Rockville Planning Commission postpones vote on next Chair

Planning Commission Chair
Don Hadley said he is ready to
turn the gavel over

The Rockville Planning Commission declined to vote on who its next Chair will be last night. Commissioners were undecided as to who wanted to take on the responsibility, and wanted the two absent members to have a say in the decision. That decision will now come in January.

Commissioner Jack Leiderman was next in line under the traditional criteria, but declined the Chair position when asked by his colleagues. Leiderman cited his often-outspoken opinions, and the fact that his term is winding down with no guarantee of reappointment, as reasons for declining the chairmanship.

David Hill, a longtime commissioner who has served as Chair in the past, said he felt he would continue to be most effective without the title of Chair, as it frees him up to fully engage in the discussion and make motions on planning items. Commissioner John Tyner, another veteran who has chaired the body, said he would be willing to do it again if necessary. All agreed they would prefer if one of the newer members of the Commission would take the Chair position. Commissioner Anne Goodman declined for personal reasons. Commissioners Charles Littlefield (who was floated as a potential chair by several commissioners) and Gail Sherman were not at the meeting.

Current Chair Don Hadley said it would be a negative for the institution of the commission for him to serve in that role beyond this month. He said the commission is best-served if the leadership chair doesn't become too closely associated with one person. Hadley asked Hill to lead an offline discussion to attempt to reach a consensus on who is interested in the seat. At the commission's January meeting, members will have to either vote at the outset of the meeting, or appoint a pro-tempore chair to get through the meeting agenda that night. Then a discussion and vote can be held later in the evening.

As the commissioners prepared to adjourn, they were stunned to hear of the departure of Senior Assistant City Attorney Marcy Waxman. Waxman said she appreciated the opportunity to work with the Commission over the past several years, and would miss them personally and professionally. She noted she had been working for the City on a temporary basis since August.

Waxman did not mention what her next career move would be, but her LinkedIn page says she is now a Real Estate Agent and Attorney with RE/MAX Realty Group. The commissioners expressed their gratitude for her service. Waxman said she will be succeeded at the Commission by two new attorneys hired by the City.

Rockville Planning Commission approves Avalon Bay project, mulls new tools to control school overcrowding

A development project delayed repeatedly over the last decade had yet another scare last night before the Rockville Planning Commission. But Avalon Bay's Twinbrook Station apartment site plan ultimately gained approval, before the end of another epic Planning Commission meeting - a meeting that began last night at 7:00 PM, and ended early this morning.

Avalon Bay has proposed building a 55' high, 238-unit apartment building at 12720 Twinbrook Parkway. There will be 24 studios, 115 1-bedrooms, and 99 2-bedroom units, and a 351-space parking garage. Thirty units will be set aside as affordable housing. Amenities promised include a swimming pool, fitness center and club room. Despite the Twinbrook Parkway address, the main driveway access will be off of Ardennes Avenue.

The project site is less than a quarter mile from the Twinbrook Metro station. Ranging from only 3-4 stories despite that transit-oriented location, the project had to also balance its proximity to the single-family home neighborhood directly adjacent to it. Commissioners - including Jack Leiderman, who cast the only dissenting vote against the plan - praised the applicant for its restraint on height and density.

View of rooftop deck at
future Avalon Bay Twinbrook
apartments, including
outdoor grill station

Concerns mostly centered on its impact on schools, including Twinbrook Elementary; traffic circulation; and public safety.

The school question caused the commission to briefly jump ahead to a discussion of what school capacity data it should consider related to projects, which had originally been confined to a later agenda item. Leiderman argued strongly that - despite this year's decision by the City Council to allow more overcrowding, by weakening Rockville's Adequate Public Facilities Standards on school capacity - the Planning Commission retains significant oversight authority and responsibility to ensure adequate classroom space.

“I do have one concern here that has to do with schools," Leiderman said of the Avalon Bay project. "Twinbrook Elementary is struggling with being over-capacity. The APFS standard, per se, when we go to the finding that we would make…the standard number three about the adequate public facilities standard…that does not preempt a municipal planning commission from taking into account what’s going on at a local school near the site."

While Avalon Bay's projected student impact "may not trigger an automatic moratorium, I would contend that the planning commission still” has authority to consider the capacity of schools in that cluster, Leiderman suggested. He recalled that Councilmembers Tom Moore and Virginia Onley, in voting for the APFS change, "made the point that nothing in the APFS change restricts the planning commission from evaluating [school capacity] on a case-by-case basis. I take that to heart [in considering] the general welfare finding. I’m not equipped with enough data to make a finding."

“We suggested that that’s not appropriate,” planning staff liaison Andrew Gunning said of why staff was not furnishing all of the numbers Leiderman and others have requested. Because the city has adopted a new standard, it should stick to that in measuring impacts of developments, Gunning argued. “To look at two different sets of measurements…would be really confusing and introduces a lot of, just, confusion,” Gunning said.

Leiderman replied that detailed data is necessary for the commission to holistically consider whether or not there are adequate public facilities to permit approval of a particular application. As it stands, “I don’t have the information I would need as a commissioner to do due diligence to make a finding,” Leiderman said.

Commissioner John Tyner disagreed. “We are bound by what current law is. That is what staff has based their recommendations on,” Tyner said.

But the "legislative intent behind [the current law] was that the commission still uses its judgement," Leiderman said. “If site plans were simply based on numbers, we wouldn’t need commissioners. [Considering school capacity] is still in our purview.”

Avalon Bay's attorney, Barbara Sears, objected to the late discussion of new school-capacity criteria. "I believe in the rule of law," Sears said regarding the new APFS revision. "I know you’re disspointed it was adopted, but the city has adopted" a lower standard.

Commission chair Don Hadley agreed with Sears in principle, suggesting that Avalon Bay - as the first applicant to come before the commission under the new standards - shouldn't be penalized for that random fact. He concurred with the idea of the commission discussing new tools it could utilize to fulfill the responsibilities Leiderman suggested were within its authority over schools. But, Hadley said, "this is not the project" to have that discussion around.

With school concerns off the table, there were not any issues that threatened to derail the project.

Regarding traffic, some commissioners were concerned that the Ardennes access would have a negative impact on streets like Halpine Road. Katie Mencarini of the Rockville Department of Public Works said that traffic studies showed the Avalon Bay development would actually generate less vehicle trips than the previous office use.

Leiderman, in discussing the lack of rear driveway access for firetrucks, segued into a discussion of a catastrophic fire at another Avalon Bay development in New Jersey. That fire left 1020 residents homeless, and is the subject of ongoing litigation and investigation by authorities, Leiderman noted.

Avalon Bay's Martin Howle acknowledged the January blaze at its Avalon at Edgewater apartments was "clearly a tragedy." New Jersey fire officials blamed that five-alarm inferno partly on the building's "lightweight wood construction," according to NJ.com.

But, Howle asserted, "the building actually performed the way it was supposed to," allowing occupants to escape. He said Avalon Bay has hired safety officers since the fire, and promised their Twinbrook project would have an "upgraded fire suppression system," beyond what current regulations require of developers. "We take these issues very seriously," Howle assured commissioners.

Commissioner David Hill questioned if there would be sufficient parking, were the 2-bedroom unit tenants to have more than 1 car. Sears said the parking-to-units ratio at Twinbrook would be 1.5, higher than the 1.2 average among other Avalon Bay properties. Hill also expressed concern over the lack of employment in the all-residential project. Sears replied that the primary motivation for the 100% residential proposal was that "the community didn't want to see retail in there." She noted that there are many jobs available within short walking distance of the site, most notably at the Department of Health and Human Services site.

Tyner moved to approve the site plan. His motion was seconded by Commissioner Anne Goodman. Commissioners approved the project by a 6-1 vote, with Leiderman dissenting.

The commission held a short discussion of the APFS staff report, but decided to postpone an in-depth conversation due to the early morning hour. Leiderman mentioned that courts have ruled schools are a local concern, meaning that the city could write laws regarding them, even if it doesn’t directly control them. He also suggested there needs to be an adequate public facilities element in the citywide Master Plan the commission is currently working on.

Renderings courtesy Avalon Bay and
SK+I Architecture
All rights reserved

Rockville Planning Commission grants schools waiver to hotel converting to senior housing

The Rockville Planning Commission granted a schools waiver from the city's Adequate Public Facilities Standards to the Quality Suites hotel that is converting into senior housing. Located at 1380 Piccard Drive, the 219-room hotel will become a 203-unit senior housing development. No exterior changes are planned for the building.

Commissioner Charles Littlefield expressed concern that the development, while limited to seniors, would impact the city's most overcrowded school, College Gardens ES, if it somehow ever generated any students. Erica Leatham of Ballard Spahr, LLP, the applicant's attorney, said that the only residents under 62 who could live in the building would be caregivers.

One related question to that was, what if sneaky parents try to use the former hotel's address to enroll their kids at College Gardens? Commissioner Jack Leiderman asked if the city could communicate to Montgomery County Public Schools that anyone applying from the address of 1380 Piccard Drive should be rejected by the school system. Staff Liaison Andrew Gunning affirmed that could be done.

Littlefield asked if the applicant intended to operate the housing once it opens. Leatham said it does for the immediate future, but added that it is impossible to speculate about a future transaction a decade down the road.

Commissioner David Hill questioned the demand for senior housing at that location. Leatham said that her own parents had recently applied to the Ingleside senior residence at King Farm, and were told it would be a 5-6 year wait. "There's clearly a pent-up demand," she said. Commissioner Anne Goodman noted that a friend of hers was accepted at Ingleside in only 7 months. Leatham jokingly said she would have to take that up that apparent discrepancy with Ingleside.

Thoughts on the hotel's current parking lot were mixed. Hill felt the opportunity exists to reduce parking in favor of more green space around the building. But Leiderman said that would not be advisable. It turns out there are only 216 parking spaces for the 203 units. That could easily be filled if only 13 residents had two cars. And that does not begin to include parking for caregivers and visitors. If anything, it appears parking would be at a premium.

"I don’t see a lot of seniors who are going to give up driving to live out by 270," Leiderman said, citing the poor access to rapid transit at the site alongside Interstate 270.

Otherwise, commissioners were in agreement on the main points of the waiver request Wednesday night. They voted unanimously to approve the waiver, which required a supermajority for approval. The motion was made by Commissioner John Tyner, and seconded by Goodman.

ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION SENDS MEMO ON APFS SCHOOL STANDARDS TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

Ahead of a February 2 discussion and February 9 vote by Rockville's Mayor and Council on the proposed changes to school capacity standards in the city's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, the Rockville Planning Commission approved a memo expressing its opinion on the matter. The opinion is advisory to the Mayor and Council, separate from the actual legislation that will be voted upon on February 9. The memo was approved at Wednesday night's meeting.

In discussing the memo's final draft, prepared by Commissioners Charles Littlefield and Anne Goodman, some changes were suggested. Goodman and Commissioner Jack Leiderman agreed that a line proposing the city fully adopt the Montgomery County APFS, if the school standards were changed, should be eliminated. Leiderman said it would be preferable for the Mayor and Council to make changes in that event, rather than require automatic adoption of the County policy in whole.

Chair Don Hadley informed his colleagues that a pending Maryland court case could require delay of the city requesting an "authoritative interpretation" from the state's Attorney General's office on whether the Mayor and Council indeed have the authority to change the APFS. He said an Anne Arundel County case pending before the State Court of Appeals will determine if a jurisdiction can "have laws passed by the legislative body that are inconsistent with the Master Plan."

The case will involve the legal standing of a citizens association to challenge something inconsistent with a Master Plan. And how "inconsistent" is defined, Hadley said.

Hadley advised that requesting an opinion from Attorney General Brian Frosh be put on hold until the court rules in the Anne Arundel case, or else "we'd be asking the AG to get ahead of the court." He suggested the Attorney General could then issue an opinion. Hadley noted that the Attorney General's brief in the case reflects his office's Fall 2014 opinion that has raised the question of whether or not the Mayor and Council have the power to change school standards.

Commissioner John Tyner questioned if Commissioner David Hill's previous concern that the school changes might be unconstitutional should be written in authoritative language, or by stating the commission believes there is a chance it might be. Tyner suggested "may well be unconstitutional" for the language. The commission's "resident expert", Commissioner Dion Trahan, said that the argument wouldn't "hold water," in his professional opinion. Trahan holds a graduate degree in Constitutional law. No clear final language was stated aloud on that point.

Hill moved that the document be adopted and transmitted to the Mayor and Council by today. The memo was unanimously approved by the commission.

ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDS NO COMPELLING NEED TO CHANGE APFS SCHOOL STANDARDS

The Rockville Planning Commission voted unanimously last night to oppose proposed changes in the city's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance regarding school capacity standards. Some on the city council are in favor of replacing the current school standards with those used by Montgomery County. The changes would include averaging school populations over a cluster, rather than measuring overcrowding at each individual school, as the current Rockville standard does.

Commission Chair Don Hadley reiterated his previous remarks that the recent legal opinion handed down by Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler suggests the Mayor and Council lack the authority to change the APFS school standards. Hadley said they and the commission "need to find out what the rules of the road are," before changing the standards. Commissioner John Tyner said the recommendations of the city's APFO Committee a couple of years back - to implement no changes to the Rockville school standards - were forwarded by the Planning Commission to the Mayor and Council. "My opinion has not changed on that," he added.

There was a sense among some commissioners that something fishy is going on, and that the proposed changes are being pushed behind the scenes for an unstated purpose. "I'm fearful something non-transparent is going on that should be made transparent," Commissioner David Hill said. Commissioner Jack Leiderman said the demand for changes is certainly not coming from the city's residents. "Whenever there has been a proposal to weaken the APFO, this room has been filled to capacity" with citizens opposing the change, Leiderman noted. He said the January 5 date for the APFO public hearing - during holiday vacations - appeared to have been "frankly, chosen to minimize" public input.

Hill said he welcomed a "vibrant public debate" on school standards, but agreed that January 5 was not particularly conducive to having one. He reiterated Tyner's point that the commission had already spoken to the school matter by forwarding the committee report to the Mayor and Council. "I am not ready to change" school standards, Hill said. He said other jurisdictions in the state have used Rockville's 2005 APFO standards as a model, and therefore, the authority issue is very appropriate for Gansler to address at this juncture. Commissioner Anne Goodman concurred that the city should get a legal opinion from Gansler before acting on the APFS. "We have a legal uncertainty," Hadley said. "It leaves us in a very tenuous position."

Leiderman suggested the commission go on the public record regarding the controversial January 5 public hearing, and send a formal letter to the Mayor and Council. Hill said he agreed "it's the Planning Commission's place to make a recommendation."

Hill prepared language for a commission resolution that would reiterate the body's support of the 2012 APFO committee recommendations. He said they should emphasize to the Mayor and Council that those recommendations were "the product of a citizen committee that spent many hours" studying the complex issues related to adequate public facilities. Leiderman argued the commission should add one element missing from the committee recommendations, namely, to affirm that 110% of capacity is the maximum allowable in a particular school. He also said that passing the proposed changes would not be a mere alteration of regulations, but a de facto repeal of the APFO - an act that would require a text amendment. Leiderman warned that the county has even considered raising its weaker standard to a higher level of acceptable overcrowding - which would leave Rockville's schools well over the 120% county standard.

Ultimately, the commissioners came to a unanimous recommendation that the Mayor and Council should not change school standards at this time. 

Meanwhile, former mayor Larry Giammo posted a second article on his blog regarding the APFO controversy. Giammo was mayor when the city passed the original ordinance, which several commissioners argued last night is clearly working to prevent further school overcrowding. This latest post is devoted to debunking the stated rationales for loosening school standards in Rockville.

ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR TO COUNCIL: EXPECT PIKE PLAN IN JUNE

The rewrite of the master plan for Rockville Pike could be sent to the Mayor and Council in June, Rockville Planning Commission Chair Don Hadley said Monday night. Hadley had been summoned before the council at the behest of members concerned that the Pike Plan process was taking too long. He submitted a written summary of the issues at hand, and highlighted some of the primary challenges in his remarks to the Mayor and Council.

Hadley noted that the consultants hired by the city to develop a Pike Plan concept had 4 years to complete their work. Translating those conceptual goals into a real-world plan is far more complicated, he said. "Structurally, the Pike Plan actually had two parts," Hadley argued: a policy part, and a practical side. That required the commission to convert policy goals into "technically proficient and enforceable law," Hadley said, "not arbitrary, [but] well supportable" city code.

"Hot topics," such as building height, naturally take time to work out among the "democratization of ideas" on the 7-member commission, Hadley said. The deliberative process among commissioners - who don't necessarily agree on all matters - has "been healthy for us," he said. Technical issues not addressed in the consultants' plan have forced the commission to take extra time, as well. Hadley pointed out that the consultants' plan did not include the massive bus rapid transit line in the center of the Pike, now being pushed on the city by the Montgomery County Council. How to balance the demands for safe bike routes, local bus service, and street parking for merchants, has been a major challenge, Hadley reported. And the current demand for surface parking and big box stores on the Pike doesn't line up with the new urbanist goals of the consultants, he explained. It has fallen to the commission to resolve these inconsistencies, Hadley said.

Most significantly, Hadley said, the consultants' plan ultimately did not reflect Rockville's values. He referred to a panel hosted by former commission chair Jerry Callistein at a city summit, which sought to determine the city's values. "Neighborhood-oriented, family-friendly small-town people," was the panel's final definition of the city's character, Hadley recalled; "that’s been our guiding influence.”

Hadley said that the incompatible nature of the policy goals and today's reality (walkable, mixed use development vs. the existing, popular commercial area along the Pike) would probably demand a reassessment of the plan's specifics and performance every two years. He also sought to assure elected officials that the delays were not political in nature. There "really aren't any politics" on the commission, Hadley said. "I wouldn’t want [the Pike Plan] to come to you with any sense that it has a particular axe to grind," he concluded.

Mayor Bridget Newton and the council briefly responded to Hadley's presentation and letter Monday night. “I thought your letter was very instructive,” Newton said. "We’re delighted to hear that it’s coming in June," said Councilmember Tom Moore, who had expressed concern over the delays.

Planning commissioners Anne Goodman, Jack Leiderman and John Tyner were present at the meeting.

ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION NOMINEES SKEPTICAL OF ROCKVILLE PIKE PLAN

A very significant item on the agenda of tonight's Rockville Mayor and Council meeting (7:00 PM at City Hall) is the appointment of two citizens to vacant seats on the Rockville Planning Commission. Those who fill the seats could well determine the outcome of the Rockville Pike Plan, and the future of the city's APFO.

Mayor Phyllis Marcuccio, who has been critical of plans to promote urban density in suburban Rockville,  has had mixed success with her previous appointments. While Marcuccio has had the opportunity to completely shift what has, in recent decades, been a pro-development body, there is still not a solid majority in opposition to the Pike Plan.

If one were to place bets on the 5 sitting members' potential Pike Plan votes, well, that would be difficult.

Only Jack Leiderman is a likely NO vote. David Hill and John Tyner II are likely YES votes, if the changes they've suggested are approved.

But Dion Trahan and Don Hadley have yet to reveal their hand. Both have been skeptical of the urbanization concept the plan represents.

2 YES, 1 NO, 2 UNKNOWNS.

Enter 2 new members:

Mayor Marcuccio has nominated Charles Littlefield and Anne Goodman. Both are skeptics of the Pike Plan. Littlefield served on the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance committee in 2011, and issued his own Minority Report that dissented against attempts to weaken the ordinance.

In his report, Littlefield made clear that he feels a strong APFO is essential to protect residents from out-of-control growth:

"As a member of this Committee I witnessed an aggressiveness on the part of certain developers, elected officials and public planners to push through large-scale residential development regardless of public opinion. The impression they made on me left me firmly convinced that Rockville's APFO/ APFS should not be weakened. From the perspective of a Rockville resident/ homeowner, the APFO 'evens the playing field' between everyday citizens and organized, connected and financially powerful developers. Without this tool, it would be virtually impossible for citizens to stop an undesirable development project from occurring and negatively impacting our quality of life."

Goodman also expressed concern "about the potential for weakening the APFO to allow more development" in her Pike Plan testimony.

While Marcuccio and Councilmember Bridget Newton owe much of their political support to voters who favor limiting growth and building heights, councilmembers Tom Moore and Mark Pierzchala are running (for council and mayor, respectively) on a more aggressive development platform.

It could be a contentious meeting tonight, as a result.

If approved by the council, could strong arguments by Littlefield and Goodman lead to a 5-2 or 4-3 defeat for the Pike Plan? Can they get majority support tonight, with outgoing councilmember John Hall as the potential deciding vote?

Intrigue! Suspense! Stay tuned!