CITY OF ROCKVILLE PLANNING DIVISION

STAFF REPORT

October 21, 1999

SUBJECT:

           

Special Exception Application SPX99-0280

Applicant: CPC Health

500 West Montgomery Avenue

Rockville, MD 20850

Property Owner: Same

Property Location: 500 West Montgomery Avenue

Planning Commission Review Date: October 27, 1999

Board of Appeals Public Hearing Date: November 6, 1999

 

PREVIOUS RELATED ACTION:

 

·    Special Exception S-120-85 (approved October 5, 1985) ­ Establishment of four new cottages to provide new residences for twenty patients and attendant staff members in each building who had previously been housed elsewhere on the property.

·    Special Exception S-184-72 (approved February 3, 1973) ­ Expansion of facilities for treatment and research of chronic mental health problems of children, including four small single-family detached living units, small play barn, a clinical center and a school for 50 students.

·    Use Permit U-630-73 to modify the exterior of certain facilities (approved September 19, 1973).

·    Use Permit U-362-86 for construction of the four cottages and a greenhouse (approved August 13, 1986).

·    Special Exception S-12-58 (approved June 7, 1958), which has been abandoned, for the construction of a dormitory for nurses. The building has been converted to doctor’s offices and treatment rooms.

 

 

 

REQUEST

 

The applicant, CPC Health, has requested a Special Exception that is two-fold.

The first part of the request is to relocate an existing school on the CPC site to the existing main “Lodge” building, displacing existing administrative offices. The total capacity of the school will be 50 students, with 15 being residential students and approximately 35 students coming from surrounding communities as day students. This school was approved as part of Special Exception S-184-72 referenced above.

Secondly, the applicant wants to remodel the existing “Doctors' Office Building” to accommodate 20 residential patients that are to be relocated from another area of the site. This building is the one referenced in the previous section regarding previous Special Exceptions. The Doctors' Office Building is the one that was approved in 1958 as a nurse’s dormitory. As part of this request, the applicant is proposing an elevator to facilitate the needs of the building as a residence. This elevator will have an effect in-so-far-as it will require an exterior elevation change on the building. It should be noted that the applicant is pursuing options that would not require the elevator.

It must be noted at this point that the compelling reason for the Special Exception is that CPC Health leases land and has buildings located on property that is currently being developed as Rose Hill. The two Special Exception uses described above (the school and the domicile) currently exist on that portion of the property that has been sold. Ergo, the request to relocate these uses onto the main site.

ANALYSIS

Property Description

CPC Health purchased the Chestnut Lodge site approximately two years ago. CPC Health owns approximately 20 acres, bordered by West Montgomery Avenue, Thomas Street, the new Rose Hill subdivision and three residences to the west. The hospital has an address of 500 West Montgomery Avenue, but has a building (the Doctor's Office Building) that has access from Thomas Street. This particular building is one of the subjects of the request. Although this building has access from Thomas Street, this particular entrance is for this building only, and does not carry vehicular access through the entire site. This building is used for the treatment of outpatients currently, and can be accessed by pedestrian path from the interior of the site.

On the entirety of the well-landscaped site, there are approximately 19 buildings. The buildings currently house a mix of uses, including residences, a dining hall, a gymnasium, a greenhouse, doctor's offices and a 1,500 square foot storage barn. Of these referenced buildings, four are residence cottages that were approved as part of Special Exception S-120-85. Each one of these buildings houses 20 patients and attending staff.

With respect to the main entrance of the site from West Montgomery Avenue, there is a narrow entrance drive that leads to the main Lodge building, which now contains a variety of administrative offices for the hospital. The front entrance is well landscaped with significant trees located throughout. The main Lodge building, which is the closest building on the site to West Montgomery Avenue, is sited approximately 335 feet form the road. Of this total setback, the first 200 feet is located within the West Montgomery Historic District. Within this 200 feet, there is a wetland that is protected by a 40-foot wetland buffer as recommended by the recently adopted Environmental Guidelines. There is also a storm drain in this area.

Adjacent to the eastern side of the site is Thomas Street. There are a variety of single-family residences located along this street. A number of these homes are owned and used by CPC Health. In addition, there are 34 parking spaces located along Thomas Street that are used by CPC Health.

Adjacent to the western side of the site is the Buckingham property, which is privately owned and zoned RS, single-family. It is a five-acre property with a variety of buildings located upon it, and an ephemeral stream running through the front. There are two additional private residences directly between the Buckingham property and CPC Health. Both of these properties have driveway access through the Buckingham property.

To the south of the site is the Rose Hill subdivision. Sitting on approximately 40 acres, Rose Hill is comprised of land that was part of the mental health facility prior to 1996. The southern boundary and the southernmost portions of the eastern and western boundaries of the hospital complex will be bordered by a variety of single-family residences and roads. The developer of Rose Hill and CPC Health have agreed to each provide a 10-foot landscape buffer along the common property line for a total of a 20-foot buffer.  In addition, a small public park containing a tot-lot will be provided at the southeast side of Thomas Street, approximately 250 feet from the proposed residence. Autumn Wind Way is the border of the southernmost part of the complex.

With respect to parking, the site has an interesting mix of areas used for parking. The current site plan indicates a total of 149 spaces on site and 34 spaces on Thomas Street. As per the Zoning and Planning Ordinance, parking on a public street (off-site parking) may not be considered as part of the total required parking for a site. While the complete layout of the existing parking is somewhat unclear on the site plan, it is apparent, however, that some of the delineated parking areas indicated are inconsistent with City standards.

There is significant and mature landscaping that is associated with this site. There is also a network of pedestrian walkways that link buildings and some of the remote parking areas of the entire site.

History

In 1996 CPC Health Corp. purchased the mental health institution that had been owned and operated by the Bullard family. This site was known as Chestnut Lodge, and had operated within the City of Rockville as a mental health treatment center for over 75 years. Prior to this use, Chestnut Lodge was the Woodlawn Hotel, a well-known resort for wealthy Washingtonians. The Bullard family sold approximately 40 acres of the original site to the Penrose Group (Rose Hill) for residential development, and sold the remaining 20 acres of the site as well as the mental health institutional use to CPC Health. At that time it was understood by the City, based on representations by CPC Health, that the health care facilities located on the housing portion of the former Chestnut Lodge site would be consolidated with the other institutional facilities on the CPC Health site. The City also agreed that the scope of the existing operations of the approved Chestnut Lodge mental health institutional use could continue, but that any changes or expansions to those operations would have to be approved by the City. These aspects of the operations are outlined in the attached letter from the Chief of Planning to CPC Health Corp., July 25, 1997 (see attachment H). This letter was prepared at CPC Health's request and CPC Health agreed to the provisions of the letter.

It must be noted here that as part of the above referenced letter, a commitment was made by CPC Health (see attachment H) to provide an overall Master Plan for this site. To date, CPC Health has not submitted that Master Plan. The Plan was to illustrate future uses on the site, conversion of existing uses, and the consolidation of the previously referenced displaced uses on the remaining 20-acre campus. Submission of a Master Plan would have allowed the proposed relocation of the school and residences be considered in relationship to the ultimate use of the entire property.

Proposed Site Use:

Doctors' Office Building

As previously mentioned in this report, there are a number of uses on the CPC Health site that have been displaced by the sale of 40 acres of property to Penrose by the site's previous owners. The applicant has stated that a variety of uses have already been relocated off-site and on-site as defined in the July 1997 letter where it states "shifts in patients allocated among programs may occur as patients needs change." It has been determined, however, that the two uses defined herein that are the subject of this report are in need of a Special Exception approval.

The first part of the request is to relocate on-site residential patients to the Doctor's Office Building, which as the name implies, houses doctors' offices. The 9,200 square-foot building is adjacent to Thomas Street, on the eastern-most portion of the site. The building is served from Thomas Street, and has an adjacent parking area.  The building is three stories, with access from the second level, with the first level being below grade. The applicant states that the building can be easily converted back to residential use with interior modifications. A stated previously, the only external changes are proposed for the building are an external elevator housing if necessary (see attachment J).

In addition to the doctors' offices, the building serves as care for outpatients. People within the outpatient program visit and depart from the site via Thomas Street. This use will no longer take place here as a result of the Special Exception. This change in use will reduce the parking demand and number of vehicles using Thomas Street.

The proposal for this building is to house 20 patients relocated from another location on the site (the aforementioned parcel sold to Penrose for the Rose Hill subdivision). It has been mentioned previously in this report that this building was originally approved as a nurse's dormitory in 1958. The applicant states that the residents of this new facility will be closely supervised and that the doors are locked at night.

Main Building

Also known as the Lodge building, this four-story structure is the subject of the second part of the Special Exception request. This building was constructed as a hotel in the late nineteenth century, and was acquired by the Bullard family in 1910. Many modifications have been made to the building over the years, including the addition of additional administrative offices referred to as "Wing A." The Main Building is now used for executive, administrative and clinical office functions.

The applicant has proposed through this request moving the school to part of the first and second floor of the Main Building. The school is currently functioning on the aforementioned part of the property that was sold. As is referenced in the attached July 25, 1997 letter, the school will maintain a 50-student capacity, with 35 students coming from off site and the remaining 15 residing on the CPC Health property. Buses will be providing the means of transportation for the off-site students, and the applicant has indicated that all of the bus traffic will be maintained in the front of the Main Building. There currently exists a traffic circle in the front of the building that is proposed as a turnaround for small and medium buses, which will discharge or pick-up students and return to West Montgomery Avenue via the signalized intersection at Laird Street. Plans for circulation of the larger buses are not finalized. The current configuration of the site has the buses entering from West Montgomery, driving through the site to the school’s current location, and then driving back through the site and exiting at West Montgomery Avenue and Laird Street where they entered originally. 

Access to the building by the children has been addressed by the applicant as occurring from either the front of the building or at an entrance on the west side of the building. There are steps that lead up to the front entrance of the building, and once inside, the children will be directed to the part of the building that will be reconfigured by interior alteration into a school.

The applicant has stated that by locating the school to the front of the campus, school related traffic would be avoided on the interior residential part of the site, as it currently exists. In addition, there are 10 parking spaces on the right side of the previously mentioned circle that are used for the administrative offices. Additional spaces for the administrative offices are provided to the rear of the building.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Denial of this application is recommended. There are numerous issues that are outlined below that make a recommendation of approval problematic, if not impossible at this juncture.

Many of the issues where the application is not in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance were to have been addressed through changes to development procedures or Special Exception provisions, as outlined in the letter from Chief of Planning, July 25, 1997 (see attachment H). This would have allowed for comprehensive consideration of the entire hospital related operation. In absence of an overall site development plan, the application for a Special Exception must be reviewed with existing regulations. Staff finds that the proposed use is not in compliance, and in order to make the required findings for Special Exception approval, physical changes would need to be designed and evaluated for impacts prior to recommending approval. A text amendment addressing the entire hospital site rather than its component parts, and an overall site Master Plan was acknowledged by staff and the applicant as the most appropriate means of addressing these issues.

In addition, there are sections of the code requiring compliance for findings that have not been met. Those code sections and description of issues that must be addressed are:

1.      The application fails to satisfy the requirements of Section 25-356(b)(1)c.2(iii) relating to side yard setbacks.

 

2.   Safe ingress, egress and circulation onto and around the Main Building site that meet City standards, to be approved by the City’s Director of Public Works, as required by Section 25-395(14). This condition is to include the on-site widening of the West Montgomery Avenue entrance to support two-way traffic and allow proper turning radii at the front of the Main Building that will safely accommodate full-size buses (see Exhibit "B"). The existing configuration of the front entrance to the site is inadequate to meet the needs of a school and must to be addressed as part of any approval. NOTE: Widening may not be required or modified if the Special Exception is implemented concurrently with implementation of a one-way loop road approved as part of an overall Master Plan. Historic District Commission approval would be necessary as well.

 

3.   A full striping detail of bus loading and unloading, parking spaces around the main building site, as well as pedestrian walkways, as required by Section 25-395(14), to be approved by the Chief of Planning and the Director of Public Works (DPW). NOTE: On October 21, 1999, the applicant submitted a plan for bus circulation that has yet to be evaluated by staff because of the late arrival date (see attachment L).

Other site development issues that will need to be adequately addressed are:

1.   That the road currently used to access the existing school and Rose Hill site, at the intersection of Autumn Wind Way, have two vehicular barriers to allow emergency access only as shown in exhibit 'B'. Detailed Application PRU97-019A indicates that this road access must be maintained for emergency purposes. In addition, an adequate turnaround must be provided at this location. This condition is to be approved by the Director of Public Works.

2.   That the road that currently adjacent to the storage barn, to the south of Sullivan House, be permanently closed, and paving removed to provide the required 10-foot landscape buffer and preclude vehicular access to the adjacent residential property.

3.   That the existing water pump station “blow-off valve” adjacent to the property line on the eastern side of the site is connected to the nearby storm drain being constructed as part of Rose Hill. NOTE: This condition will ultimately require compliance regardless of the Special Exception decision outcome since it discharges water onto adjacent residential properties.

 

4.   That on the western side of the property, near the existing gym (adjacent to Rose Hill), the CPC site is graded to direct the overland storm flow to access the storm drainage system installed by Rose Hill.

5.   That student enrollment shall not exceed 50 students.

6.   That the maximum number of residents within the Doctors’ Office Building shall not exceed 20 patients.

APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE

In accordance with Section 25-338 of the Ordinance, the Board of Appeals shall not grant any petition for a special exception unless it finds from a preponderance of the evidence of record that:

 

1.That the proposed use does not violate or adversely affect the Master Plan (the plan), the Zoning Ordinance or any other applicable law; and

As described in the staff recommendation section, there is either insufficient information to reach this finding or there are elements that are not in compliance.

 

2.The proposed use at the location selected will not: (a) Adversely affect the health and safety of residents in the area; or  (b) Overburden existing public services, including water, sanitary sewer, public roads, storm drainage and other public improvements; or  (c) Be detrimental to the use or development of adjacent properties or the neighborhood; or  (d) Change the character of the neighborhood in which the use is proposed, considering services currently required, population density, character, and number of similar uses; and

As this report has shown, this use has been present at his site in excess of 75 years. Minor modifications to the shifting of uses on the site have been historically allowed. The shifting of uses, in this case relocating residents and students, will have a beneficial result relating to the criteria above.  The new traffic flow created by relocating the school will avoid the interior of the site, which is of a residential character. The change within the Doctors’ Office Building will decrease traffic as well. The residential character of this building should decrease the traffic on Thomas Street, which is currently the means of ingress/egress for outpatients and doctors on site.

As listed in the conditions, there are issues related to storm drainage that will be addressed at the time of Use Permit application. The partitioning of this property has created the need for CPC Health to address the issue of stormwater run-off and the water relief valve as previously noted in this report. With the conditions noted above, the criteria for number ‘2’ above are met.

 

3.      The proposed use complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance that are applicable thereto.

As per Section 25-296 of the Ordinance “private educational institutions” are special exception land uses within the RS zone, which is the underlying zoning of CPC Health’s property.

With respect to the code, the issue of parking must be addressed. As has been stated at various points in this report that this site has existed for a long time at this location. The parking for the entire site, however, is nonconforming with respect to City code requirements. Section 25-395(18) states that a hospital shall provide parking at a rate of one per one thousand gross square feet, one per staff doctor, and one per two employees. At this rate, it has been determined that CPC Health would be required to have 189 spaces after the reorganization of uses associated with this Special Exception. Under this requirement, CPC Health would be required to have 208 spaces if all uses on leased land were relocated off-site with no change in on-site uses.

This lower requirement is the result of a lower parking demand for a school site. Since the school requires a separate Special Exception, staff has determined that applying the school standard, which is one space per two employees, was the most appropriate in this instance. The standard for the Special Exception request of changing office to residential is the same, however, since both are part of the hospital use.

The site plan provided by CPC Health indicates a total of 149 parking spaces on site. There are 34 spaces that have been historically used for the hospital and outpatient facilities within the Doctors’ Office Building. The Zoning Ordinance specifies that these spaces may not be used to meet on-site parking requirements because they are located on a public street. The applicant's attorney has reported that the previous owner had indicated that there was an agreement between the City and the Bullards regarding Thomas Street parking. However, the staff and attorney are unable to confirm this.

Staff has determined that although the parking does not meet current standards, the reduction in demand for this Special Exception is acceptable. Staff has determined that a change to residential use at the Doctors’ Office Building will decrease traffic and parking demands on Thomas Street. In addition, a school use at the main Building will create less of demand for parking on that part of the site as well. This is predicated on the fact that the applicant has stated that a large portion of the existing uses on the leased property are to be moved off-site.

It is worthy of note at this point that conditions requiring a widened access road and traffic circle are meant to address compliance with Section 25-395(14), Educational Institutions. This code section says that in addition to providing parking at "one space for each two employees, including teachers and administrators," the code section further states that an educational facility must provide "… sufficient off-street space for the safe and convenient loading and unloading of students…".  Staff believes that the proposed condition is necessary to ensure compliance with this code section.

It should be noted that if approved, this Special Exception does not convey any vested rights for any future uses, applications or developments as they relate or pertain to parking on this site.

Section 25-356(b)(1)c.2 of the Ordinance mandates that the following special development and use requirements apply to the use proposed:

 

2. Where the maximum attendance at any one (1) time exceeds forty (40) students, such institutions must have: (i) A lot area of at least one (1) acre plus seven hundred (700) square feet for each student in excess of sixty (60); (ii) A lot frontage of at least two hundred (200) feet; and (iii) Building setbacks at least fifty (50) feet in the front yard, side yards equal to at least two (2) times the height of the tallest institutional building located on the lot which is proximate to the side yard, and a rear yard of at least fifty (50) feet.

As part of the previous approval for the school on this site, these findings were addressed and considered to be compliant. However, as part of the new application, setbacks must be addressed as required in (iii) above.

The new school use is to be located in the Main Building, which is approximately 60 feet tall. With the standard applied above, a side-yard setback of 120 feet would have to be maintained from the side lot line. Adjacent to the Main Building are four separate lots that are owned by CPC Health (see attachment C).  Of the four lots, only one, lot 8, is associated with the CPC Health boundary identification plat and their limit of Special Exception. Lots 5, 6 and 7, however are excluded from the application and property identification plat, and are therefore separate and distinct from the Special Exception request (see attachment C). As such, the setbacks referenced above must be maintained from the common lot line, not Thomas Street.

The property does not meet the setback requirement referenced in (iii) above. Therefore one of two things must be done:

 

1.         obtain a variance for the side setback requirements, or

2.         have the referenced lots added to the property by replatting to create the required setbacks.

In either case, the Special Exception cannot be granted until the issue of the setbacks is resolved.

CONCLUSION

Based on all of the factors that have been outlined in this report, staff recommends denial of SPX99-0280.

sep

Attachments: