Planning department analysis shows 29,000 approved but unbuilt units; staff proposes permit‑ready bucket and policy tools

Montgomery Planning presented a summer analysis of the county's development "pipeline" and told the Planning, Housing and Parks Committee that not all approved projects are equally likely to be built. Staff proposed new public categories and policy concepts to better track and accelerate housing delivery.

The analysis found that the pipeline initially contained about 278 approved projects accounting for just under 30,000 unbuilt housing units. Staff focused a deeper review on 88 projects with more than 10 unbuilt units that together represented over 99% of the units then in the pipeline. A developer survey and follow‑up interviews informed staff conclusions about barriers to advancing projects.

Why it matters: the county and council have set housing production goals. Committee members and planning staff said clearer reporting and targeted policy tools are necessary to avoid over‑relying on headline pipeline counts that include early approvals with low near‑term probability of construction.

Key data and staff proposals - Total pipeline (January baseline): roughly 278 projects, ~29,500 unbuilt units (includes fully and partially unbuilt projects). - Focus sample: 88 projects (those with >10 unbuilt units) account for over 99% of the units in the sample. - Permit‑ready subset: staff estimated about 14,700 unbuilt units across roughly 110 projects meet criteria to move next into permitting; staff emphasized these numbers were preliminary and subject to quality control.

Staff described their methods: the pipeline database adds projects after Planning Board preliminary plan approval, tracks approvals and expiration dates, and is updated three times a year. For this analysis, staff surveyed developers and interviewed respondents to learn why projects slowed or stalled.

Survey/interview findings: developers representing over half the 88‑project sample responded to the survey; staff completed follow‑up interviews with 14 projects. Interviews and the survey showed the pipeline is "cautious": while many projects are technically active, only a subset are proceeding at pace. Frequently cited impediments were financing and feasibility gaps (rising construction costs and interest rates), local policy concerns (some interviewees cited rent stabilization as a capital‑market deterrent), and long local review timelines. Developers also noted multi‑phase projects carry uncertainty for later phases.

Staff emphasized interpretation cautions: a preliminary plan approval establishes an upper limit for permitted units but site‑level design and engineering often reduce buildable unit counts. Staff also noted that some long‑standing, large multi‑phase projects may remain on the pipeline for decades while actively building phases.

Proposed improvements and policy concepts - Present two public buckets: "overall entitlement pipeline" (projects with Planning Board approvals) and a narrower "permit‑ready" subset (projects with approvals enabling permitting to start). - Publish a new interactive dashboard with age‑coloring, map‑linked project popups and summary statistics; include project status (for example, under construction) and links to plan documents. - Repeat the developer outreach periodically and improve data sources: coordinate with permitting data, internal regulatory checkpoints, and aerial imagery to verify build‑outs. - Operational and policy tools under consideration: streamline regulatory steps from approvals to use permits, consider shorter validity periods tied to incentives, expand expedited reviews for eligible projects, evaluate permitting bottlenecks with the Department of Permitting Services, create a Development Approval Specialist at Planning to help projects "get unstuck," and consider targeted financial incentives or impact‑fee adjustments in coordination with the county's infrastructure funding work group.

Committee reaction and next steps: council members praised the analysis as a helpful diagnostic, asked staff to present raw survey instruments and to coordinate with DPS and other agencies before the next session, and requested comparative build‑out figures from peer jurisdictions. Planning staff said it will return with a more fully developed set of policy recommendations and an updated dashboard in October and will refine the data and analyses prior to publication.

"The pipeline is one of the most realistic ways that we can help meet our housing goals this decade," Lisa Gavoni, planning supervisor, said in the presentation, but she and colleagues warned the pipeline should not be the sole metric for future housing expectations.