Silver Spring Residents Object To Lyttonsville Redevelopment

SILVER SPRING, MD — An area of affordable housing in Silver Spring that serves minority residents would be wiped out, says one detractor, by a plan to build housing in the Lyttonsville area. One no vote was cast Tuesday as the Montgomery County Council approved the Greater Lyttonsville Sector Plan by an 8-1 margin.

The Greater Lyttonsville Sector Plan aims to expand, while simultaneously preserve, the small historic community located in western Silver Spring. The sector plan focuses on redevelopment of the historic Greater Lyttonsville, which was founded by a freed slave in 1853, but critics say the majority of the plan focuses on redevelopment in the African American area.

The predominately African American and Hispanic neighborhood of Lyttonsville currently has about 8,100 residents, according to the county planning board draft.

On paper the plan looks positive, but not all residents are excited about it. Patch spoke to Lyttonsville resident Abe Saffer, who's worked with activists to help residents tell the planning board and County Council their thoughts.

"Lyttonsville is a community that should be the pride of Montgomery County. However, year after year, it's been seen as a dumping ground for all public work projects that the county doesn't know where else to place them," Saffer said. " I worry that everything that makes Lyttonsville unique, the sense of community, will be devastated. Even if the community somehow is able to maintain its identity, it's obvious that we will continue to be overlooked."

Construction plans include building 3,749 multifamily units and 132 townhouses in the community to serve the two stops on MTA's planned light-rail Purple Line, the future 16-mile light rail route that will link Bethesda to New Carrollton. The Purple Line service will begin in 2020, according to the project website.

Plus, the plan focuses on enhancing the industrial district of Greater Lyttonsville and expanding the parks, trails and open spaces in Greater Lyttonsville by adding new greenways, sidewalks and bikeways to better connect the community to each other and the future Purple Line stations.

Saffer called the approval of the plan "shocking and upsetting." He said many residents submitted testimony or delivered it in person against the plan for massive increased density, yet the County Council sided with the development companies instead of the residents.

"For a county that describes itself as progressive, it is obvious that it doesn't look out for and protect communities full of people unable to mount a massive, time consuming, and expensive lobbying campaign," Saffer said.

Saffer told Patch his one of his biggest problems with the plan is that it separates Lyttonsville into two areas: the area near 16th Street containing the Summit Hills Apartment, and the Lyttonsville/Rosemary Hills area.

"In the other area of the plan, of the density proposed, the vast majority of the added density were placed in Lyttonsville, a majority minority community founded by a freed slave in 1853," Saffer said. "At the same time, the proposal called for the only change in the majority white community of Rosemary Hills to be the relocation of affordable housing to Lyttonsville."

Council member Marc Elrich was the lone dissenting vote against the adoption of the plan.

Elrich issued the following statement on why he voted against the Greater Lyttonsville Sector Plan:

"The Lyttonsville area offers a supply of two- and three-bedroom rental units—even some hard-to-find four-bedroom units—that meet the needs of low-income people who cannot afford rental rates in other parts of Montgomery County. As properties redevelop to the new densities allowed in the plan, we will lose a significant number of these units, with many of the larger units replaced with efficiency and one-bedroom units renting at much higher monthly rates."

Elrich believes the council shouldn't adopt a plan that diminishes the stock of affordable housing in the area.

"We protected naturally occurring affordable housing in Long Branch. We protected naturally occurring affordable housing in White Oak. We protected naturally occurring affordable housing in Glenmont," Elrich said. "There is no reason why we could not have done the same in Lyttonsville."

Photo: Tom Leonard/Flickr