Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council workshop lays out draft zoning direction to encourage ‘missing‑middle’ housing and mixed‑use growth on Montgomery Avenue
Summary
At a workshop, council reviewed draft zoning goals for the 4A and 5B districts focused on encouraging smaller multifamily 'missing‑middle' housing near downtown and keeping ground‑floor commercial on Montgomery Avenue; staff and commissioners discussed timeline and county assistance for affordable‑housing monitoring.
Council members used Thursday’s workshop to walk through a draft policy framework that would direct future zoning changes for two key districts: 4A (transition area near downtown and the train station) and 5B (Montgomery Avenue commercial corridor).
The draft reaffirms support for mixed‑use, walkable development on Montgomery Avenue while also signaling a desire to broaden housing choices in 4A — emphasizing smaller multifamily types such as cottages, townhouses, and “stacked” townhomes as alternatives to new large‑footprint single‑family houses that council members said have appeared recently.
Council discussed several specific directions for staff and the planning commission: allowing a wider range of missing‑middle housing types in 4A, regulating or placing size limits on large new single‑family footprints, keeping apartment/condo buildings generally to three stories, and exploring a “stacked townhouse” form that could be four stories but would be designed to read as smaller residential units rather than a single monolithic block. Council members also proposed offering dimensional flexibility in exchange for on‑site affordable units or meeting the borough’s green‑building standard.
County staff and council members said Montgomery County is prepared to help with income‑verification and ongoing compliance if the borough adopts an affordable‑housing bonus program; council asked staff to confirm that county support will be available when the ordinance is adopted. Planning‑commission review, county input, and the municipal code review process were discussed as necessary next steps. Staff said realistic earliest adoption, given drafting, MCPC review, a 30‑day advertisement period and public hearings, would be September if schedules align.
Council members repeatedly emphasized process points: prioritize clear, administrable zoning standards; avoid introducing unnecessary uncertainty that deters builders; and develop renderings or massing exhibits to illustrate how the new forms (cottages, stacked townhomes, four‑story mixed‑use on Montgomery where appropriate) would appear in context. Several council members said they prefer missing‑middle options that fit the borough’s walkable, fine‑grained character over larger apartment towers in residential districts.
What’s next: staff will ask the planning consultant and MCPC to draft ordinance language and massing exhibits, bring those drafts to planning commission and council, and run small‑group sessions with council members to refine priorities before public hearings and formal adoption procedures.
