Today, The Penguin drops the first slice of a three-part interview with county council member Valerie Ervin (D). The District 5 rep spoke with Penguin editor Jennifer Deseo over a plate of Mandalay’s htamin gyaw (fried rice) earlier this summer.
Q. Let’s start with a softball question. What’s the state of affairs in Montgomery County these days?
A. I think the county is in a struggle for its identity now. This was a very affluent bedroom community of people who worked the District, who worked for the federal government or big corporations. People just took the Red Line out to Silver Spring and called it a day.
Q. And now?
A. The majority of the people who live here work here [in the county].
Q. That would explain the traffic. Freakin’ development!
A. The traffic that we have in Montgomery County is not caused by development. It’s because we have a regional economy.
So many people who work in Montgomery County live outside [in Frederick or Hagerstown, for example]. You see traffic coming in from PG County, and it’s all traveling west, through us, into Virginia or into Montgomery County.
If we stop building anything right now, we’d still have traffic.
Q. So how do you explain that to other county council members? I mean, most of those people represent suburban and rural areas. They don’t know urban problems from jack squat.
A. The only way to understand it is to be in it.
The neighborhoods in Kensington, their concerns are very different from the neighborhoods in Silver Spring. We’re right here on the edge of the District. We have very different issues from the issues in Langley Park and the International Corridor.
Q. Some people just don’t get it.
A. It makes some people uncomfortable, because it’s really hard for some people to see the county the way that the county will ultimately look. All one has to do is look at Silver Spring.
Q. I don’t get it.
A. It is going to be more of an urban county, especially as we spend the money that’s necessary for transit projects. Smart growth is ultimately about building more density around Metro. That’s what’s gonna change the nature of the downtown Silver Spring and South Silver Spring area.
So many more people are moving here from the District. Young people who want to use mass transit, who want to walk, who want to be at the center of things. The challenge for us is to focus on the number of people under 30 or 40 who call Silver Spring home.
Q. Holler! But what about those Silver Spring neighborhoods that want to keep that suburban groove going?
A. At some point, those neighborhoods are going to have to reconcile the fact that things are changing, and that they are going to hopefully work this out. As development gets closer to them, we [can] make the transition so that it doesn’t impact in a negative way on the existing neighborhood.
Q. Uh, have you been to East Silver Spring lately?
A. What you’re seeing in East Silver Spring is a lot of families, many of them who have seen all these changes. Many bought their homes a long time ago. They probably have a lot of equity in their homes. Many have probably paid their loans off.
They bought into a quiet, suburban neighborhood. I don’t fault them. That’s what I bought into. But all the existing neighborhoods are going to be a challenge for developers because they don’t like the cut-through traffic.
Developers understand that if there’s no neighborhood buy-in, their projects are not going to get approved. The smarter developers work closely with the neighborhood, and they figure out ways to mitigate certain things, try to work with the neighborhood.
There are lots of things that can be done to help neighborhoods coexist in this new environment.
Q. What about people who live in Woodside and Woodside Park? They’re dealing with mixed-use development on Georgia Avenue at Spring Street.
A. Silver Place is going to be a very cool project if done correctly — for affordable housing, for Park and Planning’s new headquarters building. There’s going to be a lot of public amenities in that space.
We ‘re working with those neighbors. We hope that as we’re working through all these details with the community, we’d be able to agree upon every step of the way.
But these plans are so far from being solidified. The developers are very open to hearing from the neighbors and adjusting plans. This is the only way we’re going to make it.
Q. But is the county jamming development down people’s throats?
A. I don’t believe the county wants to be in a position where they’re putting something onto a community.
That’s why it takes so long to get something built. Developers have to go through so many approvals in the process. You can’t put a shovel in the ground on a project before a lot of years go by.
The smart ones take their time. They go to people’s homes. They go to civic meetings. It’s got to be very careful, very deliberate.
I see that as the case, for the most part.
Read 
What the hell are they building now? Learn more from 
Boxed wines and rosés are back in vogue. Just ask The Penguin's sommeliers.
Concerning Silver Place, I haven’t heard any opposition in Woodside Park to the idea of developing the M-NCPPC parking lot, which is across Spring Street from our neighborhood. But we are very concerned that it be done right and in a way that is compatible with the residential nature of the neighborhood across Spring Street as well as in a way that meets the M-NCPPC’s needs. That means, among other things, a reasonable height for the new residential buildings along Spring so they don’t tower over their cross-the-street neighbors. It also means a reasonable setback from the sidewalk and street so there is a little green space, not just a wall of buildings. It also means attractive architecture. The new residential buildings along the east side Georgia Avenue at Veirs Mill in Wheaton are an example of what is NOT wanted. Also there needs to be a way for pedestrians to get through the development across from Woodland Drive to preserve the current pedestrian path to downtown Silver Spring.
There is also a lot of concern that the M-NCPPC is both the customer and the approving entity for this project. This inherent conflict of interest is very troubling. So far we haven’t seen the degree of public participation in this project that will be needed to overcome the conflict of interest problem Valerie Ervin says “The developers are very open to hearing from the neighbors and adjusting plans.” I hope that proves to be true in the long run. We haven’t seen it yet.
Bob,
While I hear your concerns… talking about height restrictions and setbacks within half a mile of a inner city subway stop is ridiculous. I realize it probably wasn’t a concern when you bought, but metro has been there for 40 years now, it’s not like this is coming out of nowhere that your neighborhood was going to change. You live in an urban center, with all of its conviniences, shopping, dining, transportation, etc… I’m sorry that woodside wants to have it’s cake and eat it too, but that’s just not the way the world works – you need to give up some of your suburban luxeries for those conviniences. Density promotes smart sustainable living, it promotes greater pedestrian traffic which decreases crime, and the list of benefits goes on. There is a severe housing supply and demand problem in downtown SS and if we place suburban density restrictions on an urban community, it will suffer. All you need to do is look at the flat sprawling patches of unpopulated business district in DC to see the effects.
“paul_silver_spring” may be unaware that the Silver Spring Central Business District (CBD) is geographically the largest CBD in Montgomery County. It contains within its boundaries considerable underdeveloped land. There is no need for commercial or high density residential development to encroach in the existing stable residential areas that surround the CBD. The only possible reason for developers to try to do so is to maximize their profits and make more money than they would by developing within the CBD itself where land values may reflect the permitted heights and densities. So by all means continue to develop downtown Silver Spring with more housing. Just put the highest densities where it belongs within the center of the CBD and reserve the edges for lower density development.
Woodside Park residents would generally be satisfied with townhouse development along the south side of Spring Street that is similar to the townhouses along Second Street just north of Colesville Road — diagonally across from the Metro station. These are large townhouses but they are set slightly back from the sidewalk and the architectural design is fairly good. If that type of design and moderate density is appropriate across from the Metro Station, then certainly greater height and density is not appropriate on the very edge of the CBD across from an established residential neighborhood. Zoning and planning in Montgomery County have always upheld a step down in density from the highest in the middle of a CBD to a transition to lower heights and densities at the edge of the CBD. That principle should continue to be upheld by the M-NCPPC in building their own project.
Unfortunately (for you at leasst) we live in a free market society (sort of)… “Woodside Park residents would generally be satisfied with townhouse development along the south side of Spring Street that is similar to the townhouses along Second Street just north of Colesville Road” … And two of those townhouses that SHOULD sell for 400 tops are currently on the market for almost 3/4 of a million. Downtown SS has a severe housing supply & demand problem and your cited development is a perfect example of it – thank you for the reference. Personally, I don’t think downtown SS needs any more 3/4-million dollar residences that most people can’t afford to buy. Putting up any more townhouses in the central business district is not just economically unsound, it would perpetuate an already looming affordable housing crisis. And if that means that urban environment across the street from you is.. i dunno.. actually urban – then sorry, but that’s life. As I said before the huge benefits of living within walking distance to a CITY SUBWAY also come with some downsides (or things that suburbanites would see as downsides at least) and one of those downsides is an urban environment. The county govenment has desided that downtown SS is going to be urban and dense. And more importantly than that, free enterprise economics and thus the greater population as a whole has decided that that is going to be the case. I really don’t think the amount of underdeveloped land in the CBD is a valid argument for underutilizing more of it.
And, might I add this… The CBD is 360 acres (.5625 sq miles). You’ll note the perimeter is a distance of 3.75 miles (http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=1237047). Let’s say the average block size in downtown is 0.1 miles (really, most are a little longer). You’re proposing that one side of each block around the perimeter not be developed to the full potential of CBD zoning. That’s a distance of 0.05 miles, around a perimeter of 3.75 miles gives you an area of .1875 sq miles. Assuming, you’re worried about EVERYONE’s backyard bordering the CBD and not just yours, you’re saying that a full third of the CBD might just as well never been zoned CBD in the first place. Which leaves .. a handful of tall buildings, not a central business district.
Check the zoning in the CBD. The highest allowed densities and heights are near the center. The CBD zoning allows only lower heights and densities at the edges. I’m not proposing a change to make it any more restrictive than it already is.
And, by the way, you say that it is fortunate that we have a free market society and say that is unfortunate for those living in the surrounding single family and townhouse residential areas. Presumably you think it is fortunate for supporters of more moderate or low income housing in the CBD. Be careful what you wish for. You say: “Personally, I don’t think downtown SS needs any more 3/4-million dollar residences that most people can’t afford to buy.” That’s your personal preference, but not the free market’s preference. If we operated solely on the free market, expensive housing probably the only thing you’d get in downtown Silver Spring. It is more profitable for developers to build for the high-income market. That’s why we have to force builders to include MPDU units in their projects. So if you really want an unregulated free market, then the market would set the price for housing and those who couldn’t afford to live in Silver Spring without some sort of non-purely-free-market (subsidized) program would have to go elsewhere. If on the other hand, you don’t want a totally free market but instead want regulations to force moderate and lower income housing, that is a legitimate viewpoint, and one I agree with to a point, but not to the exclusion of all other values, such as protecting the existing housing stock in the surrounding neighborhoods. Fortunately the abundance of under-developed land within the CBD allows us to both support more moderate and low income housing in the CBD and preserve the surrounding neighborhoods by not violating existing planning and zoning principles for lower heights and densities along the edges of the CBD.