Rent increases in Silver Spring’s central business district are making affordable housing less affordable, one advocacy group claims.
According to Megan Moriarty, who compiled tenants’ tales for the nonprofit Impact Silver Spring, housing is considered affordable when rent and utilities hover below 30 percent of a household’s income.
For example, households that pull $50,000 a year could safely cough up $1,250 each month in rent and utilities, Moriarty writes. According to 2006 US Census data, the average Silver Spring household pulls $82,000 annually, with 27 percent of households hauling at least $100,000 a year.
However, more renters these days are exceeding that 30-percent threshold. In 2000, about 37 percent of Silver Spring’s tenants were topping the threshold. That number climbed to 47 percent of renters in 2005, states Moriarty.
Rent increases have also exceeded the county’s recommended 6-percent increase, Moriarty claims. One Falkland Chase tenant told Moriarty that rent on her $1,200-a-month one bedroom had increased by 7 percent in one year. At the Georgian Towers along Georgia Avenue, two roommates sharing a two-bedroom pad had their $1,700 monthly rent raised by 17 percent, they told Moriarty.
So how much are people paying each month to live in Silver Spring’s central business district?
According to Moriarty, tenants at Blair Towers along Eastern Avenue are dishing out at least $950 for studios, up to $1,400 for one bedroom, and up to $1,900 for two bedrooms. Those rates translate to fewer families and immigrants, and more roommates, Moriarty writes.
At the Falkland Chase complex, tenants can pay up to $1,400 for one bedroom, and almost $1,900 for two bedrooms, Moriarty reports. The apartment complex at 16th Street and East-West Highway recently inched closer to receiving historic designation, which would block construction of more than 1,000 new high-end apartments on the site.
Meanwhile, studios at the Georgian Towers are going for $1,100 a month. Tenants there can score one bedroom for up to $1,500, or two bedrooms for up to $1,900. However, parking costs an extra $80 per month, and tenants who park on the street complained to Moriarty about break-ins.
“Every year in our community, there are fewer safe, decent places that people can afford,” Moriarty writes. The result is a younger, whiter populace with fewer kids, she says.
“By not providing all residents with fair housing choices, are we losing what we value most in Silver Spring — our diversity?” Moriarty concludes.
Photo courtesy of Flickr user BDFranke.
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.
What does IHY think about this? Drum roll please…
At the risk of sounding completely non-PC, the thing I value the most in Silver Spring isn’t diversity. I like being in a multi-cultural neighborhood, but it’s not the primary reason I live here. I live here because it’s a relatively safe , pleasant area near the metro, good shopping center(s), and a synagogue. I can hardly blame a diverse group of people for wanting to live here because of those things, and I welcome them – but they didn’t cause me to move here.
Plus, this just seems like random whining without a real solution being given. You are going to lower rents in a more attractive area how? And this solution will be acceptable to current landowners why?
I’ll start… even with anything from IHY to get me going :-)
Having moved to a smaller apt in a cheaper building last year, I feel the pain too. But what exactlly are the proposed solutions? As any neighbornood becomes more desirable, market demand is going to increase the prices.. that’s simple economics. We can build more supply… which we are. Unfortunately that’s all becoming condos… but can we FORCE developers to build rentals? Of course not. Hopefully the current condo market is going to start doing that on it’s own with some of the newer buildings. We can provide more incentives for rentals… Allowing taller construction for developers that commit to their buildings being rental for at least some minimum number of years. But if silver spring becomes desirable enough, all the supply in the world won’t fix ALL the problems.
That being said… all the complexes cited here are the more expensive ones in town. You can get a 1 br in most of the southern management buildings (twin t., SS Towers, summit hills ) in the 1300 or less range, which is 30% of a 52000 salary, below which you begin qualifying for the various county subsidies (48k for a single person trying to qualify for MPDU’s I think it is). Would I prefer to have stayed in Georgian Towers, with 2 bedrooms and fancy hardwood floors.. of course – but I realized it was costing too much money, so we live in a 1br in twin with 10 year old carpets and a kitchen from the 70’s. That’s the way it goes. That’s economics. If we wanted a fancy apartment for the price, we could move out to some disconnected neighborhood in gaithersburg or something, but we prefer living downtown.
And I’m not saying the county shouldn’t do SOME things to try to combat the trend. I suggested a couple reasonable things above. But they can’t totally fight simple economics. You can’t subsidize housing for people making median income and above, which is sometimes what the folks yelling “the county has got to do something about this situation” seem to think.
The county needs to maintain a stock of affordable housing with income qualifications, and they need to do it in all neighborhoods to no neighborhood loses ALL diversity and no neighborhood becomes ALL low income. And they do this. But once those subsidies have provided for the less fortunate, the rest of us (and that means the upper 70% of us or so) are kinda stuck with economics. If we don’t like that, I hear China’s got lots of communist-subsidized dorm rooms attached to toy factories.
It just goes to show you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Besides, I doubt Silver Spring will ever lose it’s diversity. You guys make it sound as if a “diverse” population is incapable of making more money. If you’re worried about Silver Spring turning into Bethesda, keep in mind Bethesda was always more affluent than Silver Spring.
And by that, I mean they’ll balance each other out. Bethesda will keep Silver Spring a more open diverse place…maybe.
Those prices are what the market will bear for those who want to be in the center of a vibrant urban area so close to Washington, DC. And compared to DC, Bethesda, & Arlington, Silver Spring is a bargain.
If you go just a little bit outside the DTSS core, you can get apartments much cheaper (Wayne Ave, Long Branch, etc.). It just means that you can’t walk to the Metro Station and you have to take a quick bus ride to get there.
We cannot be all things to all people. Convenience has a price and unless we implement rent control (a disaster for DC) or massive tax incentives for developers, we will not see much of a dent in the “need” for affordable housing.
I completely disagree with the statement that higher rents reduce (implied) racial diversity. In the Washington area, there is tremendous racial diversity among those who can afford higher rents. There will be a reduction of economic diversity.
Sorry to sound cold-hearted but if people can’t afford the rent then they need to move. I agree with Paul, it is a matter of economics. As Silver Spring has undergone major re-development over the last several years, it has become more attractive for folks. The reason there are younger populace with fewer kids is because of all the new condos going up. Is this a bad thing? People also like to use the word “diversity” without any context. I would disagree with the statement that Silver Spring is losing its diversity. Silver Spring is becoming more diverse. There are more people from a diverse ethnic group than you had in the past. It’s not just whites, blacks and hispanics anymore. The income range of those individuals now living in Silver Spring is more diverse, albeit the mean income has probably gone up. There are more ethnic places to eat, more arts and entertainment venues that cater to a diverse crowd (AFI, Round House, Heliport, summer concerts in DTSS, Majestic movie theatre) including the soon-to-be-built music venue. How is
Silver Spring losing it’s diversity?
All, thanks for your comments. If you would like to see the full report, let me know. Obviously my compilation of stories is only one part of the discussion.
One of the other things IMPACT is doing about this issue is to talk to people about what they think about rental housing.
Come out to Highlands Coffee on Friday, from 2-6pm and share your thoughts in person.
“At the Falkland Chase complex, tenants can pay up to $1,400 for one bedroom, and almost $1,900 for two bedrooms, Moriarty reports….”
WAIT. I thought those who want ALL — not part, as an example, but ALL — of Falkland preserved were hailing it as “low-cost alternative.” This doesn’t sound like it is.
At any rate — I agree that a lot of this is just the economic reality of a neighborhood on the way back up. It’s not a conspiracy. However, I also understand there are folks who believe SS should not live under the same economic rules as the rest of the county, state our nation. Sorry, folks, it is a capitalist system. If you want to change that, you’re going to have to gain about 425 more seats in Congress than people who think like you currently hold.
I expect my Montgomery county elected officials to promote affordable housing close to metro stations like Silver Spring so that people with low and moderate incomes can manage not only their housing costs but their transportation costs.
The cost of owning, operating, and maintaining an automobile is the second largest expense for most households (second to housing) and it increases for low-income households who don’t qualify for automobile loans with low rates and for households that have to drive frequently and long distances. Living near transit and in communities with many destinatiions within walking distance provides an opportunity to drive less or even own one or no cars instead of two cars.
If low and moderate-income families are spending a disproportionate amounts of their budgets on rental housing and transportation, it is difficult for these households to invest in vehicles that build wealth and opportunity, like saving for a down payment on a home, or for their own or their kids’ education or their retirement.
The county can mitigate the rise in housing prices by promoting more dense development in and around the Silver Spring central business district to boost the supply of housing to meet the demand.
It is with this in mind that I have mixed feelings about the recent decision to recommend Historic Status for the parcel of Faulkland Chase that could be developed to a greater density. I admire the existing structure and its history and am wary of the added traffic that would be brought by the development, but on the other hand it seemed like a good opportunity to create more housing units close to metro and other convenient destinations and be part of the solution to the County’s affordable housing problem.
“The county can mitigate the rise in housing prices by promoting more dense development in and around the Silver Spring central business district to boost the supply of housing to meet the demand.”
That’s a lot easier said than done. The roads can only take a certain amount of traffic density, and unless you’re going to mandate “no car apartments”, that’s a show-stopper right there. The main roads at rush hour here are already horrific. Increase the density that much further, and you’re going to break them completely. Just ask the folks in NoVA how that’s working out for them. :)
Three comments:
1. To be more of an idealist, I’m troubled by the mindset that we are stuck with the economic system that we subscribe to. Where is the moral or ethical element of this conversation? Why do we have to let “simple economics” get the upper hand, especially when it will almost always favor the wealthier?
2. Paul mentioned that people can qualify for MPDU’s. But MPDU’s don’t solve all the problems because there is a very limited supply of them and an ever-increasing demand. Typically only 1 in 8 new units built is an MPDU, and last I checked, there are more than 1 in 8 people struggling to make ends meet.
3. Finally, Woodsider writes that this isn’t about racial diversity, but economic diversity. To be real, though, race and socioeconomic status are intertwined because of the nature of American history. Economics still favors whites. And whether you want diversity or not, I think we need to remember that the relationships we build in our community across socioeconomic and racial lines help us to pursue justice and prevent or mediate conflict better. That’s got to be good for something!
Three responses:
1. There’s no moral or ethical responsibility for me to fund people where-ever they want to live. There’s no reason poor people (let us not beat around the bush) need to live in Silver Spring versus, say, Langley Park or College Park (where I lived for a few years). You have ethical and moral standards – I respect that, but they’re not everyone’s.
2. Mass subsidized housing killed DTSS a couple decades ago by causing massive crime. It’s no surprise that when all the subsidized housing went away, and the county pumped some money into rebuilding, that the crime also went away. If you bring the poor with massive subsidized housing, you’re going to depress the area. That’s just how it always goes down – I’ve read about it in DC, and seen it in Baltimore.
3. I’m not sure it’s as true as it used to be – witness the flight of newly-affluent black families from PG County to MoCo and Howard County. But, in any case, as a libertarian, I don’t even believe in affirmative action, so I’m not going to really be agreeing with you on this. You de facto want more extensive AA, and I’m just not on-board with that. Sorry. :(
DMZ is right on with everything he/she said. Unfortunately this story is going to fuel the fire for people to cry about the “good old days” of Silver Spring. Remember that the “good old days” included open drug deals, far more crime and not much of a reason to live here. Let’s get real people. I’m all for diversity, but the real reasons people move here are its safety, the new downtown area having restaurants/entertainment and location to DC. Period.
I agree with DMZ. I believe that it is important for folks to have a roof over their head but since when is it a right for folks to live in a good neighborhood? Instead of trying to make the case for more affordable housing in Silver Spring, maybe the focus should be on trying to clean up those areas, such as Langley Park, so that people would also want to live there. Instead of the county subsidizing housing, maybe they should use the money to hire more cops to patrol the streets of Langley Park. Wouldn’t the quality of life be better for the people of Langley Park if this happened? Wouldn’t more people want to live in Langley Park?
I believe that there needs to be some serious, out-of-the box thinking done with respect to affordable housing. Putting up more subsidized housing is actually doing more harm than good.
The working class/poor do not necessarily have to live within walking distance of a metro rail station. Like I said in my prior post, there are thousands and thousands and thousands of rental units within a 10 minute bus ride of the five red line stations near Silver Spring. More affordable housing IS available, just not in the most choice location.
Downtown Silver Spring is prime real estate in a nice, up and coming area of Montgomery County, one of the most expensive areas to live in in the country. If you want to live in that central core, you have to pay for it, plain and simple. Most who do recognize that they could probably get a nicer place for cheaper if they lived farther away, but they are paying for location and that’s what they are getting.
I definitely think it is a nice notion that poorer and lower-class individuals that cannot afford a car should be able to live near a metro station. Well, there are plenty of metro stations with housing near them on the green, blue, and orange lines (Largo, Landover, New Carollton, Greenbelt, West Hyattsville, etc.) They may not be as glamorous as downtown Silver Spring, but heck, Silver Spring Metro property wasn’t that glamorous once-upon a time. Glenmont, on the outskirts of the red line, is also a cheaper area to live. Does that mean you might have to get up a bit earlier to get to work and endure a longer metro ride? Maybe, but them’s the breaks.
Convenience costs money. People who make more money and who want to live within walking distance of a metro stop that provides them a shorter trip to work and a more convenient way to go out for social activities in the DC area are going to pay for it. Building more residential space neear the metro doesn’t mean the space is going to be cheaper, because people have proven they are willing to pay the current rental prices, despite the higher than desired pricetag.
Well said, Easley.
I think IHY must be on vacation, or he knows better than to jump into a pool of “sharks” when he sees one :)
Editor’s note: Probably on vacation. I’ve never known Yuppie Hater to pass on the shark tank. — JD (Dec 14, 2007)
Hi, Easley. Many of the stations that you mentioned do not in fact have housing developments within a reasonable walk of the station. New Carrollton has a lot office space but little residential space immediately nearby. Greenbelt has Springhill Lake maybe 1/2-1 mile away, and zero development on site (to be corrected.) Silver Spring is the best of the bunch by a substantial margin and I am looking forward to coming on in in a couple of months.
There are affordable housing units near many of the Metro stations,
(See the HOC website below), and a large development coming on-line in Wheaton metro in 2008.
The problem is not lack of affordable housing, but allowing households to stay in affordable housing for a lifetime (heresy, I know). Give them 8 years to save money and then make room for someone else. Being “down on your luck” should not last forever. (And yes, the disabled would keep their vouchers.)
http://www.hocmc.org/Housing/Properties/properties.asp
Mostly in reply to Lianna…
Checking the 2000 census numbers, 1-in-8 lands us in the 25-35k income bracket in MoCo. Let’s split the difference and say 30k. Add 7 years of inflation, we’ll probably see come 2010 census it’s ~34k. I’m not claiming 34k is fun to live on. And I’m not saying that we should look at options for making life affordable for folks in that range. But I think subsidizing anymore than an 1/8th of the population’s housing costs, pushing into income brackets twice the poverty line, begins to defeat the purpose. If you ask developers to provide more than 1-in-8 MPDUs across the board, you’re going to see the prices for everyone else’s homes going up to make up the difference… as long as all the other developers are doing the same thing, which they will if forced to 2 in 8, it will make perfect economic sense, and hence will happen. Then yet one more income bracket will be making too much to qualify for an MPDU, yet too little to afford market rate condos. We already HAVE a few income brackets in that range, common sense economics says all we can do is move that dividing line around. I’m talking MPDU’s simply because the numbers are easier to talk to, but MoCo has similar rental subsidies with similar income requirements. Whether you agree with the merit of capitalist economics or not (and many would argue if we’re even entirely capitalist in MoCo) the desireability of a neighborhood WILL dictate a market value. To make that neighborhood viable to folks who can’t afford that market value you have a few options…
1) Subsidize… pull from tax dollars and flat out subsidize. This is done for some income brackets on rentals, sub prime loan guarantees, etc… In general I AGREE with most of MoCo’s quasi-socialist programs.. I think we’re doing good things in this county. But you can’t just keep taxing more and more until you’re subsidizing 50% of the population’s housing costs! Past a certain point, if you didn’t tax them so much you wouldn’t have to subsidize them. And I’m NOT saying we’re at that point yet, I’m saying that past a point it becomes circular – and without some restraint, we are well on our way there.
2) Make it a prerequisite for new development. This is done with MPDUs mostly (I don’t know of similar requirements for new rental buildings.. there hasn’t BEEN a new rental complex in MoCo in so long, anyones guess is as good as mine). This, thus far, has had a modest, but definately notable side effect on the market values of all the OTHER buyers. It has DEFINATELY created an income bracket that qualifies, a bracket that can afford market rates, and a group in the middle that has trouble staying in the neighborhood. We could expand this program, but it would only move around this middle group, not make a real difference.
3) We can try to push the supply and demand equation in favor of those folks in the middle from option 2. This is where MoCo has a real opportunity. This is where height restrictions stifle us. And in response to the person who complained about traffic… the other option is more development further up 29, where people are gauranteed to drive down colesville rd, rather than at least having the option of metro. I say put the new construction downtown where people have options. And make it tall.
I am latino first in my family to go to college and I am now able to afford a condo in Silver Spring. Not all of “us folks” are at the bottom of the economic ladder.
I have already beat, shot, drowned, and blown up this dead horse 100 times over.
Great comments by people…even by those whom I disagree with.
That’s all I got for now.
IHY: but… but you deprived all those new readers…
The dialogue here is very rich. I’m new to it, so I do not know IHY’s positions — clearly the stuff of e-legends …
I think return on investment is fine, provided the return relates well to the risk. Real estate goes up and down as we have seen here, so real estate investment deserves a good return. That gets more complicated when we include consideration about return on public investment — surely a good part of many housing deals.
I want to ask about the commercial environment and impacts there as well: These same pricing pressures are/will hit Silver Spring business owners (they own the business, not the location). Like many others, I treasure the diversity we have commercially. I am concerned that market affordability may also put some of the family owned businesses at risk that I like the most.
A rising tide (market) lifts all boats? Well, be certain to consider the “tide”. We now have direct competition between national franchises and “mom and pop” stores. Lots of public money invested in the central business district — has that been balanced outside that core? If you say yes, tell me how you measure. A the end of the day what is the balancing formula/process for fairness? It’s complicated, but that should not preclude an informed conversation and untimately well-informed action.
Or should we just wait and see who wins: Starbucks, Kefa, Highland and/or Majorga? (Apologies to non-coffee fans …)
AndyS: Never been to Majorga. Starbucks is soulsucking (and the coffee is weak). I’ve tried Highland 3 times and again, weak coffee. Kefa is my choice. I not only get a good cup of “fair trade” coffee, but I know that I will be greeted by the warm, smiles of Lene & Abiba, sisters who have “people skills” that are lost on todays service industry employees. Who wins? I would like to be more optimistic, but landlords outside of Ellsworth, are now asking Ellsworth size rent. All you can do is chose an indipendant, and give them your business, because the odds favor the chains.