MONTGOMERY

COUNTY RENTAL
HOUSING STUDY
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSESSMENT
June 2016

AGENDA

Model Neighborhood Presentation

Neighborhood Discussion
Timeline Discussion

Next Steps

WORK COMPLETED

Socioeconomic Analysis
Rental Housing Supply Analysis
Rental Housing Demand Analysis

Affordability Analysis
Model Neighborhood Assessment

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction
Goal of Assessment
Data Utilized
Glossary of Terms
Existing Conditions
Methodology and Approach
Results of Assessment
Next Steps

GOAL OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSESSMENT

Understand factors influencing preservation or

development of affordable rental housing at
neighborhood level
Identify needs and opportunities for preservation of or
introduction of new affordable rental units
Set foundation for development of policy
recommendations that support addressing needs and
opportunities for preservation and/or introduction of
new affordable rental units

DATA UTILIZED
Source
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
ESRI Business Analyst Online
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates

Description
Total Population
Total Households
Average Household Size
Average Family Size
Median Age
Age 65+
Median Household Income
Per Capita Income
Population Growth (2010-2014)
Median Gross Rent
Average Renter Income
Percentage of Renter Households
Cost Burden

Date
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2014
2014
2014
2014
2014

Data Provider
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates

Percentage of Multi-Family Rental Units

2014

APD Urban Planning and Management

DHCA Rental Single Family Units

Percentage of Single-Family Rental Units

2014

Montgomery County Department of Housing and Community

Affairs, Montgomery County

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; U.S. Census Bureau, Center for
Economic Studies Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamic
Montgomery County Planning Department
Montgomery County Planning Department
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates
Montgomery County Planning Department
Montgomery County Planning Department
APD Urban Planning and Management
Montgomery County Planning Department
Montgomery County Planning Department
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units

Job-Housing Balance
Proximity to Existing Public Transit
Proximity to Future Public Transit
Public Transit Commuters
Average Travel Time
Lack of Vehicle Availability
Limited Access to Transit
County Land Availability
Underutilized Parcels
Vacant Parcels
Public Amenities
Rental Units by Threshold

2014
2015
2015
2014
2014
2014
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2014

APD Urban Planning and Management

Montgomery County
Montgomery County
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
APD Urban Planning and Management
Montgomery County
Montgomery County
APD Urban Planning and Management
Montgomery County
Montgomery County
APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units

Rental Units by Type

2014

APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units

Rental Supply of Rental Units by Bedroom Size

Rental Supply of Rental Units by Income Threshold

2014
2014

APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units
U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year Estimates; DHCA Rental Single Family Units

Rental Demand of Rental Units by Income Threshold

Rental Demand of Rental Units by Household Size
Rental Affordability

2014
2014
2014

APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.
APD Urban Planning and Management; RKG Associates, Inc.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Affordability

The relationship between a households ability

to pay for housing and the cost of housing; also called
price appropriateness.

Character Area Typology

Defined geography displaying unique characteristics that

lend towards preservation of existing affordable rental
units or development of new affordable rental units.

Cost Burdened

Relationship between household income and

percent of that income being spent on housing HUD
defines cost burdened as spending more than 30% of gross
income.

Neighborhood

Geographically defined area with distinctive characteristics

METHODOLOGY AND
APPROACH

APPROACH

Define Define four Character Area

Typologies that represent unique rental
housing markets in Montgomery County
Identify Identify criteria (influences) that
make up a Character Area Typology
Select Select model neighborhoods that best
characterize the four Typologies
Analyze Analyze data for representative
neighborhood selected

Define
Identify
Select
Analyze

TYPOLOGY ASSESSMENT
DEFINE
IDENTIFY
SELECT
ANALYZE
10

DEFINE

CHARACTER AREA TYPOLOGIES

Future Purple Metro Line

Neighborhoods that are to be included in the

future Purple Line light rail transit system.

Existing Metro Line

Neighborhoods that have existing Metro Red

Line rail transit service.

Established Suburbs

Neighborhoods that have limited public

transportation (i.e., no metro line).

Concentration of Existing Rental Units Neighborhoods that have a high concentration

of affordable rentals.

11

12

13

14

15

INVESTMENT CRITERIA EXPLANATION

Criteria
Population Growth
Average Gross Rent

16

Rationale for selection

Population growth can be considered an indicator for the demand for both market rate and affordable rentals. A developer
would look at higher growth area as opposed to slow or no growth areas.
A developer would look at a median gross rent to determine profit potential. A higher return on investment may allow a
developer an opportunity to set aside a higher number of affordable units.

Average Renter Income A developer would look at median renter income to determine if an area can absorb affordable or market rate units.
Percentage of Renter
Households
Cost Burden
Percentage of MultiFamily Rental Units
Percentage of SingleFamily Rental Units
Jobs-Housing Balance
Proximity to Existing
Metro Red Line
Proximity to Future
Public Transit
Public Transit
Commuters
Average Travel Time

A developer would target areas with a high percentage of renters for new development.
High cost burdened areas suggest a need for affordable housing.
A developer would look at concentrations of rental units or housing to determine if an area demands rental housing.
Areas that have existing concentrations of non-owner occupied housing could be identified for affordable rental units.
Accessibility and proximity to employment is an important factor for households seeking affordable rental housing. Rents may
be lower the further you go into the suburbs, but higher transit costs can still make those areas more expensive places to live
for employed residents.
A developer would consider walkability as a consideration in developing affordable rental housing near the existing Metro Red
Line.
A developer would consider walkability as a consideration in developing affordable rental housing near the Future Purple Line.
Areas in Montgomery County that see a high usage of public transit can be helpful in identifying areas that demand affordable
housing.
Longer commute times may indicate a demand for affordable housing near job centers.

Lack of Vehicle
Households without vehicles is one of many indicators of lower income households.
Availability
Limited Access to
A renter seeking affordable housing would be more inclined to seek housing in communities that have transit options.
Transit
County Land
Availability of non park County owned land as an asset to delivering affordable housing projects.
Availability
Underutilized or Vacant A developer seeking to build new housing would search a community for underutilized parcels that have potential for higher
Parcels
density.
The presence of public amenities within the neighborhood (parks, schools, hospitals, libraries) is an important factor16when
Public Amenities
developing housing. Additionally, potential tenants would want to see these amenities near their homes.

INVESTMENT CRITERIA DEFINITION

Criteria
Population Growth
Average Gross Rent

Description
Population growth between Census 2010 and 5-Year ACS Estimates (2009-2014) within identified
geography
Average gross rent within identified geography

Average Renter Income

Percentage of Renter
Households
Cost Burden
Percentage of Multi-Family
Rental Units
Percentage of Single-Family
Rental Units

Average household income for rental households within identified geography

Jobs-Housing Balance

Number of all jobs per all housing units

Percentage of renter households residing in identified geography

Percentage of renter households paying more than 30% of household income for housing
Percentage of housing units in traditional rental properties (apartments) within identified
geography
Percentage of non-owner occupied single family rental units within identified geography

Proximity to Existing Metro

Identified geography within 1 mile of existing public transit (excluding MARC)
Red Line
Proximity to Future Public
Identified geography that is within 1 mile of future public transit (excluding MARC)
Transit
Public Transit Commuters
Percentage of commuters that travel on public transit within identified geography

Average Travel Time

Average commute time from identified geography to work

Lack of Vehicle Availability

Percentage of households without vehicles within identified geography

Limited Access to Transit

Availability of public transit greater than 1 mile from identified geography

County Land Availability

Underutilized or Vacant
Parcels
Public Amenities

Number of non park County owned parcels within identified geography

Estimated potential for new residential rental housing based on vacancy, lot size, age, transit score,
walkability score, potential FAR
Number of public amenities (schools, parks, libraries, hospitals) within identified geography
17

KEY TYPOLOGY FINDINGS

FUTURE PURPLE LINE
(LONG BRANCH)

Nearly half of renter households are

cost-burdened
Typically higher commute times to
work
Generally more underutilized parcels
near proposed transit stops

ESTABLISHED SUBURBS
(KENSINGTON)

Low percentage of renters, but high

percentage of cost burdened
households
Likely to have 3-bedroom unit
availability
Generally fewer underutilized parcels
(but larger acreage)

EXISTING METRO LINE

(NORTH BETHESDA)
High percentage of communters who
use public transit
Variety of rental unit types
Proximity to community amenities
Generally more underutilized parcels
near existing transit stops

CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING
RENTAL FACILITIES
(GERMANTOWN)

High number of commuters who use

public transit but low percentage
Variety of rental unit facilities
High percentage of single family rental
units
Proximity to community amenities
18

NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSESSMENT
FUTURE PURPLE LINE LONG BRANCH
EXISTING METRO LINE NORTH BETHESDA
ESTABLISHED SUBURB KENSINGTON
CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL HOUSING - GERMANTOWN

19

LONG BRANCH
(FUTURE PURPLE METRO LINE)

20

2015 NEIGHBORHOOD SNAPSHOT

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
Total Population: 11,265
Total Households: 3,945
Average Household Size: 2.77
Average Family Size: 3.37
Median Age: 33 years old
Age 65+: 7.25%

Median Household Income:

$56,366
Per Capita Income: $27,225

21
Source: ESRI, 2015

TYPOLOGY CRITERIA REVIEW

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
Typology Criteria
Long Branch
County
Population Growth (2010-2014)
1.01%
3.43%
Average Gross Rent
$1,187
$1,611
Average Renter Income
$53,088
$60,276
Percentage of Renter Households
66.22%
33.36%
Cost Burden
46.76%
51.54%
Percentage of Multi-Family Rental Units
96.46%
79.53%
Percentage of Single-Family Rental Units
3.39%
13.30%
Jobs-Housing Balance
0.7
1.30
Proximity to Existing Metro Red Line
No
N/A
Proximity to Future Public Transit
Yes
N/A
Public Transit Commuters
25.76%
15.50%
Average Travel Time
40.08 min
34.40 min
Lack of Vehicle Availability
25.17%
17.48%
Limited Access to Transit
Yes
N/A
County Land Availability
11
N/A
Underutilized Parcels
15 (19.48 acres)
N/A
Vacant Parcels
32 (5.82 acres)
N/A
Public Amenities
17
1,079
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

22

RENTAL TYPOLOGY
LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
RENTAL UNITS BY THRESHOLD

Extremely Low (30%) Income Limits

Very Low (50%) Income Limits
Low (80%) Income Limits
100% AMI
120% AMI
Above 120% AMI
Total

Income
Threshold
$28,900
$48,150
$61,650
$96,300
$115,560
N/A

Rent
Threshold Total
$723
$1,204
$1,541
$2,408
$2,889
N/A

Supply
99
1,700
630
111
24

Share of
Total
3.9%
66.1%
24.5%
4.3%
0.9%

0.2%

2,570

100.0%

23
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY - BEDROOM SIZE

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)

24
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY RENTAL UNITS

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
Under 30% of AMI
3.9%
Above 120% AMI
0.2%
100% to 120% of AMI
0.9%
80% to 100% of
AMI
4.3%

30% to 50% of AMI

66.1%

50% to 80% of AMI

24.5%

Under 30% of AMI

30% to 50% of AMI

50% to 80% of AMI

80% to 100% of AMI

100% to 120% of AMI

Above 120% AMI

25

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND RENTAL UNITS

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
100% to 120% of AMI
3.88%

Above 120% AMI

10.51%
Under 30% of AMI
30.64%

80% to 100% of AMI

22.69%

50% to 80% of AMI

11.23%

30% to 50% of AMI

21.05%

Under 30% of AMI

30% to 50% of AMI

50% to 80% of AMI

80% to 100% of AMI

100% to 120% of AMI

Above 120% AMI

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

26

RENTAL DEMAND HOUSEHOLD SIZE

LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)

1-person household
28.8%

7-person household
3.8%

2-person household
26.4%

6-person household
2.7%
5-person household
7.9%
4-person household
9.4%

1-person household
4-person household
7-person household

3-person household
21.1%

2-person household
5-person household

3-person household
6-person household

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

27

RENTAL AFFORDABILITY
LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
Surplus of Units at:
Very Low Income (50%)
Low Income (80%)
Shortage of Units at:
Extremely Low Income (30%)
Median Income (100%)
Moderate Income (120%)
Above Moderate Income
(Above 120%)

28
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

KEY FINDINGS
LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
50% of rental units are 1-2 bedroom units but generally are not affordable to
renter households earning below 50% AMI
Older housing units observed to not be well maintained
Most rental units are located on or near main thoroughfares (Piney Branch,
around Houston Avenue, and on or near Flower Avenue and Greenwood
Avenue)
Vacant lots are typically small, and are often being used as side lots by
current residents (single family detached) in southeastern part of
neighborhood
Commercial properties tend to be one story, suburban scale
Underutilized parcels located primarily on Piney Branch

29

CONSIDERATIONS
LONG BRANCH (FUTURE PURPLE LINE)
Densities do not match market opportunity
Need for more 3+ bedroom units
Shortage of units for households at or above 100% AMI
Preservation of garden-style or small multi-family apartments may be more
financially feasible
37% of rental units are small multi-family apartments (5-8 unit buildings)
29% of rental units are garden apartments
Public private partnerships for TOD redevelopment could boost affordability
25% of renters do not have vehicles
Targeted infill development (accessory dwellings)
Small vacant parcels scattered throughout neighborhood

30

NORTH BETHESDA
(EXISTING METRO LINE)

31

2015 NEIGHBORHOOD SNAPSHOT

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
Total Population: 9,118
Total Households: 4,949
Average Household Size: 1.71
Average Family Size: 2.48

Median Age: 41 years old

Age 65+: 22.59%
Median Household Income:
$82,317

Per Capita Income: $64,071

32
Source: ESRI, 2015

TYPOLOGY CRITERIA REVIEW

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
Typology Criteria
Population Growth (2010-2014)
Average Gross Rent
Average Renter Income
Percentage of Renter Households
Cost Burden
Percentage of Multi-Family Rental Units
Percentage of Single-Family Rental Units
Jobs-Housing Balance
Proximity to Existing Metro Red Line
Proximity to Future Public Transit
Public Transit Commuters
Average Travel Time
Lack of Vehicle Availability
Limited Access to Transit
County Land Availability
Underutilized Parcels
Vacant Parcels
Public Amenities

North Bethesda County

10.23%
3.43%
$1,792
$1,611
$77,782
$60,276
61.60%
33.36%
44.12%
51.54%
82.98%
79.53%
1.86%
13.30%
3.47
1.30
Yes
N/A
No
N/A
30.69%
15.50%
33.90 min 34.40 min
18.31%
17.48%
Yes
N/A
31
N/A
25 (90.08 acres)
N/A
9 (16.82 acres)
N/A
1
1,079

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

33

RENTAL TYPOLOGY
NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
RENTAL UNITS BY THRESHOLD

Extremely Low (30%) Income Limits

Very Low (50%) Income Limits
Low (80%) Income Limits
100% AMI
120% AMI
Above 120% AMI
Total

Income
Threshold Rent Threshold Total
$28,900
$723
$48,150
$1,204
$61,650
$1,541
$96,300
$2,408
$115,560
$2,889
N/A

N/A

Supply Share of
108
233
592
1,872
404

Total
2.7%
5.9%
15.0%
47.5%
10.3%

729

18.5%

3,938

100.0%

34
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY - BEDROOM SIZE

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)

35
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY RENTAL UNITS

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)

30% to 50% of AMI

5.9%
50% to 80% of AMI
15.0%

Under 30% of AMI

2.7%

80% to 100% of AMI

47.5%

Above 120% AMI

18.5%
100% to 120% of AMI
10.3%

Under 30% of AMI

30% to 50% of AMI

50% to 80% of AMI

80% to 100% of AMI

100% to 120% of AMI

Above 120% AMI

36

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND RENTAL UNITS

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)

37
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND HOUSEHOLD SIZE

NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
7-person household
0.00%
6-person household
0.00%

1-person household
45.94%

5-person household
0.52%
4-person household
4.48%
3-person household
17.57%

2-person household
31.50%

1-person household

2-person household

3-person household

5-person household

6-person household

7-person household

4-person household
38

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL AFFORDABILITY
NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
Surplus of Units at:
Low Income (80%)
Median Income (100%)
Moderate Income (120%)
Shortage of Units at:
Extremely Low Income (30%)
Very Low Income (50%)
Above Moderate Income
(Above 120%)

39
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

KEY FINDINGS
NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
High costs have kept households at or below 30% AMI from securing price
appropriate housing
63% of existing rental housing affordable to households between 50-100%
AMI; however these units are generally occupied by households with
incomes at or greater than 120% AMI

Vacant parcels are opportunity for new high density rental development
(i.e. Citadel and Marinelli; near Montrose and Hoya)
Recent/pending developments will continue to reshape the market
Phase I of Pike and Rose has been completed; currently in Phase II
Office building on Montrose and Hoya

40

CONSIDERATIONS
NORTH BETHESDA (EXISTING METRO LINE)
Commercial corridor redevelopment mixed use potential
Availability of underutilized parcels adjacent to or within 1 mile of Metro
line either redeveloped or proposed redevelopment
Focus MPDU requirements for fewer units, but highly subsidized
44% of renters are cost burdened even though 90% of renters have
household incomes at or above 80% AMI
Take advantage of transportation infrastructure
Creation of receiving area for off-site programming if appropriate, and if
so, where should this go?

41

KENSINGTON
(ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

42

2015 NEIGHBORHOOD SNAPSHOT

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)
Total Population: 4,651
Total Households: 1,917
Average Household Size: 2.42
Average Family Size: 3.15
Median Age: 44 years old

Age 65+: 18.92%

Median Household Income: $84,695
Per Capita Income: $48,508

43
Source: ESRI, 2015

TYPOLOGY CRITERIA REVIEW

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)
Typology Criteria
Population Growth (2010-2014)
Average Gross Rent
Average Renter Income
Percentage of Renters
Cost Burden
Percentage of Multi-Family Rental Units
Percentage of Single-Family Rental Units
Jobs-Housing Balance
Proximity to Existing Metro Red Line
Proximity to Future Public Transit
Public Transit Commuters
Average Travel Time
Lack of Vehicle Availability
Limited Access to Transit
County Land Availability
Underutilized Parcels
Vacant Parcels
Public Amenities

Kensington
County
-4.68%
3.43%
$1,213
$1,611
$47,838
$60,276
32.59%
33.36%
45.63%
51.54%
80.25%
79.53%
19.75%
13.30%
2.60
1.30
No
N/A
No
N/A
13.15%
15.50%
34.07 min 34.40 min
37.43%
17.48%
Yes
N/A
25
N/A
7 (16.66 acres)
N/A
46 (6.75 acres)
N/A
17
1,079
44

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL TYPOLOGY
KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)
RENTAL UNITS BY THRESHOLD

Extremely Low (30%) Income Limits

Very Low (50%) Income Limits
Low (80%) Income Limits
100% AMI
120% AMI
Above 120% AMI
Total

Income
Threshold
$28,900
$48,150
$61,650
$96,300
$115,560
N/A

Rent
Threshold Total
$723
$1,204
$1,541
$2,408
$2,889
N/A

Supply
3
163
188
132
20
44

Share of
Total
0.5%
29.6%
34.2%
24.0%
3.6%
8.0%

550

100.0%

45
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY - BEDROOM SIZE

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

46
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY RENTAL UNITS

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

47
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND RENTAL UNITS

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

48
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND HOUSEHOLD SIZE

KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

49
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL AFFORDABILITY
KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)
Surplus of Units at:
Very Low Income (50%)
Low Income (80%)
Median Income (100%)
Shortage of Units at:
Extremely Low Income (30%)
Moderate Income (120%)
Above Moderate Income
(Above 120%)

50
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

KEY FINDINGS
KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)

Commercial sites in Kensington tend to be one story, partially vacant

Nearly all underutilized parcels are located on the main corridors in the
neighborhood, also along the rail line
Industrial businesses are located within the neighborhood due to their
historical proximity to the railroad
Two vacant commercial properties available for development at key
intersections (Connecticut and Plyers Mill)
20% of rental housing is single family units, yet more than 40% of renters are
one person households
Nearly 65% of rental housing is affordable for households between 30-80%
AMI, but not enough available units for households at or below 30% AMI
Indication of single family conversions were evident by for-rent signs in the
neighborhood.
New residential units appear to be out of scale with existing community
51

CONSIDERATIONS
KENSINGTON (ESTABLISHED SUBURB)
Development character an important issue
Restrict low density rentals to underutilized/vacant parcels near core of
neighborhood
Provide more flexibility for development along major corridors
Rental Assistance Program to make neighborhood more accessible
46% of renters are cost burdened
Credit counseling program for income qualifying households
Infill Development on low density rental communities to capture family
market
20% of rental units are single family rentals; less than 5% of rentals are
3+ bedrooms
Renovation of older housing stock necessary to address aging in place
30% of renters are 65 or older

52

GERMANTOWN
(CONCENTRATION OF
RENTAL UNITS)

53

CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
Total Population: 30,862
Total Households: 11,850
Average Household Size: 2.60
Average Family Size: 3.23
Median Age: 33 years old
Age 65+: 6.26%
Median Household Income:
$76,565
Per Capita Income: $34,724

54
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

TYPOLOGY CRITERIA REVIEW

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
Typology Criteria
Population Growth (2010-2014)
Average Gross Rent
Average Renter Income
Percentage of Renter Households
Cost Burden
Percentage of Multi-Family Rental Units
Percentage of Single-Family Rental Units
Jobs-Housing Balance
Proximity to Existing Metro Red Line
Proximity to Future Public Transit
Public Transit Commuters
Average Travel Time
Lack of Vehicle Availability
Limited Access to Transit
County Land Availability
Underutilized Parcels
Vacant Parcels
Public Amenities

Germantown
County
3.49%
3.43%
$1,553
$1,611
$62,698
$60,276
46.44%
33.36%
51.40%
51.54%
81.29%
79.53%
12.61%
13.30%
1.39
1.30
No
N/A
No
N/A
10.59%
15.50%
41.37 min
34.40 min
11.15%
17.48%
Yes
N/A
115
N/A
4 (38.53 acres)
N/A
60 (232.25 acres)
N/A
14
1,079

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

55

RENTAL TYPOLOGY
GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
RENTAL UNITS BY THRESHOLD

Extremely Low (30%) Income Limits

Very Low (50%) Income Limits
Low (80%) Income Limits
100% AMI
120% AMI
Above 120% AMI

Total

Income
Threshold
$28,900
$48,150
$61,650
$96,300
$115,560
N/A

Rent
Threshold Total
$723
$1,204
$1,541
$2,408
$2,889
N/A

Supply
239
1,114
3,260
2,861
98

Share of
Total
3.1%
14.6%
42.8%
37.6%
1.3%

46

0.6%

7,618

100.0%

56
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY - BEDROOM SIZE

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)

57
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL SUPPLY RENTAL UNITS

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
Above 120%
AMI
0.6%
100% to 120%
of AMI
1.3%

Under 30% of AMI

3.1%

30% to 50% of AMI

14.6%
50% to 80% of AMI
42.8%

80% to 100% of AMI

37.6%

Under 30% of AMI

30% to 50% of AMI

50% to 80% of AMI

80% to 100% of AMI

100% to 120% of AMI

Above 120% AMI

58

Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND RENTAL UNITS

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)

59
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL DEMAND HOUSEHOLD SIZE

GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)

60
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

RENTAL AFFORDABILITY
GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
Surplus of Units at:
Very Low Income (50%)
Low Income (80%)
Median Income (100%)
Shortage of Units at:
Extremely Low Income (30%)
Moderate Income (120%)
Above Moderate Income
(Above 120%)

61
Sources: APD Urban Planning and Management LLC, 2015; Montgomery County, 2015; RKG Associates, 2015; ESRI, 2015; U.S. Census 2010; 2010-2014 ACS 5-Year Estimates

KEY FINDINGS
GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)

New senior housing in development (Churchill Senior Living Facility Phase II)
Recent/planned development will continue to affect the rental market
Century Technology Campus (office space)
Infrastructure completed for Black Hill Development (mixed use development)

Pricing structure of rental units does not match renters ability to pay
Value alternative rather than destination location

Need for rental units for households at or below 30% AMI and at or above
100% AMI is almost the same
Scale of delivery should not be equal, though

62

CONSIDERATIONS
GERMANTOWN (CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING RENTAL UNITS)
Colocation on publicly held land (i.e. emergency services)
Limited access/proximity to community amenities
Access to existing public transportation/services critical
Limited MARC service available
No Metro rail lines
Potential for employer-based housing programs
Several large employers are located in or within a mile of Germantown
neighborhood
Fewer MPDU units with deeper subsidies
51% of renters are cost burdened
Vacant industrial parcels could be rezoned as medium density for potential
redevelopment

63

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD
SUMMARY

64

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY

Households by Tenure
Model Neighborhoods
100%
90%

33.36%

36.29%

80%

50.84%

All Households

70%

66.22%

61.60%

60%
50%
40%

66.64%

63.71%

30%

49.16%
20%

33.78%

38.40%

10%
0%
Long Branch

North Bethesda

Owner Occupied

Kensington

Germantown

County

Renter Occupied
65

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY

Rental Units by Type

Model Neighborhoods
100%

3.5%

90%

16.9%

19.7%

18.7%

20.8%

83.1%

80.3%

81.3%

79.2%

North Bethesda

Kensington

Germantown

County

80%

All Rental Units

70%
60%
50%

96.5%

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Long Branch

Multifamily

Conversion
66

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY

Rental Units by Bedroom Count

Model Neighborhoods
100%

1.0%

0.2%

3.4%

10.9%

90%
80%

22.1%
25.8%
41.9%

39.5%

32.1%

70%

All Rental Units

3.2%

60%

50.7%

50%
40%
30%

34.4%

31.5%

36.4%

46.2%

20%

39.5%

10%

22.7%

20.7%

North Bethesda

Kensington

27.0%

10.9%
0%
Long Branch

3+ Bedrooms

2-Bedrooms

1-Bedroom

Germantown

County

Efficiency
67

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY

Average Travel Time to Work (in Minutes)

Model Neighborhoods
44

42

Minutes

40

38

36

41.37
40.08

34

32

33.90

34.07

North Bethesda

Kensington

34.40

30
Long Branch

Germantown

County

68

MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY

Commuter Mode of Transportation

Model Neighborhoods
100%

10.6%

9.6%

90%
80%

5.0%

12.6%

10.6%
15.5%

13.1%
25.8%

8.9%

30.7%

All Workers

70%
60%
50%

84.4%

40%
30%

75.6%

74.3%
63.7%

59.7%

20%
10%
0%
Long Branch

North Bethesda

Personal Vehicle

Kensington

Public Transit

Germantown

County

Other
69

DISCUSSION
Q &A

70

NEXT STEPS

Policy analysis (CHP) Late July

Financial feasibility model (RKG) Late August

Draft strategy presentation/discussion Late September
Policy refinement Mid November
Strategy completion Year end

71

THANK YOU

72

VAC ANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS

73

COUNTY OWNED LAND

74

VAC ANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS

75

COUNTY OWNED LAND

76

VAC ANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS

77

COUNTY OWNED LAND

78

VAC ANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS

79

COUNTY OWNED LAND

80