DISCUSSION

Consideration of Mayor and Council’s Request to Delay the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan Public Hearing

Commissioner Johnson stated that it is his intention to have the public hearing tonight. 

Mr. Wasilak explained the Mayor and Council’s request is to delay the public hearing until RORZOR has concluded its process. 

The Commission discussed its options on how to proceed on this matter. 

Ms. Block explained the process. 

Commissioner Hill stated that delaying the public hearing would really be a curtailment of public input.  He believes it is very important to move forward with the public hearing and the earlier they do that the better.

Commissioner Medearis stated that she would not be in favor of postponing this public hearing.  She stated that there are too many people here who have a vested interest in being heard this evening.   

Commissioner Ostell said she concurred with the other Commissioners on going ahead with the public hearing.  She noted that the most important thing is that the people of Twinbrook are heard and that the Commission gains input from the public on what they want to see in their plan.  She said she personally believes it is important to do this before RORZOR comes up because it gives the neighborhood the most control over what would happen to various parcels of land that may be developed.      

Commissioner Wiener said she also concurred with the other Commissioners.  She noted that she had been involved in plans in the past and, therefore, she thinks it is really important to hear what the whole community has to say.   

Commissioner Britton said that obtaining input from the citizens is a valuable exercise.  Commissioner Britton also noted that the Commission would not be making a decision tonight on this plan, but the Commission will be collecting important information from the citizens. 

Commissioner Johnson informed the audience that the Commission would go ahead and open the public hearing on the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan.  He encouraged speakers to address not only the substance of the Plan, but why they feel that this plan ought to be delayed, or why it ought to continue on pace, and what their feelings and thoughts are about the parallel process with RORZOR, and where they think the Twinbrook Plan fits in with that process.   

PUBLIC HEARING

Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan – for a neighborhood plan for Planning Areas 7 (Twinbrook Forest/Northeast Rockville) and Planning Area 8 (Twinbrook

Commissioner Johnson instructed the speakers to be clear on what they want in the Plan.

Ms. Wallas presented an overview of the Plan.  She thanked Mr. Wasilak and the members of the Advisory Group who worked on this Plan for so many hours.

Ms. Wallas stated that the Plan began in 2004 (November 9 and 16).  This Plan has been worked on for approximately 2.5 years.  The advisory group was formed in the spring of 2005 and has been working consistently through 2005 and then through 2006.  Citizen-wide meetings were held.  A joint session with the Mayor and Council and the Planning Commission was held on December 13, 2006.  Ms. Wallas spoke about the vision that the Twinbrook Neighborhood Advisory Group (TNPAG) agreed upon.  She pointed out that there are eight chapters for traditional planning elements and eight appendices that cover a wide range of topics and support the chapter information.  Ms. Wallas stated that there are five primary catalysts that address the residential and nonresidential areas as well as the public realm.  Ms. Walls discussed the five primary catalysts.  1.  Residential neighborhoods – this is the primary land use in the area.  97-98 percent of the land is given to residential use; the majority of it is single-family housing.  The Advisory Group recommendation is to consider developing an overlay zone for the Twinbrook neighborhoods.  2 – The Public Realm – this is a recommendation to take a systematic approach to the use of the public facilities, the public realm in the area.  It brings together recommendations on transportation, recreation and parks, and the environment.  It is very much concerned with the connectivity and access to amenities within the neighborhood.  3.  Commercial Areas - There are three nonresidential areas:  the Veirs Mill Road commercial area and the industrial areas.  These are adjacent to the Twinbrook Metro Station on Lewis Avenue and some parcels at Ardennes and Twinbrook Parkway and the Burgundy Center.  The goal is to promote the renewal of the Twinbrook neighborhood commercial areas.  She noted that some of the sites that have the potential to change such as promote the renewal of the Twinbrook neighborhood and provide additional residential options, together with a wide range of goods and services to serve the neighborhood.  4.  Industrial Areas - promote the renewal of the Twinbrook neighborhood industrial areas and improve the transitional area between the two areas.  Retain the industrial and some commercial uses that serve the community while expanding the allowable uses to include residential.  5.  Burgundy Center - seek ways to improve the physical plant and traffic circulation.  Should the Center redevelop, it should do so within the existing zoning standards, which means about 30 feet high. 

Ms. Wallas discussed the next steps of the process. 

The following citizens testified:

1.  John Tyner, Chair of TNPAG – testified and thanked advisory group members and Planning Division.  He said he chaired the former group that put this plan together.  The draft document that is before the Planning Commission tonight is the result of a two-year process by fellow citizens.  He noted that the Planning issues in and of themselves require a dedication to detail and an acquired awareness of how every element affects every other element.  Mr. Tyner pointed out that the Advisory Group tried to make sure that its neighbors knew about the Plan.  As with all such plans, Twinbrook residents now have many opinions about the Catalyst recommendations.  

2.  Joseph McClane testified that he live in Cambridge Walk community.  He said he was a member of TNPAG.  He talked about that process.   He is very impressed with the give and take and it has taken over two years to come to the Plan they developed now.  A great deal of that time was spent in educating them on how the City works, educating them on zoning, educating them on how planning works, etc.  He stated that everything they put in the Plan worked someplace.  He is pleased with the public realm and industrial areas.  Mr. McClane talked about delaying the Plan, but they have worked on this for 2.5 years now.  They believe that the will of people is in the Plan.  The Plan is well thought out and he thanked the City Planning staff and advisory group members.  He said he hopes that the Mayor and Council honor the original schedule and get the Plan through just as soon as possible.

3.  Todd Harrison stated that he is Traffic and Transportation Chair with the TCA.  He thanked City staff and the citizens Advisory Group who took a lot of time to put this plan together.  Mr. Harrison read an article in the Washington Post describing Twinbrook.  He noted that Twinbrook is a modest neighborhood, and, it is not flashy, showy type of neighborhood, and the residents would like to maintain and preserve those characteristics.  The overall Plan does not preserve that.  This Plan says that Twinbrook should become denser and a more populated area.  This is contrary to the wishes of the neighborhood and it says nothing of affordable housing and is critical of preserving the neighborhood.  Mr. Harrison said he does not want a mini King Farm or something like Town Center, where there would be the potential for developers to come in and build luxury condos, or luxury apartments.  It would not fit in with their neighborhood and he strongly opposed the proposal in there to change to multi-use zoning.  Mr. Harrison said that the multi-use zoning should be taken out of the Plan and replaced with something else. 

Mr. Harrison stated that the Plan is lacking the bus transportation system, which is kind of buried in the Plan.  In addition, widening the roads and having one road for public transportation is not the way to go.  He said he believes there is a need to reconstitute the Advisory Group so it better suits the needs of their neighborhood.

4.  Lora Meisner, President of Burgundy Estates Civic Association testified that she is speaking on behalf of Leslie Strauss, who is the vice president of the civic association.  She said that they are the deciders and they are the ones to decide what their community should look like.  The citizens want to wait until RORZOR concludes.  She asked that the public hearing be postponed for several months to give the residents more time to consider everything that is in the Plan and because they want to see where RORZOR may be heading with zoning changes for the entire City. 

5.  Steve Elmendorf, Attorney with Linowes & Blocher presented six copies of written testimony to the Commission.  He said he was speaking tonight on behalf of AvalonBay Communities, a national developer of apartment communities and the owner of the site that was referenced briefly as one of the industrial areas.  The address is 12720 Twinbrook Parkway.  It is the current building that houses FDA, the FDA is in there doing R&D work.  Mr. Elmendorf stated that the purpose in testifying tonight is to request that the Planning Commission consider an amendment to the staff draft plan that would allow multi-family dwellings in this mixed-use industrial zone that is called for in this plan.  The reason for their request is that the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan calls for this site zoned I-1 to be a transitional buffer between the more intense, particularly the commercial development that is occurring and will occur around the Twinbrook Metro Station as well as the adjacent single family residential neighborhood.  Mr. Elmendorf stated that the lease for FDA is up in 2009 and the building would be vacant.  The concern is what is going to end up with a building with Class C type tenants or long period when that building will be vacant.  He recommended an amendment to allow multifamily as a special use.  It would be the best way to preserve that site.

Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Elmendorf if he presented his proposal to the TNPAG?  Mr. Elmendorf replied that they presented it to staff, and staff made their presentation for them to the advisory group.

6.  Jonathan Cox, Senior Vice President with AvalonBay Communities explained that his company acquired the property at 12720 Twinbrook Parkway in late 2004.  Mr. Cox discussed their concept of the site.  He stated that the site’s proximity to the Metro is a driver for smart growth initiatives throughout the area.  He said they tend to focus their developments in those types of locations.  Mr. Cox stated that the current concept is 240 units, which are 60 units to the acre.  That is dense for the Twinbrook neighborhood, but they believe it is a great transitional use between single-family residential and higher density commercial.   

7.  Rich Gottfried testified that he objects to the zoning in the Plan. He suggested that the three Twinbrook shopping areas be defined and zoned as retail use only.  He pointed out that the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan needs a lot more work, specifically defining R-60 zoning and mixed-use property.  He noted that the shopping centers need to be improved and upgraded.  He wants no more condos and houses or widening of roads, or adding more lanes.  Mr. Gottfried said that they do want mixed residential and no floating zones.  Twinbrook will be overcrowded as is on Rockville Pike.  He suggested having a Town Hall meeting so that the Twinbrook residents can talk about what they want.  Mr. Gottfried said that Twinbrook residents are much diversified and have households of Asian, Hispanic, and African-Americans.  The town hall should have separate tables, which have representatives from the various associations or City of Rockville staff who can answer questions about the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan into Spanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese.  

Commissioner Britton inquired whether there was any multi-lingual approach.  Ms. Wallas replied that staff sent out flyers announcing meetings in Spanish and English.  They were also sent home with children in backpacks.  Staff also went door to door to all of the businesses in the community and took flyers in with English on one side, and Chinese and Korean on the other side, as well as those in English and Spanish.  Staff also sought Vietnamese translation but could not get it.  Mr. Wasilak explained that a senior planner on staff, fluent in Spanish, was able to help those citizens. 

8.  Mary Ann Barnes testified that she bought her house in Twinbrook in 1966 and at that time Rockville was isolated from Washington, D. C. and public transportation.  She said she came here tonight to remind those who are here why the metro system was created in the beginning.  It was brought here to benefit Twinbrook and other residents and other uses in Rockville.  It was not created as a real estate holding corporation with a future intent to create large profits for residential and commercial land development in the future.  

9.  Eileen McGuckian representing Peerless Rockville stated that they have looked at the Plan from the perspective of the history of the Twinbrook neighborhood.  What is missing in the Plan and very much needed is a chapter on historic resources.  A commentary is needed on Twinbrook’s history, its architecture, and its place in Rockville’s total development.  Ms. McGuckian stated that Peerless Rockville believes that every Rockville plan should include a chapter on historic resources.  In this case, the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan’s historic resources chapter should include a discussion of history and architecture that moves quickly beyond the early years into the post-World War II period of this neighborhood’s unique significance.  Ms. McGuckian noted that Peerless Rockville would be happy to work with staff or the advisory group to develop such a chapter on historic resources.  

10.  William Neil testified that he supports the Plan, but citizens have a right to be fully informed.  He asked that staff give citizens a chance on what is coming.  Mr. Neil stated that he was a renter and lived on Gainsboro Road.  He said he moved to Twinbrook to take advantage of the proximity to the Metro.  He noted that Twinbrook is a safe neighborhood and affordable.  Mr. Neil expressed his concern regarding traffic, density and mixed use.

11.  Linda Bozzonetti testified that she is a resident of Twinbrook and has been on the TNPAG for almost two years.  She noted that the group started out with 22 members and now there are only eight people who are actual members of the committee.  This is because of the long process and many disagreements.  Ms. Bozzonetti stated that there needs to be something done about Veirs Mill Road.  It is a state road.  Ms. Bozzonetti explained that waiting for RORZOR is not fair to the community because they have been working on this plan for a long time.  She noted that she does not believe this plan needs to be prolonged beyond the July 30 date that is currently on the table. 

12.  Judy Miller testified that she is the Vice President of TCA and a member of the TNPAG. She stated that she has lots of concerns about the interaction between RORZOR and this plan.  The residents need some additional time to look at the Plan.  Ms. Miller said that she was concerned about the residential areas regarding the conservation districts in Twinbrook and she would not want the conservation to interfere with the improvement of their neighborhood.  Ms. Miller talked about mixed-use, zoning and they really need to know more about the mixed zone uses.  She also talked about floating zones.  Ms. Miller asked that the residents be given a chance to look again at this Plan as well as having more community input.  They want to take the time to develop a plan that really suits the community.

13.  Tracy Pakulniewicz-Chidiac, President of Cambridge Walk I, but she is not representing that HOA.  Ms. Pakulniewicz-Chidiac stated that she is in support of the Plan with the exception of the historic perspective.  It is a flexible plan.  It is a guideline for the future.  It is in line with the development trends of the City.  TCA is a good organization, but she believes it does not represent Twinbrook.  She asked the Commission to consider that in the Plan and urged them to pass this plan. 

14.  Harry Thomas testified that he supports the mixed use and he applauded the member of the TNPAG.  He noted that this is a good recommendation.  It can be tweaked so it is right for the Mayor and Council and give time for the citizens to come back.  Mr. Thomas suggested that everybody work together and not fight one another.

15.  Carl Harger testified that he is a homeowner in Rockcrest community.  He addressed concerns that are not perfectly clear in the Plan.  What potential impact would it have on his family?  Not clear.  He said he does not want to see any more towers, and big buildings with swimming pools on top.   

16.  Chris Cox, Allison Drive recently joined TCA because he is concerned about what is going on in Rockville.  He said he does not believe the Plan is finished.  He said he feels that the terms need to better defined.  He said he wants to know what the Plan would look like in twenty years. 

17.  Robert Ostlund stated that he was a member of the TNPAG.  He explained that after the group dragged on he began to attend less frequently.  He said he began following it on the Internet and talking to a few people whenever he could.  Mr. Ostlunor stated he believes the Plan needs to go back and be presented to the citizens again.  In his view, he wants to be insured that whatever was happening, it would not have an impact on him and his family.  One of the major things was the reduction in home improvements in the community.  This plan must be reviewed.  There has been low response from the community at meetings.  Where are we going with development in this country today?  Do we need more condos, or apts?  Mixed use is a good concept, but he does not want to lose industrial.  Mr. Ostlunor noted that the Plan should be delayed and RORZOR is a major contributor to this plan.

18.  Kevin Harris, Forbes Street asked what the Plan is going to look like in 20 years?  This plan does not answer that question.  Mr. Harris pointed out that he believes there is a lot of debate still to be had, and there is obviously a lot of disagreement in the community.  He suggested postponing the Plan because he thinks there is still a lot of work to be done.

19.  Colleen Garbel, Rockcrest testified that she is non-U.S. citizen, married to a U.S. citizen and they been very happy here in Rockcrest.  She said they are not familiar with the Plan.  She expressed a major concern regarding Veirs Mill Road.  Ms. Garbel stated that she has seen many accidents on a weekly basis.  There are no rail guards.  She noted that they have spent about $4,000 on improvement projects on their house.  They live on Veirs Mill Road where the service lane is slightly depressed from Veirs Mill Road.  She said that Veirs Mill Road is very dangerous on the service street where they live because of the accidents. 

20.  Kenneth Brown, Calvin Lane and works for JP Morgan Chase and deals with realtors all day long.  The people of the community all have different opinions and the Plan should listen to the needs of the community.  Mr. Brown noted that this plan should have definition.  What he sees in his job are developers without good plans.  The Plan should be defined concisely and in detail that would preserve the Plan.  He said that developers are taking advantage of loopholes.  Mr. Brown recommended that the Commission hold off on approving the Plan until it is well defined. 

21.  Linda Ekizian President of East Rockville CA, said she is on the advisory committee that wrote the East Rockville Neighborhood Plan.  She said she is now serving on the Stonestreet Implementation Task Force.  Stonestreet is the one commercial zone adjacent to the Rockville Metro Station property.  She said she is really here to speak to the Plan from both sides of it.  It is imperative that the Plan be specific on its vision.  These become blueprints for developers to use, as they desire.  The Plan is lacking the picture view of what the people want.  Floating zones are not good because they allow opportunities for developers that may not be the wish to the neighborhood.  They need to know what the neighborhood wants and the Plan is the way to get it known and published. 

Commissioner Hill asked Ms. Ekizian that based on her experience in other neighborhoods in the City, what are her observations on the best way to engage the neighborhood at this stage of the process.  Ms. Ekizian replied that the citizen associations are great mechanisms because even if the attendance in an ERCA meeting in an East Rockville meeting, they might have five people in a meeting room, but they sent out the minutes of the meeting to 100 households and received comments back from a number of them.  Ms. Ekizian said that the Internet is a great resource, and meetings.  She suggested that the citizen associations host meetings and let them get together and find ways.   

Commissioner Medearis spoke out as a former resident of Twinbrook.  She noted that, with the exception of the one non-U.S. citizen here tonight, Twinbrook does not have the representation here and that is a huge obstacle.  She stated that she does not believe East Rockville or West End face what Twinbrook does regarding diversity.   

Commissioner Wiener stated that East Rockville had subcommittees, which helped a lot in getting things done. 

Commissioner Medearis noted that it would be hard to come up with a solution with all the diversity in the community. 

22.  Deborah Smeal, Crawford Drive thanked the TNPAG for their work in the first place.  She said she would like to reiterate that need for definitions.  Lack of clear definitions would be a temptation to developers.  She said she would also like to see more defined descriptions of what the zoning would be for green spaces, setbacks, height limits, define the zoning before they really decide that this is the Plan they want. 

23.  Christina Ginsberg President of TCA testified that she agrees with them that it is difficult to reach the neighborhood.  This is a good turnout for them.  She said, while they support  appropriate and reasonable development, they are against a plan that recommends an increase on those two shopping centers of a six fold, order in FAR.  This is something that really does have to be considered in detail.  They are talking curb-to-curb development.  Ms. Ginsberg expressed concern about floating zones and if RORZOR comes back and wants floating zones, she believes the whole City would be concerned about that, not just Twinbrook.  Ms. Ginsberg stated that they would like to come back and give the Planning Commission a presentation in detail on how they want to fix the Plan.  She said they are prepared to spend another year on this plan.

24.  Irvin Charles Cohen testified that he does not live in Twinbrook, but he was there to talk about the process.  He noted the there are many people in the community who have not had the opportunity to speak.  The Planning Commission has the authority to run a second public hearing in lieu of rushing into something.   The Mayor and Council wanted to defer this public hearing and he believes they wanted to give a message that they want community input.  Mr. Cohen stated that AvalonBay was wonderful because they showed something concrete that people could look at.  Therefore, the people need a vision.  The public hearing allows the Planning Commission to be educated and that good judgment that they are expecting them to make.

The Commission discussed the fact that the public hearing opened their eyes on what the neighborhood wants. 

Commissioner Hill thanked the speakers for their input tonight and for the time it has taken, particularly for people recognized from last night from being here late.  He said it has been a big call to do a lot for the City this week, and he appreciated that input.  Commissioner Hill noted that, from what was discussed tonight, there is a gap in the detail and the description of the vision of the residents in the Plan.  He said he actually thought about it in terms of what the commercial space would look like.  He said he also hoped to hear a little more detail tonight as to whether there as been the recommendation of having a special R-60 Residential Zone for this neighborhood.  He said he really did not hear a lot of detail about whether the citizens knew anything about that.  Commissioner Hill pointed out that the definitions must be made clear; he recommended having a worksession about the Plan among the Planning Commissioners.  They   need to make an effort to reach out and engage the community.  They should hear what the community has to say and there still needs to be a lot of work done at the neighborhood/community level. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that staff will need to bring in resources in terms of urban design for the citizens to look at and understand. 

Commissioner Medearis suggested that pictures and visuals would help with the diversity. 

Commissioner Britton encouraged the citizens to attend a public session of RORZOR.  It frustrates him that there is no public showing at those public sessions.  He pointed out that developers attend and take notes. 

Commissioner Ostell noted that it is rare that the Planning Commission has closed a public hearing.  She said she sees no problem in keeping this public record open so that the citizens can review the Plan and create what they really want in the Plan and wait for input from the neighborhood with a revised Plan. 

The Commission discussed the process for revising the Plan.

Mr. Wasilak replied that staff can set up a group to work with the advisory group and property and business owners.  In this case, they would work with representatives of TCA and bring in advisory group members and the TCA to work on revising the Plan; it could be done on a similar note as East Rockville. 

Mr. Wasilak said that they could keep the public record open.  They need to have another formal public hearing on the revised document.  Commissioner Hill asked about the time frame.  Mr. Wasilak replied that they would reach out to the civic associations and get a better sense of what their timing might be and how they want to move their process forward to the point where staff can bring the advisory group and the associations together.  

Mr. Neil stated that they need to know the number of dwelling units in the neighborhood.  Commissioner Ostell stated that the Planning Commission needs to hear from the citizens. 

Ms. Ginsberg suggested that they come back on March 14 with a schedule.  Mr. Wasilak replied that the first meeting would be kind of what is going to be the process.  So, he felt that staff will need to meet with TCA and with the Burgundy Estates.  He said they could come back on March 14. 

Commissioner Britton asked if that would be a group effort by contacting all the citizen associations in Twinbrook.  This room does not have the representatives of Twinbrook who he thinks the Planning Commission would like to see.  So, that is part of the process they should probably hear about. 
Ms. Block explained that the Advisory Group should continue their process. 

Some citizens suggested needing a core group and come back with outreach proposals.  The Planning Commission should give them time to work up something. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that the residents need to come up with a plan that will allow the Planning Commission to move forward.  A plan should be brought back with a proposed membership of this group and some statement of resources available and then move forward.  He pointed out that March 28 would be better for the process for a briefing, only.

COMMISSION ITEMS

New Business

The Commission discussed the time limit for speakers such as five minutes for representatives and three minutes for individual speakers.

Chief of Planning Report

Mr. Wasilak stated that the next Commission meeting is scheduled for February 28.  He discussed some items that were to be on the agenda.  He noted that there will also be some items for March 14 and 28.

Mr. Wasilak reported on the Lincoln Park Neighborhood Plan, which will be adopted by the Mayor and Council with some revisions.  It is to be approved on March 26. 

Minutes

Commissioner Ostell moved, seconded by Commissioner Hill to approve the minutes of Meeting No. 23-06 as amended.  The motion passed on a vote of 4-0-2 with Commissioners Johnson and Wiener abstaining.

Commissioner Ostell moved, seconded by Commissioner Britton to approve the minutes of Meeting No. 2-07 as written.  The motion passed on a vote of 4-0-2 with Commissioners Hill and Wiener abstaining. 

FYI Correspondence

Mr. Wasilak distributed correspondence about the WINX property.  He noted that the property is on the market. 

After further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 9:56 p.m.