After reviewing Howard Hughes Corp.'s presentation to the Howard County Council about an "alternative" plan for affordable housing in downtown Columbia,I feel compelled to agree with observations from the article. That article noted "Council members and housing advocates pointed out that five of the six sites where Howard Hughes is proposing new, tax-credit-funded affordable housing are owned by the county or another business. They also noted that building units financed by Section 8 vouchers would require limiting affordable housing elsewhere in Howard, as the county receives only a limited pot of money from the federal government to allocate to low income projects."
Also, Howard Hughes' slides are incorrect, in that there is no new "project-based Section 8" available (unless it is transferred from elsewhere).
My vote is to stick with the inclusionary zoning requirement the Full Spectrum Housing Coalition came up with originally. The Howard Hughes proposal is a lot of "smoke and mirrors" and complex enough to try to fool the Council into thinking Howard Hughes is actually trying to do something about the lack of affordable housing in downtown, when they are not.
Stephen Sprecher
Columbia