| Home > Government > Boards and Commissions > Planning Commission > 2000 > Staff Reports > USE2000-00607 - Memo |  |
City of Rockville
M E M O R A N D U M
July 7, 2000
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Wasilak, Planner III
SUBJECT: Use Permit USE2000-00607, Potomac Capital Investment Corp.
620 Gaither Road
The above-referenced request is an application to construct three office buildings totaling 500,000 square feet, a parking garage and surface parking lots at 620 Gaither Road. The project is to be called Redland Technology Park. Buildings one and three will both be six stories in height, and each will contain 142,500 square feet of office space. Building two will be nine floors in height and will contain 215,000 square feet of office space. The applicant proposes to build a multi-level parking garage containing 1,095 spaces that will be built in conjunction with the second building.
The Planning Commission reviewed this application at its meeting of June 14, 2000, and identified concerns in the following areas: landscaping, parking garage elevations and traffic impact. These issues are addressed below.
Landscaping Plan
In addition to the existing forested areas to be saved, additional tree planting is proposed throughout the developed area of the site. The applicant is proposing to plant a combination of deciduous and evergreen trees, as well as provide an area of tree preservation, along the propertys boundary with the King Farm development. These trees, a combination of red maples and willow oaks, will be planted in an approximately 28-foot wide planting strip along the property line. The trees will be supplemented by Norway and Serbian spruces and American Hollies. A similar treatment including tulip poplars will occur along the future property line with the PEPCO Rockville Service Center. This landscape strip should effectively screen the surface parking lots from surrounding public streets and adjacent properties. To address a concern of the residents in King Farm, these trees should be planted during the first planting season after the completion of the rough grading of the site to allow the trees to establish themselves. The landscape plan for the site also includes trees lining the site access road that will effectively function as street trees and planted parking lot islands, including landscaped islands to separate areas that include grater than 150 spaces. Landscaped areas also include the courtyard area between Buildings 1 and 2, as well as the pedestrian amenity area in the central courtyard.
Parking Garage Elevations
The Commission raised a concern about the elevations of the parking garage, as none were presented for review at the meeting. The Commission felt that the garage elevations should be compatible with the building elevations, as portions of the garage are potentially visible from adjacent residences. Staff has recommended a Condition of Approval to ensure compatibility. The applicant will present these elevations at the meeting.
Traffic Impact
The Commission discussed extensively the traffic impact of the proposal. The applicant was not required to submit a new traffic study because, under the Standard Traffic Methodology, a new study is not required if the initial study was completed within three years or the site conditions of the proposal have not changed. In this case the development proposal was for a reduced amount of office space, so the basic site conditions were deemed to not have changed. Staff accepted the applicants request to not conduct a new traffic study.
The Commission raised concerns about external conditions that have changed since the original application was submitted, especially the impact of the approval of the Fallsgrove Concept Plan application. Fallsgrove was approved in February, 2000, and could yield up to 1,530 residential dwelling units, 150,000 square feet of retail space and 950,000 square feet of office and research and development space.
The applicants traffic consultant conducted an analysis of the intersections affected by the Fallsgrove development, and the impact of the Redland Technology Park on each of those. In addition, traffic and transportation staff compared the levels of service of the studied intersections both with and without the traffic associated with the proposal, with the impacts noted in Attachment 3.
Staff continues to believe that the amount of contribution to be paid by the applicant ($640,000) is a fair contribution to mitigate the off-site traffic impacts caused by the development proposal. Staff also finds that it is preferable to have the amount contributed rather than target the specific improvements to be made by the developer. This provides the maximum flexibility to target resources where they are most needed. Therefore staff recommends that the originally proposed conditions regarding traffic impact be maintained.
Recommendation
The revised list of conditions is contained in Attachment 4. This reflects minor modifications to reflect the discussion during the June 14 Planning Commission meeting regarding the Redland Boulevard curb cut removal, landscaping, sidewalks and items already completed, such as the floodplain study (Reference Conditions 1.c., , 1.i., 4.c. and 9 of the original staff report).
/rjw
Attachments
1. Proposed Site plan
2. Proposed Landscape plan
3. Memo from Traffic/Transportation Staff regarding Traffic Impact
4. Revised List of Proposed Conditions
5. Original Staff Report dated June 8, 2000