Developers looking to overhaul run-down commercial properties with housing will soon benefit from incentives for undertaking such projects in some parts of Anne Arundel County.

In a 4-3 vote along party lines, the Democratic majority on the Anne Arundel County Council passed a hotly contested bill Monday that eases restrictions on the redevelopment of commercial properties, so long as the builder includes housing.

County Executive Steuart Pittman advanced the legislation to address the county’s housing shortage and reduce blight. In a statement, the Democrat described the bill’s passage as a victory.

“It’s a win for residents who have long called for revitalization of areas where crumbling infrastructure, vacant commercial eyesores, and abandoned industrial sites exist,” Pittman said. “It’s a win for families and our essential workers who are priced out of our housing market and need more options close to jobs, schools, and transit.

“And it’s a win,” he continued, “for the environment because this bill directs growth to already developed areas, helping us preserve forests, fields, and waterways.”

Pittman’s administration originally tailored the bill to places identified as “critical corridors” in the county’s general development plan — areas that were already built up and close to public transit.

Under the legislation, which takes effect July 1, developers overhauling commercial properties in those corridors can take advantage of incentives for rebuilding with 22 residential units per acre, roughly a floor more of apartments than the county’s zoning already allows.

The prospect of more housing outraged residents in some communities. They raised concerns about traffic and school crowding.

Responding to those constituents, Republican Councilwomen Amanda Fiedler and Shannon Leadbetter sought and secured amendments to exempt applicable portions of their districts from the legislation. Their amendments mean the bill doesn’t apply to commercial properties on Route 2 in Severna Park and Edgewater and the Crofton area of Route 3.

Some questioned the motivations of those opposing the bill, saying they believed concerns about traffic and schools disguised racism and classism.

But to pass their amendments, Leadbetter and Fiedler needed at least one Democratic vote. Both got one from Councilman Pete Smith, the council’s only Black member.

In an interview after Monday’s vote, Smith said he was respecting Leadbetter and Fiedler’s responsiveness to the concerns of constituents who elected them.

“With any piece of legislation, we’re never going to get to a perfect answer right out the gate,” Smith told The Banner. “The good thing about legislation is we can always amend these things in the future once we see the effects of the current legislation. … I didn’t think it was inappropriate to allow the concerns of the council member whose in that district to have their say on when this thing would roll out in that area.”

A late amendment from County Councilwoman Allison Pickard, a Democrat, expanded the bill’s scope, providing the same incentives, like reduced fees and expedited review, to the redevelopment of commercial spaces anywhere in the county.

With Pickard’s amendment, which passed along party lines, the legislation says projects that fall outside of “critical corridors” have to be rebuilt with at least half of the space preserved as commercial and up to 15 housing units per acre.

By the time of Pickard’s amendment, Fiedler had exempted one “critical corridor” in her district, the area of Severna Park surrounding Route 2, but allowed the bill to apply to another one, the section of Severna Park around Veterans Highway.

Fiedler said she wanted to support the bill.

However, she said, Pickard’s amendment expanding it to allow residences in the county’s “most intensive commercial” zoning district — typically reserved for the likes of gas stations — risked the possibility of 200 or more residential units being erected on the Broadneck Peninsula. That area, she said, is “plagued with crippling traffic and an inability to get to and from communities for months in the peak of summer traffic.”

“There is no development proposal under review, but there could be in the future with the passage of this bill, and that is what concerns me,” Fiedler wrote to constituents Tuesday.

Before Pickard’s amendment, Leadbetter, who represents southern Anne Arundel, adjusted the bill to exclude her entire district from the bill. She nonetheless voted against it.

Leadbetter declined to comment, but in a Facebook post late Monday night she wrote that she was “concerned about the unintended consequences on our infrastructure, how those consequences could negatively impact the quality of life for all the citizens of Anne Arundel County and with the timing of this change.”

She noted that the county is doing comprehensive rezoning.

Pickard, a self proclaimed “huge proponent of redevelopment,” called the legislation’s passing a step in the right direction, despite areas being carved out. She said building in places where there’s already impervious surface, rather than in green spaces, was a priority in the county’s general development plan.

“It’s the right thing to do at the right time,” Pickard told The Baltimore Banner.

She described some of her colleagues’ apprehension about redevelopment as misplaced and premature.

“Redevelopment projects are still really hard,” Pickard said. “We’re not going to see projects popping up on every corner. This is a long-game situation. We’re setting the table for some good revitalization and redevelopment in some of our target areas. It’s going to take time.”