life for their inhabitants. Infill development in neighborhood enhancement areas should be sensitive to the uses, densities, and character of surrounding homes and neighborhoods. Infill development in retail and employment enhancement areas should provide jobs and services for nearby residents and the larger community. ### Areas to Transform Areas to Transform provide opportunities to reimagine Howard County's future and introduce new, energized activity areas that provide key locations for new employment centers, regional shopping centers, entertainment areas, and upper-story or adjacent residential units in appropriate locations. These areas require more deliberate planning and phasing to keep them viable over longer periods of change and have the potential to serve as new and reinvigorated activity centers for the whole of Howard County. <
> MAP 2-3: THE GENERAL PLAN MAP The General Plan map provides a simplified overview of our future growth and conservation strategy showing those areas targeted for transformational redevelopment compared to areas where existing character should be preserved, strengthened, or enhanced. <
> * Planned Service Area * Areas to Transform * Areas to Enhance, Strengthen, Transform * Areas to Strengthen, Enhance (Residential) * Areas to Enhance (Nonresidential) * Areas to Preserve, Open Space * Areas to Preserve, Strengthen, Historic Community * Other Areas to Preserve NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 # Elements Of The Organizational Framework Throughout The General Plan * **Character Area Typologies (Growth and Conservation Framework chapter and Character Areas technical appendix)** * Eighteen character areas identified in the General Plan are presented within the P-S-E-T organizational framework categories. * **Focus Area Studies technical appendix** * Illustrative design concepts were developed for New Town Columbia, Gateway, and Rural Crossroads. <
> # Character Area Typologies The General Plan uses the term "character areas" to describe unique and discernible areas of the community depicted in the FLUM. The categories describe important elements that work together to instill a sense of place (or visitor experience) for residents, customers, or employees in the character area. A character-based planning approach prioritizes site design, public realm, building form and massing, and architecture over general land use and density. More specific rules and standards for the character areas — including provisions for permitted land uses, densities, block sizes, setbacks, parking, or landscaping considerations — will be addressed in the County’s Zoning Regulations or Subdivision and Land Development Regulations using the guidance and recommendations from the General Plan character descriptions found in Technical Appendix B: Character Areas. Character areas were assigned on the FLUM based on the amount of change or intensity expected for a particular area, as indicated within the P-S-E-T organizational framework. As shown below, character areas in the FLUM where the least amount of change is expected include Open Space, Rural Conservation, Rural Living, and Historic Communities; and character areas where the most amount of change is expected include Mixed-Use Activity Centers, Downtown Columbia, and Transit Activity Centers. Each of the 18 character areas are described briefly below. Additional descriptions of the character areas and their typical lot size and building placement; open space and natural resources; building types and massing; transportation network; and street and block patterns are provided in Technical Appendix B: Character Areas. <
> # Character Area Typologies Each of the 18 character areas are described briefly on the pages below. Additional descriptions of the character areas and their typical lot size and building placement; open space and natural resources; building types and massing; transportation network; and street and block patterns are provided in Technical Appendix B: Character Areas. | Areas to Preserve | Areas to Strengthen | Areas to Enhance | Areas to Transform | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | <
> | <
> | <
> | <
> | <
> | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Special Use | Village Activity Center | | | | Open Space | Multifamily Neighborhood | | | | Rural Conservation | Single Family Neighborhood | Industrial | Downtown Columbia | | Rural Living | Mixed Use Neighborhood | Campus | Regional Activity Center | | | Rural Crossroads | Suburban Commercial | Transit Activity Center | | Historic Community | | | Industrial Activity Center | | | | | Mixed-Use Activity Center | Character Area Descriptions <
> <
> <
> SPECIAL USE Land reserved for landfills, quarries, or other uses that are unique in the County and often guided by federal or state planning, permitting, and design guidelines, such as the Alpha Ridge Landfill & Recycling Center. OPEN SPACE Land dedicated for active or passive open space uses. For example, open space uses can include natural resource protection, parks, greenways, and combinations of trails and pathways for recreational use and for amenity spaces in multi-family housing areas. RURAL CONSERVATION Land corresponding to the County's Rural Conservation (RC) Zoning District and characterized by large lots and a high degree of separation between buildings. Homes, farms, and farmettes are scattered throughout the countryside and integrated into the landscape. Several areas are preserved under agricultural or environmental easements. RURAL LIVING Land corresponding to the County's Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District and characterized by large lots or cluster lots surrounding open space and a high degree of separation between buildings. Homes, farms, and farmettes are scattered throughout the countryside and integrated into the landscape. Some areas are preserved under agricultural or environmental easements. HISTORIC COMMUNITIES Historic Communities include the Ellicott City Local and National Register Historic District, the Lawyers Hill Local and National Register Historic District, and the Savage Mill Historic National Register District. Each of these designated Historic Communities has a different character based on its original founding, historic growth, and site constraints, and may include several different land uses within the Historic Community. <
> <
> <
> <
> SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD Land generally formed as subdivisions that currently includes a limited number of home choices (usually single-family detached or single-family attached homes). MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD Land generally formed as complexes or communities with a relatively uniform housing type and density throughout. They support residential development at varying densities in the suburban landscape and may contain one or more of the following housing types: apartments, townhomes, stacked townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, or cottage dwellings. MIXED-USE NEIGHBORHOOD Land offering the opportunity to live, work, shop, and play in a master-planned community that emphasizes a mix of uses; a small, but discernable, neighborhood activity center; and one or more neighborhoods connected to the small activity center by a network of pathways or walkable streets such as Maple Lawn and Turf Valley. RURAL CROSSROADS Small nodes of mixed-use areas focusing on commercial activity along rural highways at important intersections in older farming communities in the Rural West. INDUSTRIAL Land providing opportunities to concentrate employment clusters in the County. They support large-scale, single-tenant industrial, warehouse, and flex space buildings, as well as smaller, multi-tenant industrial buildings that are clustered and may support and serve one another. CAMPUS Land to support academic, medical, or office buildings; athletic facilities; event spaces; equipment; or other ancillary uses needed to support an educational, medical, or other large institution. SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL Land contributing to the County’s office employment base and serving the daily retail needs of office users and surrounding residential neighborhoods. <
> <
> <
> DOWNTOWN COLUMBIA Land comprising of Downtown Columbia. The Downtown Columbia Plan, adopted in 2010, creates a 30-year master plan for the revitalization and redevelopment of Downtown Columbia. For more information on the character of Downtown Columbia, refer to the Downtown Columbia Plan. REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER Land consisting of the Columbia Gateway business park, an existing employment center with large-format buildings and surface parking lots throughout that should redevelop as a large regional growth center in the future. A master plan established through a public process should re-envision the area as a major hub for entertainment, employment, and innovation in the County with access from one or more major transportation corridors. TRANSIT ACTIVITY CENTER Land creating opportunities for compact, mixed-use development that maximizes residential, commercial, and open spaces within walking distance of premium public transit. INDUSTRIAL MIXED-USE ACTIVITY CENTER Land contributing to the County’s economic viability by providing places where people live, work, create, build, store, and distribute goods and services throughout the County and region. VILLAGE ACTIVITY CENTER Land in Columbia that provides goods and services to surrounding neighborhoods. New or redeveloped Village Activity Centers offer the opportunity to serve broader economic, civic, community, entertainment, and housing needs in the community. MIXED-USE ACTIVITY CENTER Land offering the opportunity to serve broader economic, entertainment, and housing needs in the community. # Future Land Use Map The FLUM depicts preferred development types, locations, patterns, and intensities throughout the County and is based on empirical land use data that assumes the carrying capacity in each character area. It provides a physical framework to more effectively realize the plan’s vision, including advancing the General Plan ‘themes’ of Ecological Health, County in Motion, Economic Prosperity, Dynamic Neighborhoods, and Quality By Design. Some areas of the FLUM reflect what currently exists. Some are more aspirational in nature; others are a mix of what exists and what could be in the future. Some character areas depicted on the map and described later in the Character Areas technical appendix articulate how a given area should look and feel, even if that is not the case today. Others seek to retain and advance the current character. Realization of the FLUM is a long-term endeavor: it could take several decades before all the land in the planning area is developed, redeveloped, or preserved. Realization of the FLUM is dependent on the factors that influence growth described above, including the inclinations of individual property owners. Revisions to the FLUM may be needed to reflect changing realities in the future. Modifications to the FLUM should be evaluated against the vision and policies in HoCo By Design to determine if the proposed changes are consistent or if a General Plan amendment is needed. County officials should also evaluate proposed changes to the FLUM using an “if-then-what-else” approach to decision making, whereby potential ripple effects or unintended consequences associated with a proposed change are evaluated to see what else might be impacted as a result. For example, a major economic development decision or if a regional or state transportation agency plans improvements for an area not previously anticipated in HoCo By Design. ### Future Land Use Map Guidelines The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) generally depicts the intended land use for an area. It is not a zoning map. A zoning map is parcel-specific and, combined with Zoning Regulations, establishes detailed requirements and development standards for setbacks, height, use, parking, and other attributes. By contrast, the FLUM is intended to provide generalized guidance for conservation and growth, and is considered in the context of other polices and recommendations in the General Plan. Even though specific parcel boundaries have been used in the FLUM to designate land uses, this map is not intended to be prescriptive at a parcel level. This map is to be interpreted broadly using land use categories to evaluate desired character area objectives around the County and is intended to provide guidance for future consideration. A printed copy of the FLUM is available by request from the Department of Planning and Zoning. Several important considerations, defined below, accompany the FLUM: 1. The FLUM envisions intended development types, patterns, and intensities for build out of the County. It should be considered aspirational in nature. It is not an existing land use map, although in many cases future development intended for an area is the same as what exists there today. 2. Intended zoning for a specific area should be guided by the FLUM and interpreted with guidance from the text in the General Plan, including the Character Areas technical appendix. 3. Some zoning districts in the County’s Zoning Regulations may be compatible with more than one character area for the General Plan (or vice versa). 4. The FLUM can be amended. It is intended to be a dynamic map that is updated periodically in response to the evolving needs of or opportunities for the County. Requests to change the map are considered via General Plan Amendments (GPAs). *** ### The Development Regulations Assessment and the FLUM In 2016, DPZ retained Clarion Associates, a national land use firm, to assess the County’s current Zoning Regulations and Subdivision and Land Development Regulations. The Development Regulations Assessment engaged community members to explore strengths and weaknesses of existing land development regulations and recommendations for improvement. Through the process, nearly 500 community members participated in more than 40 meetings. This outreach and an online survey resulted in more than 700 comments. From results of the evaluation and public engagement, the Development Regulations Assessment made recommendations on how to make these regulations more user-friendly, internally consistent, streamlined, and better aligned with County planning goals. The assessment proposed the creation of a Unified Development Ordinance that would provide all regulations within one easily accessible document, emphasizing user-friendly graphics and legibility. Additionally, the assessment included recommendations for new and existing uses and districts, district conversions or changes, and streamlined processes for the land development approval process. The FLUM establishes greater predictability for the creation of a Unified Development Ordinance in line with the recommendations proposed in the Development Regulations Assessment. To provide greater specificity and guidance to the development of future regulations, HoCo By Design combines character areas, targeted focus area concepts, and a set of flexible policies developed through a design lens. # MAP 2-4: DETAILED FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map does not dictate zoning district boundaries but will be a guiding factor in the Comprehensive Rezoning and Map Amendment processes. <
> * Planned Service Area * Preservation Easement * Open Space * Historic Communities * Rural Crossroads * Rural Living * Rural Conservation * Single-Family Neighborhood * Multi-Family Neighborhood * Mixed-Use Neighborhood * Suburban Commercial * Campus * Industrial * Special Use * Downtown Columbia * Regional Activity Center * Transit Activity Center * Industrial Mixed-Use Activity Center * Village Activity Center * Mixed-Use Activity Center Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 # Planning Themes Overview The next five chapters, respectively covering five planning themes, present the land use and planning issues that were identified through the HoCo By Design process. These chapters explain how the County can strategically transform while preserving, strengthening, and enhancing the variety of places and assets that make Howard County so special. The five planning themes, each described more fully in the next five chapters of the plan, include the following: 1. Ecological Health: Protecting and Preserving our Natural Resources 2. County in Motion: Fostering Modern Mobility Choices 3. Economic Prosperity: Creating Opportunities for Business to Innovate and Thrive 4. Dynamic Neighborhoods: Maintaining and Supporting Vibrant Living for a More Equitable Future 5. Quality By Design: Respecting and Prioritizing Community Character Each theme chapter contains an introduction, summary of community input, and a series of topics with associated policies and implementing actions. While themes describe cross-cutting issues, the policies and implementing actions within each chapter are grouped by topic. However, the policies and implementing actions will require a multi-faceted approach to their implementation. <
> Ecological Health <
> County in Motion The themes were initially identified following public engagement activities in 2020, which include the following: On the Table events; Community Ideas Exchange Workshop; Better Communities Online Game; Physical Assessment focus groups and public meetings; and the Bring Your Own Question/BYOQ series. The physical assessment reports prepared in 2020, which covered a series of topics, also contributed to initial theme development. In 2021, a combination of public input, data evaluation, and best practice research was used to further identify topics and develop policies and implementing actions. Scenario planning, the Growth Choices Workshops, New Town Columbia Design Sessions, Strategic Advisory Group meetings, Planning Advisory Committee meetings, Technical Advisory Group meetings, and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Focus Groups all contributed to the topics, policies, and actions explored in the planning theme chapters. In 2022, a series of public meetings and online input opportunities allowed the community to comment on the planning theme chapters. In 2023, additional feedback was collected on the public draft. As a result of this public engagement, policies and implementing actions were further refined, as presented in the next five chapters. <
> Economic Prosperity <
> Dynamic Neighborhoods <
> Quality By Design --- ## Circulation — Chapter 4, County in Motion - Source: https://www.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/Chp4.pdf - Pages: 23 - Covers: circulation # CHAPTER 4 # COUNTY IN MOTION # County in Motion : Fostering Modern Mobility Choices This chapter highlights policies, initiatives, and actions to manage and provide a safe, equitable, and fiscally sustainable transportation system for all users that is responsive to changing local, regional, and national transportation trends. The chapter builds upon a comprehensive Transportation Assessment completed for HoCo By Design and HoCo By Design’s public engagement process. The assessment described travel trends, travel forecasts, and county transportation investments since the last General Plan, PlanHoward 2030. These investments included efforts to reduce congestion, improve connectivity, and reduce environmental impacts, among other achievements. Several recent efforts also influenced the chapter, such as the Bicycle Master Plan (BikeHoward), the Pedestrian Master Plan (WalkHoward), and the Complete Streets Policy, which together guide the County’s commitment to safety, accessibility, and equitable transportation choices. This chapter is organized around six key topics: 1) maintaining the transportation system, which addresses the importance of investing in the ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the system; 2) safety and the transportation system, which details the actions the County is taking to ensure the transportation system is safe for all users; 3) transportation mobility and access, which addresses the wide range of topics, factors, and actions the County considers in managing the transportation system; 4) delivering transportation projects, which outlines the challenges in delivering transportation projects and options to accelerate projects; 5) future of the transportation system, including the Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, which outlines the pending and expected changes facing the transportation system in the County and region; and 6) transportation investment priorities, which details a range of transportation investments to support the goals in HoCo By Design. Finally, the chapter should be read with the understanding that there are many current and future challenges to which the County will need to react, such as connected and autonomous vehicles, and post Covid-19 travel patterns. The impacts of these and other challenges are uncertain, so the chapter recommends a flexible and nimble policy approach. <
> # WHAT WE HEARD Throughout the HoCo By Design public engagement and planning process, community members and stakeholders discussed the importance of transportation to local and regional economies, housing, youth, people with disabilities, and carless community members. There was general acknowledgement that travel in Howard County is currently dominated by automobiles and is expected to remain so for the foreseeable future. However, some stakeholders strongly emphasized the need for enhancements to the public transit system to ensure equitable access to jobs, services, and amenities. They said the existing system does not adequately meet current or future needs. Business owners and managers also expressed their frustration with the current public transit system and the challenges their staff face getting to work, with limited bus stops and infrequent service. These challenges were echoed by riders who use the system every day to get to work, school, and shopping. Some participants requested more creative, flexible, and efficient transportation choices, such as on-demand micro-transit, e-bikes, and e-scooters. Some community members worried that redevelopment areas would not provide enough parking spaces and that parking garages may not meet the needs of seniors and disabled drivers. Other participants said that many current parking spaces are unused and parking studies would help "right size" parking lots for redevelopment. These participants suggested smaller parking lots could allow for more green space to meet environmental goals. Others cited challenges related to accommodating connected and automated vehicles. Participants recognized the strong link between new housing and transportation, acknowledging that the County's current land use pattern does not encourage non-automobile travel or public transit investment. Some participants supported targeted residential density to facilitate meaningful transit connections between employment centers, key activity areas, and Columbia's village centers. Comments also suggested that affordable housing should be accommodated in areas with existing or planned transit, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure. Some participants suggested accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and missing middle housing locate in these areas as well. <
> The County's and Columbia's pathway system was regarded as a treasured amenity that serves as a travel mode for everyone. Similar sentiment was expressed in participants' comments about sidewalks and bike lanes, where they exist throughout the County. Some participants embraced the use of complete streets to enable multi-modal access to school, shopping, and work. They noted that complete streets could reduce car dependency and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and improve air quality and safety. Other participants expressed concern that the County would move too far in the direction of alternate modes of transportation and not address existing road safety needs. In a larger context, many respondents identified Howard County's strategic position between Baltimore and Washington, DC as a key asset. There was general agreement that better regional transit connections, including links to MARC and the Purple Line, would strengthen Howard County's attractiveness—a position emphasized by younger respondents seeking increased access to regional jobs and attractions. Finally, there was interest in a strong multi-faceted transportation system that would create opportunity for all community members, employers, and workers. *** ### Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Focus Groups Findings * Expand the sidewalk network and bicycle infrastructure, emphasizing safety and ensuring it is well-connected. * Improve the bus system by addressing headways/wait times, creating direct travel routes to county amenities, providing more bus rider amenities (such as shelters and technology that indicates wait/travel times), and ensuring local transit connects to regional systems. * Create an affordable and reliable rideshare program. ### Equity in Action The following equity best practices helped identify policies and implementing actions in this chapter that could help advance equity in the County. Each policy or implementing action that contributes to the advancement of equitable outcomes will be noted with a "🔥" symbol. * Support planning, funding, and process improvements that enhance or expand multi-modal infrastructure, facilities, and dependable transit options that provide access to jobs and amenities, particularly for low-income and transit-dependent community members. * Plan for improvements that support residents' health outcomes and transportation safety, especially those that target communities with higher percentages of transit-dependent community members. * Plan for physical activity and healthy lifestyles. # County in Motion Terms Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS): A quantitative rating given to a road segment or crossing that indicates the traffic stress it imposes on the users of scooters or bicycles. There are four rating levels, from one (tolerated by cyclists of all ages and abilities) to four (only tolerated by riders who are characterized as ‘strong and fearless.’) Connected and Automated Vehicle (CAV): A term used to describe vehicles that can either communicate with other vehicles, infrastructure, and devices through wireless network technology, such as Wi-Fi and radio frequencies, or are equipped with technology that enables them to operate with little to no human assistance. Delivery as a Service (DaaS): On-demand deliveries of goods arranged through digital platforms. Examples of DaaS include grocery, restaurant takeout, and retail deliveries to consumers via third-party delivery drivers. Fiscally Unconstrained: A term used in transportation planning that communicates the gap in funding available versus funding to fully address infrastructure needs, including a pipeline of unfunded projects for consideration if/when new funding becomes available. Level of Service (LOS): Quantitative and qualitative measures of how well traffic flows through an intersection. LOS relates to such factors as number of lanes, percentage of trucks, total traffic volume, turning movements, signal timing, and other factors that affect intersection congestion. Micro-mobility: A category of transportation modes that includes electric scooters and bicycles, suited for trips over short distances. Mobility as a Service (MaaS): On-demand transportation arranged through digital platforms. Examples of MaaS include ride-, car-, and bike-sharing services that offer alternatives to using private vehicles for trips. Multi-modal Transportation: Refers to the many ways people travel, whether by personal vehicle, public transit, or bicycle, or on foot. # County in Motion Terms (Cont.) Transportation Demand Management (TDM): TDM strategies encourage people to take transit, rideshare, walk, bike, and telework, thereby reducing the number of motor vehicles using the road network. Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO): A set of strategies focused on operational improvements to maintain and restore the performance of the existing transportation system before extra capacity is needed. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): A measure used extensively in transportation planning that measures the amount of travel for all vehicles in an area over a set time period. <
> # Maintaining The Transportation System Howard County's transportation system is comprised of facilities and operations that provide transportation services and maintain the existing transportation infrastructure. The system reflects public and private investments that are critical to Howard County community members and businesses. Maintaining this investment requires continuous assessment of—as well as repairs and upgrades to—bridges, roadway pavement, bike lanes, sidewalks, signals, and transit buses, to name just a few key items. Each new facility installed or new vehicle purchased adds to the inventory of assets that require regular maintenance to ensure their safety, accessibility, and operability. The small sample below shows the scale of the County's investment in the transportation system: * More than 1,065 miles of sidewalks * 72 transit buses and support vehicles used to provide transit service * 8 Regional Transportation Agency (RTA) bus transit lines running service 15 hours a day * Over 65 miles of bike lanes and pathways * 1,200 miles of roads, of which 30-40 miles are repaved every year * Over 100 traffic signals * 363 bridges * More than 75 county-owned trucks and heavy equipment used to clear snow, mow roadsides, sweep roads, and repair sidewalks, ramps, roads, and signals Deferring maintenance and repairs of the transportation system can lead to larger and more frequent repairs, or replacement costs in the future as facilities age or fail. For the public transit system, buses and support vehicles that have exceeded their useful lives become more expensive to maintain and break down more often, which often results in delays and canceled service. In 2021, of the 72 vehicles in the Howard County public transit fleet, 40 vehicles have exceeded their useful life. For the county's road system, despite an anticipated reduction in the number of road miles rated in good condition over the next few years, the County has been able to ensure roads, bridges, and other transportation assets are well-maintained. Historically, the County has been able to align and adjust transportation budgets to meet most transportation maintenance and replacement needs by annual funding infusions, either from the County or Maryland Department of Transportation. However, these funding infusions can vary widely based on national, state, and local economic conditions. In Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023, the County received an unprecedented level of state and federal funding to replace vehicles, allowing the County to place 28 new vehicles into service, about 39% of the total fleet. However, replacing this many vehicles at one time also means they will exceed their useful lives at the same time. Maintaining a reliable transportation system requires a regular and defined investment program. The County's challenge over the next two decades will be to prioritize a limited budget for system maintenance to meet a variety of needs across the community, meet climate goals by building a zero-emission fleet, respond to changing maintenance obligations from new engineering and environmental practices, and also communicate how these needs are prioritized. This will require regular evaluation of the maintenance needs of the transportation system and matching these needs to available funding. <
> > ❝ > Infrastructure items are critical to maintain. > ❞ > - HoCo By Design process participant To ensure the long-term viability of the transportation system, policies and actions should advance national best practices. In 2021, Howard County participated in the Capital Improvement Program Development and Promoting Healthy Communities Study (CIP Study) with the Baltimore Metropolitan Council. The study’s recommendations were developed by comparing the state of the practice across the Baltimore region’s jurisdictions with the best practices found nationwide. The recommendations include specific actions that can be taken, barriers to implementation, and metrics to determine success. For example, the study recommends incorporating an equity lens in the capital planning process. Howard County has begun to adopt this approach for transportation with the inclusion of an Equity Emphasis Area index in the Complete Streets Policy (detailed in the next section of this chapter). The CIP Study’s recommendations have been used to guide this chapter’s implementing actions. The Supporting Infrastructure chapter also references the CIP Study; please refer to the “Equity in Capital Planning” section of the Supporting Infrastructure chapter for details. ### CIM-1 Policy Statement Maintain transportation system assets to ensure the viability of the system and safety of users. ### Implementing Actions 1. Develop and regularly update a risk-based asset inventory and management program for all transportation assets and ensure adequate maintenance funding. 2. Closely coordinate system maintenance activities with utilities and private development to minimize future roadway damage. 3. Develop fiscally unconstrained plans for each asset class to communicate the deferred maintenance needs and a pipeline of unfunded projects for consideration. 4. Consider equity emphasis areas in the prioritization of maintenance needs. 5. Encourage the proliferation of non-polluting vehicles by upgrading county fleets and requiring appropriate infrastructure. <
> ## SAFETY AND THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Howard County is recognized as one of the best places to live in the United States and is one of the safest jurisdictions in the state to drive, take the bus, walk, and bike. However, crashes continue to be one of the leading causes of death and injuries for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. Improving the county transportation system’s safety is critical to ensuring Howard County remains an attractive and desirable location to live. Consideration should also be given to improving walking routes to school. In 2020, Howard County completed its Strategic Road Safety Plan with the goal “to prevent all traffic crash-related fatalities and serious injuries, and to reduce the number and severity of crashes” by articulating realistic, achievable, and data-driven goals and actions. Between 2014 and 2018—the five-year period of data that informed the Strategic Road Safety Plan—Howard County averaged more than 3,900 reported crashes per year for an average of 1,499 people injured per year. During this same time period, 95 community members and visitors died in crashes on roads in the County. As detailed in the plan, of the approximately 19,500 crashes during that time period, the most prevalent factor was distracted driving (involved in 8,800 crashes, or 45%). Another 3,100 crashes involved improper driving behaviors, such as speeding and aggressive driving, and 1,200 crashes involved impaired driving. Finally, 280 crashes involved cyclists or pedestrians. Notably, while two-thirds of all bicycle and pedestrian crashes occurred on local roadways, 85% of all bicycle and pedestrian fatalities occurred on state roadways, which typically have greater traffic volume and higher speeds. In 2019, the County Council adopted a Complete Streets Policy to ensure that community members using any transportation mode can travel freely, safely, and comfortably throughout the County. The Complete Streets Policy uses an Equity Emphasis Area index to track implementation, prioritize projects, and evaluate designs. The index uses methodology developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC), which assigns scores to census tracts in Howard County based on multiple factors, including the percent of households in poverty, transit dependent households, non-Hispanic minority individuals, low English-proficiency individuals, Hispanic or Latino individuals, individuals 75 years and older, and disabled individuals. Map 4-1 shows the Equity Emphasis Areas and index scores. Building on the Complete Streets Policy, the Howard County Design Manual Volumes III and IV (Design Manual) were updated in 2022 to incorporate best practices in street design to accommodate all modes of transportation. The next step in complete streets implementation is to update the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to ensure that the development process supports the County’s vision for complete streets. In early 2020, Howard County also adopted a new pedestrian master plan, WalkHoward, which identifies and prioritizes pedestrian infrastructure needs. A fundamental organizing principle of WalkHoward includes last-mile access, and the plan recommends a series of projects and connections to ensure walking is a safe, effective, and viable recreational and transportation choice. BikeHoward, further described under the “Mobility and Access” section of this chapter, envisions safe bicycling on roads and paths as a means of daily transportation and healthy recreation. BikeHoward calls for the creation of a safe and seamless network of bikeways that connect people to schools, shops, parks, and work, with facilities that serve all skill and comfort levels. The Strategic Road Safety Plan recommended a safe system approach for the County that identifies the link between priority crash types and the roadway contexts in which they most frequently occur. The system then prioritizes countermeasures that provide a solution to those crash types at the identified location types. This approach is innovative because it can prioritize locations that have a high propensity for crashes to occur even if crashes have not occurred there in recent years. Overall, the system proactively targets road safety improvements in high-risk locations where the most frequent and severe crashes could occur. This effort should also coordinate with and support the Complete Streets Policy and the WalkHoward and BikeHoward capital programs. Finally, HoCo By Design’s Economic Prosperity chapter describes the transportation needs of the agricultural community and conditions that impact safety. Refer to the section “Sustaining our Agricultural Economy” within the Economic Prosperity chapter for details. ### CIM-2 Policy Statement Design and operate an equitable transportation system that prevents and mitigates the most severe types of crashes for motorists, transit riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians. ### Implementing Actions 1. Prioritize and fund measures outlined in the Strategic Road Safety Plan using a safe system approach to focus education, enforcement, and engineering efforts and investments. 2. Advance the Complete Streets Policy by updating the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to provide accommodations and favor land use and development that improves safety, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists who are the most vulnerable roadway users. 3. Execute the priorities of WalkHoward and BikeHoward through dedicated funding in the capital budget and efficient project delivery. 4. Ensure that all transportation capital projects include review of potential safety improvements during the project scoping process. 5. Pursue state-enabling legislation to allow well-signed, stationary speed cameras and other road safety mechanisms in school walk zones. <
> # MAP 4-1: COMPLETE STREETS POLICY EQUITY EMPHASIS AREAS <
> **Equity Emphasis Area Score** * 0 - 1 (12 Tracts) * 1 - 2 (9 Tracts) * 3 (12 Tracts) * 4 - 5 (9 Tracts) * 6 - 11 (13 Tracts) NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Office of Transportation and Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 # Mobility and Access Transportation systems are based on two transportation concepts: mobility and access. Mobility is generally defined as the ability to use the transportation system to move from place to place, such as on a highway or on a regional train system. Access is generally defined as how many places one can get to safely and easily. The planning and development of transportation systems balance these two concepts to reflect and advance community goals. Traditionally, Howard County's transportation system was more focused on mobility but is evolving to focus on ensuring and improving access for walkers, cyclists, drivers, and transit riders, a process that is guided by some of the highlighted topics below. Increased multi-modal access is important to serve the County's growing senior community, youth, people with disabilities, and carless community members. ### Transportation Trends, Patterns, and Facts #### Vehicle Miles Traveled Annual daily vehicle miles traveled in Howard County is in flux as the County and the country emerge from the Covid-19 pandemic. On average, each resident drove approximately 500 more miles per year in 2018 compared to 2013, while the same measure shows that each resident drove approximately 1,300 fewer miles in 2021 compared to 2018. On a per-resident basis, the County's vehicle miles traveled was approximately 37% and 33% higher than the region for those two time periods. This increase is likely a function of longer commute distances between home and work, higher per-resident automobile ownership, and limited transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities that support viable non-automobile trips for local travel. #### Congestion, Roads, and Highway Infrastructure The Maryland State Highway Administration monitors road conditions in the region and reports conditions using a Travel Time Index. The Travel Time Index measures travel time during congested periods of the day and compares it to the same trip made during less congested periods. The regional transportation system in Howard County performs well, with just three exceptions: Route 32, Route 29, and Interstate 95. Projects and studies to address travel time reliability on these roads are underway or complete, and conditions continue to be monitored on other roads, including Route 103, Route 108, Route 144, Broken Land Parkway, and Little Patuxent Parkway. In addition to congestion and delay that occur during peak hours on both local and state roads, many users are impacted by non-recurring delay, which is delay caused by crashes, weather, and other events that cannot be forecasted. These non-recurring events can considerably impact travel time and how users plan their trips. Howard County's authority for transportation planning and investment is limited based on jurisdictional responsibility associated with different roads in the community. In 2022, the County maintained over 1,000 miles of roads; however, these roads supported only 19% of the average daily vehicle miles traveled in the County. The remaining average daily vehicle miles traveled in the County were on state roads or federal interstates, which the County does not have the authority to maintain or expand to meet future year needs. These systems experience the greatest delay in aggregate, which is primarily attributed to regional traffic. However, many users of the transportation system also experience periodic congestion and delay on the local road system. <
> > ❝ > Great places require access by multiple modes. Keeping children active from a young age is an essential public health imperative. > ❞ > - HoCo By Design process participant Best practices that support a balanced and fiscally-driven approach to managing congestion include the following: * Prioritizing and advocating for road improvements funded by the State, with a focus on Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) solutions. TSMO is an integrated approach to planning, engineering, operating, and maintaining the transportation network. TSMO looks at improving the performance of the existing system for all modes and can deliver more cost-effective congestion relief than adding new capacity along county roads. * Advocating for federal, state, and regional partners regional transit solutions that improve Howard County’s access to regional job centers. * Coordinating with state, regional, and local partners to efficiently deploy resources to address recurring and non-recurring congestion. ### Bicycle and Pedestrian Access The Howard County Bicycle Master Plan, BikeHoward, provides a framework to improve conditions for bicyclists and promote bicycling as a safe and convenient travel option for people of all ages and abilities. BikeHoward offers guidance in the following general categories: 1) policy updates; 2) programs providing education, encouragement, and enforcement; and 3) infrastructure improvements to create a connected bicycle network. BikeHoward has been implemented and funded through aggressive efforts to secure grants, in-kind contributions, county investments, and coordination with the County’s road resurfacing program and schedule. Since 2016, 35 of 95 miles in BikeHoward’s recommended short-term network plan have been completed. New projects that implement BikeHoward’s infrastructure recommendations and policy improvements—such as the introduction of a bikeshare pilot, bicycle parking improvements, and a police bicycle pathway patrol unit—have advanced into final design and construction. <
> WalkHoward sets forth a plan for implementing a connected, comfortable, and safe pedestrian network that accommodates all users and provides a framework to rethink walking as more than a recreational trip in the County. It especially emphasizes improving and expanding pedestrian infrastructure to serve the daily needs of community members, businesses, and visitors. Like BikeHoward, WalkHoward recommends the following: 1) updating policies; 2) providing programs that would allow more residents to walk, support safety goals, and track walking rates; 3) continuing to allocate resources to maintain the existing pedestrian network; and 4) constructing 60 structured projects and high priority connections. As part of the implementation of WalkHoward, county staff also partner with the Howard County Public School System to coordinate WalkHoward projects with efforts to expand and improve the safety of school walking routes. The Howard County Design Manual, Complete Streets and Bridges, provides guidance on the design of pedestrian and cycling infrastructure by requiring sidewalks on all streets where there is demand for walking and bicycle facilities that operate at a Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of two or better. ### Local and Regional Public Transit Howard County provides local and some regional public transit service through the Regional Transportation Agency of Central Maryland (RTA). After the adoption of PlanHoward 2030, the County created RTA by joining with Anne Arundel County, the City of Laurel, and Prince George’s County to operate shared bus service throughout the four jurisdictions. RTA operates 15 routes, 12 of which serve Columbia, Ellicott City, Elridge, Jessup, Savage, and North Laurel. The highest ridership stop in the RTA system is the Columbia Mall transit center, which accounts for 500 trips daily—two-thirds of all trip origins and destinations. This location is the pulse point or hub of nearly all services in Howard County. A significant investment to construct a Downtown Columbia Transit Center to replace the existing center is listed at the end of this chapter as part of Table 4-1. Of the remaining highest-ridership stops in the County, six are at apartment complexes, five are at commercial or retail centers, and four are at village centers in Columbia. The RTA service mostly provides access to jobs for those with few mobility options. More than 65% of all trips on RTA are for work-related purposes, and 85% of RTA riders do not own a vehicle. Seventy-six percent of all riders have an average annual income of $40,000 or less. In addition to providing fixed-route service, RTA also provides ADA-complementary paratransit and demand-response service for seniors and persons with disabilities. This ridership market is expected to grow significantly as the County’s population ages. ### Howard County’s Age-Friendly Action Plan The County’s Age-Friendly Action Plan (2021) envisions a varied, efficient, and sustainable multi-modal transportation system that provides safe and affordable transportation for users of all ages and abilities. The system is further described as facilitating active transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and using scooters and similar devices. The plan promotes alternative transportation options and supports implementation of the Complete Streets Policy, WalkHoward, BikeHoward, and the Strategic Road Safety Plan. <
> Local public transit is also supplemented by a network of local and regional social service nonprofit organizations, such as Neighbor Ride and the Arc of Howard County, that provide transportation services to specific populations in the County, including seniors and people with disabilities. These organizations have the capacity to provide highly specialized services to ensure community residents can continue to go to school, shop, and go to work. These organizations provide a critical service to the community and are a strong complement to RTA service. The development of local transit service is guided by a series of planning activities and projects. The Howard County Transit Development Plan (TDP) is a five-year plan to guide the management of existing transit service, organizational improvements, customer service, and service expansion. The 2018 TDP focused on service and frequency expansions, supported by a transit budget of $16 million in FY 2022, of which Howard County funded 75%. While expansion is important, leveraging new technology to deliver service efficiently, frequently, and reliably is also critical to continue to equitably serve and better address the needs of underserved populations and meet the county's equity goals. The County also has a bus stop improvement program supported by local and state funds. Public transit planning is also guided by larger regional planning efforts. The Central Maryland Regional Transit Plan (RTP) identified 30 regional transit corridors, including Route 1, Route 29, and Route 40. The RTP's US 1 Corridor Small Area Plan identified opportunities to improve transit service from Route 175 to Baltimore and recommended advancing an app-based, demand-response service known as micro-transit to expand local transit coverage and complement the regional transit network through first- and last-mile connections. The RTP also supported the County's continuing efforts to implement new service on Route 29, along with a new east-west regional connection on the Route 40 Corridor. While Howard County is located between Washington, DC and Baltimore, regional transit connections to the east and south are not robust and don’t reflect the County’s current economic and geographic position in the region. Connections to Washington, DC and Baltimore are provided by nine commuter bus routes and one express bus route operated by the Maryland Department of Transportation’s Maryland Transit Administration (MTA). Five of the routes serve commuters from Clarksville, Columbia, and Ellicott City to Washington, DC, and two routes serve commuters from Columbia to Baltimore. One route each serves commuters from Columbia to Bethesda, Dorsey to Gaithersburg, and Baltimore to Columbia. The MARC Camden Line follows the Howard County and Anne Arundel County border, connecting Washington, DC and Baltimore with stations in Jessup, Savage, Dorsey, and North Laurel. While the MARC and the commuter bus system are used by some community members, their effectiveness as both a strong transportation service and a tool to manage congestion on the regional system is limited by the following factors: * Service that is limited to peak AM and PM periods, a service pattern that has not been changed to reflect changing work patterns and times. * Camden Line frequency and reliability is limited by track capacity and freight prioritization by the track owner, CSX. * Camden Line stations are not conveniently located. * Lower-density land uses around MARC stations in Howard County, Anne Arundel County, and the City of Laurel. * Commuter bus service routes that use Interstate 95 rather than Route 29 into Washington, DC. When the Montgomery County Flash Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line is fully implemented on Route 29, transit travel time will improve and enhance access to job centers in the corridor. The Purple Line light rail will also provide another opportunity for enhanced regional connections to job centers in Bethesda, College Park, and New Carrollton that are currently bypassed by commuter bus services using Interstates 95 and 495. Howard County is uniquely positioned to foster multi-region transportation solutions. Sitting halfway between Washington, DC and Baltimore, and adjacent to major employment centers at Fort Meade and in Montgomery County, Howard County must view transportation policy and planning issues from the greater regional perspective. The County should leverage its current role in the Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC) and Transportation Planning Board (TPB) while also actively enhancing its relationship with the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board to advance and promote both short- and long-term transportation initiatives and progress. The County has already used this approach to form the RTA, illustrating how the County can convene resources to improve transportation services in a multi-jurisdictional area. This bi-regional approach will be critical in advancing short-term initiatives, such as the expansion of the Montgomery County Flash service to Columbia and the projects highlighted in the Central Maryland Regional Transit Plan, as well as longer-term initiatives to provide separated guideways on the most congested sections of Route 29 for bus rapid transit. Freight and Goods Movement The regional and local economies rely on an efficient transportation system to allow people to get to jobs and shopping, move goods to stores, and transport freight throughout the region. The County has an extensive road and highway network linked to one of the nation’s largest port facilities, rail terminals, food and retail distribution centers, and major airports. Due to changing distribution and warehousing business practices, freight and goods movement nationally and in the region is expected to grow at an increasing rate. These projections do not account for the impact of Covid-19 on the local and regional freight movement and the warehousing and distribution sectors. Covid-19 accelerated and compressed changes that were expected to take place over a decade into two years. * From 2012 to 2020, freight pick-ups, drop-offs, and transfers in the County grew from 195,000 to 243,000 tons a day and are projected to grow to just over 292,000 tons a day by 2045. * In 2012, the freight industry in the Baltimore region moved over 800,000 tons of freight a day. In 2020, this figure rose to over 1 million tons and is expected to rise to 1.3 million tons a day by 2045. Howard County partners with the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) as part of the Maryland Freight Plan. The Maryland Freight Plan, which is updated on a five-year cycle, assesses state and local freight movements, evaluates multi-modal networks, and details the actions and programs MDOT will employ to meet the goals of plan. These actions and programs can include addressing truck parking needs, congestion on Interstate 95, and the impacts of the freight transportation system on communities. <
> Transportation Demand Management Transportation demand management (TDM) is a group of strategies used to manage demand for travel on the local and regional transportation system. These strategies encourage people to take transit, rideshare, walk, bike, and telework, thereby reducing the number of vehicles using the road network. TDM strategies can involve providing information on the range of transportation options in a community, promoting travel options to community members and businesses, and developing incentives to support using non-automotive travel options, along with disincentives. Strategies will also include parking management and reducing automobile parking requirements to influence which transportation options people choose when they travel and reduce search times for parking. TDM programs can be implemented in specific locations or throughout a region and have been used in many communities to support efforts to reduce vehicle emissions, reduce the need for new road capacity and also support the County’s focus on ensuring and improving access for walkers, cyclists, drivers, and transit riders. The County should expand and support TDM. <
> ### Transportation Demand Management ### in Howard County Howard County’s Office of Transportation promotes transportation demand management (TDM) solutions countywide through its Go Howard initiative, part of the regional TDM program. Go Howard provides information to community members and businesses on travel options including ridesharing, transit, bicycling, and other alternatives to driving alone. While Go Howard promotes TDM solutions countywide, there are also required TDM programs in two Howard County communities: Downtown Columbia and Maple Lawn. Those programs are enabled by Transportation Demand Management Plans (TDMPs) that guide the types of strategies used in each community to manage demand on the transportation system. The Downtown Columbia Master Plan called for the development of a TDMP to ensure Downtown will be multi-modal as it grows. In Maple Lawn, the TDMP was incorporated as part of the Zoning Board’s 2000 decision and order pertaining to the development. **CIM-3 Policy Statement** Make the transportation system equitable, close mobility gaps, and improve access to jobs, housing, health care, education, and social services. **Implementing Actions** 1. Continue to monitor system performance, gather input from current riders, and allocate existing resources to maximize ridership and enhance service for current public transit riders. 2. Ensure investments in the Regional Transportation Agency system accomplish increased service frequencies, improved reliability, and additional routes to unserved areas by considering transit-supportive land uses. 3. Provide support and enhance community-based mobility programs for seniors and people with disabilities. 4. Explore flexible transit routing, mobility as a service, and other micro-mobility concepts to provide efficient and economic transit service in lower-density areas of the County. Consider subsidies for income-qualified residents to use existing rideshare programs. **CIM-4 Policy Statement** Leverage Howard County’s position in the Baltimore and Washington regions to advance transportation projects and policies with regional and local impacts, including focusing efforts on governance, accountability, funding policies, and strategies to address unmet transportation service needs. **Implementing Actions** 1. Continue to engage in regional discussions regarding state and federal investment in regional transit systems to ensure funding and support for Howard County projects, meet the County’s goals to enhance and improve access to regional job centers, and maintain the County’s position as an attractive location to live and work. 2. Continue to support the collaborative efforts to improve the Regional Transportation Agency of Central Maryland. 3. Continue to partner with Montgomery County and the Maryland Department of Transportation to extend the Flash Bus Rapid Transit Service to Howard County. 4. Support and partner with Maryland Department of Transportation and other regional organizations to expand service and improve reliability on the Camden Commuter Rail Line and improve transit connections from Howard County to existing Penn Commuter Rail Line Stations. 5. Continue to engage and participate in regional and state planning and coordination activities to ensure the needs of freight and goods movements are considered and supported. 6. Continue to engage with neighboring, regional, and state partners to support and advance regional high-quality connections articulated in local and regional functional plans. **CIM-5 Policy Statement** Deliver transportation system improvements that support efforts to reduce reliance on automobile trips, improve air quality, and give people cost-effective and sustainable choices on how they get to work, home, school, and play. **Implementing Actions** 1. Construct and enhance transportation facilities to increase connections across Howard County and support the goals of WalkHoward, BikeHoward, and the Complete Streets Policy, with a focus on the equity goals outlined in the Complete Streets Policy. 2. Continue to plan and implement projects that enhance transportation connections to regional job centers and high-quality transit. 3. Review and expand efforts to develop and implement Transportation Demand Management programs (such as car share, bikeshare, and shared e-scooter systems; telecommute policies; and vanpools) and expand Park and Ride lots, where appropriate. Improve the reporting process for outcomes and goals. 4. Continue to plan and coordinate investments with the Howard County Public School System to increase safe routes to schools, enhance access to the local transit system, reduce demand for hazard-based school bus service, and decrease driving to school. Assess walking routes for safety and equity. 5. Partner with the Maryland Department of Transportation to align commuter bus routes and funding priorities with current and expected travel patterns and complementary regional public transit initiatives. 6. Continue to work with federal, state, and regional partners on preliminary studies for high-quality connections. 7. Implement Development Regulations that require site plans that allow access to buildings by transit, bicycle, walking, and micromobility services. 8. Work with state and regional agencies to develop reliable and sustainable methods to measure bike and pedestrian activity. 9. Require safe, non-automobile pathways that connect buildings within commercial and office complexes as well as activity centers to support “park once” behavior. 10. Consider more funding for electric school buses. **CIM-6 Policy Statement** Focus on improvements to the transportation system that improve travel reliability. **Implementing Actions** 1. Evaluate the use of Transportation Systems Management and Operations concepts to manage the County’s road system. 2. Develop real-time traffic monitoring and coordinate transportation and emergency resources to address non-recurring congestion due to weather and crashes on the local and regional transportation system. 3. Focus on operations at key intersections while ensuring improved safety for bicycle and pedestrian movements. 4. Optimize signal timing and phasing at key intersections in coordination with efforts to improve pedestrian and bicycle movements and safety, and coordinate signals in major commute corridors during peak time periods. 5. Increase street connections in key locations that provide more route choices to system users. 6. Develop access management approaches through updates to the Zoning Regulations and the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, design approvals, and coordination with the Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration. “ Walkability in commercial corridors is a big issue in HoCo, so I appreciate solutions to make pedestrian areas a priority. The entire Route 1 Corridor, Route 216, Route 40, and Route 108 come to mind as highly unwalkable and unsafe. ” - HoCo By Design process participant # DELIVERING PROJECTS Howard County’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) details how the County is funding transportation projects, either as part of a single project or a program of projects. Funding, planning, designing, and constructing transportation projects is a challenging and lengthy process. Some of these challenges are engineering-based, while others are process and communication focused. In 2021, Howard County participated in the CIP Development and Promoting Healthy Communities study with the Baltimore Metropolitan Council. This study identified common barriers to communicating how the CIP works, how challenges impact project delivery times and costs, and how the risks of these challenges are incorporated into the CIP process. The study developed a series of best practice recommendations related to the CIP and project delivery: * Develop a clear internal process to define, identify, and screen capital projects. * View asset management and State of Good Repair through a resiliency lens. State of Good Repair means a transportation asset is maintained to operate at its full level of performance. Consider the condition of each asset in the prioritization process and the impact that asset’s failure could have on transportation services and finances. Maintain a detailed and up-to-date inventory of all assets that includes asset condition. Develop formal processes to monitor the state of assets on a continuous basis. * Incorporate an equity lens throughout the capital planning process, from start to finish. Equity questions should be considered as needs are identified, measures are prioritized, and impacts are assessed. * Use digital tools to help the public engage with traditionally lengthy budget documents that may not be easily accessible or understood. Jurisdictions have found ways to improve the flow of information related to capital planning and increase transparency by creating online interfaces that translate the budget. HoCo By Design’s Supporting Infrastructure chapter builds upon the CIP study’s recommendations for capital planning. In 2022, the County initiated a study to develop recommendations for priority sidewalk and safety projects in the Route 1 Corridor and their delivery. It found that a significant amount of local and state funding has been allocated to design and construct projects, but progress has been slow due to challenges with securing rights-of-way for the project, permitting, and contracting. Based on these findings, the County should consider the recommendations from the CIP study. To achieve benefits more quickly while respecting its Equal Business Opportunity Program goals, the County should also adopt programmatic approaches in which the process of design, right-of-way acquisition, permitting, and construction are based on performance-driven design-build contracts. ### CIM-7 Policy Statement Refine processes and policies to deliver transportation improvements strategically, efficiently, and equitably. ### Implementing Actions 1. Review existing rules, policies, processes, and procurement procedures to identify opportunities to accelerate the planning, design, permitting, or construction of new and equitable transportation projects, including the recommendations from the Capital Improvement Program study. 2. Identify opportunities to minimize the time needed to acquire right-of-way for planning road, sidewalk, or bicycle projects while respecting the rights of private property owners. Alternatively, reevaluate the scope of projects earlier in the planning process if it is determined that there is strong opposition to land acquisition. 3. Implement contracting methods that shorten construction activities for a project, including, but not limited to, design-build provisions for small projects like sidewalks or intersection improvements, contracts that share risk with contractors and support flexible project phasing for larger projects, and incentives for early project completion. <
> # Future of the Transportation System Technological and Economic Change Rapidly evolving transportation technologies and changes to commuting and work patterns accelerated by Covid-19, will likely lead to shifting demands on the transportation system. As a result of this shift in demand, the County might modify its approach to planning its transportation system. In the short-term, it might focus more on integrating technology solutions to address the main effects of connected vehicle (CV) technology and automated vehicles (AV) on safety, mobility, and the environment. In the long-term, the County might focus more on the relationship between evolving transportation developments and shifting employment and housing patterns. The first waves of change in the transportation industry have been focused on Mobility as a Service (MaaS), such as Lyft, Uber, and ever-evolving micro-mobility technologies deploying e-scooters and bike sharing. MaaS supports living and working in suburban downtowns, as it provides a convenient transportation alternative and can reduce transportation costs for users. The industry is still in its infancy, and the long-term viability of the current business models are not certain. On the more immediate horizon, connected and automated electric vehicles (CAV) may be prevalent by the early 2030s, and the County should expect them to alter both demand on parking infrastructure and the road system. However, these impacts are very uncertain. Some forecasts claim CAVs will self-park more efficiently than humans can, leading to more efficient use of parking facilities. Changes in parking space needs could have several positive effects. New development in activity centers could share parking with existing projects. Infill and redevelopment could take place without the prerequisite of additional parking facilities, reducing costs. On the other hand, CAVs could also increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and cause more congestion as a result of multiple trips when a CAV drops its passenger in front of a destination, parks in a remote lot, and then later returns to pick up its passenger. In the longer-term, if CAVs mature and are cycled into the vehicle fleet in significant ways, they may alter commuting patterns in the County. CAVs could offer more efficient commutes by reducing travel times, providing community members a greater choice of locations to live in, and shifting demand to areas in the County, or outside, that are further away from job centers or less connected to the highway system. However, like the potential impact on parking demand, the adoption of CAVs may increase VMT as a result of this shift. The automotive industry is years away from fully leveraging CAV technology and impacts are not yet clear or understood. Further, most regulatory policy will be established at the state and federal levels. The County should monitor the progression of CAV technology and associated regulations, and respond to changes as they occur. The County’s response to future changes may include updated road design standards, expanded electric vehicle charging policies, a robust fiber optic communications network, and revised parking requirements. The County may also need to ensure the safety of cyclists and pedestrians if it is not adequately addressed in state and federal regulatory changes. *** "The increase in 'work from home' needs to be evaluated seriously in relation to the transportation network. Feels like the demand for road and public transportation will be somewhat different over the next 20 years than the previous 20 years. We tend to make projections based upon the past usage and growth and that will probably misstate the need." - HoCo By Design process participant <
> Climate Change and Air Quality As outlined in the Ecological Health chapter, climate change can be generally defined as a significant long-term shift in weather patterns for a specific geographic region. Emissions of the long-lived greenhouse gases carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases are causing climate change as they build up and trap heat in the atmosphere. A significant contributor to emissions is the transportation sector. In the United States, transportation accounts for 33% of CO2 emissions, with 65% of that total resulting from gasoline consumption in cars and light trucks. Commercial airplanes and business jets contribute 10% to US total carbon dioxide emissions and nearly 9% of greenhouse gas emissions in the US. Annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in Howard County has grown slightly in recent years, increasing by just over 400,000 between 2013 and 2018. This growth in VMT represents nearly 500 additional miles driven by every county resident per year. On a per capita basis, the county VMT is approximately 37% higher than the regional average. This difference is a function of slightly longer commuting distances to Baltimore and Washington, DC, high per capita auto ownership, and a limited number of transit options for most commute trips. Air pollution levels are reported to the general public via the Air Quality Index (AQI), which measures the level of criteria pollutants (air pollutants that contribute to the formation of ozone and particulate matter, including hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen, which can have adverse short- and long-term health effects). In the Baltimore-Washington region, the AQI is driven by ground level ozone and particulate matter. The Clean Air Act enables interstate commissions to develop regional strategies for reducing air pollution. Maryland is part of the Northeast Ozone Transport Region, which includes 12 states and the District of Columbia. At the local level, Howard County is a member of the Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC) and its Baltimore Regional Transportation Board (BRTB), which coordinate regional transportation planning and work to reduce emissions from transportation. Under the Clean Air Act, the BRTB cannot approve any project, program, or plan that does not conform to Maryland’s State Implementation Plan, which guides Maryland’s actions to attain and meet air quality standards. Reducing emissions and air pollutants from the transportation system will take multiple approaches, including the following: 1) reducing direct emissions from vehicles and airplanes; 2) shifting demand and creating more efficient transportation modes with fewer direct emissions; and 3) reducing VMT. The national, state, and local vehicle fleet is still primarily comprised of gasoline and diesel vehicles; however, electric and hybrid vehicles are becoming more common. In 2022, less than 1% of the US vehicle fleet was electric but sales were increasing rapidly. Meaningful market penetration of electric vehicles will depend on availability of government incentives, alleviating buyers' range anxiety, and facilitating investment in charging infrastructure. The high cost of electric vehicles is often cited as a barrier, as approximately two-thirds of households that own electric or hybrid vehicles have incomes over $100,000. Therefore any incentives and supporting policies will need to address the County’s equity goals. Shifting demand to other modes, such as transit, walking, and biking, is another reliable and equitable method to reduce VMT and emissions. By investing in reliable transit and safe walking and cycling facilities, the County can ensure that community members will have the option to shift their vehicle trips. Additionally, increasing frequency of transit service not only benefits those who depend on it out of necessity, but also improves the attractiveness of transit to those who are able to choose their mode of travel. Climate change is also forecast to impact the reliability of the transportation system as periods of higher temperatures increase wear on road surfaces; stronger and more sustained rain events increase flooding on roads, bridges, and culverts; and long-term droughts dry out subsurface soils, leading to subsidence. Additionally, reduced capacity, detours, and crashes from flooding impact travel time, reliability, and safety. As articulated in the BMC’s Capital Improvement Program study, viewing asset management and county design standards through a resiliency lens will be critical to ensuring the County’s transportation system can continue to operate safely and effectively. The Volume III Design Manual Complete Streets and Bridges requires a noise analysis if the proposed residences are located within a specified number of feet from a roadway or a rail line, or if the location is within an airport noise zone. The Design Manual also requires noise mitigation through the use of buffers, barriers or acoustical insulation, or through building orientation. ### CIM-8 Policy Statement Actively plan for and evaluate the impact of technology and climate change on the transportation system. ### Implementing Actions 1. Evaluate and update parking and land development requirements to reflect greater use of mobility and delivery as service models. 2. Amend design standards and asset management approaches to ensure resilience. 3. Encourage the installation of electric vehicles (EV), such as electric cars and electric bikes, and charging stations in private and public space, with particular attention to shared parking lots to ensure they are EV ready by including connections and infrastructure. 4. Evaluate and address the potential impact of electric vehicle charging stations on electric power requirements. 5. Participate in regional and state coordination efforts to ensure federal and state regulations on connected and autonomous vehicles account for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists. ### CIM-9 Policy Statement Support efforts to improve air quality with an emphasis on communities and populations most threatened by high levels of pollution. ### Implementing Actions 1. Develop land use and environmental policy strategies that reduce the impact of diesel particulate matter in communities adjacent to industrial areas. 2. Develop a plan and transition the County’s fleet (including school buses and contracted services) to low/no emission vehicles. 3. Continue to invest in increasing public transit frequency and walking and cycling infrastructure to support both a more equitable transportation system and shifts away from automobiles to non-automobile modes. 4. Consider targeted financial incentives and the removal of regulatory barriers for property owners and companies that deploy electric vehicle charging infrastructure, idle reduction technology, and other technologies that capture or mitigate diesel emissions at the source. 5. Consider a subsidy program to support low emission vehicles, bicycles, and scooters in traditionally underserved communities. Baltimore/Washington International Airport Flight Paths Noise associated with air traffic to and from Baltimore/Washington International (BWI) Thurgood Marshall Airport was recognized as far back as the 1982 General Plan, which described an objective “to ensure that general aviation activity does not produce excessive noise in residential areas.” Three years after the adoption of PlanHoward 2030, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) implemented NextGen, creating an airspace in which planes are flying lower and longer over residential areas resulting in more noise impacts to residents in Howard County than ever before. Hundreds of thousands of noise complaints have been filed with the Maryland Aviation Administration (MAA) by residents impacted by these flight path changes. To date, the MAA officially recognizes an Airport Noise Zone (ANZ) that was created “to control the incompatible land development around BWI Airport and develop a Noise Abatement Plan (NAP) to minimize the impact of aircraft noise on people living near the Airport.” In order to develop residences or community facilities (such as churches, libraries, schools, and hospitals) in the ANZ, the Board of Airport Zoning Appeals (BAZA) must be petitioned and the proposals must meet specific noise reduction standards. The first ANZ and NAP for BWI were adopted in 1976 and were most recently updated in 2020. In the 2020 update, the MAA expanded the ANZ by approximately 23%, due to various operational details, including changes in flight paths and the aircraft fleet mix. The 2015 adoption of the FAA’s NextGen system contributed to many of these operational changes The ANZ changes have had a significant impact on Anne Arundel County and abutting the Howard County border. To address the noise from BWI Airport, the BWI Roundtable was formed in 2017. It includes representatives from Howard and Anne Arundel Counties appointed by state and local government representatives. The Roundtable called for changes to the operational procedures and flight patterns to lessen the airplane noise disturbances. These changes are anticipated to go into effect in the spring/summer of 2024. Another concern expressed by residents pertains to the air pollution that may be caused by airplane particulate matter. Airplane exhaust, like car exhaust, contains a variety of pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The County should work with state and federal partners to mitigate any impact of the particulate matter on the air quality of Howard County communities within the flight paths. While proximity to BWI serves as an economic generator for the movement of goods and provides many benefits to county residents and businesses who desire convenient access to commercial air travel, such proximity is not without its drawbacks. The County should continue to monitor BWI’s flight patterns and the health impacts of aircraft noise and particulate matter on residents. The County should also advocate and participate in discussions with the FAA around mitigation of impacts associated with BWI flight paths. Development within Howard County that falls within the ANZ or directly under NextGen flight paths should utilize best practices in building standards for attenuating noise. This is particularly important given recent studies on the impact of airport noise conducted at the request of the Maryland General Assembly, and FAA’s consideration of changes to noise measurement policies to that more accurately reflect the true impact of noise on residents near airports. <
> *Source: MOOT MAA Airport Noise Zone Update, December 2020* ### CIM-10 Policy Statement Pursue ways to reduce the impacts of noise and air pollution generated by air travel and ensure that future residential development addresses these evolving conditions. ### Implementing Actions 1. Continue participating in the BWI Roundtable to track the proposed technical changes requested by the BWI Roundtable and agreed to by the FAA. 2. Continue to encourage the MAA and FAA to identify and develop additional and necessary changes to NextGen that reduce airplane noise disturbances. 3. Continue to advocate for state and federal policies to help communities monitor the airplane particulate matter in communities within state or federally defined zones associated with BWI flight paths (existing height and noise). Support efforts by state and federal partners to develop environmental policies and strategies to mitigate the impacts of particulate matter. 4. Research national trends and implement requirements for innovative building designs that reduce airplane noise in areas highly impacted by BWI operations. 5. Work with our state and federal partners to have them develop environmental strategies to mitigate the impacts of particulate matter. # Transportation Investment Priorities Howard County’s transportation needs and preferences have changed significantly over the last three decades. Travel demands and commuting patterns have settled along major corridors that are now generally built to their ultimate size and configuration. While automobile travel will continue to dominate travel patterns for the near future, there is growing and demonstrated community interest in improving the safety and efficiency of the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. Many community members continue to express their desires to replace their work, shopping, or other automobile trips with more economic and environmentally-conscious choices. These preferences are starting to be reflected in the County’s shift to building a transportation system focused on travel time reliability, safety, and travel choices for all members of the community. Since the adoption of PlanHoward 2030, substantial investments have been made in transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Eleven percent of capital transportation spending is focused on these three non-automobile categories while operational and capital investments for the transit system are also increasing dramatically. The future mixed-use activity centers envisioned in HoCo By Design complement this shift to greater walking, bicycling, and transit use. Refer to the Quality By Design chapter and Focus Areas appendix for details on how design can facilitate increased use of non-automobile modes. To continue to support this shift in direction, the County should use the Significant Transportation Investments to Support Growth & Redevelopment Map and Table (Map 4-2 and Table 4-1) to guide county investments in, and support of, transportation projects and activities. The selection of projects is not intended be exclusive since many county projects are focused on specific operational issues and might not be shown on the map. Further, projects are not listed in priority order (they have not been prioritized). The projects shown were selected based on travel trends and forecasts, PlanHoward 2030 transportation projects, and more recent functional planning projects—including the Regional Transit Plan for Central Maryland, Walk Howard, the Strategic Road Safety Plan, and the Complete Streets Policy. The map and table will not only guide county priorities but also support the County’s partnerships and advocacy for large regional transportation projects and initiatives. These regional efforts could be funded and implemented by the Maryland Department of Transportation in the Consolidated Transportation Program or advanced in the Baltimore Metropolitan Council’s Long-Range Transportation Plan, which is critical to ensuring projects are eligible for federal funding. Howard County’s transportation investment priorities should also be informed by the reality of county transportation funding. County spending for transportation is divided between operating costs, such as transit services and routine maintenance costs, and capital costs, such as engineering intersections, resurfacing roads, rehabilitating bridges, installing traffic signals, maintaining bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and replacing transit vehicles. Both operating and capital funding in the County are limited and can change significantly from year to year, which makes it difficult to sustain a steady pipeline of projects to plan, engineer, and construct over time. As a result, many projects identified for implementation in the CIP have been delayed due to funding constraints, and some older projects may not advance the policies and goals in HoCo By Design. The County should reevaluate the purpose and need of these delayed projects to ensure they are consistent with HoCo By Design. <
> Map 4-3 shows the current road system in Howard County by functional class. These functional classifications, coupled with design guidance in the Howard County Design Manual, are used to determine the right-of-way and road improvements required for both private development projects and county capital projects. The map divides roads into five functional classifications, primarily organized based on vehicle throughout. New roads, as they are built and accepted into the county road system, are assigned a functional classification based on their design. These five classifications are matched to multi-modal street types in the Howard County Design Manual, which details the process to design a road based on its full context to meet the goals of the Complete Streets Policy (see pages 39-40 below). To further identify transportation investment priorities, the County should develop a countywide transportation plan that: * Results from a comprehensive process that engages the County’s diverse population, including users of all transportation modes. * Builds upon the Significant Transportation Investments to Support Growth & Redevelopment Map (Map 4-2), functional plans, and corridor master plans. * Incorporates complete streets typologies. * Reevaluates the purpose and need of the existing transportation system and proposed transportation projects to ensure consistency with county goals and funding. * Aligns with the equity in capital planning approach described in HoCo By Design’s Supporting Infrastructure chapter, and the emission reduction goals in the County’s Climate Action Plan. ### CIM-11 Policy Statement Advance transportation planning and transportation investments to support an economically and environmentally sustainable transportation system that moves people safely and efficiently throughout the County and supports the land use and equity goals in HoCo By Design, including its emphasis on mixed-use activity centers. Similarly, advance land use patterns and individual site development that support an economically and environmentally sustainable transportation system. ### Implementing Actions 1. Develop a countywide transportation plan and conduct a focused transportation study for each activity center in the Route 1 Corridor. 2. Continue to use the Functional Road Classification Map to guide the design, capacity, and function of roads as they are built or improved. 3. Implement HoCo By Design’s recommendations for transit service through future transit service functional plans or master plans. 4. Continue to implement recommendations from WalkHoward and BikeHoward as methods to advance the broad concepts and recommendations in the General Plan. 5. Ensure the Design Manual is consistent with the General Plan as part of the regular update process for the Design Manual. 6. Advance the Complete Streets Policy by updating the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to favor land use patterns and individual site development that supports an economically and environmentally sustainable transportation system. # MAP 4-2: SIGNIFICANT TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS TO SUPPORT GROWTH & REDEVELOPMENT <
> Future improvements to facilities such as Interstates 95 and 70 will be implemented by other transportation organizations. Projects identified, particularly those showing endpoints outside of county boundaries on the map, should be implemented with the County's regional and state partners. Changes to the County's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance should consider opportunities to fund a portion of the recommended projects depicted on the map. Projects are not listed in priority order. MARC Transit Stations Park and Ride Locations Project Type Interchange Road Transit Bicycle/Pedestrian Interchange Multi-modal Road Transit 18 29 30 Multi-modal Investments NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Office of Transportation and Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 | Table 4-1: Significant Transportation Investments to Support Growth & Redevelopment | | | :--- | :--- | | Project Number | Project Description | | 1 | Sanner Road: Johns Hopkins Road to Guilford Road - improve safety and operations for all modes, along with stormwater management improvements. | | 2 | Snowden River Parkway: Oakland Mills Road to Broken Land Parkway - construct all segments of the multi-use pathway and associated intersection modifications to ensure accessibility for all modes. | | 3 | Gateway Regional Activity Center: Create new eastern access point to Gateway and Berger Road via CSX right of way. | | 4 | US 1: MD 100 to Prince George's County Line - continue operational, safety, and streetscape improvements between MD 100 and Prince George's County line, along with advancing regional transit efforts. | | 5 | MD 108: Trotter Road to MD 32 - expand section to accommodate left turns, improve safety, and complete the Clarksville-River Hill Streetscape Project. | | 6 | MD 103/104/108 Corridor: Construct operational and safety improvements along MD 103, 104, and 108, including continuous sidewalk and pedestrian connections between neighborhoods and schools in the corridors. | | 7 | US 40: Chatham Road to Baltimore County Line - construct operational, safety, and access management improvements along US 40, including improved pedestrian connections and regional transit connections. | | 8 | US 29: US 29 from Ellicott City to Burtonsville via Downtown Columbia and Maple Lawn - extend Montgomery County Flash service to provide direct connection to WMATA Red Line and MTA Purple Line with high-quality BRT service. | | 9 | Downtown Columbia: Construct Downtown Columbia Transit Center to improve transit operations, customer services, and service expansion. | | 10 | Downtown Columbia: Establish Downtown Columbia Circulator. | | 11 | MD 99/US 29: Construct Park and Ride lot to create northern terminus for US 29 BRT service and provide capacity for rideshare vanpools. | | 12 | East/West Corridor between Downtown Columbia and Odenton MARC Station: Create new enhanced bus service connecting MARC station via Gateway Regional Activity Center and Fort Meade with eventual regional extension to Annapolis. | | 13 | US: 1 East County Transit Center - construct new transit center to improve transit operations and customer service. | | 14 | MARC Camden Line: Infrastructure, frequency, and service improvements and support MTA efforts to construct third track, sidings, and other infrastructure improvements to allow for mid-day and weekend service. | | 15 | Laurel Park MARC Station: Support MDOT and Howard County efforts to create a mixed-use transit-oriented community. | | 16 | Dorsey MARC Station: Support MDOT and Howard County efforts to create a mixed-use transit-oriented community. | | 17 | Park and Ride Lots: Leverage park and ride lots for co-location of residential and commercial development. | | 18 | Bus Stop Improvements: Continue investments to upgrade rider amenities and access to bus stops. | | 19 | US 1: Montevideo Road and Port Capital Drive - realign intersection for safety and access management and widen Montevideo Road to accommodate truck traffic from Dorsey Run Road. | *Source: Howard County Office of Transportation, 2022* | Table 4-1: Significant Transportation Investments to Support Growth & Redevelopment | | | :--- | :--- | | Project Number | Project Description | | 20 | US 29: Middle Patuxent River to MD 175 - widen southbound US 29 from Middle Patuxent River from four to six lanes to accommodate bus rapid transit and improve travel time reliability. | | 21 | MD 108: Woodland Road to Centennial Lane - expand to continuous five lane section to accommodate left turns, improve safety, and add continuous pathway and landscaping. | | 22 | MD 175: Anne Arundel County line to US 1 - establish a coordinated roadway design in conjunction with Anne Arundel County efforts to improve access management, safety, and operations along MD 175 between the county line and US 1. | | 23 | Kit Kat Road/Brookdale Road: Develop unified link to Dorsey Run Road. | | 24 | Patapsco Regional Greenway: Construct new regional trail from Elkridge to Ellicott City in coordination with Carroll and Baltimore Counties. | | 25 | US 1: US 1 access and safety projects - retrofit roadways and construct new pathways to neighborhoods, community centers, and schools in the US 1 corridor to support safety and access. | | 26 | Hickory Ridge Road: Hickory Ridge Bicycle Corridor project will retrofit roadways and construct new pathways from the Hickory Ridge, Owen Brown, and Atholton communities to Howard Community College and Downtown Columbia. | | 27 | Dobbin, Snowden River, and Oakland Mill road corridors: Retrofit roadways and construct new shared use paths to connect corridors to Gateway Regional Activity Center. | | 28 | Columbia to North Laurel Corridor: construct South Entrance, Patuxent Branch, and North Laurel Connections pathway projects to provide high quality four season connections. | | 29 | BikeHoward: Construct structured projects recommended in the Bicycle Master Plan. | | 30 | WalkHoward: Construct structured projects recommended in the Pedestrian Master Plan. | | 31 | MD 175: Oakland Mills Road and MD 175 - create limited access interchange to enable access to Blandair Park North. | | 32 | US 29: Extend Symphony Woods Road to Broken Land Parkway and modify the US 29 interchange to create additional southern access to Downtown Columbia. | | 33 | MD 216: MD 216 at Leisher Road, Sky Lark Boulevard Extended, and Gorman Road - realign Gorman Road and Leisher Road to improve mobility and safety in consideration of development patterns and future extension of Skylark Boulevard from Emerson. | | 34 | Broken Land Parkway: At Snowden River Parkway - improve intersection safety and capacity, including alignments with ramps to MD 32. | | 35 | US 29 / I 70: Improve safety and operations at congested interchange. | | 36 | US 1: US 1 at MD 175 - create urban interchange to improve traffic safety and operations. | | 37 | Gateway Regional Activity Center: At MD 175/MD 108/Columbia Gateway Drive - construct new northern access point to Gateway Regional Activity Center and improve traffic safety and operations with partially grade separated interchange. | | 38 | MD 100: At MD 100, MD 108, and Snowden River Parkway - construct operational and safety improvements for traffic exiting MD 100 to MD 108 and Snowden River Parkway. | | 39 | I 70 and Marriottsville Road: Construct capacity, ramp, and bridge improvements over I 70, expansion of Marriottsville Road from MD 99 to US 40. | *Source: Howard County Office of Transportation, 2022* MAP 4-3: FUNCTIONAL ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS <
> **Functional Classification** * **Principal Arterial** * **Intermediate Arterial** * **Minor Arterial** * **Major Collector** * **Minor Collector** NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Office of Transportation and Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 # Functional Classification and Design Manual Street Types The road system in Howard County is categorized by functional class. The functional classification, coupled with design guidance in the Howard County Design Manual, determines the right-of-way and the design of the road. There is not a one-to-one relationship between the functional classification and street types in the Design Manual; the selection of street types is based on the land use context and expected volumes. | Functional Classification Description | Functional Class | Design Manual Street Type | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Principal Arterials provide for efficient and uninterrupted travel between or across states and large metropolitan areas, including most interstate designated routes. | Principal Arterial | The Design Manual does not provide design guidance on principal arterials. | | Intermediate Arterials provide access to principal arterial highways, offering efficient but not necessarily free or uninterrupted motor vehicle traffic flow between major roads in highly developed areas. | Intermediate Arterial | Parkway <
> | | Minor Arterials provide a lower level of travel mobility than intermediate arterials to major towns and communities. They often provide mobility to or through areas of high-density residential, commercial, retail, or industrial land uses. Unlike principal and intermediate arterials, minor arterials may allow occasional access to abutting commercial, residential, and industrial properties. | Minor Arterial | Boulevard <
> | | Functional Classification Description | Functional Class | Design Manual Street Type | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Collectors provide connections between mobility-oriented arterials and access-oriented local streets. They may allow a limited amount of travel through neighborhoods and non-residential areas, even when that travel does not begin or end in the neighborhood. There are two types of collectors: major and minor. Driveway access to adjacent properties is generally allowed on minor collectors but not major collectors. | Major Collector | Town Center Connector <
> Neighborhood Connector <
> Country Road <
> | | | Minor Collector | Town Center Street <
> | *Source: Howard County Office of Transportation, 2022* | Functional Classification Description | Functional Class | Design Manual Street Type | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Collectors provide connections between mobility-oriented arterials and access-oriented local streets. They may allow a limited amount of travel through neighborhoods and non-residential areas, even when that travel does not begin or end in the neighborhood. There are two types of collectors: major and minor. Driveway access to adjacent properties is generally allowed on minor collectors but not major collectors. | Minor Collector | Neighborhood Street 1

<
>

Neighborhood Street 2

<
>

Country Road

<
> | | Local streets are focused on access to adjacent properties, allowing direct driveway access. They are generally not designed to accommodate motor vehicle through traffic, except to connect other local streets with a nearby collector. | Local Street | Rural Development Street

<
> | *Source: Howard County Office of Transportation, 2022* | Functional Classification Description | Functional Class | Design Manual Street Type | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Local streets are focused on access to adjacent properties, allowing direct driveway access. They are generally not designed to accommodate motor vehicle through traffic, except to connect other local streets with a nearby collector. | Local Street | Neighborhood Yield Street

<
>

Alley

<
>

Industrial Street

<
> | *Source: Howard County Office of Transportation, 2022* --- ## Housing — Chapter 6, Dynamic Neighborhoods - Source: https://www.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/Chp6.pdf - Pages: 34 - Covers: housing # CHAPTER 6 # DYNAMIC NEIGHBORHOODS # Dynamic Neighborhoods: Maintaining and Supporting Vibrant Living Dynamic neighborhoods are places that provide an exceptional quality of life, attainable and diverse housing options, and opportunities for all to thrive through access and connection to neighborhood amenities, such as community centers, parks, schools, and jobs. The Dynamic Neighborhoods chapter of the General Plan provides guidance on maintaining and supporting vibrant living that meets the needs of current and future residents, and offers opportunities for a more equitable future for all. It recommends a balanced approach to residential development for all income levels and age ranges. It emphasizes creating more diverse housing options throughout the County, increasing housing affordability, and ensuring there are housing options for older adults, disabled populations, and those with special needs. It also discusses how the County can preserve existing affordable housing and highlights the importance of improving infrastructure and amenities in existing and new neighborhoods. While schools, transportation options, neighborhood amenities, and other infrastructure are key elements of a dynamic neighborhood, they are discussed in the following chapters: Supporting Infrastructure, Public School Facilities, Managing Growth, and County in Motion. <
> # What We Heard <
> Throughout the engagement process, the character of housing and neighborhoods were prominent themes communicated by participants. Community members cited concerns regarding the impact of new housing on county infrastructure (including schools and roads), yet also acknowledged that there is both a high demand to live in the County and a growing need for more financially attainable quality housing. Community members also grappled with the lack of developable land in the County and were interested in redevelopment opportunities to offer a variety of housing choices, from high-density housing to moderate-density options like missing middle housing (defined later in this chapter). They also considered strategies that would allow detached accessory dwelling units on existing residential lots and opportunities for missing middle housing through residential infill development. Many said that if housing were integrated in the redevelopment of activity centers, design should recognize the uniqueness of each community and the scale should fit the context of the existing built environment. This recognition of context included the Rural West, where there was mixed feedback about whether any additional housing should be constructed. Most agreed new housing in the West should respect the rural nature of the area and not infringe upon, but compliment, agricultural uses by offering housing affordable to workers of local agribusinesses and farms. Some community members expressed concerns about adding housing in the County given the existing school capacity challenges, while others shared concerns with new housing types. Many suggested that missing middle housing and accessory dwelling units should be compatible with existing housing and contribute to a cohesive neighborhood design. Furthermore, many supported developing appropriate guidelines for the design of housing, with an emphasis on ensuring guideline compliance. It was also emphasized that any new housing should be sensitive to the natural environment and sustainable building practices. There was general agreement that new housing should be attainable for a diversity of income levels. Some mentioned challenges with the existing Moderate Income Housing Unit (MIHU) program and suggested it be reevaluated to ensure it is meeting its intended objectives. Housing was viewed as a part of a holistic community. Many remarked that the County should be intentional about the location of future development so it is well connected to amenities, planned improvements to public facilities, and employment centers—all assets that make Howard County’s neighborhoods so desirable. ### Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Focus Groups Findings * Housing in Howard County is not financially attainable for many people—need greater variety of housing types at various price points (for both rental and homeownership). * Need more housing units that serve persons of all age and ability levels, especially the older adult population. * Housing is connected to concerns regarding school overcrowding and redistricting. * Need for common/open space to be integrated into all neighborhoods. ### Equity in Action The following are equity best practices. Housing is inextricably linked with equity in Howard County, so many of the policies and associated implementing actions in this chapter have been identified as equity best practices. Each policy or implementing action that directly advances equitable outcomes will be noted with a "✊" symbol. * Remove barriers to affordable housing in zoning and subdivision regulations. * Provide a range of housing types. * Preserve affordability of existing homes and neighborhoods for rental and homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. Explore programs that will incentivize developers to build housing in mixed-use projects that will be affordable and create new homeownership opportunities. * Increase connected multi-modal infrastructure that provides access to jobs and amenities, particularly for low-income and transit-dependent community members. * Identify housing needs for the entire community, as well as specific populations, including low-income, older adults, disabled, and homeless families and individuals. ### Strategic Advisory Group Input Since housing affordability was identified as one of the most critical challenges currently facing the County, a Housing and Neighborhoods Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) was formed to discuss how to diversify housing options throughout the County. The SAG focused on housing typologies referred to as missing middle and discussed several factors: what missing middle housing could look like, where it should be located, and what zoning changes need to occur to make it possible. The group recognized that missing middle housing has the potential to foster racial and socioeconomic diversity, provide more entry-level housing options, help address the downsizing needs of the older adult community, and contribute additional housing for persons with disabilities. There was consensus that to support a diversity of housing types and strong neighborhoods in the County, there must be policies that ensure affordable and attainable units are created, zoning tools that support diverse housing development, and infill development/redevelopment opportunities for missing middle housing that respect the character and integrity of a neighborhood—all while recognizing that limited land is available for new development. The work of the SAG informed many of the policies in the Dynamic Neighborhoods chapter and complemented recommendations found in the Howard County Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP). # Overview: Housing in Howard County Howard County’s Housing Mix As shown in Map 6-1, the County’s land is dominated by residential development and preserved land, with approximately 40% used for residential and 39% permanently preserved as parks and open space or agricultural and environmental land. Most of the preserved land is located in the West; whereas the majority of the residential development is located in the East. The Planned Service Area (PSA) boundary marks the distinction between these two geographies: the West relying on wells and septic systems, which generally do not support higher densities, and the East relying on public water and sewer. <
> Most of the County’s residential land has been developed as low-density residential. Generally speaking, the housing mix in the County, east of the PSA boundary, consists of 40% low-density, single-family, detached residential, 22% medium-density residential (single-family attached homes) and 22% high-density residential (multi-family homes). The area west of the PSA, commonly referred to as the Rural West, contains 12% of the County’s low-density residential development. Additionally, approximately 4% of the County’s housing mix is age-restricted (55 years and older). Low-density residential land offers limited choices for living in Howard County. According to the Land Use Assessment prepared for HoCo By Design, the lowest densities are in the Rural West, approximately one home per three acres, while the eastern part of the County averages 2.35 homes per acre (a little more than one home per half acre). The distribution of low-density residential development, with large blocks and limited street connections, generally favors travel by automobile to meet residents’ daily needs. <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> # Map 6-1: Residential Development Types <
> **Planned Service Area** **Preserved Land** **Age Restricted Neighborhoods** **Single-family Detached Neighborhoods** **Single-family Attached Neighborhoods** **Multi-family Neighborhoods** NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 # Housing Element (HB 1045) and the Housing Opportunities Master Plan Maryland House Bill (HB) 1045, adopted in 2019, requires jurisdictions with planning and zoning authority to include a housing element in comprehensive plan updates. A housing element must address the need for affordable housing within jurisdictions, including both workforce and low-income housing. HB 1045 defines workforce housing as follows: * Workforce housing for homeownership – Housing that is affordable to a household with an aggregate annual income between 60–120% of the area’s median income (see AMI definition next page). * Workforce housing for rental – Housing that is affordable to a household with an aggregate annual income 50–100% of the area’s median income (see AMI definition next page). Columbia was built on the concepts embodied in HB1045 and offers a variety of for-sale and rental opportunities, including some of the more affordably priced for-purchase and rental housing in the County. According to the 2022 Howard County Rental Survey, Howard County has over 25,400 rental units in professionally managed multi-family communities, of which over 46% are located in the Columbia submarket. In addition to Columbia, older and/or more diverse housing inventories with more affordability can also be found in the Elkridge and Southeast submarkets. According to the Housing Opportunities Master Plan: Market Overview and Background Research, between 2015 and 2018, 44% of home sales in Howard County took place at price points below $350,000 including 61% of sales in Columbia, 56% in Elkridge, 42% in Southeast, and 26% in Ellicott City. Columbia also has the County's highest number of housing units and the highest percentage of renter-occupied units as compared to owner-occupied units. There are 42,063 total housing units in Columbia with 13,680 (33%) renter-occupied units and 28,383 (67%) owner-occupied. The next highest submarket for renter-occupied units as a percentage of the total units is the Southeast where 29% (5,938) of the total units are renter-occupied and 71% (13,074) are owner-occupied. While homeownership should be fostered throughout the County, these housing demographics highlight the need to increase home buying opportunities in Columbia. <
> Since various policies and actions in HoCo by Design are based on the Howard County Housing Opportunities Master Plan, workforce housing (also referred to as moderate-income housing) in this document is more broadly defined as housing that is affordable to households that earn 60–120% of the area median income (AMI), while low-income housing is defined as housing affordable to households that earn less than 60% of the AMI. According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a home is affordable when 30% or less of a household income is spent on housing costs. In 2019, recognizing that the housing inventory was scarce for people at every income level, which contributed to rising housing prices and rents, the County launched a process to create a housing plan. Completed in 2021, the County's housing plan, known as the Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP), includes an assessment of the current state of housing in the County and strategies for improving its availability, affordability, and accessibility. The HOMP includes various recommendations for land use planning, many of which have been contemplated in the HoCo By Design planning process. The Dynamic Neighborhoods chapter incorporates various data and recommendations from the HOMP and includes policies and implementing actions that address the requirements of HB 1045. <
> # DYNAMIC NEIGHBORHOODS TERMS **Affordable Housing:** As defined in the Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP), this term is often used in different contexts and to convey different concepts. Broadly speaking, affordable housing is housing in which its occupants can live and still have enough money left over for other necessities, such as food, health care, and transportation. This relationship is often expressed in terms of the percentage of income that a household spends on its housing payments. For instance, one of the guiding principles in the HOMP recommends, "Howard County should prioritize housing development to serve owner households making less than 120% of Area Median Income (“AMI”) and renter households making less than 60% of AMI.” For the purpose of the HOMP and HoCo By Design, affordable housing can include both income-restricted housing, as well as attainably priced market-rate housing. **Attainable Housing:** An attainably priced home is one that does not create cost burdens for the family living there and is generally affordable without a subsidy. According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a home is affordable if the occupant is paying no more than 30% of gross income for housing costs, including utilities. Based on this definition, a household that makes $73,000 per year could probably afford a monthly rent of $1,825 and a mortgage on a home priced at $200,000–$250,000. **Income-Restricted Housing:** As defined in the HOMP, rental or homeownership units that are restricted to households at a certain income level, and are often calculated as a percentage of Area Median Income (AMI). These units tend to receive some form of public, philanthropic, or policy support. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following: * Moderate Income Housing Units (MIHUs)—units that developers of new market-rate housing in Howard County must reserve for moderate-income households at reduced rents or purchase prices. * Low Income Housing Units (LIHUs)—units that must be reserved for low-income households at reduced rents or purchase prices. * Disability Income Housing Units (DIHUs)—units that must be reserved for households receiving a disability income. **Area Median Income (AMI):** As defined in the HOMP, the midpoint of the income distribution for a region, with half of the households in that region earning more than this amount and half of the households in that region earning less than this amount. In 2019, according to the US Census, the AMI in Howard County was $121,160. Using this AMI as the basis, below are estimated low and moderate household income ranges: * Extremely Low Income: Under 30% of AMI (or $36,348 or less/year) * Low Income: 30–60% of AMI (or $36,349–$72,696/year) * Moderate Income: 60–120% of AMI (or $72,696–$145,392/year) ### Data and Findings from the Housing Opportunities Master Plan The Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP) involved extensive research of the local housing market and existing policy landscape, and makes the case for expanding home choices and affordability in the County. The “Market Overview & Background Research,” a Technical Appendix prepared by RCLCO for the HOMP, should be used as a resource document to HoCo By Design as it provides an overview of the County’s housing inventory, affordability, and demand. However, some of the key findings relevant to the policies and actions presented in HoCo By Design can be found below: * In 2019, just one-quarter (25.6%) of for-sale housing units in Howard County were affordable to households making less than 120% of Area Median Income (AMI), with most of this housing stock being much older. * There is not enough housing supply for renters who make less than 60% of AMI (or less than $73,000 annually). * Most new housing being built by the market is affordable to households making more than 80% of AMI (rental) and more than 120% of AMI (for-sale). * Just 9% of housing in Howard County is affordable to households making less than 60% of AMI, and virtually no for-sale homes that have been built in the last two decades are affordable to this group. * The Rural West lacks housing options for low- and moderate-income households. Based on prices of homes sold between 2015–2018, to include new construction and resales, just 1% of its homes are affordable to households making less than 60% of AMI, largely due to the lack of modestly priced for-sale housing. * Cost burdens are disproportionately felt by diverse populations, both for rental and for-sale housing. * While single-family detached homes under 3,000 square feet represent nearly half (48%) of the overall for-sale inventory, they account for just 17% of new product today. In April 2020, the average size of a for-sale, newly constructed, single-family detached home was 4,025 square feet and 2,471 square feet for a townhome, generally larger than neighboring jurisdictions. * The average share of income spent on housing is especially high (32.2%) for 65 years and older renter households, one-quarter of which pay 50% or more of their incomes. * The amount of new housing that has been built in Howard County has decreased in recent years. As a result, housing supply has not kept up with housing demand, which has contributed to rising home prices. * Households that own their own homes and make more than 120% of AMI account for a majority (51%) of all households in Howard County, compared to just 37% in surrounding counties (which include: Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Montgomery, and Prince George’s). * Compared to surrounding counties, Howard County is home to a lower percentage of homeowners who make less than 120% of AMI, as well as most types of renters. The types and price points of housing that exist in the County today are at least partially attributable to these differences. Overall, the housing affordability challenges are most severe for low- and moderate-income households. These households, concentrated mostly in Columbia, along Route 40, and along Route 1, have lower homeownership rates and less access to for-sale homes that are affordable.. Map 6-2 on Pages 15-16 shows median household income, by census block group, throughout the County. The block groups with the lowest income households are found along Route 40, in Ellicott City, in parts of Columbia, and along the Route 1 Corridor. MAP 6-2: HOUSEHOLD MEDIAN INCOME BY CENSUS BLOCK GROUP <
> Median Household Income (2021) ● $149,000 Or Higher ● $100,000 - $149,000 ● $75,000 - $99,999 ● $50,000 - $74,999 ● $35,000 - $49,999 ● Less Than $35,000 NOT TO SCALE Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2021; Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 In Howard County, housing demand tends to follow supply. Most of the homes recently built have been larger and higher end. Graph 6-1, Table 6-1, and Table 6-2 show that most for-sale housing in Howard County is not affordable to households making less than 120% of the AMI, with 92% of the for-sale homes built after 2000, only affordable to households making more than 120% of the AMI. Graph 6-2, Table 6-3, and Table 6-4 show that a large share of the County's rental market is affordable to households that make 60–120% of the AMI. However, this supply serves both higher- and lower-income households due to the lack of rental housing supply at the lower and higher ends of the market. The scarcity of rental housing affordable to households that make less than 60% of the AMI highlights the importance of policies that call for affordable housing preservation. <
> <
> | | SFD | Townhome | Condo | Multi-Family | Total | Percent | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Table 6-1: For-Sale Units Built Before 2000** | | | | | | | | Under 30% AMI Very Low Income | 7 | 2 | 55 | 111 | 175 | 0% | | 30% - 60% AMI Low Income | 126 | 216 | 1,195 | 647 | 2,184 | 3% | | 60% - 80% AMI Moderate | 593 | 1,133 | 1,423 | 202 | 3,351 | 5% | | 80% - 120% AMI Workforce | 6,203 | 6,729 | 2,425 | 269 | 15,626 | 23% | | Over 120% AMI Market Rate | 40,557 | 6,549 | 297 | 59 | 47,462 | 69% | | **Total** | **47,486** | **14,629** | **5,395** | **1,288** | **68,798** | | | | SFD | Townhome | Condo | Multi-Family | Total | Percent | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Table 6-2: For-Sale Units Built After 2000** | | | | | | | | Under 30% AMI Very Low Income | 2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 8 | 0% | | 30% - 60% AMI Low Income | 39 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 43 | 0% | | 60% - 80% AMI Moderate | 98 | 23 | 24 | 0 | 145 | 1% | | 80% - 120% AMI Workforce | 357 | 678 | 362 | 0 | 1,397 | 7% | | Over 120% AMI Market Rate | 11,766 | 6,952 | 401 | 0 | 19,119 | 92% | | **Total** | **12262** | **7655** | **795** | **0** | **20,712** | | | | Studio | 1BR | 2BR | 3BR | 4BR | Active Adult/Seniors | Shadow Market | Total | Percent | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Table 6-3: Rental Units Built Before 2000** | | | | | | | | | | | Under 30% AMI Very Low Income | 0 | 255 | 377 | 116 | 43 | | 337 | 1312 | 2,440 | 12% | | 30% - 60% AMI Low Income | 0 | 564 | 351 | 61 | 0 | | 759 | 874 | 2,609 | 12% | | 60% - 80% AMI Moderate | 26 | 2,910 | 5,532 | 600 | 3 | | 0 | 461 | 9,532 | 45% | | 80% - 120% AMI Workforce | 0 | 1,598 | 1,224 | 340 | 9 | | 0 | 1,149 | 4,320 | 21% | | Over 120% AMI Market Rate | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 0 | 2,126 | 2,126 | 10% | | **Total** | **26** | **5,327** | **7,484** | **1,117** | **55** | | **1,096** | **5,922** | **21,027** | | | | Studio | 1BR | 2BR | 3BR | 4BR | Active Adult/Seniors | Shadow Market | Total | Percent | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Table 6-4: Rental Units Built After 2000** | | | | | | | | | | | Under 30% AMI Very Low Income | 0 | 53 | 54 | 0 | 0 | | 297 | 214 | 618 | 6% | | 30% - 60% AMI Low Income | 0 | 167 | 148 | 96 | 0 | | 1,176 | 9 | 1,596 | 16% | | 60% - 80% AMI Moderate | 12 | 153 | 629 | 33 | 0 | | 5 | 101 | 933 | 9% | | 80% - 120% AMI Workforce | 80 | 2100 | 2647 | 501 | 0 | | 202 | 271 | 5,801 | 56% | | Over 120% AMI Market Rate | 0 | 47 | 210 | 103 | 0 | | 235 | 740 | 1,335 | 13% | | **Total** | **92** | **2,520** | **3,688** | **733** | **0** | | **1,915** | **1,335** | **10,283** | | Source: Housing Opportunities Master Plan, 2020 <
> *Source: Housing Opportunities Master Plan, 2020* Graph 6-3 shows that most housing units (87%) built between 2010 and 2019 were large single-family detached (20%), townhome/single-family attached (28%), and rental apartments (39%). According to the Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP), a small single-family detached (SFD) home is less than 2,000 square feet, a moderate single-family detached home is between 2,000 and 3,000 square feet, and a large single-family detached home is over 3,000 square feet in size. <
> # DIVERSIFY HOUSING TYPOLOGIES PERMITTED IN THE COUNTY ### What is Missing Middle Housing? For the purposes of the General Plan, missing middle housing refers to a range of small- to medium-size home choices that are available at different price points. New missing middle homes are compatible in scale and character with surrounding neighborhoods or integrated into new or existing activity centers throughout the County as a transition between different land uses or building types. Missing middle homes may be represented by a single multi-unit building on a single lot, a multi-unit building on multiple lots, or a cluster of homes oriented around a common green space. Missing middle housing types may include duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, courtyard apartments, live/work units, multi-use dwellings, cottage courtyards, modest-sized homes (under 2,000 square feet), stacked townhomes, plus others. ### Why is Missing Middle Housing Important? Missing middle housing would increase home choices for both rental and homeownership in Howard County. Having more diverse housing types in a community fosters socioeconomic diversity. Relative to larger single-family detached homes, these housing types could be more affordable for those with lower or moderate incomes. They could also provide housing options for the County's growing older adult population, persons with disabilities, young professionals, artists, and many members of the County's workforce. <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> Source: Opticos Design Inc. MAP 6-3: HOUSING TYPES AND PERCENT NONWHITE POPULATION BY CENSUS TRACT <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2021; Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 Map 6-3, on Pages 23-24, depicts the locations of existing multi-family buildings (both apartments and condos), single-family attached (SFA) neighborhoods, and single-family detached (SFD) neighborhoods. There is greater racial and ethnic diversity where there is a variety of housing types. While 36% of all census tracts have a nonwhite population that is 50% or greater, those same census tracts contain 60% of all apartment, townhome, and condominium units in the County. Homeownership opportunities should be emphasized in the areas where apartments are now concentrated. <
> Image 6-1 is an example of a modest-sized home, approximately 1,300 square feet, in the Cottages at Greenwood, a permanently affordable housing development that consists of 10 single-family homes on approximately 3.5 acres. This development provides homeownership opportunities for moderate-income households. In 2011 and 2012, homes in the neighborhood sold for $252,400. In 2019, a home in the neighborhood sold for $265,274. ### Zoning Regulations and Missing Middle Housing The Howard County Zoning Regulations and the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations govern the development and use of land in the County. The County has multiple zoning districts in which different uses are permitted, prohibited, or permitted with conditions. The Zoning Regulations dictate which housing types are permitted by-right, as an accessory use, or by conditional use in specific zoning districts. While the Zoning Regulations overall allow single-family detached, single-family attached, single-family semi-detached (homes that share a wall but have separate lots), and multi-family homes by-right, there are a limited number of zoning districts that allow single-family attached, single-family semi-detached, and multi-family homes by-right. The series of zoning maps on the following pages depict where certain housing types are allowed by-right in the County. However, Map 6-7 reflects the locations in Columbia's New Town Zone that allow certain housing types because this zoning district is governed by Final Development Plans for small geographic areas that are more specific than the general residential zoning districts. Map 6-4, on Pages 27-28, depicts where single-family detached homes are permitted by-right under the Zoning Regulations. Map 6-5, on Pages 29-30, shows where single-family attached and single-family semi-detached homes are permitted by-right under the Zoning Regulations. Map 6-6, on Pages 31-32, shows where multi-family and mixed-use residential homes are permitted by-right under the Zoning Regulations. <
> Images 6-2 and 6-3 show examples of a duplex (semi-detached) and a two-family dwelling, both of which are allowed in limited areas under the Zoning Regulations. Homes in a duplex share a common wall but are divided by property lines (shown in yellow). A two-family dwelling has two separate living units but is on one parcel. # MAP 6-4: ZONING PERMITTING SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS <
> Planned Service Area Zones Permitting Single-Family Detached Dwellings New Town Zoning* *Please refer to Map 6-7 to see the housing types permitted within New Town Zoning as determined by the approved Final Development Plans. NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 # MAP 6-5: ZONING PERMITTING SINGLE-FAMILY SEMI-DETACHED AND ATTACHED DWELLINGS <
> * **Planned Service Area** * **Zones Permitting Semi-Detached and Attached Dwellings** * **New Town Zoning*** *Please refer to Map 6-7 to see the housing types permitted within New Town Zoning as determined by the approved Final Development Plans. **NOT TO SCALE** Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 # MAP 6-6: ZONING PERMITTING MULTI-FAMILY AND MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL <
> * **Planned Service Area** * **Zones Permitting Apartments & Mixed-Use Residential** * **New Town Zoning*** *Please refer to Map 6-7 to see the housing types permitted within New Town Zoning as determined by the approved Final Development Plans. *** Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 MAP 6-7: HOUSING TYPES PERMITTED BY NEW TOWN ZONING <
> **Planned Service Area** **Apartments & Mixed-Use Residential** **Garden Style Apartments & Single-Family Attached** **Single-Family Detached Low Density** **Single-Family Detached Medium Density** NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2023 While the County’s housing mix presented earlier in the chapter represents the percentage of specific housing types that exist in the County today, zoning districts determine where certain housing types are allowed by-right or as a conditional use. Zoning districts west of the Planned Service Area (PSA) are restricted in development density due to lack of access to public water and sewer, growth tiers limiting the number of units, and significant amounts of land permanently preserved for agricultural uses. Therefore, the amount of land permitting single-family detached homes is much higher than the amount of land permitting other types of housing in the County. Since missing middle housing types often include two or more units, there are a limited number of locations where they can be built under the Zoning Regulations, as they are either not defined in the regulations or not permitted. New zoning should also consider bulk requirements (a set of controls that determine the size and placement of a building on a lot) that are realistic for these housing types and do not preclude their potential on existing lots. Regulatory barriers, limited precedent, and uncertain returns on investments are noted obstacles to creating this housing type in today’s market. While demand exists for smaller, more affordable housing stock, many missing middle types are not a common housing product within the building industry and the ability to finance them remains to be proven in the market. Therefore, jurisdictions may need to facilitate and incentivize demonstration projects to encourage these new housing types or offer a range of multi-unit or clustered housing models or designs that are compatible with single-family homes. This could provide greater predictability for both the community and the developers of these housing types. ### Accessory Dwelling Units The American Planning Association defines an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) as “a smaller, independent residential dwelling unit located on the same lot as a stand-alone (i.e., detached) single-family home.” ADUs are self-contained residences that include their own kitchen, bathroom, and sleeping area. ADUs can go by many other names, such as granny flats, tenant homes, accessory apartments, in-law suites, and more. They can also come in a variety of shapes and forms, including basement, attic, garage, attached, and detached. The ADU drawings and descriptions on page 37 help to distinguish between these different types. <
> Not only do ADUs increase the supply of diverse, lower cost housing options, they provide opportunities for homeowners to supplement their income. This could help many older adults to age in place. Today, Howard County Zoning Regulations allow some forms of ADUs—accessory apartments and temporary accessory family dwellings—but there are various restrictions on where they are permitted. Between 2015 and 2020, only 99 attached accessory apartments and one temporary accessory family dwelling were permitted in the County. Throughout the HoCo By Design planning process, some residents have expressed concerns about the impact that ADUs would have on parking, the environment, and neighborhood character. However, regulatory tools can be adopted to minimize these potential impacts. To ensure that ADUs have minimal impact on the environment and neighborhood character, zoning regulations could provide height and size caps, design controls, minimum lot size or environmental condition restrictions, and limits on the number of bedrooms. These types of standards could provide neighbors with greater predictability of the size and look of this housing type. Additional information on the environmental impact can be found in the “Infill Development in Existing Residential Neighborhoods” section. ### ADUs in Howard County #### Attached Accessory Apartments Accessory apartments are permitted as an accessory use in most residential zoning districts if located within a single-family detached dwelling, such as a renovated basement, attic, or garage. In addition to meeting various site and building criteria, they must be located in an owner-occupied dwelling, and the owner must occupy either the accessory or the principal dwelling. #### Detached Accessory Apartments Detached accessory apartments are not permitted under the Zoning Regulations, except as a temporary accessory family dwelling. These dwellings are permitted conditionally (as opposed to by-right) and allow for a second dwelling unit on a lot if it is used for an elderly or disabled family member of the resident of the primary residence. There are various site and building criteria that must be met, such as being located on a lot that is two acres or larger, and allowed through a conditional-use process in certain zoning districts. These dwellings must be removed once no longer in use by a family member. Attached ADUs Homes that are attached to the side or rear of an existing single-family detached home. These are typically built as additions or partitioned after construction, and can have a separate entrance or a shared entrance with the primary residence. <
> Garage ADUs Homes that are converted from existing garages or the space above garages into livable residences. Entrances can be found on the exterior of the garage, or from internal or external staircases for second-story garage ADUs. <
> Attic ADUs Homes that are converted from existing attic space into livable residences. Entrances for these spaces are provided by stairways inside the primary residence or by a separate, exterior staircase. <
> Basement ADUs Homes that are converted from existing basement spaces into livable residences. These typically have separate entrances at or below ground-level. <
> Detached ADUs Homes that are stand-alone structures on the same lot as the larger primary residence, typically located on the side or the rear of the lot. These are either converted from existing storage spaces, or are newly constructed buildings. <
> Other Considerations While the Zoning Regulations limit opportunities for the development of missing middle housing types and ADUs, Howard County has not always restricted these housing types. Prior to 1971, the County allowed one- and two-family dwellings on a single-family lot, which permitted duplexes and detached ADUs. However, the 1971 Zoning Regulations update reduced the number of dwelling units permitted per single-family lot to one. The trend in Howard County has historically been to build larger homes. One solution to diversifying the housing stock is to allow and encourage both missing middle and ADU housing types, which tend to be more budget-friendly for consumers by virtue of their smaller size, rather than because of income restrictions established by a program such as the Moderate Income Housing Unit (MIHU) program. However, MIHU requirements could still apply to these housing types, since they apply to all new developments in certain zoning districts and are dependent upon the market value of the unit. It is also important to consider the County's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO). APFO is the County's growth management system established in 1992. It sets the pace of residential growth through an annual housing unit allocation system to ensure that the new residential development keeps pace with the County's school and road capacity. This system also provides predictability in terms of the amount of growth to expect annually. To learn more about HoCo By Design's recommendations for APFO, see the Managing Growth chapter. <
> **DN-1 Policy Statement** Increase opportunities for missing middle housing through the creation and use of zoning tools and incentives. **Implementing Actions** 1. Evaluate conditions where duplex and multiplex homes can be compatible with existing neighborhoods and permitted by-right in a greater number of residential and mixed-use zoning districts. 2. Consider eliminating barriers in the Zoning Regulations and Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to housing stock diversification. Ensure that bulk regulations are realistic for these housing types. 3. Consider expanding the types of housing allowed in the Zoning Regulations and Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to include missing middle housing types, such as stacked townhomes, cottage clusters, and multiplexes, and consider appropriate parking requirements for these housing types. 4. Evaluate one or more of the following zoning tools and incentives as potential opportunities to create missing middle housing: a. Zoning overlays or floating zones that could be applied to activity centers, transportation corridors, or other areas that are appropriate for this housing type. b. Smaller lot sizes (lot width and lot area). c. Density-based tools such as transfer of development rights or density bonuses. d. Tax incentives for developers and/or land owners. e. Flexible development standards such as maximum building size or lot coverage. 5. Establish regulations that disperse missing middle homes throughout the County so that neighborhoods contain a proportionate mix of different housing types and can balance other infrastructure needs. 6. Explore opportunities to work with public and private partners to build missing middle housing demonstration projects or provide models and designs for these housing types. **DN-2 Policy Statement** Allow attached and detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on a variety of single-family attached and single-family detached lots that meet specific site development criteria in residential zoning districts. **Implementing Actions** 1. Explore a clear, predictable process and location-specific criteria for ADUs, including, but not limited to, consideration of lot coverage, lot size, setbacks, and other bulk regulations; stormwater management; and parking. 2. Consider revising the Zoning Regulations and Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to allow attached and detached ADUs that meet pre-determined location and site criteria. Provide parking requirements as needed. 3. Establish a clear definition of ADUs in the updated Zoning Regulations. 4. Direct the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) task force to develop recommendations as to the applicability of APFO to accessory dwelling unit creation or construction. **DN-3 Policy Statement** Promote homeownership. **Implementing Actions** 1. Build on existing programs that are geared toward helping income-qualified buyers become homeowners. 2. Develop methods that encourage the development of ownership versus rental projects (for example, condominium versus apartment). 3. Expand public awareness of the various state, federal, and local programs available to assist home buyers, along with the financial benefits of owning versus renting a home. # Expand Locations and Opportunity Areas for More Diverse Housing Choices throughout the County Diverse housing options are necessary for continued economic prosperity, especially to attract talent to fill positions with new companies in employment centers and retain the people who already enjoy the quality of life the County offers. As the County continues to evolve, providing housing choices that appeal to a broad range of people, whether they are young professionals starting their careers or retirees who want to downsize, will be critical. Housing variety can expand the range of price points and help to balance the overall housing market. Focusing these housing options strategically in areas where infrastructure already exists (such as activity centers) provides multiple economic, transportation, and environmental benefits. As discussed in the Economic Prosperity chapter, job growth fuels the need for nearby homes to create a healthy jobs-housing balance and strong tax base. Balancing jobs and housing within a jurisdiction has the potential to reduce road congestion and the need for public investment in additional roads by keeping trips within the County and reducing trips into the County. It also retains more spending locally, as people who live and work in the same community are more likely to shop in that community, thereby helping to strengthen and diversify the local economy. Targeted housing opportunities also benefit the environment as sites are redeveloped with new or improved stormwater management. Additional environmental enhancements could include incorporating green site and building design elements, such as energy efficient buildings, solar energy, green space, multi-modal transportation options, reduced water consumption, and other environmentally friendly features. As discussed in Chapter 2, new residential growth may have a net positive fiscal impact on the County's budget: the revenues generated can exceed costs to service the new development. Much of this impact is attributed to the tax structure in Howard County, whereby property and income tax comprise 90% of the County's operating revenues. Additionally, transfer and road excise taxes and a school surcharge fee are collected and used to help pay for new capital facilities. These one-time revenues make up a significant portion of the net revenues to the County each year and are necessary to sustain the County's supporting infrastructure. Absent a steady revenue stream, additional funding would be needed to maintain current services levels. Solutions to increase home choices for all income levels throughout Howard County start, in part, with the type and distribution of uses envisioned in the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), and the guidance and policies included to support those uses. In HoCo By Design, redevelopment in activity centers provides the greatest opportunity for growth in places that are already developed. However, opportunities for modest growth exist elsewhere, including in the Rural West and existing residential neighborhoods, and through multi-family redevelopment and infill development. <
> As noted in the previous section, the Zoning Regulations do not permit many missing middle housing types or detached ADUs, and proposed policies aim to allow them with appropriate criteria. This section focuses on where opportunities exist for all types of new housing in the County. The section also emphasizes how regulations may need to change within different geographies, or opportunity areas, to accommodate diverse housing types. ### Diverse Housing Opportunities in New Activity Centers Based on the limited amount of land still available for development, a significant amount of future housing may be concentrated in new mixed-use activity centers identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The new mixed-use activity centers are envisioned to be compact walkable areas with employment opportunities, commercial uses and open space, community services and amenities, and multi-modal transportation connections. Activity centers, refined from PlanHoward 2030’s Growth and Revitalization place type, create a predictable and sustainable pattern of growth. This pattern supports existing neighborhoods with retail, services, and job growth; provides greater opportunity for attainable housing; and supports opportunities to reduce environmental impacts of activity centers through redevelopment, including improved stormwater management infrastructure. Medium to high housing densities will likely be necessary to supporting this vision. It is anticipated that activity centers will appeal to a wide variety of residents and will support and maintain the County’s socioeconomic diversity by offering a multitude of housing options and opportunities to increase the supply of income-restricted affordable housing. Retirees, empty nesters, persons with disabilities, families, and young professionals would likely be attracted to living in more active mixed-use environments. As activity centers are envisioned to be the areas with the greatest potential for growth and are planned to be located along transportation corridors, having an efficient, safe, and well-maintained multi-modal transportation system <
> that connects these places is critical. See the County in Motion chapter for more details about the future of transportation. Activity centers are envisioned to be varying sizes and scales, which will help inform their infrastructure needs. They will also provide beneficial amenities to adjacent existing neighborhoods. However, they should be sensitive to any unintended impacts they may cause, such as traffic, noise, and students who may add to overcrowded schools. The Supporting Infrastructure chapter discusses the adequate and timely provision of infrastructure. The Public Schools Facilities chapter discusses opportunities for new models for public schools that could be appropriate in certain locations. The Quality by Design chapter recommends that adverse impacts, such as noise, light, and air pollution, be mitigated and new developments should be contextually-appropriate. It also provides guidance on the public realm and walkability within and around these new mixed-use centers. Depending on the size, scale, and proposed mix of uses in a redevelopment project, there may be increased complexities and costs associated with planning, financing, design, and construction of these projects. Furthermore, as HoCo By Design envisions activity centers to provide a range of housing types, including for-sale and rental options, overcoming hurdles in financial lending markets and navigating regulatory requirements associated with certain types of condominium development may impede some mixed-use redevelopments from realizing the full potential of diverse housing forms. There may be opportunities for the public sector to partner with the private sector to overcome these barriers and realize the desired vision. #### DN-4 Policy Statement Future activity centers—as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)—should include a unique mix of densities, uses, and building forms that provide diverse, accessible, and affordable housing options. **Implementing Actions** 1. Consider establishing a new mixed-density and mixed-use zoning district that encourages diverse housing types and creates opportunities for mixed-income neighborhoods and more homeownership opportunities. 2. Allow a vertical (a range of uses within one building) and horizontal (a range of uses within one complex or development site) mix of uses, including housing, employment, and open space, that encourage walkability and transit connections. 3. Incentivize the production of Low Income Housing Units (LIHU) and Disability Income Housing Units (DIHU) affordable to low- and moderate-income households, beyond what is currently required by the Moderate Income Housing Unit (MIHU) program. 4. Incentivize the production of housing units that meet the needs of different levels of ability (like persons with disabilities) and other special needs households. Ensure that these units are both accessible and affordable. 5. Explore models of public-private partnerships that facilitate redevelopment of a mixed-use activity center with a mix of for-sale and rental housing. 6. Consider establishing housing scenarios that support for-sale units to households making 60% or less of AMI that are financially feasible for the developers. Require mixed-use activity centers to reflect homeownership opportunities. # Infill Development in Existing Residential Neighborhoods While existing residential neighborhoods in Howard County generally have one residential dwelling per lot, there may be opportunities through residential infill development to introduce missing middle housing typologies and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). During the planning process, some participants expressed concerns that new development, especially missing middle housing types or ADUs, could detract from the existing neighborhood character; therefore, preserving the character of existing neighborhoods is paramount when developing any housing type, including single-family detached homes. All missing middle housing and single-family detached homes should attempt to maintain the scale, massing, and building orientation of existing development. For example, a quadplex with four apartments or condos can be designed to look nearly the same as a single-family detached home, allowing it to fit seamlessly into the neighborhood. When parking is located in the rear of the lot, accessed from an alley or a front-loaded driveway, the occupancy of the building can appear to be no different from the adjacent houses. Design requirements, pattern books, and/or other character-based regulations offer predictability for what new diverse housing types will look like. <
> <
> In addition to the form of a house itself, various other factors contribute to neighborhood character, including road networks, architecture, tree canopy, and open space. Refer to the Quality By Design chapter for additional guidance on maintaining the character of single-family neighborhoods. Throughout the planning process, concerns were also raised that ADUs would cause an owner-occupied single-family neighborhood to convert to a rental community. In consideration of these concerns, it is important to note that ADUs are not a new housing typology. As noted previously, detached ADUs were permitted in Howard County until the 1970s. Detached ADUs are often found on historic sites as a carriage or coach house and occupancy is currently limited to elderly or disabled family members. Currently, attached ADUs are permitted and mostly undetected <
> in a neighborhood. Not only have many of these housing types existed for centuries, they have successfully conformed to the neighborhood character and have not yet turned owner-occupied single-family communities into rental communities. As previously noted, between 2015 and 2020, there were 99 attached ADUs permitted in the County. New development not only has to consider its impact on neighborhood character and stormwater management but also infrastructure such as parking, road, and school capacity. By virtue of their smaller size, newly-constructed ADUs are likely to disturb less than 5,000 square feet and would be treated akin to customary single-family home additions or garages. If disturbance for an ADU exceeds 5,000 square feet, stormwater management must be provided to treat runoff. Additionally, given the cost to build a new dwelling, such as an ADU, it is unlikely that many residents/property owners will have the resources to build these structures immediately or rapidly. Most ADUs are envisioned to be renovations within existing homes or detached structures, such as garages, barns, or pool houses. In many instances these structures already exist and could be converted to a self-contained residence, resulting in limited impacts to stormwater runoff (with the exception of any off-street parking or paved access that may be required). However, as identified in the Ecological Health chapter, watershed health, flood risk, and other environmental concerns should be considered for any new development, including new ADU structures. <
> ### DN-5 Policy Statement Allow the development of small-scale missing middle housing and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that are consistent with the character and integrity of their surroundings, meet specific site conditions in single-family neighborhoods, and comply with all applicable APFO and parking requirements. ### Implementing Actions 1. Establish design requirements, pattern book, or character-based regulations for missing middle housing types and detached accessory dwelling units to ensure that new construction is consistent with the character of the surrounding existing housing. 2. Establish provisions in the regulations that include dimensional and design standards to ensure neighborhood compatibility, off-street parking requirements, minimum lot sizes, and other standards. 3. Explore zoning and other incentives for minor subdivisions that consist of missing middle housing types and explore form-based or character-based zoning for these types of residential infill developments. 4. Evaluate how accessory dwelling units and other types of new development could enhance or impact stormwater management practices. 5. Determine parking requirements for small-scale missing middle housing and ADUs that accommodate increased occupancy and diffuse neighborhood conflicts. <
> --- <
> ### Opportunities to Increase the Supply of Income-Restricted Housing Units Inclusionary zoning policies typically encourage the construction of homes affordable to low- and moderate-income households in communities where there are higher area median incomes. In Howard County, the Moderate Income Housing Unit (MIHU) program is an inclusionary zoning program that requires developers of new housing in specific zoning districts to sell or allocate a portion of new dwelling units to low- or moderate-income households. The MIHU requirements are established in 20 zoning districts and require that 10-25% of any new residential development be affordable to households earning 40-80% of the Howard County Area Median Income (AMI). Generally, the total production of MIHUs is proportionate to the overall quantity of new residential units constructed. As of June 2021, there were 770 MIHU rental apartments and 402 MIHU homeownership units that had been rented or sold to low- and moderate-income households in 30 communities throughout the County. Most rental units are in the eastern part of the County (Elkridge and Southeast). Additionally, county regulations ensure the units in the MIHU program remain affordable to low- and moderate-income households in perpetuity. As new developments are built, more units are required to enter the program. All MIHU prices are dependent upon the County’s AMI and are set by the Howard County Department of Housing and Community Development. # AFFORDABLE HOUSING # OVERLAY DISTRICT CONSIDERATIONS According to the Housing Opportunities Master Plan, the overlay district should: * Identify neighborhoods with few existing housing options for low- and moderate-income households. * Include incentives to encourage the production of additional affordable and/or accessible units beyond the MIHU baseline rules. * Allow affordable housing development proposals that meet specified criteria to proceed by-right, or without the need for additional reviews and approvals. To qualify, an affordable housing development should reserve a significant portion of units at 60% of AMI and be subject to a long-term use restriction, provide accessible and visitable units beyond the minimum required by law, and fall within a range of parameters related to form, density, massing, setbacks, parking, etc. * Expand below-AMI housing opportunities in larger areas of the County to address de-concentration of poverty for redevelopment or preservation projects within the wider context of the County as a whole. * Consider areas of the County where existing infrastructure is underutilized and therefore could support additional residential density with limited new public investment. * Encourage greater racial and socioeconomic integration by increasing affordable housing opportunities throughout Howard County, especially in locations that do not have them at this time. There are circumstances in which land and construction costs make it challenging for developers to produce income-restricted units on-site, primarily in the case of single-family detached and age-restricted housing developments. For these two housing types, Howard County therefore allows developers to pay a fee-in-lieu (FIL) instead of providing the units on-site, which is a practice that other jurisdictions also use to advance affordable housing goals. The County commits to adjusting the MIHU program so that missing middle housing can be used to alleviate the need to build off-site and to provide a greater socioeconomic balance in all our communities. There should also be consideration for ways to locate multiple missing middle housing types and units throughout a development. The FIL generates revenue that allows the County to provide gap funding for housing developments with even greater percentages of income-restricted units or even deeper levels of income targeting than what market-rate developments can achieve. However, as HoCo By Design promotes the development of missing middle housing types throughout the County, these housing types offer opportunities to advance a greater socioeconomic balance in all communities. The County should determine how missing middle housing types can complement the MIHU program to create more mixed-income neighborhoods. The MIHU and FIL policies are central elements of the affordable housing strategy in Howard County. To increase the number of income-restricted units in the County and make more units available to special needs households, the HOMP recommends improvements to the MIHU program, such as additional flexibility to accommodate on-site provisions, incentives to encourage the production of more than the required number of units, greater shares of accessible and visitable units for those with disabilities, and/or deeper levels of income targeting. The HOMP also recommends that the County establish various growth and development targets to demonstrate a clear commitment to increasing the supply of homes affordable to low- and moderate-income households and persons with disabilities and special needs, including the following. * Affordability Target: The greater of at least 20% of all net new housing units should be available to households making less than 60% of AMI each year. * Accessibility Target: At least 10% of new housing units affordable to households making less than 60% of AMI should be physically accessible for persons with disabilities. This target should be supplemented with concerted efforts to facilitate accessibility improvements to the existing ownership and rental stock to better enable integrated aging in place. In addition to the MIHU program, the County encourages affordability with financial incentives to residents. For example, the County currently offers downpayment assistance to low- or moderate-income residents seeking to purchase a home through the Settlement Downpayment Loan Program. The County also supports the Columbia Downtown Housing Corportation’s Live Where You Work (LWYW) Program. Through this effort, the LWYW Program partners with local employers, employees, and landlords and offers financial assistance that allows low- and moderate-income employees to rent a home in the County where they work. According to data provided by the County’s Department of Human Resources, approximately 44% of Howard County government employees live in Howard County. With more than 4,000 employees actively working for County government, the County should evaluate establishing a program for its workforce and expand partnerships with other employers in the County so that the County’s workforce not only have shorter commutes to their places of employment, but also have opportunities to live in the County where they work. The County could also encourage greater affordability through the Zoning Regulations by providing density bonuses or other incentives to developers and property owners in exchange for meeting affordable housing goals. The County should create a working group to examine the feasibility of a targeted incentive program, such as a zoning overlay district, to increase the supply of affordable and accessible housing. According to the HOMP, a zoning overlay district could be targeted to areas with limited affordable and accessible housing, and offer incentives to encourage an increase in the supply of affordable housing through tools such as density bonuses, a bonus pool of housing allocations within the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Allocation chart (refer to the Managing Growth chapter), and an administrative review process. Such a program should seek to increase the supply of affordable and accessible housing at different AMI levels, similar to the multi-spectrum market affordable housing provisions for Downtown Columbia. DN-6 Policy Statement Increase the supply of for-sale and rental housing units in all new developments attainable to low- and moderate-income households and special needs households. ### Implementing Actions 1. Reevaluate the County's inclusionary zoning policies to ensure they are meeting their intended objectives. Expand Moderate Income Housing Unit (MIHU) requirements in areas with a disproportionately lower share of housing options affordable to low- or moderate-income households. 2. Ensure that any corridor, neighborhood, redevelopment, or area plan includes clear policies for meeting affordable housing goals. 3. Update MIHU rules and fee structures, with the goal of producing more units throughout the County that are integrated within communities. Seek opportunities to amend the Zoning Regulations to enable housing types more conducive to on-site MIHU provision across a broader area. 4. Establish a working group that consists of members appointed by the County Executive and the County Council and is concurrent with the evaluation of APFO to evaluate the feasibility of a targeted incentive program for affordable and accessible housing, including: a. The creation of a definition of affordable and accessible housing, including physical factors such as unit type, size, or physical accessibility design criteria; and/or income factors through tools such as deed restrictions. b. A zoning overlay targeting locations for affordable and accessible housing where there is limited existing supply of affordable and accessible units. c. Incentives related to development, such as density bonuses or relief to setback or other development standards. d. Incentives related to the development process, such as the creation of a specific housing allocation pool for affordable and/or accessible units, exemptions from school requirements in the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, allowing affordable housing allocations to roll over from year to year, releasing allocations from their requirement to be either for ownership or rental after three years, or other means of reducing other regulatory barriers. e. Incentives related to homeownership opportunities. 5. Implement a required minimum allocation of units for seniors and people with a disability in any development receiving an APFO waiver or a Payment in Lieu of Taxes, or other form of local funding. 6. Incentivize affordable for-sale housing opportunities in areas where low-income rental housing has become concentrated. DN-7 Policy Statement Provide various incentives that encourage the development of for-sale and rental housing units affordable to low- and moderate-income households and special needs households, and preserve the County's existing affordable housing inventory. ### Implementing Actions 1. Continue to support the Housing Opportunities Trust Fund to expand the number of income-restricted rental and homeownership units produced. Explore the feasibility of establishing a dedicated funding source for this fund. 2. Evaluate opportunities to co-locate income-restricted housing and community facilities on county-owned land. 3. Establish criteria for flexible use and disposition of county real estate assets that are near amenities and would promote development of affordable missing middle and multi-family housing for low- and moderate-income households where appropriate. 4. Offer additional incentives to encourage the production of more Moderate Income Housing Units than required, and/or deeper levels of income targeting in the form of Low Income Housing Units or Disability Income Housing Units. 5. Continue to provide and increase downpayment assistance funding to income-eligible households through the County's Settlement Downpayment Loan Program. 6. Explore ways to allow homeowners in the County's moderate-income homeownership program to realize appreciation in their homes. 7. Establish a goal of zero net loss of existing housing affordable to households with income below 60% of the area median income while adding new affordable units to the County's housing inventory. 8. Expand funding and partnerships for a Live Where You Work program. Evaluate expanding the program for homeownership opportunities. Opportunities for New Multi-Family Communities Rising affordability issues and personal lifestyle preferences, nationally and locally, have driven many households towards rentership. Between 2005 and 2018, the homeownership rate in Howard County fell from 77% to 72%, as households in nearly every age category moved away from homeownership. The number of renter households between the ages of 25 and 74 increased by 6,000 between 2010 and 2018 (a 43% increase). However, the number of renter households under the age of 35 decreased by 9% between 2010 and 2018, likely due to affordability issues. The County lacks a sufficient supply of rental units to meet future demand. The HoCo By Design Market Research and Demand forecast cites projected demand for 11,249 multi-family apartment rental units over 20 years (2020-2040). While there is a much greater demand for rental multi-family developments, there is still a projected demand for 1,884 for-sale condominium units over the next 20 years. The HOMP found that a large share of the County's existing rental market is affordable to households that make 60-80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). However, since there are limited rental options for higher (over 120% AMI) and lower (under 60% AMI) income households, the supply of moderately priced rental units tends to serve all income levels. The HOMP suggests that future rental housing should be available at all price points, especially housing that serves low- and moderate-income households where housing supply is limited. <
> To remain socioeconomically diverse and support a healthy economy, the County should consider opportunities for new multi-family communities in the Multi-Family Neighborhood, Mixed-Use Activity Centers, and Mixed-Use Neighborhood character areas identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). These opportunities can be realized through redevelopment of existing, aging, multi-family properties, older suburban shopping centers, and strategic infill development. Increasing the supply of multi-family units, to include market rate rental and units affordable to low- and moderate- income households, will help the County meet various housing supply gaps identified in the HOMP and the Market Research and Demand Forecast completed for HoCo By Design. While multi-family buildings are defined in the County's Zoning Regulations as structures with three or more housing units, multi-family properties can range in size from three to more than 50 units per structure. Various character areas on the FLUM are envisioned to have a range of multi-family housing types; however, Multi-Family Neighborhood, Mixed-Use Activity Centers, and Mixed-Use Neighborhood character areas are envisioned to contain apartment complexes and condominiums with a higher number of units and buildings at a greater scale. New multi-family communities are encouraged to redevelop using design principles that emphasize an interconnected network of streets, bicycle facilities, and walkways; encourage options to reduce the size and location of surface parking lots; orient buildings toward the street; offer a variety of housing types between larger buildings; and deliver a comprehensive and connected network of open space. For additional details and illustrative concepts about the design and character of new multi-family communities, see Technical Appendix B: Character Areas and Technical Appendix C: Focus Areas. ### DN-8 Policy Statement Support the new development and redevelopment of multi-family communities to meet the County's current and future rental housing demands and ensure that resident displacement is minimized in redevelopment projects. ### Implementing Actions 1. Support multi-family housing projects that serve a range of income levels and integrate traditional market rate housing with affordable housing opportunities. 2. Ensure that redevelopment of age-restricted housing and housing for residents with disabilities preserves affordability of units for existing residents. 3. Strive for a one-for-one replacement of affordable housing units when multi-family communities with affordable units are redeveloped. <
> ## Housing Opportunities in the Rural West The Rural West is a unique and special place in Howard County and should maintain its rural character. As previously noted, residential development in the Rural West follows a low-density, large-lot development pattern with a significant percentage of land preserved through agricultural and environmental easements. The Rural West also includes three Rural Crossroads, which are small nodes of mixed-use areas with a focus on commercial activity along a rural highway. While the Rural West presents some opportunities to expand and diversify its housing options, especially in areas with greater school capacity, it is not intended for significant development as it lacks access to public water and sewer. Smaller, more affordable missing middle housing units, such as modest duplexes, would likely require a shared sewage disposal system or multi-use sewerage system (a type of sewerage system that serves more than one lot, or more than one user on a single lot, respectively). These systems can be costly to install, and annual maintenance fees could present challenges to owners or renters of moderately priced dwelling units. Depending on the septic system, soil, and the site, detached ADUs could potentially connect to existing septic systems with capacity. However, this may require changes to state code. County and state code clarifications related to facility ownership, regulation, and maintenance may also be necessary prior to implementation. With smaller lots and clustered homes, more households could connect to one shared or multi-use sewerage system, which could make these systems more cost-effective options. Zoning changes may be needed to allow for smaller lots in the west. The Rural West is also home to most of the County's farming community, with significant land permanently preserved through easements. With residential land uses often adjacent to agricultural uses, there is potential for conflict between farmers and their neighbors. Neighbors frequently have concerns with farming practices, such as pesticide spraying, equipment/tractor noise, odors and dust, slow-moving tractors on roads, and agribusiness operations on the farm that bring visitors to the area. Additionally, new housing developments sometimes remove existing mature tree stands that can serve as natural buffers and screening between agricultural and residential uses. As new housing is developed in the West, it is important that new residential development incorporate adequate buffering and screening, including preserving wooded perimeter areas where possible, to minimize any potential adverse impacts between uses. *** ### Maryland Agricultural ### Conflict Resolution Service According to the Maryland Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Agricultural Conflict Resolution Service is the official US Department of Agriculture (USDA)-certified agricultural mediation program for Maryland, offering confidential assistance to help resolve agriculture related issues in a productive environment. Further, the farming community has experienced challenges with hiring and paying their workers. Farm workers in Maryland earned an average annual wage of $32,890-$33,400 in 2019. With an annual wage this low, farm workers representing an individual household likely have difficulty living in the County and making ends meet. The Economic Prosperity chapter discusses the challenges in the agriculture industry in greater detail. However, this chapter includes policies and actions that focus on improving relationships between farm operations and their neighbors and creating affordable housing opportunities for farm workers. Maintaining the rural character of the West, minimizing conflicts between residential and agricultural land uses, addressing environmental concerns, and meeting the needs of the farming community are paramount if housing options are expanded. <
> **DN-9 Policy Statement** Create opportunities to increase the diversity of home choices in the Rural West, especially missing middle housing types, that preserve the character of the Rural West. **Implementing Actions** 1. Consider the development of accessory dwelling units that conform to specific design and site criteria. 2. Explore locating missing middle housing typologies in the Rural Crossroads, where upper-story residential and small-scale residential infill opportunities exist. Use recommendations found in the Rural Crossroads section of the Focus Areas Technical Appendix for additional guidance. 3. Determine if there are strategic locations in the Rural West where it is feasible to accommodate increased housing development on shared or community well and shared or multi-use sewerage systems while balancing other priorities such as environmental concerns, historical context, and agricultural preservation goals, while maintaining rural character. 4. Evaluate and amend Rural Conservation and Rural Residential Zoning District regulations to allow for duplex and multiplex housing types that fit within the existing neighborhood character. 5. Determine zoning, land development, and other code changes needed for small-scale, context-sensitive, multi-family or mixed-use development in the Rural West. 6. Evaluate and identify barriers to on-site tenant housing for the agricultural workforce. **DN-10 Policy Statement** Facilitate the use of shared and/or multi-use sewerage system technologies to create more diverse housing options in the Rural West. **Implementing Actions** 1. Identify best practices for shared and/or multi-use sewerage systems and pursue state and local code changes necessary to facilitate their use. 2. Establish necessary management, operations, and maintenance structures to increase the use of shared and multi-use sewerage systems in the West. 3. Evaluate how accessory dwelling units may be able to safely connect to existing septic systems with capacity. **DN-11 Policy Statement** Establish policies, programs, and planning and zoning practices aimed at reducing farmer-neighbor conflicts. **Implementing Actions** 1. Enhance farmer-resident relationships through expansion of educational programs that encourage farm visits and other activities to bridge the farming and non-farm communities and build understanding of allowable farm-related uses. 2. Work with the agricultural and development communities to evaluate, determine, and implement adequate landscape, screening, or other type of buffer requirement on new residential development abutting agricultural uses. 3. Encourage use of the Maryland Agricultural Conflict Resolution Service or other conflict resolution programs to help address farmer-neighbor conflicts. # Housing for A Growing Older Adult Population: Age-Friendly Communities Although Howard County has historically been home to many families with children, its empty nester household base is aging. In response to this trend, the County launched the Age-Friendly Howard County Initiative in 2019. This initiative involved an 18-month process of community engagement, research, and planning to develop a strategic plan that will move the County toward becoming a more cohesive livable community for persons at all ages and stages in life. The Age-Friendly Howard County Action Plan was released in December 2021. The Action Plan describes the following: * By 2030, one in five Howard County residents will be 65 or older and 8,000 residents will be 85 years or older—double the number of individuals in that age group today. * 5.6% of individuals aged 65 or older live below the poverty level. * Of those living alone, 3.3% are men over the age of 65 and 6.4% are women over the age of 65. Creating more opportunities for older adults to remain in the County is key to its future. Older adults provide significant contributions to the community, including, but not limited to, serving as volunteers in many organizations, offering expertise in consulting and gig-work, and supporting the economy as vibrant purchasers of services and products. ## Housing and Community Needs According to the Age-Friendly Howard County Initiative and AARP, age-friendly communities are “safe and secure, have affordable and appropriate housing and transportation options, and offer supportive community features and services.” There should be sidewalks with safe crossable streets for pedestrians, dedicated bicycle lanes, and public transit options. Throughout the HoCo By Design planning process and the Age-Friendly Initiative, older adults expressed that they want housing options that meet the needs of those with differing incomes and at various life stages. Some of the specific needs mentioned during the planning process include more opportunities for communal living, small housing options that allow older adults to downsize, greater flexibility to make accessibility modifications to homes, updated universal design guidelines, and greater opportunities for attached and detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Findings from the Strategic Advisory Group and recommendations in the Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP) suggest that missing middle housing and ADUs would provide housing options for down-sizing and allow aging residents to remain in Howard County as they grow older. <
> # Universal Design As defined in the Age-Friendly Action Plan, "Universal design, also called barrier-free design, focuses on making the house safe and accessible for everyone, regardless of age, physical ability, or stature. Universal design elements in homes and apartments contribute to age-friendly communities and multi-generational households, and they increase the independence of persons with disabilities." As noted previously, only 4% of the County's residential land is used for 55 years or more age-restricted development. According to the County's land use database, there are a total of 5,160 age-restricted units consisting of the following housing types: 419 single-family detached, 367 single-family attached, 1,244 single-family attached condominiums, 1,364 apartments and 1,766 apartment condominiums. However, many of those homes are not financially attainable. The County has limited affordable housing options for older adults, many of whom will have mobility and accessibility needs as they age, and persons with disabilities. Without an adequate supply of these types of homes, some older adults may be unable to find appropriate housing, forcing them to look outside the County if/when they decide to move. While many older adults prefer to age in their homes, that option is not always feasible due to health reasons, mobility issues, changes in finances, or a home not being suitable for modifications. Therefore, housing options for early retirees, empty nesters, or older adults who want to downsize—perhaps because they can no longer maintain a single-family detached dwelling on a large lot (or choose not to)—should be readily available as part of a larger suite of housing typologies catering to changing demands and interests. ## Multi-Generational Neighborhoods Multi-generational neighborhoods offer a variety of housing types and include units that are designed with older adults in mind but appeal to people of all ages and abilities. While the features of the units for older adults are important—size, number of floors, and universal design—the elements of the neighborhood are also important. The housing mix should contribute to the creation of a community that is conducive to social interaction among neighbors and a level of activity that can minimize feelings of isolation that older adults could experience with changing health and social conditions. When surrounded by a network of support, older adults living in a multi-generational neighborhood have a lower likelihood of depression, as such arrangements can foster an environment of neighbors helping neighbors. In addition, older adults provide a resource to younger neighbors in the form of teaching, mentoring, and sharing personal histories, thus improving interactions among generations and enhancing respect across age, race, ethnicity, and other differences. Neighborhoods that offer a safe system of sidewalk connections to nearby convenience retail and services can help older adults with mobility issues maintain their independence longer while allowing all families to maintain healthy lifestyles. The County in Motion chapter provides more details about plans for multi-modal transportation options. *** **DN-12 Policy Statement** Provide a range of affordable, accessible, and adaptable housing options for older adults and persons with disabilities. **Implementing Actions** 1. Use zoning tools and incentives that increase the supply of missing middle housing and accessory dwelling units, as identified in Policy Statements DN-1 and DN-2. 2. Provide flexibility in the Zoning Regulations and the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations for adult group homes/communal living and for accessibility modifications for persons with disabilities who wish to live independently or older adults who wish to age in place or downsize and age in their community at affordable price points. 3. Encourage Age-Restricted Adult Housing (ARAH) developments to build small- to medium-scale housing units to include apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and missing middle housing types that allow seniors to downsize and are affordable to low- and moderate-income households. Evaluate if current ARAH Zoning Regulations allow sufficient density increases to incentivize missing middle housing types, such as cottage clusters, duplexes, and multiplexes. 4. Explore options for additional Continuing Care Retirement Communities in the County. 5. Update the County's Universal Design Guidelines to enhance the capacity for individuals to remain safe and independent in the community through universal design in construction. 6. Require builders to adhere to the updated Universal Design Guidelines for new and rehabilitated, remodeled, or redesigned age-restricted housing. 7. During review of the building code update, consider local amendments that establish minimum building standards for the majority of new housing units as discussed in the Age Friendly Action Plan. 8. Evaluate incentives to achieve Universal Design Guideline utilization in at least 10% of all affordable units built. **DN-13 Policy Statement** Create greater opportunities for multi-generational neighborhoods, especially in character areas identified as activity centers. **Implementing Actions** 1. Design new activity centers to accommodate the needs of various ages, abilities, and life stages. Ensure design of neighborhoods and their amenities provide accessibility using universal design guidelines with sidewalks, wayfinding, and safe connections. 2. Bring multi-modal transportation options to locations planned for new multi-generational neighborhoods. # Enhancing Existing Neighborhoods with Affordable Housing Preservation, Infrastructure, Amenities, and Revitalization According to the Housing Opportunities Master Plan (HOMP), the preservation of affordable housing—both income-restricted (homes that can only be sold or rented to households that meet specific income requirements, often due to subsidy or regulation) and market-rate (homes that cost less due to market conditions, such as older smaller housing stock or fewer neighborhood amenities, but are not restricted to certain incomes due to a subsidy or regulation)—is a critical part of a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. Preservation is important from an equity standpoint, given the disruption and hardship faced by cost-burdened and displaced households. Research suggests that preservation can be more cost-effective than new development. In addition, the challenges and timelines associated with new development make preservation necessary to maintain affordability while waiting for new units to be placed into service. A comprehensive preservation strategy requires a combination of policies, programs, and land use. While the policies and actions in this section focus on land use, the HOMP provides guidance on other aspects of this strategy. The HOMP suggests a goal of zero net loss of existing affordability for households with incomes below 60% AMI. In other words, Howard County should pledge to maintain the number of housing units that are currently in the County while adding new affordable housing units. To meet those goals, the County has the following programs established: * Right of First Refusal – In 2020, Howard County passed the Affordable Housing Retention Act, which created a legal “window of opportunity” when a market-rate rental property is put up for sale for the Howard County Department of Housing and Community Development or Housing Commission to purchase the rental property. * Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) funds – The County also receives funding from these two federal programs to advance affordable housing preservation and neighborhood revitalization goals. Some of the efforts these programs support include: downpayment and closing cost assistance for first time homebuyers, grants and loans for home renovations that address code violations and emergency repairs for both homeowners and renters to maintain property values, and public facility construction or rehabilitation in communities without access to these resources. * Reinvest, Renovate, Restore Program (RRR Program) – To supplement the annual allocations of CDBG and HOME funds, the County also provides low interest loans to existing homeowners to make health and safety improvements to stay in their homes or make modifications to age-in-place. In addition to the RRR Program, the County administers various programs on behalf of the State to support homeowners with upgrades and repairs to their homes. Some jurisdictions offer acquisition/rehabilitation grant/loan programs that assist low- and moderate-income homebuyers with purchasing a lower cost home in need of improvements and repairs. A combination of grants and loans often assist the homebuyer with both acquisition and renovation costs. Jurisdictions may also work directly with nonprofit partners, such as affordable housing developers, to implement the acquisition and rehabilitation work and then sell the home to an income-eligible homebuyer. <
> The HOMP also provides guidance for identifying neighborhoods in the County with a higher concentration of affordable housing stock. These areas, referred to as “Preservation-Revitalization” Neighborhoods, are those in which “the age, tenure, quality, and price point of the housing stock enables residency of a wider range of households, and lower-income households in particular.” Many of these neighborhoods offer a more affordable housing stock, such as cape cods, cottages, and ranchers that were built in the early to mid-20th century. However, they lack various amenities and upgraded infrastructure that newer neighborhoods tend to have, such as sidewalks, community parks, modern stormwater management facilities, and streetlights. Some examples include areas within Long Reach, Oakland Mills, and much of the Route 1 Corridor. The HOMP recommends that the County establish a process to help support these neighborhoods and ensure that any future developments contribute to the revitalization or strengthening of these communities. Therefore, as these neighborhoods experience infill and redevelopment, “policies should work to support mixed-income opportunities over the long-term by preventing concentrations of poverty, preventing displacement, providing supportive services to households with greater needs, and encouraging revitalization of any lower-quality/deteriorating housing stock.” It will also be important to assess their needs for upgraded infrastructure and access to high-quality community facilities and parks. Through the planning process, residents of some older multi-family communities expressed concerns with the lack of maintenance of their properties. They shared that their landlords don’t keep their units updated, pipes are old with potential lead hazards, and the exteriors need landscaping. While Howard County has requirements for rental housing licenses, maintenance, and inspections, many residents may not be aware of these requirements or know how to report an issue. The County should work with the multi-family rental community to better understand barriers to reporting and resolving property maintenance issues. For policies and actions that guide the design and character of infill development and redevelopment, see the Quality by Design chapter. Additionally, the Economic Prosperity chapter discusses opportunities in the County for greater or continued revitalization efforts. Finally, the Supporting Infrastructure chapter provides a detailed overview for addressing existing and new infrastructure needs. <
> ### DN-14 Policy Statement Preserve affordability of existing housing stock and create opportunities for context-sensitive infill development, especially in Preservation-Revitalization Neighborhoods. **Implementing Actions** 1. Identify neighborhoods and properties for preservation. 2. Continue to support the County’s housing preservation programs, which are designed to preserve existing affordable housing and assist low- and moderate-income homeowners and renters to remain in their homes. 3. Explore options and partnerships for acquisition/rehabilitation programs for older single-family homes, townhomes, and condominiums that would support homeownership opportunities for moderate-income households. 4. Encourage the development of missing middle housing types that conform to existing neighborhood character and contribute to the creation of mixed-income communities. 5. Develop strategies for employing the right of first refusal policy to ensure no loss of affordable units when there are opportunities for redevelopment of multi-family properties. ### DN-15 Policy Statement Support existing neighborhoods and improve community infrastructure and amenities as needed, especially in older or under-served neighborhoods and multi-family communities. **Implementing Actions** 1. Assess existing community facilities and the neighborhoods that they serve, and upgrade or retrofit as needed to support changing neighborhood needs. Engage communities in the identification of neighborhood needs. 2. Identify older communities in need of a comprehensive revitalization strategy and work with those communities to develop revitalization plans to assist those communities. 3. Work with the multi-family rental community to understand barriers to reporting and resolving issues related to multi-family property maintenance. Expand our landlord-tenant division and the enforcement component to support the maintenance and revitalization of multi-family communities. # HOMELESSNESS The Path Home is Howard County’s strategic plan to end homelessness, and its implementation requires support from various county agencies and nonprofit organizations. Ending homelessness requires a community-wide commitment to provide housing, transportation, employment, and other wrap around services. This section of HoCo By Design focuses primarily on the housing needs of this population and supplements the policies and actions identified in the “Opportunities to Increase the Supply of Income-Restricted Housing Units” section. The policies and actions in both of these sections are intended to help the County achieve the housing goals identified in The Path Home. Despite the County’s resources and services committed to resolving homelessness, a significant number of residents struggle to maintain housing and are at risk of or are experiencing homelessness. The Point in Time (PIT) count is a nationwide effort to capture the number and characteristics of persons experiencing homelessness in America. According to the County’s 2019 PIT count, a total of 201 people identified as being homeless in January 2019. Of these 201 individuals, 129 were sheltered and 72 were unsheltered. Homelessness in Howard County disproportionally affects the African American population, which represents 20% of the general population but makes up 58% of the homeless population. According to The Path Home: * Emergency shelter space is often full; clients may wait as long as a year for a shelter bed. * The system has limited rapid re-housing resources, a practice that has worked well in communities that have shown a significant reduction in homelessness. The Path Home advocates for a housing first approach to homelessness intervention. One of the key challenges to addressing homelessness is the lack of affordable housing stock that can accommodate the needs of this population. In terms of housing stock, one size does not fit all. Homes serving this population need to vary in size to accommodate both small and large families, incorporate universal design elements for those with physical disabilities, and be close to amenities, jobs, and transportation connections. By increasing the number of affordable homes that can accommodate these various needs, those who are homeless would spend less time in temporary shelters and could be re-housed more quickly. <
> *** **DN-16 Policy Statement** Increase access to and availability of affordable housing for people experiencing or threatened by homelessness in Howard County. **Implementing Actions** 1. Seek out additional opportunities for partnerships on future housing developments to increase the number of homeless preference set-aside units developed in Howard County. 2. Create awareness and advocacy around the needs of those experiencing homelessness whenever new housing developments are being planned and created. 3. Evaluate the need for additional shelter/bed capacity, permanent supportive housing, and expanded public-private partnerships to address the needs of the County’s chronically homeless and other individuals with special needs. 4. Explore opportunities for acquisition of blighted or under-utilized properties for the purposes of providing flexible shelter options and services for the homeless population. 5. Seek opportunities to locate housing for the homeless or individuals with special needs in close proximity to jobs, amenities, and transportation connections and ensure that the Zoning Regulations and the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations provide flexibility for these opportunities. --- ## Conservation — Chapter 3, Ecological Health - Source: https://www.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/Chp3.pdf - Pages: 29 - Covers: conservation # CHAPTER 3 # ECOLOGICAL HEALTH # Ecological Health: Protecting and Preserving our Natural Resources From its beautiful natural areas to its picturesque working farmlands, Howard County residents have a deep appreciation for protecting and preserving the environment. This chapter discusses the opportunities to deepen Howard County’s commitment to environmental stewardship and create better compatibility between the natural and built environments. Both landscape and environmental factors play a large role in how character is defined within a community. A protected and celebrated natural environment brings significant economic opportunities and enhances quality of life, health, and well-being. Approximately 39% of the County is in parkland, open space, and easement (agricultural, environmental, and historic), and the County continues to invest in the protection and restoration of the natural landscape. Recent actions include adoption of enhanced stormwater management requirements in the Tiber Branch and Plumtree Branch watersheds to address flooding; an overhaul of the Howard County Forest Conservation Act to increase forest retention and mitigation for clearing; early-stage implementation of the Green Infrastructure Network Plan; and acquisition of additional agricultural land preservation easements. Preservation and growth management efforts, including the existing Planned Service Area boundary, have contributed to the current pattern of land uses, where the Rural West is predominantly rural residential, agricultural, and conserved land, and the eastern portion of the County is more traditionally suburban with parks and open space. Protection and restoration of natural resources will be crucial to the future of Howard County, as climate change alters how we interact with and plan for our developed environments. PlanHoward 2030 included many recommendations that have seen success in the County. HoCo By Design celebrates and builds on this success, recommending further actions to protect and restore natural resources within the County, which will also provide climate change mitigation and adaptation. <
> # WHAT WE HEARD Throughout the public engagement process, a common thread of discussion was the importance of the natural environment, parkland, and open space in Howard County. Participants expressed strong interest in increasing protections for natural resources and farmland, expanding access to existing parks, exploring opportunities for enhanced, flexible open spaces in site planning requirements, and integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation measures throughout county land use policies. Many participants advocated for increased implementation of the Green Infrastructure Network Plan and enhanced protection and management of watersheds throughout the County. Participants also emphasized the importance of stormwater management and the need for aggressive development regulations for forest preservation and tree canopy protection to combat heat island effects and climate change. Other participants raised concerns that while environmental regulations may have benefits, they can also complicate redevelopment, infringe on private property rights, and compromise a property's value. Some community members were concerned for those who are already cost-burdened, including low-and moderate-income households, and who may be least able to retrofit their homes to prepare for severe weather impacts, including increased heat and flooding. Policies and implementation actions within HoCo By Design help support ecosystem health by ensuring natural resources within the County are restored, protected, and managed for long-term health. These measures will, in turn, help the County address climate change mitigation and adaptation. This Plan provides strong natural resource protection recommendations, while also advancing other equity goals, such as affordable housing. *** ### Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Focus Groups Findings * Desire to protect natural resources while advancing other equity goals such as affordable housing. * Those already cost burdened—low/moderate income households—may be least able to retrofit their homes to prepare for severe weather impacts, including flooding and heat waves. * Suggestion to combat heat island effect and address global warming. ### Equity in Action The following equity best practices inform several of the implementing actions in this chapter. Each implementing action that directly advances equitable outcomes will be noted with a “ ” symbol. * Reduce household energy costs with climate mitigation measures. * Protect populations in vulnerable areas from natural hazards and health hazards caused by airplane noise and particulate. * Promote environmental justice and increased representation through environmental education. * Build housing in a way that reduces harm to the environment and improves resident health outcomes. *** # STRATEGIC ADVISORY GROUP INPUT During the HoCo By Design process, three Strategic Advisory Groups were formed to advise the project team on specific opportunities and challenges that were identified. The Environment Strategic Advisory Group (SAG), comprised of a multi-disciplinary group of experts, was asked to address the following questions: How should the County increase natural resource protection and restoration measures? What additional climate change mitigation and adaptation measures should the County consider? The SAG was additionally asked to focus on natural resource measures to answer the climate change questions, as other actions to address climate change are specified in the County's Climate Action Plan. However, the SAG wanted to ensure that the two plans are complementary. The SAG's response to these questions began with the overarching concept that a healthy environment is an essential base for a healthy culture and economy. Environmental health in turn is based on healthy ecosystems that support diverse native flora and fauna and are resilient to future changes, including those from climate change. Members agreed that watershed planning and management provides a useful framework for protecting and restoring natural resources. The group also expressed the need to identify communities most vulnerable to climate change and develop solutions related to land use that can help them become more resilient. The SAG also provided recommendations on addressing flood mitigation and stormwater management under a changing climate, increasing regulatory protections and incentives for natural resource protection and restoration and sustainable development, implementing the Green Infrastructure Network Plan, and promoting environmental stewardship. A report of the SAG's findings is available from the Department of Planning & Zoning. *** # ECOLOGICAL HEALTH TERMS **Ecosystem:** – An ecosystem is comprised of all living organisms, the physical environment, and the relationships between the living and inanimate elements within an area. **Watershed:** A watershed is the land area that drains to a body of water, such as a lake or river. **Climate Change:** Climate change is a significant, long-term shift in weather patterns for a specific geographic region. **Climate Change Mitigation:** Climate change mitigation seeks to limit climate change by reducing the generation or increasing the removal of greenhouse gases from the air. **Climate Change Adaptation:** Climate change adaptation seeks to moderate or avoid harm from the current and expected impacts from climate change. # Supporting The County's Ecological Health Howard County contains a wealth of natural resources, including forests, meadows, wetlands, streams, and lakes, which are linked together through ecosystems (see Map 3-1). Ecosystems are comprised of all living organisms, the physical environment, and the relationships between the living and inanimate elements within a particular area. Ecosystems provide a wide variety of services that benefit humans and other species, including food production, clean water, flood control, temperature regulation, recreational opportunities, and aesthetic value. However, their monetary values are often overlooked, until human intervention is needed to repair or replace them. It is generally far more cost-effective to protect a healthy ecosystem than to try and restore one that has been degraded. The health of these ecosystems—ecological health—is the foundation that supports economic and community health and personal well-being. Human activities can negatively affect ecological heath by removing or degrading natural resources, but people can also help restore and protect these resources. The challenge is to meet current human needs while ensuring actions protect and restore ecological health so that it may continue to support future life. Through the January 27, 2021 Executive Order 14008 on Tackling the Climate Crises at Home and Abroad, the United States joined an international movement by countries to pledge conservation of at least 30% of their land and water by 2030. This pledge is intended to help protect biodiversity and mitigate climate change through locally led conservation efforts. Howard County already has 39% of its land and water conserved in parkland, open space, and easements. The County should continue to support this movement by establishing a goal for natural resource conservation. This goal could be for the County as a whole and each major watershed. ### EH-1 Policy Statement Continue to support the County's ecological health. ### Implementing Actions 1. Integrate the goals of protecting and restoring the County's ecological health when updating county programs, regulations, and policies. 2. Ensure adequate funding for programs and measures to protect and restore the County's ecological health, track outcomes of these investments, and provide necessary maintenance and enforcement. 3. Create a dedicated funding source, as was done for the Agricultural Land Preservation Program, for environmental programs. 4. Establish a natural resource protection goal for the County and each major watershed to help protect biodiversity and mitigate climate change. <
> > ❝ > The health of everyone in HoCo is interwoven with environmental health. I have seen the ecosystem substantially change and recognize loss of indicator species. I think HoCo can have the balance of sustainable development and environmental stewardship. Also, I am thankful for growing up in a diverse county and I hope it maintains this essential diversity to make the county and country better. > ❞ > - HoCo By Design process participant MAP 3-1: ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES <
> * Ponds, Lakes, and Reservoirs * Streams * Steep Slopes (Over 25%) * Wetlands * 100-Year Floodplain * Forest Cover (2009) NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Public Works, Technology and Communication Services, and Planning and Zoning, 2022 “ I would like to see environmental and climate change concerns be the most important consideration for growth and infrastructure. ” - HoCo By Design process participant # Mitigating and Adapting To Climate Change Climate change can be generally defined as a significant, long-term shift in weather patterns for a specific geographic region. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Fourth National Climate Assessment notes that emissions of the long-lived greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases are causing climate change as they build up and trap heat in the atmosphere. The assessment further notes that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions come from human sources (fossil fuel combustion, industrial processes, deforestation) and natural sources, but emissions from human sources have increased dramatically since the start of the industrial age and the growing use of coal, oil, and natural gas. NOAA’s Maryland State Climate Summary (2017) projects impacts in Maryland from climate change will include increased average annual precipitation, especially during the winter and spring. More frequent and intense rainfall events are also projected, which could lead to more flooding events in urban areas and expanded flood inundation areas. Projected changes also include higher daytime and nighttime temperatures, which could intensify droughts. NOAA further projects that the oceans will continue to warm and sea levels will continue to rise, which may displace people living along the coast. These effects combined could shift available habitat and impact migratory patterns for plant and wildlife species. If these shifts occur at a rapid pace, species that cannot adapt quickly enough may not survive. Not only could climate change have a devastating impact on the natural environment and plant and wildlife species, it could also economically distress many households, businesses, and families. Families could experience higher energy bills resulting from temperature extremes, unless they are able to upgrade the heating and cooling systems in their homes. They may also need to further weatherproof their homes and retrofit their properties to add stormwater management for more frequent nuisance flooding. While all households may experience impacts from climate change, lower-income and cost-burdened households could have significant challenges affording these extra costs. In Howard County, as of 2018, 5% (5,732) of all households are below the poverty line and 23% (27,310) of households are in the ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) income bracket. Financial assistance programs are available to assist income-qualified households, such as weatherization programs funded by federal and state grants. ## Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions in our region can include reducing the use of fossil fuels through energy conservation and efficiency in buildings and transportation, switching to renewable energy, and promoting carbon sequestration through natural resources and agriculture. Carbon sequestration is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. Many Smart Growth policies promote development patterns and actions that are in harmony with climate mitigation goals. Polices that promote compact growth, walkable communities, green buildings, complete streets, and increased transit reduce fossil fuel use. Other policies promote protecting environmental resources, such as wetlands and forests, and preserving open space and agricultural land, which can provide carbon sequestration and help mitigate increased temperature extremes. HoCo By Design’s Smart Growth strategy of targeting redevelopment in mixed-use activity centers offers opportunities to preserve existing environmental resources by directing growth away from undeveloped lands and creating compact, walkable communities that support transit investment and innovative green building design. Zoning and other policies can promote renewable energy by making it easier to include solar and other on-site or local renewable energy generation, especially on developed parcels. Mitigation measures can help communities improve their quality of life and save money through reduced energy costs, an important outcome for everyone, but especially for low-income or cost-burdened households. <
> ### Adaptation Measures Adaptation will also be needed to address impacts from the climate changes occurring now and in the future due to existing levels of GHG in the atmosphere. Adaptation measures in our region could include the following: * Revising building and construction standards to increase the resilience of buildings and roads to extreme weather events; * Planning microgrids with on-site power generation to preserve critical public safety functions during major power outages; * Revising stormwater management standards to address short-term, intense storms in areas that are or will become prone to flooding; * Changing agricultural crops, and reforestation and landscaping species to those that are better suited to a warmer climate; * Changing agricultural and forest pest management to address new pest species or the need for more frequent treatment; and * Conserving and planting more trees to reduce the urban heat island effect. Natural resources will be impacted by climate change, but resource management can help with both mitigation and adaptation. ### Building Resilience Resilience, and particularly climate change resilience, is becoming an increasingly important topic for land and water resources planning. Resilience can be described as the capacity of a community or an ecosystem to sustain function and well-being under both unexpected shocks and ongoing change. Climate change is often noted as a driver of ongoing change that will also increase unexpected shocks, such as severe weather events (extreme heat, drought, flooding, etc.). In some cases, this planning organizes current best management practices under the theme of promoting resilience. In other cases, such as with flood management and carbon sequestration, planning identifies specific new tools and policies that are needed to adequately address resilience needs. Some communities will be more vulnerable to the impacts from climate change, whether through location or lack of resources. Resilience planning should ensure the special needs of these communities are addressed. The Howard County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), which is intended to reduce the County’s human, social, environmental, and economic losses from future natural disasters, contains recommended actions that will help build the County's resilience. For additional information about the HMP, please see the Technical Appendix A: Environment. ### Climate Action Plans Climate change is a global issue that requires policy changes on a global level to fully resolve. However, local and regional actions, including mitigation and adaptation planning, contribute to broader efforts to combat climate change. Maryland released its first Climate Action Plan in 2008 and has updated the plan several times since. Climate Action Plans contain an inventory of GHG emission sources, set GHG emission reduction targets, and specify actions to achieve those targets by a certain date. Howard County developed a countywide Climate Action Plan in 2010 and updated the plan in 2015 with a focus on emissions from government operations. <
> An update to the plan began in 2022, and is being developed in concert with HoCo By Design. The updated plan will include countywide strategies and actions for mitigation, adaptation and building resilience to climate change, particularly for the County's most vulnerable communities. For additional information about Maryland and county actions and goals to promote renewable energy and reduce GHG emissions, please see Technical Appendix A: Environment. ### Green Buildings Green Buildings are designed to be environmentally sustainable and conserve the use of resources in their design, construction, and operation. The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) generates Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards for green buildings at the Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum levels. The County requires that most new public buildings of 10,000 square feet or larger attain a LEED Silver rating and most new private buildings of 50,000 square feet or larger attain a LEED Certified rating. These requirements were established in 2008 and were revised in 2020 to incorporate bird-friendly design standards to reduce bird collisions. They should be reviewed for opportunities to enhance Green Building requirements. <
> ### EH-2 Policy Statement Seek to integrate climate change mitigation and adaptation goals as specified in the Howard County Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, or the most recently adopted Plan, into all county programs, projects, policies, and regulations. ### Implementing Actions 1. Ensure the Howard County Climate Action and Resiliency Plan update continues to maximize opportunities to mitigate and adapt to climate change with clear goals and strategies, and that county departments' policies are aligned with the plan's goals and strategies. 2. Evaluate and enhance opportunities where needed for climate change mitigation and adaptation measures in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations and Zoning Regulations, such as redevelopment in mixed-use activity centers, natural resource protection, and the provision of renewable energy. 3. Enhance county design requirements for county infrastructure and public and private buildings, to ensure these structures will be resilient under projected future weather patterns and minimize resource consumption. 4. Adopt the most current standards of the International Green Construction Code and review and update county Green Building requirements for opportunities to enhance the sustainability of public and private buildings. 5. Identify and ensure economically-vulnerable communities, businesses, and households have the resources necessary for mitigation and adaptation measures. # PROTECTING SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES The County Subdivision and Land Development Regulations and Zoning Regulations contain significant provisions for the protection of sensitive environmental resources when properties are developed. This section discusses regulatory protections for water resources, steep slopes, and rare, threatened and endangered species, as well as three zoning districts specifically designed to protect sensitive resources. Additional protective measures for forests and stormwater management requirements are addressed in later, separate sections. ### Water Resources and Steep Slopes Water resources include rivers, wetlands, floodplains, ponds, lakes, and groundwater. These are vital natural resources that provide drinking water, stormwater management, pollution abatement, floodwater storage, and recreation, as well as important habitat for a wide variety of plant and animal species. To protect water quality and habitat within streams, the County Subdivision and Land Development Regulations require the following undisturbed buffer areas: * 75 to 100 feet along perennial streams in residential zoning districts; * 50 feet along perennial streams in non-residential zoning districts; and * 50 feet along intermittent streams in all zoning districts. The regulations also require a 25-foot undisturbed buffer around nontidal wetlands. Additionally, most wetlands in the County are found within the 100-year floodplain, which is protected from disturbance. County regulations also protect steep slopes of 25% or greater when there is a contiguous area of 20,000 square feet or larger. Disturbing steep slopes can generate excessive erosion and sedimentation that can be difficult to contain even with enhanced sediment and erosion control practices, and once disturbed steep slopes can be difficult to stabilize. This can be especially problematic when these slopes are adjacent to water bodies. When slopes of 15% or greater occur in conjunction with highly erodible soils, these erosion problems are intensified. To provide the greatest benefit, stream and wetland buffers should be wide enough to allow adequate filtering of overland stormwater runoff, include adjacent steep slopes and highly erodible soils, and be forested. The use of a floodplain buffer can improve resilience to flooding by accounting for future changes in the floodplain due to changing weather patterns (increased rainfall), increased development, or outdated mapping. County regulations require sediment and erosion control practices comply with the 2011 Maryland Standards and Specifications for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control when development or forestry activities will result in clearing and grading. These practices prevent sediment and other pollutants from leaving a disturbed site and entering nearby water bodies during storm events. The requirements for sediment and erosion control should be reviewed to ensure they are adequate for changing precipitation patterns, especially short-duration, high-intensity storms. Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species The 2019 Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) list of current and historical rare, threatened, and endangered species identifies 98 species within Howard County. Of these 98 species, 15 are animals and 83 are plants. Threats to these species are primarily caused by habitat destruction, particularly of wetlands, riparian areas, steep slopes, and forests. Therefore, protective measures for these important habitats also benefit these species. The DNR mapped the known habitat areas for rare, threatened, and endangered species throughout Maryland as Sensitive Species Project Review Areas (SSPRA). The SSPRA information is used by the County to initially screen development proposals under the Forest Conservation Act. If this screening indicates that such habitat may be present, the developer is referred to the DNR for guidance on protecting the species and the associated habitat. Zoning Regulations Excluding mixed use zones, there are three residential zoning districts with a stated purpose that includes protecting environmental resources. (Note that there is a fourth district that includes this purpose, but it is applicable only to historic properties.) These zoning districts require or allow the use of cluster development to achieve this purpose. The Residential-Environmental Development (R-ED) zoning district in the East is located primarily along the Patapsco River in areas with steep and narrow stream valleys. The R-ED zoning district has a 50% open space requirement (as specified in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations) and allows smaller lots, clustered together to keep development impacts away from steep slopes and streams. In the Rural West, the Rural Conservation (RC) zoning district requires low-density, clustered residential development for parcels of 20 acres or greater to protect agricultural lands and natural resources. This type of cluster development is also allowed on smaller lots in the RC zoning district and on any lot in the Rural Residential (RR) zoning district. Cluster development and other alternative development patterns may also be appropriate to enhance environmental protection in other residential zoning districts. For sites where environmentally-sensitive resources are present, alternative or flexible development standards may better realize the intended purpose of the zoning district while providing greater site-specific protection of resources and enhanced site design. EH-3 Policy Statement Ensure the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations and Zoning Regulations provide adequate protection for sensitive environmental resources within new development and redevelopment. Implementing Actions 1. Evaluate and enhance protections, including sediment and erosion control, where needed for sensitive environmental resources, such as water resources, steep slopes, and rare, threatened, and endangered species, in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations. 2. Explore whether cluster development may also be appropriate in other residential zoning districts during the zoning regulation update process. 3. Explore the creation of alternative or flexible development standards that would result in more site-sensitive and enhanced site design outcomes during the zoning regulation update process, including criteria for determining eligibility for utilization of alternative standards. 4. Explore housing development patterns that enhance opportunities for preservation while reducing emissions that contribute to climate change. *** “ Preservation of environmental resources, equitably throughout the County is crucial, especially areas of mature trees on slopes. ” - HoCo By Design process participant <
> # Incentivizing Natural Resource Protection and Restoration The County currently has few incentives to encourage resource protection and restoration measures that go beyond the minimum requirements of the Subdivision and Land Development and Zoning Regulations. ### Zoning Regulations The Zoning Regulations include a Density Exchange Overlay (DEO) District for the RC and RR Districts, which provides an opportunity and incentive to preserve significant blocks of farmland and rural land in the West. An overlay district is a district established to respond to special features or conditions of an area, such as historic value, physical characteristics, or location. An overlay district may also supplement or provide an alternative to the regulations of the underlying zoning district. The DEO District allows residential density in the RC and RR Districts to be exchanged between parcels. Density exchanges are intended to preserve large parcels in perpetuity, while residential development is directed toward parcels that can more readily accommodate the additional dwellings. Use of this district has been successful in permanently preserving large tracts of open space and environmental and agricultural land, and should be continued under any new zoning regime. Additionally, an overlay district may be an appropriate approach to further protect watersheds with unique conditions or resources, as well as the Green Infrastructure Network. ### Additional Incentives Additional incentives could be employed to supplement changes to the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations and Zoning Regulations for enhanced resource protection and restoration. These could include density bonuses, tax credits, housing allocations, and private-public partnerships. ### EH-4 Policy Statement Incentivize additional resource protection and restoration measures within new development and redevelopment. ### Implementing Actions 1. Consider increased use of a density exchange overlay district, in both the West and the East, to protect sensitive resources in areas with unique conditions or resources. 2. Consider incentives to encourage environmental protection and restoration when properties are developed or redeveloped, such as tax credits, density bonuses, housing allocations, and public-private partnerships. <
> <
> “ Stormwater management will be increasingly important as climate change accelerates. ” - HoCo By Design process participant # MANAGING STORMWATER Impervious surfaces, such as roads, parking lots, and buildings, interfere with stormwater runoff’s ability to soak into the ground. Stormwater runoff travels quickly across impervious surfaces, picking up sediment and pollutants, and during warm weather, becoming warmer, before it enters nearby water bodies. The simultaneous increase in both water quantity, pollutants, and temperature leads to flooding, stream erosion, and degraded water quality and habitat. These impacts will be exacerbated by the more frequent and intense rainfall events and warmer temperatures projected to occur with climate change. Stormwater management can help remove pollutants from runoff, reduce water temperature, moderate the flow of runoff into nearby water bodies, and reduce flooding. ## New Development Since 2010, Howard County’s stormwater management regulations have required that all new development employ environmental site design (ESD) techniques to treat runoff from smaller, more frequent storms (the 1-year, 24-hour storm of 2.6 inches) to the maximum extent practicable. ESD emphasizes reducing the amount of stormwater runoff generated by using site design techniques that limit site disturbance and reduce the creation of impervious surfaces. ESD treats runoff by holding it on-site where it can be filtered and treated by the vegetation and soil in multiple, small treatment facilities. ESD is different from the County’s previous approach to stormwater management, which focused on collecting and treating runoff in large treatment facilities, most often stormwater management ponds. However, the County continues to require stormwater management for the larger 10- and 100-year, 24-hour storm events of 4.9 and 8.5 inches, respectively, in the Tiber Branch, Deep Run, and Cattail Creek watersheds, where older development exists within the 100-year floodplain and are vulnerable to flooding. Stormwater management in these watersheds uses a combination of ESD techniques and large holding facilities, such as ponds or underground storage tanks. In response to severe flooding events in Ellicott City in 2016 and 2018, the County also adopted stormwater management regulations to address short-duration, high-intensity storms in the Plumtree Branch and Tiber Branch watersheds (requiring quantity management for a 3.55-hour, 6.6-inch storm event). Stormwater management for these types of storms again requires a combination of ESD techniques and large holding facilities. These types of storms are projected to occur more often under the effects of climate change. The County should consider adding quantity management requirements for the 10- and 100-year storms, as well as short-duration, high-intensity storms, to other vulnerable watersheds. ## Flooding Concerns In 2021 Maryland’s stormwater management law was amended to require that the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) update the stormwater management regulations to incorporate the most recent precipitation data available and add quantity management standards for flood control in watersheds that have experienced flooding incidents since 2000. The amendments also require that MDE review and update the stormwater management regulations at least once every five years. The County will work with MDE to adopt the new regulations, which are expected to be finalized in 2023. In 2022 the County initiated a Vulnerable Watershed Restoration and Resiliency Program to evaluate whether other watersheds are or will become susceptible to flooding and develop potential capital projects to address the problem areas. For more information about state and county efforts to address flooding, please see Technical Appendix A: Environment. ## Redevelopment The County's stormwater management regulations also have requirements for redeveloping sites. Redevelopment sites must reduce impervious cover by 50% or provide an equivalent water quality treatment for the first one inch of rainfall using ESD techniques. However, there are no quantity management requirements. The recent update to stormwater management requirements in the Plumtree Branch and Tiber Branch watersheds also added quantity management for redevelopment in those watersheds. Requiring stormwater management for redevelopment sites offers a significant opportunity to improve water quality and quantity controls for stormwater runoff in areas that were developed prior to current stormwater management regulations. The County should ensure redevelopment is designed and implemented to reduce stormwater runoff and pollutant loadings to the maximum extent practicable. The County should also consider creating incentives for new development and redevelopment to provide on-site or off-site stormwater management that exceeds minimum regulatory requirements. ## Stormwater Management Facilities Stormwater management systems must be regularly inspected and maintained and, as they age, deteriorated systems must be upgraded or replaced. The County is required by both state and local legislation to conduct inspections of stormwater management facilities every three years. There are approximately 11,000 stormwater management facilities in the County, and approximately 1,634 of these are public facilities maintained by the County. In general, the County shares maintenance responsibilities with homeowners associations for residential facilities located on open space lots, while non-residential facilities are privately maintained. With increased use of ESD, small treatment facilities have and will continue to become more prevalent. These types of facilities can include downspout infiltration areas or drywells, and bioretention facilities or rain gardens that can be located on private residential lots. The ability to inspect and maintain these facilities over time is an area of concern. Developments with ESD have multiple facilities, which require increasing county resources for inspections. Funding for County inspection and maintenance of stormwater management facilities is through the Watershed Protection and Restoration Fund, which is discussed later in this chapter under Managing Natural Resources by Watershed. The County should evaluate alternatives for improving, enforcing, and funding long-term inspection and maintenance of stormwater management facilities, particularly those facilities located on private residential lots. <
> ### EH-5 Policy Statement Evaluate and improve stormwater management requirements to enhance climate change resilience. ### Implementing Actions 1. Conduct a flooding vulnerability assessment to determine which watersheds are susceptible to chronic flooding under current and expected future precipitation patterns. 2. Update stormwater management design standards to address current and expected future precipitation patterns. Consider adding quantity management requirements, including management for short-duration, high-intensity storms in vulnerable watersheds. Ensure that redevelopment, at a minimum, meets current stormwater management projects for redevelopment projects. 3. Reduce stormwater runoff and pollutant loadings when redevelopment occurs. Ensure that redevelopment, at a minimum, meets current stormwater management requirements. Incentivize redevelopment to meet current requirements for new development and address watershed health, flood risks, and other environmental concerns. 4. Increase use of a nature-based or green stormwater infrastructure approach (bioretention, swales) in combination with a built or gray infrastructure approach (pipes, ponds) to address flood mitigation and adaptation, to maximize ecological benefits. 5. Evaluate alternatives for improving, enforcing, and funding long-term inspection and maintenance of stormwater management facilities, particularly those facilities located on private residential lots. 6. Encourage redevelopment to meet new development stormwater management requirements to the maximum extent possible and address watershed health, flood risks, and other environmental concerns. # Managing Natural Resources by Watersheds The health of wetlands, streams, lakes, and reservoirs is directly linked to the use of land within their watersheds. For this reason, the County takes a watershed-based approach to comprehensively address the design, construction, and maintenance of the stormwater management system; water quality and habitat improvements in local streams; and flooding concerns. The Chesapeake Bay is a valued source of beauty, recreation, and commercial activity in Maryland, and it has played an important role in Maryland’s history and development. The multistate effort to restore the Chesapeake Bay continues to be a strong influence in promoting watershed-based planning and management efforts to protect not only the Bay, but also the Bay’s numerous tributary rivers and streams. For additional information about restoration efforts for the Chesapeake Bay, please see Technical Appendix A. Howard County lies within the Patuxent River and Patapsco River watersheds, two major tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay. Approximately 75% of the County is within the Patuxent River watershed and the remaining 25% of the County is within the Patapsco River watershed. The main stems of these rivers have many tributary streams which drain large areas of the County. The Patuxent River and Patapsco River watersheds in Howard County are divided by the State into seven major watersheds, as shown in Map 3-2. Watershed management plans generally include: * A description of current land use within the watershed; * Water quality and habitat conditions in the watershed streams; * An identification and severity ranking of problem areas; * An identification and priority ranking of potential restoration projects; * Preliminary designs and cost estimates for priority restoration projects; and * An implementation schedule. Restoration projects can include: * Building new stormwater management facilities in areas that lack them and retrofitting existing facilities to add water quality treatment; * Planting forest, especially to create forested buffers along streams; * Restoring and creating wetlands; * Stabilizing stream channels and restoring instream habitats; * Identifying and eliminating superfluous impervious surfaces, particularly on upstream or county land; and * Identifying and mitigating most significant point sources of surface runoff. Many of these restoration projects require cooperation and participation from private landowners, so public outreach and education is a critical component of implementation. *** “I support watershed-based approach because our water goes to the Chesapeake Bay, an estuary that depends on its health from all surrounding areas. Mitigating runoff and managing pollution is a major factor in improving the health of our watershed.” - HoCo By Design process participant <
> MAP 3-2: MAJOR WATERSHEDS <
> Ponds, Lakes, and Reservoirs Streams Existing Impervious Surface (2020) Major Watersheds Brighton Dam Watershed Little Patuxent River Watershed Middle Patuxent River Watershed Patapsco River Lower North Branch Watershed Patuxent River Upper Watershed Rocky Gorge Dam Watershed Patapsco River South Branch Watershed NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Public Works, Technology and Communication Services, and Planning and Zoning, 2022 Wherever possible, the County uses state of the art, nature-based stream restoration design and construction techniques to promote the long-term health of restored streams and their associated floodplains. Completed stream and wetland restoration projects are monitored to measure changes in water and habitat quality. As more is learned about these projects, state and federal guidance is updated to improve outcomes, and the County works to stay informed and incorporate current best practices for restoration projects. Protection and restoration goals may vary by watershed. In a healthy watershed, the goal may be to protect and maintain current conditions, whereas in a degraded watershed, the goal may be to actively restore and improve current conditions. It is easier and more cost-effective to protect high-quality resources in a watershed than to restore degraded resources. The more degraded a watershed, the more difficult restoration becomes. In some more highly-developed watersheds, conditions may be so degraded that full restoration is prohibitively expensive. ### Water Quality in Local Streams Many streams and lakes in Howard County and in Maryland do not meet state water quality standards and exhibit degraded habitat conditions. Eroding stream channels and pipe outfalls from stormwater management facilities and a lack of riparian buffers are common problems in the County’s watersheds. However, there are also stream segments in the County with excellent water quality and habitat for aquatic life. The State classifies these types of stream segments as Tier II waters and employs special procedures to regulate discharges to these streams to ensure water quality is not degraded. The State also encourages local governments to further protect these waters. For additional information about water quality in local streams, and how projected changes to impervious cover and forest cover from expected growth may impact watershed health, please see Technical Appendix A: Environment. ### Total Maximum Daily Loads The Federal Clean Water Act requires each state identify water bodies that do not meet water quality standards. If necessary, the state must then develop a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or an allowable pollutant load and an implementation plan to bring the water body into compliance with the water quality standards for that pollutant. Depending on the land uses within the watershed of that water body, the TMDL is divided or allocated between the major pollutant sources in the watershed. In general, the current pollutant loads in a watershed must be substantially reduced to achieve the TMDL, but there is usually no required time frame for achieving the TMDL. <
> <
> Howard County has the following EPA approved local TMDLs: | Table 3-1: EPA Approved Local TMDLs | | | :--- | :--- | | **Water Body** | **Pollutant** | | Baltimore Harbor (includes South Branch Patapsco and Lower North Branch Patapsco Rivers) | Nitrogen and Phosphorus | | Centennial Lake | Phosphorus and Sediment | | Little Patuxent River | Sediment | | Lower North Branch Patapsco River | Bacteria and Sediment | | Patuxent River | Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) | | Patuxent River Upper | Bacteria and Sediment | | Rocky Gorge Reservoir | Phosphorus | | Triadelphia Reservoir | Phosphorus and Sediment | *Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2022* ### National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit As a requirement of the Federal Clean Water Act, Howard County has a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for discharges from the County’s stormwater management system. The NPDES permit has a five-year term and each new permit contains significant requirements for improving the quality of water discharged through the County’s stormwater management system. The County must document these water quality improvements through chemical, physical and biological monitoring. The County NPDES permit area includes the full County minus lands that have their own NPDES permit, such as federal and state lands, and industrial properties. The County’s fourth NPDES permit was issued in December 2014. To address the Chesapeake Bay cleanup goals, this permit required that the County provide additional or improved stormwater management for 20% of the impervious cover in the County that was not currently managed to the maximum extent practical by the end of the permit term (December 2019). This was approximately 2,204 acres of untreated impervious area. The County met and exceeded this target by 2019, expending about $56 million in capital and operating funds since 2010. The permit also required that the County develop watershed restoration plans within the first year of the permit to achieve the stormwater allocations for local TMDLs. In response, the County conducted assessments of the Little and Middle Patuxent River watersheds and developed a Countywide Implementation Strategy (CIS) in 2015. Assessments were done for the Patapsco and Patuxent River main stem watersheds in 2016, and the CIS was updated in 2017. The CIS includes an assessment of water quality impairments and proposed management measures, including new and retrofit stormwater management facilities, stream restoration, tree planting, and stormwater facility outfall stabilization, with expected pollutant load reductions and impervious area treatment. The CIS also includes a cost estimate of $168 million, based on an implementation schedule through 2029, when the stormwater allocations are expected to be achieved. The CIS indicates the majority of spending will be in the Patapsco River Lower North Branch watershed, followed by the Little Patuxent River watershed. The County received a new NPDES permit in December 2022. This permit includes a new requirement to provide water quality treatment for 1,345 acres of the County’s untreated impervious area by December 2027. The County must also continue progress toward achieving stormwater pollutant load reductions for each local TMDL. The County plans to update the CIS during this new (5th generation) permit term. The County plans an update to the CIS during the next (5th generation) permit term. ## Regional Water Resources In addition to watershed planning and management for local water resources, it is also important to remember that the County is part of the larger Patuxent and Patapsco River watersheds. The Patuxent River watershed is located within Howard, Montgomery, Anne Arundel, Prince George’s, Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s Counties. Howard County contains 21% of the watershed, the second highest of the seven counties in the watershed. The Patapsco River watershed is located within Carroll, Baltimore, Howard, and Anne Arundel Counties, as well as Baltimore City. The County is in the headwaters of each watershed, so management practices in the County affect many downstream users. For this reason, the County coordinates and cooperates with other local, regional, and state agencies and organizations on joint watershed planning and management for the rivers. The Patuxent River Policy Plan, which has been adopted by each of the seven counties in the Patuxent River watershed, contains land management recommendations to control nonpoint or diffuse sources of pollution and also protect and restore habitat in the watershed. The Patuxent River Commission, whose membership includes each of the seven counties and other watershed stakeholders, provides oversight for implementation of the Policy Plan. The County also participates in regional planning for the Patuxent Reservoirs watershed, which is discussed in Technical Appendix A: Environment. ## Funding The County’s NPDES stormwater permit requires the County allocate adequate funding to address permit conditions. In 2013, the County established an annual watershed protection and restoration fee that is based on the size of the property for residential properties or on the area of impervious cover for nonresidential properties. <
> These fees go to a Watershed Protection and Restoration Fund, which may be used by the County to build new or retrofit existing stormwater management facilities, implement stream and wetland restoration projects, operate and maintain the stormwater management system, conduct public outreach and education, and provide grants to nonprofit organizations to also do this work. The fund is used to support multiple programs that incentivize environmental stewardship among property owners. Under the CleanScapes Program, residential property owners with homes built before 2003 may add stormwater management to earn a credit against the fee. The fund may also be used to provide financial assistance for stormwater management installations or upgrades. Similar opportunities exist for credit and reimbursement on commercial properties through the Commercial Stormwater Solutions Partnership. The Nonprofit Watershed Protection Partnership Program allows partnering nonprofits to receive a 100% credit on their fee in exchange for working with the County to implement stormwater treatment practices on site. Agriculturally assessed properties can pay a flat rate rather than a fee based on impervious cover if the farm has a Soil Conservation and Water Quality Plan or a Forest Management Plan. The Septic Savers Program is a rebate for residential property owners who have their septic systems pumped out every three to five years to promote proper septic maintenance and reduce pollution in groundwater and streams. The watershed protection and restoration fee generates approximately $10 million per year. As each watershed restoration study has identified projects, these projects have been prioritized and added to the overall county watershed restoration project list. This list also includes project sites identified from citizen referrals and complaints. The list is used as the basis for capital budget requests for restoration projects. The fee also helps to fund work on existing stormwater management ponds, including repair of failing infrastructure and implementing water quality enhancements. The watershed restoration project list and the pond repairs/enhancements together total several hundred million dollars’ worth of projects. The County spends on average $10-$13 million annually, although this amount varies from year to year. The County also uses grants, partnerships, and alternative funding solutions to implement projects, making the best use of limited financial resources. This funds about 8-12 projects each year, depending on the size of the project. Additional funding would be needed to increase the pace of restoration and pond repair/retrofit efforts. ### EH-6 Policy Statement Expand the use of watershed management plans to provide a comprehensive framework for protecting and restoring natural resources. ### Implementing Actions 1. Expand the scope of watershed management plans to set priorities and guide efforts to protect, restore, and improve the County’s environmental resources. 2. Continue to coordinate and cooperate with other local, regional, and state agencies and organizations on joint watershed planning and management for the Patuxent and the Patapsco Rivers. 3. Ensure the Watershed Protection and Restoration Fund has adequate funding to meet National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater permit requirements and for proactive resource management. 4. Continue to pursue federal and state grant and cost-share opportunities to secure additional resources for restoration efforts. Apply jointly with community and environmental organizations and with neighboring jurisdictions, as appropriate. 66 *Trees are infrastructure.* 66 - HoCo By Design process participant # Expanding Tree Canopy and Forest Cover Tree canopy and forest cover help reduce and filter stormwater runoff, minimize erosion and sedimentation of streams, create wildlife habitats, sequester carbon, improve air quality, provide health benefits, and moderate local temperatures. They form visual buffers and are scenic in their own right. Increasing tree and forest cover is also an effective measure for climate change mitigation and adaptation. For these reasons, establishing goals for forest cover and forested stream buffers by watershed helps to achieve multiple objectives. In more developed watersheds, it may be more appropriate to establish a tree canopy goal. ## Existing Tree Canopy and Forest Cover Tree canopy is defined as the layer of leaves, branches and stems of trees that cover the ground when viewed from above. Tree canopy includes individual trees, such as those found within a parking lot or residential lawn, as well as trees within a forest. Based on 2018 tree canopy data, the County contained approximately 79,460 acres of tree canopy or 49% of the County had tree canopy cover. The County tree canopy cover in 2018 is shown in Map 3-3. A forest is a natural ecological community dominated by trees, generally including woody understory plants such as shrubs and young trees, and herbaceous vegetation such as grasses and flowers. To be fully effective as a complex environmental community, forest areas need to be large enough to provide space for a variety of native plant and animal species, to afford protection from outside intrusions, and to be able to mature and regenerate themselves. Based on a separate analysis by the County of 2009 forest cover data, the County contained approximately 45,460 acres of forest or 28% of the County was in forest cover (distinctive from tree canopy). Forest cover in the eastern portion of the County is prevalent primarily within stream valley areas where sensitive resources have discouraged development or within publicly-owned conservation areas, such as the Patapsco Valley State Park and the Middle Patuxent Environmental Area. In the Rural West, upland and stream valley forests are more extensive. County forest cover in 2009, the most recent data available when the HoCo By Design scenarios were developed, is shown in Map 3-1. Countywide forest cover data should be updated on a regular and consistent basis to help assess changes in forest cover and manage forest resources over time. Forest loss and fragmentation result in a continuing decline in forest interior habitat, which is generally defined as forest at least 300 feet from the forest edge. Forest interior habitat is generally more isolated from disturbance than forest edge habitat, and has a closed canopy that creates moist, shaded growing conditions, with less predation by forest edge species (raccoons, crows, cats) and fewer invasive species. In 2009, only 17% of the forest cover in the County was forest interior habitat. The loss of forest interior habitat threatens the survival of species that require this type of habitat, such as reptiles, amphibians and migratory songbirds. ## Tree Planting Priorities for Economically-Vulnerable Communities Howard County does not have an overall goal for tree canopy or forest cover, but Maryland has a policy that 40% of all land in the State should be covered by tree canopy. The County has several programs that provide free native trees to help increase tree canopy on qualifying residential properties, including the Stream ReLeaf and Turf to Trees Programs, along with an annual tree giveaway. Map 3-4 shows tree canopy cover by subwatershed and census tracts with average household annual median income under $50,000. There are four subwatersheds with less than 40% tree canopy coverage that contain one or more of these census tracts. Map 3-5 shows subwatersheds that have less than 40% tree canopy cover and impervious cover over 25%, along with census tracts with average household annual median income under $50,000. Watersheds with higher levels of impervious cover and lower levels of tree canopy cover will experience greater heat island impacts, and households in these census tracts may have economic difficulty addressing these impacts. There are three subwatersheds that reflect these conditions and contain one or more of these census tracts. These subwatersheds should be prioritized for native tree planting programs, with a focus on residential areas within these census tracts, where there are willing participants. <
> MAP 3-3: TREE CANOPY <
> Tree Canopy (2018) NOT TO SCALE Source: Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022; Chesapeake Conservancy, 2018 Map 3-4: Tree Canopy and Areas with Low Annual Median Income <
> Census Tracts with Annual Median Income Under $50,000 (2019) Major Watershed Boundaries Subwatersheds Percent Tree Canopy By Subwatershed 20% or Less 20% - 40% 40% - 60% 60% - 80% 80% or More NOT TO SCALE Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2019; Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022; Chesapeake Conservancy, 2018 MAP 3-5: POTENTIAL HEAT ISLANDS AND AREAS WITH LOW ANNUAL MEDIAN INCOME <
> Census Tracts with Annual Median Income Under $50,000 (2019) Major Watershed Boundaries Subwatersheds with Over 25% Impervious Cover and Under 40% Tree Canopy Subwatersheds NOT TO SCALE Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2019; Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022; Chesapeake Conservancy, 2018 <
> ### Forest Conservation Act Since 1993, Howard County’s Forest Conservation Act (FCA) has mitigated forest loss caused by development. The FCA contains a series of incentives and penalties to encourage forest retention on development sites and includes reforestation requirements for forest that is cleared. Afforestation (planting of areas presently without forest cover) is also required on sites that don’t meet minimum forest cover specifications. The FCA does not require an equal area replacement for forest cleared, and forest cover continues to be lost to development in Howard County and throughout Maryland. The County updated the FCA in 2019 to enhance forest retention, including changes such as adding site design requirements for larger residential developments to meet 75% of their forest conservation obligation on site. The update increased mitigation requirements by increasing replanting ratios, especially if the replanting was done outside the watershed where the clearing occurred, and limiting use of the fee-in-lieu option for residential developments. The update also made changes to ensure more successful forest plantings, such as increasing the maintenance period for new plantings from two to three years. The County will monitor implementation of the updated FCA to measure its effectiveness and modify the regulations as needed to enhance forest retention and ensure forest plantings are successful. ### Threats to Forest Health The loss of forest species diversity and the degradation of forests by invasive exotic species are concerns for long-term forest health. Invasive exotic species are not native to the area where they live and are a significant problem because they can displace or kill native species. They lack the predators, competitors, diseases, or parasites that help control their populations in their native habitat. Invasive species can include invertebrates such as the emerald ash borer, which kills ash trees, and plants such as Japanese honeysuckle and English ivy, which can smother trees. Forest health is also damaged by an overpopulation of deer, which tend to prefer native species when browsing. When deer exceed the carrying capacity of a forest, they can eat most of the understory trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation. Overgrazing of understory damages the ability of forests to regenerate, eliminates shrub and herbaceous species, and reduces bird species that nest within understory habitat. This damage can be compounded by impacts from invasive species, which can quickly cover the empty forest floor and inhibit the regrowth of native species. Invasive species often do not provide the same food, cover, and nesting benefits as native species do for native wildlife. The Howard County Department of Recreation and Parks implements a comprehensive deer management program that is intended to maintain a stable, balanced deer population. Managing deer populations may also help reduce tick populations and tick-borne diseases such as Lyme disease. The program includes managed hunting on public lands to reduce deer numbers where necessary. Deer are quite adaptable and thrive in suburban environments, but hunting is not feasible in these areas, making it difficult to control their population on a countywide basis. Controlling deer-related impacts using a variety of management tools requires a cooperative effort between public agencies and landowners. Climate change may exacerbate forest health issues caused by invasive exotic species and deer overpopulations. NOAA's Fourth National Climate Assessment notes that warmer winters in the northeast will likely expand the geographic range and population size of existing invasive exotic insect species, such as the emerald ash borer. There may also be a shift in native plant species to those that are better suited to a warmer climate, but if current species die off and new species are unable to become established, the forest may be unsustainable. Increased forest management on public and private property can help address these threats to forest health and help forests transition to native species that are adaptable to a warmer climate and provide greater resilience to climate change. Federal and State programs are available to assist forest landowners with forest management. For example, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources will work with property owners to develop forest management or stewardship plans for a nominal fee. ### EH-7 Policy Statement Expand native tree canopy and forest cover in the County and manage forests to ensure long-term health and sustainability, addressing threats from invasive species, overpopulation of deer, and climate change. ### Implementing Actions 1. Monitor implementation of the recently updated Forest Conservation Act and modify the Act as necessary to ensure adequate protection of forest resources. 2. Update countywide forest cover data on a regular basis to help assess changes in forest cover and manage forest resources over time. 3. Establish and achieve measurable goals for tree canopy, forest cover, and riparian forest buffers in all county watersheds. 4. Prioritize economically-vulnerable communities for native tree plantings to mitigate heat island impacts. 5. Continue and expand forest management, including invasive species removal, on county properties to ensure long-term health and sustainability of the forest. 6. Continue and expand outreach and technical assistance to private forest landowners for forest management to ensure the long-term health and sustainability of the forest. 7. Continue and expand implementation of the county Deer Management Program and develop safe strategies for deer management in residential and recreational areas. # IMPLEMENTING THE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK PLAN Howard County’s Green Infrastructure Network is comprised of a mapped system of hubs and corridors that includes and links the most ecologically significant natural areas in the County, as shown in Map 3-6. Hubs are large, natural areas that provide valuable habitat for plants and wildlife. Large contiguous blocks of interior forest and sizable wetland complexes are essential components of hubs. Corridors are linear features that tie hubs together and they may include rivers and streams, narrow sections of forest, and other upland areas. The intent of the Green Infrastructure Network is to provide a protected system of interconnected waterways, wetlands, forests, meadows, and other natural areas. The network helps support native plant and animal species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources, and contribute to the health and quality of life of Howard County’s communities. A protected network of continuous habitat is a valuable resource for plant and animal species now and in the future, especially if they need to shift their habitat range due to climate change. According to the 2012 Green Infrastructure Network (GIN) Plan, there are 51 hubs that contain approximately 22,148 acres or 14% of the County’s total land area. Approximately 76% of the land in the hubs is protected in parkland or open space, and 11% is under an agricultural, environmental, or historic easement. The remaining 13% of the land is in a variety of uses and approximately 6% is uncommitted, which is land that still has development potential based on the zoning. According to the 2012 GIN Plan, there are 48 corridor connections in the network. The corridor system contains approximately 6,173 acres or 4% of the County’s total land area. Approximately 26% of this system is protected in parkland or open space, and 26% is under an agricultural or environmental easement. The remaining 48% of the land is in a variety of uses and approximately 11% is uncommitted. Protected land within the GIN is shown in Map 3-7. Since development of the GIN Plan, the County conducted site visits to confirm the viability of the corridors for safe wildlife passage, with a focus on road crossings and areas close to existing development. Based on this assessment, two corridors (Cattail Creek – Friendship North and South) were removed from the GIN because they were not viable for wildlife passage. A mapping update of the network is needed to reflect these and other changes, such as corridor realignments and new development. The GIN Plan defines goals and objectives to protect and enhance the network. It also contains a comprehensive toolkit for implementation that includes stewardship, financial incentives, regulatory protection, easements, acquisition, and indicator monitoring. The HoCo By Design public engagement process and the Environment Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) provided extensive comments on the importance of the GIN to identify and protect the County’s most sensitive and ecologically beneficial resources. Further, the Environment SAG reported that “the Green Infrastructure Network is a valuable resource for the County, but implementation of the Green Infrastructure Network Plan has been slow.” While the County has made some progress with plan implementation, <
> > ❝ > The Green Infrastructure Network (GIN) needs stronger protections in the General Plan and in Howard County policy. Once these areas are gone, the connectivity is gone and we no longer have a network of natural areas, but isolated green islands where wildlife cannot thrive. > ❞ > - HoCo By Design process participant MAP 3-6: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK & NATURAL RESOURCES <
> * Green Infrastructure Network Corridors (500 Feet) * Green Infrastructure Network Hubs * Ponds, Lakes, and Reservoirs * Streams * Steep Slopes (Over 25%) * Wetlands * 100-Year Floodplain * Forest Cover (2009) NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Public Works, Technology and Communication Services, and Planning and Zoning, 2022 MAP 3-7: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK & PROTECTED LANDS <
> * Green Infrastructure Network Corridors (500 Feet) * Green Infrastructure Network Hubs * Ponds, Lakes, and Reservoirs * Streams * Steep Slopes (Over 25%) * Wetlands * 100-Year Floodplain * Park or Open Space * Agricultural or Environmental Easements NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Public Works, Technology and Communication Services, and Planning and Zoning, 2022 additional actions are still needed, such as integrating the GIN Plan into county planning processes, establishing a new easement/land acquisition program, amending development regulations and design standards for increased protection, and instituting financial incentives to support more costly best management practices on private property. Additional studies are also needed on existing resource conditions and on how wildlife use the GIN, so that informed management of the network helps optimize the many benefits provided by the GIN. While the GIN is intended to provide a connected system of large areas of significant habitat that supports native plants and wildlife, other natural resources and habitats outside the network are also valuable and worthy of protection and restoration. The GIN is part of the larger ecosystems in the County, so the health of these ecosystems supports the health of the network. There may also be value in protecting smaller forest and wetland habitats that could provide ‘stepping stones’ to the network to strengthen the ecological function of the GIN. ### EH-8 Policy Statement Expand implementation of the Green Infrastructure Network Plan. ### Implementing Actions 1. Integrate the Green Infrastructure Network Plan implementation actions into the relevant county plans and programs. 2. Consider use of an overlay zoning district or other regulatory measures to target resource protection measures for the Green Infrastructure Network. 3. Establish an easement or land purchase program to protect uncommitted parcels within the Green Infrastructure Network. 4. Amend county design standards for roads, bridges, and culverts to facilitate safe passage for wildlife at county road crossings within the Green Infrastructure Network. 5. Conduct studies of existing resource conditions and wildlife use within the network to enhance management of the Green Infrastructure Network. 6. Consider expansion of the Green Infrastructure Network to include smaller habitat areas that provide ‘stepping stones’ to the primary network. <
> # PRESERVING FARMLAND Howard County preserves farmland in the Rural West primarily through its Agricultural Land Preservation Program (ALPP), in which a property owner, whose land meets certain size and soil criteria, can offer to sell a perpetual easement to the County, while holding fee simple title to the land. The land may be sold, but the easement, which restricts the development of the property, remains with the land and binds future owners. Howard County had one of the first local purchase of development rights programs in the nation and began acquiring agricultural preservation easements in 1984. The Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation (MALPF) program also purchases agricultural easements and was particularly active in Howard County in the early 1980s, prior to the establishment of the ALPP. As of September 2022, there were 4,046 acres under a MALPF easement in the County. MALPF easements established since 2004 are perpetual. MALPF easements established prior to 2004 allow a property owner to petition to terminate their easement and buy back their development rights from MALPF after 25 years. To terminate their easement, the property owner must demonstrate that profitable farming is no longer feasible on the property and both MALPF and the Howard County Council must approve the owner’s request. When reviewing the request, MALPF considers the economic feasibility of farming and the County considers local land use priorities, including consistency with comprehensive planning goals and impacts to vicinal properties. As provided for in the Zoning Regulations, land may be dedicated to the ALPP by way of preservation parcels created through the cluster subdivision or Density Exchange process. No county funds are used to acquire the dedicated easements because they result from private market transactions between the property owner and a developer. Like the ALPP purchased easements, the restrictions on the dedicated parcels against development remain with the land and bind all future owners. As of September 2022, there were 18,979 acres of preserved farmland through the ALPP Purchased and ALPP Dedicated programs. There is additional farmland that is protected as county-dedicated environmental preservation parcels and some that is held under conservation easements between the landowner and one or more local land trusts, though many of these parcels contain more environmentally sensitive areas than active agricultural land. Local land trusts, such as the Howard County Conservancy and the Rockburn Land Trust, accept donated easements from private property owners and the property owner may receive tax benefits based on the value of the donation. The County recently entered into a partnership with the Howard County Conservancy to create a new purchased easement program for nonprofit landowners with environmentally sensitive areas on their land who cannot derive tax benefits from a donated easement. The Preservation Easements Map (see Map 3-8) shows farmland and other lands preserved in the County through the diverse options available to landowners seeking to preserve their land. For information about efforts to support the agricultural economy, including agriculture in the East, please see the Economic Prosperity chapter. MAP 3-8: PRESERVATION EASEMENTS <
> Howard County Environmental Preservation Parcels Conservation Easements Neighborhood Preservation Easement Rural Legacy Easement Howard County Agricultural Preservation Parcels Howard County Purchased Easements Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Easements Maryland Environmental Trust Easements Planned Service Area NOT TO SCALE Source: Howard County Departments of Technology and Communication Services and Planning and Zoning, 2022 ALPP Funding Since its inception, the ALPP has been funded by a 25% share of local transfer tax revenues. This dedicated funding source has been critical to the success of the program over the years. The County initially compensated property owners in cash for their development rights, but in 1989 established the installment purchase agreement (IPA) method. The initial IPAs provided the property owner with small, incremental principal payments and twice-yearly tax-free interest throughout the length of the term, with a balloon payment of the remaining principal upon maturity of the IPA bond. After about 20 years, the County stopped using balloon payments and began paying the owner in equal amounts over the length of the term. The twice yearly tax-free interest on the remaining principal arrangement did not change. Howard County was the first jurisdiction in the nation to utilize the innovative IPA approach, the template of which has since been copied elsewhere in Maryland and across the country. The County monitors the fund balance annually to ensure solvency and to anticipate future spending potential. A number of large final IPA payments will come due between 2019 and 2024, resulting in a significant decrease in the fund balance. However, given the waning number of annual acquisitions, the closure of final payouts, and reduced interest rates over time, the fund balance is projected to rebound quickly and significantly starting in the mid-to-late 2020s. Given the limited amount of remaining land eligible for preservation, the County should continue to use the fund to improve the ecological health of our agricultural land. There is precedent for using the ALPP Fund for other agricultural purposes besides acquisition, including support for the Howard Soil Conservation District and the Agricultural Business Development Program within the Howard County Economic Development Authority. ### The Future of ALPP There are approximately 86 properties totaling just over 3,300 acres that are potentially eligible for the ALPP. Additional recruitment efforts to preserve remaining uncommitted land may prove successful as properties transfer to new ownership. However, it is unlikely that recruitment will result in a significant amount of additional preserved land, since the ALPP is well known throughout the community, given its 40-year operational history in Howard County. PlanHoward 2030 recognized that uncommitted land was a diminishing resource and that, in addition to acquisition, the focus of the ALPP should shift to stewarding existing easements, and helping farmers confront challenges and embrace opportunities that they may face in the future. In the intervening years since the adoption of PlanHoward 2030, the ALPP has been active and successful in these endeavors. There have been 26 properties preserved, totaling 1,480 acres. As of this General Plan, two additional properties totaling 55 acres are in the acquisition pipeline. The ALPP established and implemented an easement stewardship program, whereby most properties received their first monitoring inspection in well over a decade. Monitoring helps determine whether the terms and conditions of each easement are being met, such as maintaining the agricultural suitability of the land. Lastly, ALPP staff continues to partner with the County's other agricultural agencies to provide financial incentives, technical assistance, and general support to the farming community as it grows and diversifies. *** ### EH-9 Policy Statement Continue to promote agricultural land preservation, recognizing that uncommitted land in the Rural West is a diminishing resource. #### Implementing Actions 1. Build on the successes of the Agricultural Land Preservation Program (ALPP) and continue acquiring land through the ALPP. 2. Continue to promote other land preservation options, such as the dedication of easements to the County through the subdivision process, the purchase of easements by the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation program, and the donation of easements to nonprofit land trusts. 3. Continue to implement the Agricultural Land Preservation Program easement stewardship activities to monitor compliance. 4. Evaluate strategies to identify, expand and preserve agricultural land uses within the Planned Service Area, to include a review of regulations specific to agricultural use and preservation. ### EH-10 Policy Statement Expand the scope of potential uses of the Agricultural Land Preservation Program Fund to support traditional agriculture and expand agribusiness opportunities for existing and future farmers. #### Implementing Actions 1. Work with various stakeholders to identify areas in which the fund can be most effective in supporting the overall health of agriculture land along with the overall industry and businesses, while ensuring continued funding of the ALPP. <
> # ENCOURAGING ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP The majority of land in the County is privately owned, so environmental stewardship on private property is critical to protecting and restoring natural resources. Healthy natural resources support ecosystems that will be better able to adapt to climate change. Stewardship actions can include reducing the use of pesticides and herbicides, installing rain gardens and rain barrels, planting native tree species (especially along streams and wetlands), and replacing lawn with native plants and pollinator gardens, and removing and refraining from planting non-native invasive plants. Public outreach and education are essential to raise awareness about the cumulative positive or negative impacts individual actions can have on the environment. Maryland schools are required to provide a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary environmental literacy instructional program for all students and this program must include opportunities for outdoor learning. Through a combination of efforts by government agencies, community and environmental organizations, business associations, and educational institutions, there is a wide variety of outreach and education programs available in the County for residential, commercial, and institutional property owners. Some programs may also include financial incentives or assistance, such as rebates, and planning and installation services. Where needed, these efforts should be expanded and new programs initiated to increase stewardship activities on private property. For example, a rising concern is the detrimental impact to local freshwater streams, lakes, and wetlands from the overuse of winter salt on roads, driveways, and parking lots. Education programs about the proper use of winter salt could help reduce this negative impact. The County can also continue to exemplify stewardship by incorporating environmentally sensitive site development and property management practices into county activities. County actions could include exceeding minimum Green Building requirements for county buildings; improving energy efficiency and expanding use of renewable energy in county operations; retrofitting stormwater management for county facilities; implementing demonstration projects to encourage their use by others; replacing lawn with native plantings and pollinator gardens; and increasing forested riparian buffers and tree canopy on public property. *** Surveys of biodiversity show the world's overall decline in species. What good is farmland if there are no pollinators for the crops? Contiguous open space and the ecosystem it supports is the only way to protect our food sources in the long run...Sustainability and food security mean preservation of our local farms and pollinators. - HoCo By Design process participant *** Bee City USA In 2019, the County Executive signed an Executive Order designating Howard County as a Bee City USA, committing the County to support and encourage healthy pollinator habitat creation and enhancement. This Executive Order notes that bees and other pollinators are responsible for reproduction in almost 90% of the world's flowering plants, including fruits and vegetables, but they have experienced population declines in the United States due to habitat loss, poor nutrition, pesticides, parasites, diseases, and climate change. Under this Executive Order, the County agreed to work with the Howard County Conservancy to enhance understanding among county staff and the public about the vital role that pollinators play and what each person can do to sustain them. Identified techniques include developing and implementing a program to create or enhance pollinator-friendly habitat on public and private land, and adopting an integrated pest management plan designed to prevent pest problems, reduce pesticide use, and expand the use of non-chemical pest management methods. ### EH-11 Policy Statement Encourage individual environmental stewardship in daily activities on private and public property. ### Implementing Actions 1. The County should continue to provide leadership by incorporating environmentally sensitive site development and property management practices on county properties. 2. Continue existing and expand current outreach programs to promote and assist private property owners with the implementation of stewardship practices. 3. Increase opportunities for student participation in environmental outreach and education and stewardship practices on school properties. ### EH-12 Policy Statement Commit to and support the County's designation as a Bee City USA. ### Implementing Actions 1. Integrate pollinator-friendly practices into county policies, programs, and capital projects. 2. Incorporate improvements to the County's pest management policies and practices as they relate to pollinator conservation. 3. Develop and implement a program to create and enhance pollinator-friendly habitat on public and private land. <
>