The Rockville Planning Commission voted unanimously to grant a parking waiver to Hungerford Retail, LLC at last night's meeting. While virtually every future transit-oriented project in the city will likely meet the basic criteria for a parking waiver, the issuing of one is at the discretion of the commission. The planning body reached a consensus around the suggestions of commissioners Charles Littlefield and Jack Leiderman. Littlefield argued that the impact of the future Dawson Avenue extension was detrimental to the JBG Companies' project at 275 N. Washington Street, and reduced their available space for parking. It should be noted that future Town Center road extensions will also impact the Walgreens and an Asian grocery store's property and parking, as well.
JBG was credited by commission chair Don Hadley for its efforts to work with the adjoining property owners, and the West End Citizen's Association, to revise its initially-disastrous waiver presentation. Susan Prince spoke on behalf of WECA, and expressed concern at the downsizing of the planned restaurant space in the development. Prince said the neighborhood would prefer that JBG be required to contract with its neighbor, to provide additional parking in its monthly garage.
Ultimately, the commission declined to stipulate such a contract, which Sam Stiebel of JBG said would put the developer in a poor negotiating position, were it required to make a deal. It deemed sufficient, with some reservations, a deal JBG reached with Town Center II neighbor Shelter Development, that will provide 18 attended spaces in its future Brightview residential project for 275 N. Washington Street customers. A below-grade garage will hold 45 spaces, in addition to some surface parking. In addition, a valet service must begin immediately, rather than the original proposed delay.
The eventual agreement was briefly threatened when Commissioner John Tyner made a motion to grant the waiver, as he preferred to include the findings of the basic waiver criteria in the language. Leiderman and Littlefield said they could not support such a motion. After Leiderman advised Tyner to present a motion a majority could agree upon, Tyner relented. Littlefield seconded Tyner's motion.
There was still a matter of JBG's ability to be released from the parking agreement, should it be able to show there was indeed a surplus of parking available on two occasions, between 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM. A friendly amendment by Leiderman restored the criteria to the original number of 5 study times.
Overall, several commissioners expressed the feeling that the desire for development in Town Center Phase II - as well as JBG's good-faith efforts in revising their proposal - outweighed their remaining concerns that parking will be a problem there in the future.
Showing posts with label JBG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label JBG. Show all posts
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
ROCKVILLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL BRIEFED ON UPPER ROCK PLAN CHANGES
JBG's attorney, Bob Harris, and Senior Development Analyst Devon Lauer returned to City Hall Monday night, to brief the Rockville Mayor and Council on changes the developer seeks for its 5 Choke Cherry Road project in the Upper Rock District.
There are no real points of contention with the project at this point, although Harris again indicated that JBG will return with greater detail at future meetings. Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr asked about the bicycle plan and stormwater management for the site. Neither Harris nor Lauer were familiar enough with the bike issues at the site to comment, but said they would have that information at the next meeting. City staff said that the project, while having been approved long ago, would be built under current Rockville stormwater requirements.
Councilmember Tom Moore asked if the green space once designated as an office building could be developed as residential in the future, "[i]f the residential market picked up at some point?" Harris said he did not foresee any changes to the current proposal in the future. In a previous presentation before the Rockville Planning Commission, Harris said residential development was not sustainable, given the proximity of Crown Farm and other projects under construction.
There are no real points of contention with the project at this point, although Harris again indicated that JBG will return with greater detail at future meetings. Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr asked about the bicycle plan and stormwater management for the site. Neither Harris nor Lauer were familiar enough with the bike issues at the site to comment, but said they would have that information at the next meeting. City staff said that the project, while having been approved long ago, would be built under current Rockville stormwater requirements.
Councilmember Tom Moore asked if the green space once designated as an office building could be developed as residential in the future, "[i]f the residential market picked up at some point?" Harris said he did not foresee any changes to the current proposal in the future. In a previous presentation before the Rockville Planning Commission, Harris said residential development was not sustainable, given the proximity of Crown Farm and other projects under construction.
Friday, May 16, 2014
WEAK OFFICE MARKET LEADS JBG TO ASK FOR UPPER ROCK PLAN CHANGES
More evidence of Montgomery County's abysmal office market was on display at this week's Rockville Planning Commission meeting. Developer JBG is requesting an amendment to its Pre-Development Plan for 5 Choke Cherry Road, in the Upper Rock District off Shady Grove Road.
When the plan was approved on May 23, 2005, it included 293 residential units, retail and restaurant space, a community park, and 73,700 square feet of office space, with a surface parking lot.
Devon Lauer, Senior Development Analyst for JBG, said the company wants to replace the 73,700 SF office space component with 35,000 SF of retail and restaurant space. This would be arranged in four, single-story structures, with surface parking serving all four. Potential tenants under discussion include CVS and MOM's Organic Market.
The applicant's attorney, Bob Harris of Lerch, Early & Brewer, said the change is needed due to the poor office market. Residential would not work either, Harris said, due to “the evolution of the residential marketplace in this area,” noting that such units would have to compete with Crown Farm, the Reed Brothers project, and others on the east side of MD 355, around the Shady Grove Metro. That "softness in the office market” is being felt by existing office building owners near the Upper Rock District. JBG believes that adding retail and restaurant amenities will help it attract new tenants to its existing office space in Upper Rock, as well as to nearby office buildings. Harris recalled another office owner saying he’s struggling to keep his tenants, and could use the retail nearby to help retain them.
JBG will return at future sessions with more detailed information for the commissioners regarding the request. Once again, the weak office market is casting doubt on whether smart growth can be applied in Montgomery County, if there are not adequate, high-wage jobs nearby these new developments.
When the plan was approved on May 23, 2005, it included 293 residential units, retail and restaurant space, a community park, and 73,700 square feet of office space, with a surface parking lot.
Devon Lauer, Senior Development Analyst for JBG, said the company wants to replace the 73,700 SF office space component with 35,000 SF of retail and restaurant space. This would be arranged in four, single-story structures, with surface parking serving all four. Potential tenants under discussion include CVS and MOM's Organic Market.
The applicant's attorney, Bob Harris of Lerch, Early & Brewer, said the change is needed due to the poor office market. Residential would not work either, Harris said, due to “the evolution of the residential marketplace in this area,” noting that such units would have to compete with Crown Farm, the Reed Brothers project, and others on the east side of MD 355, around the Shady Grove Metro. That "softness in the office market” is being felt by existing office building owners near the Upper Rock District. JBG believes that adding retail and restaurant amenities will help it attract new tenants to its existing office space in Upper Rock, as well as to nearby office buildings. Harris recalled another office owner saying he’s struggling to keep his tenants, and could use the retail nearby to help retain them.
JBG will return at future sessions with more detailed information for the commissioners regarding the request. Once again, the weak office market is casting doubt on whether smart growth can be applied in Montgomery County, if there are not adequate, high-wage jobs nearby these new developments.
Friday, May 2, 2014
TOWN CENTER II DEVELOPER TAKES "HORSEWHIPPING" FROM ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
A request for a parking waiver by JBG entity "Hungerford Retail II, LLC" failed to convince a skeptical Rockville Planning Commission last week, leading the development's attorney to request a deferment of the petition. The project is a 2-story, mixed-use building with office and restaurant space, where a former Giant grocery store was recently demolished. A 41% decrease in parking spaces was requested for the structure, which will include a one-level, below-grade garage.
The waiver request stumbled out of the gate, with the last-minute revelation that the applicant had not apprised nearby residents of the parking changes. A communication from the West End Citizen's Association earlier in the day suggested neighbors were not yet informed of the plan, and requested a postponement of the decision. “It is with some puzzlement that I’ve learned that WECA was not involved, was not notified about this parking waiver," Commissioner Jack Leiderman said. "We did receive a letter from the president of WECA to postpone the waiver. As a commission, we need to slow down and get the input of the community." Commissioner John Tyner concurred, characterizing the applicant's failure to inform WECA in advance as "a strategic error." City planning staff member Cas Chasten said that, while waiver applicants are not required to notify neighbors, city staff had strongly advised them to do so.
Commissioner Dion Trahan was equally concerned about neighborhoods that would be affected by parking changes in East Rockville, such as Lincoln Park. The failure to notify them made the applicant appear "insincere," he said. "Whenever the citizenry talk about these back room deals going on in City Hall, this is what they’re talking about,” Trahan added.
The applicant's attorney, Erica Leatham, said they apologized to WECA and the Planning Commission for the lack of communication.
Another major concern among commissioners was the relevance and accuracy of the parking studies submitted by the applicant, which were designed to support approval of the waiver.
The wheels came entirely off when the applicant's parking consultant, Edward Papazian, was caught off-guard during cross examination by Leiderman.
Papazian had stated that the high volume of parking recorded in a study of Rockville Town Square garages on Thursday, December 12, 2013, was atypical. Demand would be less on the average night, Papazian claimed, because the city's Christmas tree lighting event had inflated the numbers on the 12th.
"Would it surprise you, sir," Leiderman asked, "to learn that the tree lighting event was actually a week before, on Thursday, December 5th?”
"We were there, our people were there," Papazian insisted.
Leiderman begged to differ, citing official transcripts of a Mayor and Council meeting three days before Papazian's claimed tree lighting ceremony.
"It’s a matter of public record," Leiderman said. "I have The Mayor and Council meeting [transcript] of December 9th, [during which] Councilmember [Beryl] Feinberg reported that she attended the Rockville Christmas tree lighting on Thursday, December 5th."
Leiderman said the false information regarding the parking counts called the whole report into question. "I don’t trust your report, with all due respect. If I had more time, what other junk would I find in it?" Leiderman asked. "You’re coming here with this report that’s filled with numbers, and we’re supposed to base important land use decisions on the accuracy of them. You’re attributing [numbers] to something that didn’t even happen, some data that could have just been a routine Thursday night with [it being] hard to park in the city. You’re saying it’s [the tree lighting]. It didn’t happen. So, I’m looking at this report going…”, Leiderman concluded with an expression of disbelief.
Many commissioners, including Chairman Don Hadley, expressed concern that the urban parking concept was out of sync with the reality of Rockville as a suburban city of residential neighborhoods. Using Montgomery County parking studies and practices would put future growth in Rockville on a course more in line with denser areas like White Flint or downtown Bethesda, something the city does not want, Hadley suggested.
"The assumption that this is an urban area…probably misses the mark on what we deem or believe to be the reality in Rockville, now and for the future," Hadley said. "[I]f [people] want an urban area, they can go to New York, Chicago or L.A." Large parking garages may not be preferable to suburban clientele, Hadley said. Most families with children won't ride bikes to the town center, he argued, saying most will "hop in the car." Moreover, between existing transit options, and those on the drawing board, many suburban residents "won’t have public transportation that is desirable for their preferences” anytime soon, he said. Hadley noted that Montgomery County Government's perception of urban is “vastly different” from Rockville’s definition.
Leiderman expressed similar skepticism of the applicant's smart growth predictions. He pointed out that previous town center projects were held to a higher standard than the applicant was proposing for itself. Urbanization proponents, Leiderman said, are "wanting to buy in to the aspirational goal that Rockville will no longer be a suburb, it will be an urban center, and everyone is going to be on a bike, and walking, and 75% of the people working here will use transit…that’s not what the numbers for the Choice Hotels site were based on." Leiderman predicted "people are going to park in the residential neighborhoods,” or take their business elsewhere, if parking is difficult.
Commissioner Charles Littlefield expanded on Leiderman's reference to the impact on businesses, warning that one bad parking experience is enough to send patrons elsewhere to dine and shop. Littlefield cited the free and ample parking at Gaithersburg's Washingtonian Center as a better model. "I’ve never once not been able to find parking” at Washingtonian Center, Littlefield noted. Leiderman said difficulty and inconvenience locating parking would deter customers, "as things get built out, having a harder time finding parking, having to go higher and higher” in the garages, he said.
The idea that customers could park in other garages would be shifting the cost of parking to taxpayers and other adjacent property owners, Leiderman said.
By this point, the applicant had also lost Commissioner David Hill's support. Considering that the applicant had already received significant exemptions on parking for the project, Hill said, "I as a public official can’t countenance making that number bigger. He said Bethesda or White Flint-style development is not what Rockville wants for its future.
"I'm not comfortable passing our responsibility onto the chief of planning," Hill said. "I have no problem with the argument that you qualify for the waiver [but] I would like to see us leave this in a position where we can continue talking."
In addition, Hill felt that the city is facing a larger issue with this and future parking waiver requests, which the city's zoning code is currently unequipped to address. "I think that what we should be doing right now is having a legislative discussion about changing the zoning ordinance," Hill suggested. He also doubted the numbers regarding how many customers would indeed be on-site, as opposed to traveling by car. "You haven’t cleared the very high wall" to justify an exemption, Hill concluded.
With the request obviously heading for rejection, Leatham then asked the commission for a deferral. After some discussion among commissioners as to how citizens could best be heard, and to whether or not it would be best to extend this petition, or require a new one, the commission voted unanimously to defer the waiver request, and leave the public record open.
The applicant was advised to gain public input from residents of nearby neighborhoods before returning. Leatham said there was no guarantee the specifics of the request would change, but that the applicant would gather more data in support of a waiver.
Hadley somewhat jokingly apologized to the applicant's representatives, for having to take a "horsewhipping" during the four-hour meeting.
The waiver request stumbled out of the gate, with the last-minute revelation that the applicant had not apprised nearby residents of the parking changes. A communication from the West End Citizen's Association earlier in the day suggested neighbors were not yet informed of the plan, and requested a postponement of the decision. “It is with some puzzlement that I’ve learned that WECA was not involved, was not notified about this parking waiver," Commissioner Jack Leiderman said. "We did receive a letter from the president of WECA to postpone the waiver. As a commission, we need to slow down and get the input of the community." Commissioner John Tyner concurred, characterizing the applicant's failure to inform WECA in advance as "a strategic error." City planning staff member Cas Chasten said that, while waiver applicants are not required to notify neighbors, city staff had strongly advised them to do so.
Commissioner Dion Trahan was equally concerned about neighborhoods that would be affected by parking changes in East Rockville, such as Lincoln Park. The failure to notify them made the applicant appear "insincere," he said. "Whenever the citizenry talk about these back room deals going on in City Hall, this is what they’re talking about,” Trahan added.
The applicant's attorney, Erica Leatham, said they apologized to WECA and the Planning Commission for the lack of communication.
Another major concern among commissioners was the relevance and accuracy of the parking studies submitted by the applicant, which were designed to support approval of the waiver.
The wheels came entirely off when the applicant's parking consultant, Edward Papazian, was caught off-guard during cross examination by Leiderman.
Papazian had stated that the high volume of parking recorded in a study of Rockville Town Square garages on Thursday, December 12, 2013, was atypical. Demand would be less on the average night, Papazian claimed, because the city's Christmas tree lighting event had inflated the numbers on the 12th.
"Would it surprise you, sir," Leiderman asked, "to learn that the tree lighting event was actually a week before, on Thursday, December 5th?”
"We were there, our people were there," Papazian insisted.
Leiderman begged to differ, citing official transcripts of a Mayor and Council meeting three days before Papazian's claimed tree lighting ceremony.
"It’s a matter of public record," Leiderman said. "I have The Mayor and Council meeting [transcript] of December 9th, [during which] Councilmember [Beryl] Feinberg reported that she attended the Rockville Christmas tree lighting on Thursday, December 5th."
Leiderman said the false information regarding the parking counts called the whole report into question. "I don’t trust your report, with all due respect. If I had more time, what other junk would I find in it?" Leiderman asked. "You’re coming here with this report that’s filled with numbers, and we’re supposed to base important land use decisions on the accuracy of them. You’re attributing [numbers] to something that didn’t even happen, some data that could have just been a routine Thursday night with [it being] hard to park in the city. You’re saying it’s [the tree lighting]. It didn’t happen. So, I’m looking at this report going…”, Leiderman concluded with an expression of disbelief.
Many commissioners, including Chairman Don Hadley, expressed concern that the urban parking concept was out of sync with the reality of Rockville as a suburban city of residential neighborhoods. Using Montgomery County parking studies and practices would put future growth in Rockville on a course more in line with denser areas like White Flint or downtown Bethesda, something the city does not want, Hadley suggested.
"The assumption that this is an urban area…probably misses the mark on what we deem or believe to be the reality in Rockville, now and for the future," Hadley said. "[I]f [people] want an urban area, they can go to New York, Chicago or L.A." Large parking garages may not be preferable to suburban clientele, Hadley said. Most families with children won't ride bikes to the town center, he argued, saying most will "hop in the car." Moreover, between existing transit options, and those on the drawing board, many suburban residents "won’t have public transportation that is desirable for their preferences” anytime soon, he said. Hadley noted that Montgomery County Government's perception of urban is “vastly different” from Rockville’s definition.
Leiderman expressed similar skepticism of the applicant's smart growth predictions. He pointed out that previous town center projects were held to a higher standard than the applicant was proposing for itself. Urbanization proponents, Leiderman said, are "wanting to buy in to the aspirational goal that Rockville will no longer be a suburb, it will be an urban center, and everyone is going to be on a bike, and walking, and 75% of the people working here will use transit…that’s not what the numbers for the Choice Hotels site were based on." Leiderman predicted "people are going to park in the residential neighborhoods,” or take their business elsewhere, if parking is difficult.
Commissioner Charles Littlefield expanded on Leiderman's reference to the impact on businesses, warning that one bad parking experience is enough to send patrons elsewhere to dine and shop. Littlefield cited the free and ample parking at Gaithersburg's Washingtonian Center as a better model. "I’ve never once not been able to find parking” at Washingtonian Center, Littlefield noted. Leiderman said difficulty and inconvenience locating parking would deter customers, "as things get built out, having a harder time finding parking, having to go higher and higher” in the garages, he said.
The idea that customers could park in other garages would be shifting the cost of parking to taxpayers and other adjacent property owners, Leiderman said.
By this point, the applicant had also lost Commissioner David Hill's support. Considering that the applicant had already received significant exemptions on parking for the project, Hill said, "I as a public official can’t countenance making that number bigger. He said Bethesda or White Flint-style development is not what Rockville wants for its future.
"I'm not comfortable passing our responsibility onto the chief of planning," Hill said. "I have no problem with the argument that you qualify for the waiver [but] I would like to see us leave this in a position where we can continue talking."
In addition, Hill felt that the city is facing a larger issue with this and future parking waiver requests, which the city's zoning code is currently unequipped to address. "I think that what we should be doing right now is having a legislative discussion about changing the zoning ordinance," Hill suggested. He also doubted the numbers regarding how many customers would indeed be on-site, as opposed to traveling by car. "You haven’t cleared the very high wall" to justify an exemption, Hill concluded.
With the request obviously heading for rejection, Leatham then asked the commission for a deferral. After some discussion among commissioners as to how citizens could best be heard, and to whether or not it would be best to extend this petition, or require a new one, the commission voted unanimously to defer the waiver request, and leave the public record open.
The applicant was advised to gain public input from residents of nearby neighborhoods before returning. Leatham said there was no guarantee the specifics of the request would change, but that the applicant would gather more data in support of a waiver.
Hadley somewhat jokingly apologized to the applicant's representatives, for having to take a "horsewhipping" during the four-hour meeting.
Friday, April 18, 2014
JBG ASKS ROCKVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PARKING WAIVER IN TOWN CENTER PHASE II
At next Wednesday's meeting of the Rockville Planning Commission, attorneys for JBG's Hungerford Retail II, LLC project at 275 N. Washington Street will seek a waiver to eliminate 46 parking spaces at the 2-story office/restaurant building. The applicant says the waiver is justified because of sufficient garage parking within Rockville Town Square, and the percentage of clients who will not drive to the bank and restaurants planned for the development.
The waiver request documents, submitted by Ballard Spahr attorney Erica Leatham, include numerous exhibits and citations of both national trends, and specific parking studies conducted recently in Rockville. They also reference a parking waiver recently granted to the 1800 Rockville Pike development.
Leatham argues that most customers will walk to the restaurants from nearby office buildings, and the adjacent residential neighborhood. At the same time, the letter notes that parking tends to be available around the clock in the Town Center garages. JBG's petition also cites the high percentage of Americans who now do their banking online. Of course, this trend does not seem to have stopped a current explosion of new bank branches opening in lower Montgomery County.
The building will have a single below-grade parking garage.
The meeting will be Wednesday, April 23, at 7:00 PM in City Hall.
The waiver request documents, submitted by Ballard Spahr attorney Erica Leatham, include numerous exhibits and citations of both national trends, and specific parking studies conducted recently in Rockville. They also reference a parking waiver recently granted to the 1800 Rockville Pike development.
Leatham argues that most customers will walk to the restaurants from nearby office buildings, and the adjacent residential neighborhood. At the same time, the letter notes that parking tends to be available around the clock in the Town Center garages. JBG's petition also cites the high percentage of Americans who now do their banking online. Of course, this trend does not seem to have stopped a current explosion of new bank branches opening in lower Montgomery County.
The building will have a single below-grade parking garage.
The meeting will be Wednesday, April 23, at 7:00 PM in City Hall.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
ROCKVILLE GIANT DEMOLISHED! (PHOTOS)
The classic architecture of Rockville's venerable town center Giant grocery store is gone forever.
A store design familiar to longtime area residents, one could find contemporaries at one time in DC and in Bethesda. The latter was located where Upstairs at Bethesda Row stands today.
It's sad to see it go. Many of the classic postwar Safeway stores are now gone as well. I managed to get the Damascus Safeway on tape for posterity, just before the wrecking ball arrived.
No such luck with this Giant, but here is the aftermath.
The Giant will be replaced by a low-rise retail development, to be delivered by developer JBG early next year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)