City of Rockville

M E M O R A N D U M

April 20, 2000

TO:  Planning Commission

FROM: Jim Wasilak, Planner III

SUBJECT: Comprehensive Planned Development Detailed Application CPD98-001F
Review of Landscape Plan for the Tower Building in Tower Oaks

On June 23, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the Detailed Application allowing construction of a 276,600 square foot, ten-story office building at the northwest corner of Wootton Parkway and Tower Oaks Boulevard North.  The original proposed landscape plan did not show any plantings along the Tower Oaks Boulevard North frontage.  At the meeting, the Planning Commission imposed a condition of approval to add the following to the landscape plan:

“Additional trees, to include large evergreens along the east side of the property for the explicit purpose of eliminating light emanating from the property.”

This is an addition to requiring additional low level landscaping to be provided along the east side of the property and within the new bulb of the cul-de-sac on Tower Oaks Boulevard North to approximate the existing landscaping along other portions of the road.

The landscape plan was submitted for final approval indicating the proposed installation of plantings in between the existing Red Maple street trees.  These include evergreens such as American Holly and Nellie Stevens Holly, as well as deciduous understory trees such as Hawthorne, Pink and White Dogwoods and Sweet Bay Magnolias.  These plant species were selected because they are native species that would be located appropriately at the edge of the existing forest.  The installation of the hollies was intended to act as the evergreen screen along the property boundary that would fulfill the Planning Commission condition of approval.   

During review of the final landscape plan, a resident of the Villages at Tower Oaks expressed concern, in writing to the Planning Commission, that these plantings would not meet the intent of the condition of approval regarding planting of large evergreens (See Attachment).  Upon receipt of the letter, staff requested a response from the applicant regarding justification of the selection of the species (See Attachment).  These selected species were selected due to the fact that they are native species that are appropriately located either as understory trees or native to the forest edge.  Although the size of the hollies were intended to be 8 to 10 feet at installation, the American hollies can measure up to 70 feet in height at maturity, according to textbooks sources cited by the applicant.

Staff Comment    

Staff finds the use of the proposed landscaping choices to have merit, in that native and appropriate, high-quality species are employed.  However, the City Forester has indicated that a likely maximum height for the American hollies would be 40 to 50 feet at maturity.  Although these plants would provide an evergreen screen, they are also slow-growing and would require a considerable length of time to achieve maturity.  Alternatively, a screen of white pines could be planted which would achieve maturity sooner, as they grow faster and reach heights up to 80 feet.  This would be a cheaper and conventional alternative to providing a landscape screen, but would be less appropriate as a native species and at the forest edge.  Although the applicant has represented a willingness to install such trees, their preference would be to install the plan as proposed.  Staff recognizes the value of both alternatives, and recommends a compromise to continue the proposed holly and other understory tree installation but to add several white pines to achieve the maximum screening effect.  Staff notes that light emanating from the site will likely be reduced due to the applicant’s proposed installation of lights on smaller standards than originally proposed.      

Staff therefore requests concurrence by the Planning Commission on the modification to the landscape plan.  Staff will then approve the landscape plan administratively as required in the original conditions of approval. 

/rjw

Attachments

1.      Approval Letter for CPD98-001F

2.      Letter Received from Patricia King

3.      Proposed Landscape Plan

4.      Applicant Justification