​​The Smart Development Struggle: Residents Fight Against Ingrained Insensitivity  

 

The goal of smart and sustainable development is littered with an array of obstacles that are difficult to recognize and challenging to overcome. As a Fort Washington, Maryland resident it is clear the County Executive’s office and some members of the County Council have aligned to fast-track certain types of development and limit public engagement in the process. In 2020, the Prince George’s County Council voted 11-0 to exempt data centers from property taxes depending on how many new jobs they brought to the county. In 2021 the County Council voted 11-0 to allow developers of qualified data centers by-right zoning in various places, while also exempting data centers from different stages of land use review. In 2024, the County Executive’s office sponsored bill CB-52 that attempted to limit citizen’s ability to participate in the development process, while exempting developers from even more land use reviews that require proof of impact on street design, environment, stormwater management, open space, etc. The bill was supported by some members of the County Council, not all. Fortunately, community organizations caught it in time and forced a tabling of the bill. The justification used by the County Executive and County Council for all of these actions is the need to attract increased tax revenue.  

 

I respect all opinions regarding the pros and cons of data centers and logistics warehouses. They are a necessity in our world today. Emphasizing the need to increase tax revenue, however, seems counter intuitive considering steps were taken to exempt data centers from paying property tax revenue. Moreover, removing steps in the permitting process to fast-track projects creates the potential for dangerous outcomes to quality of life. Furthermore, limiting citizen’s participation in the discussion of these large-scale developments is deceitful and callous. Advocating against these efforts is exhausting and irritating, and it is sad to see some officials so willing to obstruct resident participation in the development of their own communities.  

 

Ingrained Insensitivity and Collusion Against Residents Become The Norm

​

It is also clear that strategic efforts from the highest levels of government to fast-track projects and block citizen participation, can create conscious or subconscious collusion by those around them. The logistics warehouse development along Livingston Road reflects this problem. The property in question sits in an area recommended to be part of a pedestrian-centric village center by the County’s own Master Plan. Yet, the zoning in the area allows for some industrial properties. This conflict was identified by the County’s Planning Department itself during the initial planning board hearing. The District Council, however, who is the body designed to deconflict Master Plan/zoning issues, sat on the sidelines and watched it unfold. Delaying proceedings would have been messy and maybe even litigious, but clarifying and correcting an obvious conflict would have been best even if the result was not what citizen's preferred. Instead, officials deferred to zoning rights, and approved a project featuring a questionable traffic study, environmental concerns, and obvious road infrastructure problems. They also signaled to future developers that Master Plans do not really matter. 

 

Fort Washington Forward recommended a Reconsideration Hearing after discovering flawed traffic generation data, and additional environmental concerns. During opening statements, however, a Planning Board Commissioner recommended the hearing not proceed for fear of setting the precedent that citizens could hold up decisions just because they were not happy with the original outcome. The commissioner also suggested the Planning Department determine whether a reconsideration should be held, despite regulations that state it is the Planning Board’s responsibility. When the highest levels of government normalize the exclusion of its citizens, it creates the perception that residents have little to offer, and can lead officials like the commissioner in this case to consciously or subconsciously assume citizens couldn’t possibly have legitimate points to make. His impulsive statement cast aspersions on the case before it even began, and no doubt influenced other commissioners who eventually denied the reconsideration request. 

 

Some Suggestions Moving Forward

​

Residents must realize that unless there’s a coalescence of citizen advocacy, officials are more likely to allow the momentum of a project to occur regardless of its impact on the community in question. 

 

1. Community organizations should form coalitions. Consider working together to create voting report cards so fellow citizens know who is voting for what.

​

2. Establish members of the community to find out which bills are being authored and explain them to the community in advance. Citizens cannot rely on elected officials to explain bills to them, especially those that are potentially controversial. Citizens have to know the bills in advance and then show up to voice opinions on them. This is excruciatingly difficult, considering it often means taking time away from work. Still, it must be attempted. Important bills sometimes get passed with little or no public input. 

 

3. Citizens should resist the social conditioning that urges them to “talk to your elected official” to solve every problem. This could become a crutch. Officials and local businesses have their own agendas, and it is naive for citizens to believe those agendas always align.  

 

4. Communities have to create their own funding sources. Money is required to file lawsuits and procure other ancillary services such as traffic studies. Development traffic studies submitted at planning boards come from developer consultants, and are essentially educated guesses based on flimsy, flawed data sources. Citizens have to be willing to pay for their own to combat this flawed practice. 

 

Make no mistake, there are passionate officials willing to stop bad policy, but they are sometimes outnumbered. Good luck citizens. 

 

David Owens is Planning and Development Unit Leader for Fort Washington Forward, a non-profit in Prince George’s County, Maryland, a suburb of Washington, D.C. Fort Washington Forward leverages placemaking to attract resources that enhance smart and sustainable development.