| Home > Government > Boards and Commissions > Planning Commission > 2008 > Minutes > October 22, 2008 |  |
Minutes of the Rockville Planning Commission Meeting No. 27-08 The City of Rockville Planning Commission convened in regular session in the Mayor and Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 5, 2008. | |||||||||
| |||||||||
REVIEW AND ACTION Use Permit USE2009-00712, Chabad Israeli Orthodox Synagogue – for the conversion of a single-family dwelling to a place of worship in the R-75 Zone at 216 Rollins Avenue.Mr. Chasten presented the staff report. In response to Commissioner Medearis, Mr. Chasten explained that the special exception for this use was filed two months ago and cannot proceed until the Planning Commission approves this application. In response to Commissioner Tyner, Mr. Chasten stated that religious institutions are permitted within residential zones as permitted uses. The special exception was filed for a childcare center and that is being held until this process is completed. Commissioner Tyner stated that he has noted in the staff report about permanently changing this from a residential home to a religious institution. Once it becomes a religious institution, it is no longer a dwelling unit. Mr. Chasten explained that if the Rabbi chooses to live there, it remains a residential use. Ms. Block explained that it does not mean that a commercial use is there. If it ceases to operate as a synagogue, it would then become a residence. Commissioner Hill stated that there are about two properties in Twinbrook that are very small religious institutions and nestled into the neighborhood fabric. He said he could not think of any other precedent in the City of taking a home and converting it into a religious institution. Mr. Chasten explained that the Zoning Ordinance was amended in the 90s to allow for these religious institution uses if they have orthodox congregations, which would not require a great deal of parking. Mr. Wasilak pointed out another example of a religious institution in Lincoln Park, which was a conversion of a single-family residence to a church on Westmore Avenue. Joav Steinbach, civil engineer, representing the applicant, explained the situation. He stated that the synagogue has operated in the house for more than five years. No one said anything about the use to the applicant and they also operated a childcare center in that home. Mr. Steinbach stated that there are many Jewish people who need this type of service and they have requested whether the daycare could take more children. Mr. Steinbach stated that the synagogue would not operate at the same time as the childcare center. He explained that as soon as they applied for a permit, many people began to complain about them and said they hear drums and music coming from the house. Mr. Steinbach noted that the next-door neighbor is in favor of the synagogue and is present tonight, but only for the synagogue, not the daycare use. Mr. Steinbach stated that the synagogue has a very small congregation of approximately 15 people attending services. On special holidays, they rent space from the Jewish Community Center (JCC) for larger services. On other Jewish holidays, approximately 20 people may attend the services. Mr. Steinbach pointed out that people, who are new to the area, drive to the next-door neighbor for Chabad, by mistake. He said that the Rabbi informs the congregation, at every service, that they are not allowed to drive to services and if they have to drive, they should park elsewhere and walk to the synagogue. The next-door neighbor entertains guests for dinner and many people drive to his house, but not to the synagogue. Mr. Steinbach stated that the use might only generate three vehicular trips to the site. In order to park on Rollins Avenue, people must have a permit on the synagogue’s side of the street (from 6 am to 6 pm), and on the other side of the street, there is ample parking and no permits are needed. Mr. Steinbach stated that nobody has ever said a word about the synagogue for the five years they have been occupying the house. Steve Van Grack, Attorney representing the synagogue stated that the synagogue has a very small congregation and they speak only Hebrew. The congregation has been operating for five years as a synagogue. He stated that the City has been aware of it, but the synagogue does not have a use permit. Mr. Van Grack pointed out that this issue began when the synagogue was seeking to expand the size of the day-care. The applicant has filed a use permit in order to meet the safety requirements. The fire inspector informed the applicant that they have to comply with the code, but the applicant does not know exactly what they have to do to comply with the code. The applicant will make this building a safe building. The synagogue really has had a fine relationship with the community; it has only been the recent efforts to try to expand the childcare center that has brought about some of the dissention. Rabbi Shlomo Beitsh talked about his synagogue. He talked about the noise complaints and the parking situation. He noted that all of the windows are closed when they have their meetings. If the noise had been an issue, it would have been brought up during the last five years. Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac questioned where there is a synagogue around the corner from Rollins Avenue. Mr. Steinbach replied that there are other synagogues in the area. This synagogue is very conservative and different from other synagogues. The congregation is comprised of mostly Hebrew-speaking people. Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac inquired why there is a “Do Not Enter” parking restriction sign on Rollins Avenue. Mr. Steinbach replied that that sign has nothing to do with the synagogue. She inquired how cars drive down the street and park during those restricted hours. Mr. Steinbach stated that there are many other ways to get to the synagogue. In response to the Commission, Mr. Van Grack stated that there is a very large conservative Jewish congregation located around the corner. He noted that this synagogue is an orthodox synagogue. He spoke of other congregations that are different in the area. He said this is a unique type of orthodox synagogue because the congregation speaks only Hebrew. The Commission discussed concerns regarding regulations of a religious institution; the expansion of the childcare center; parking restrictions on the street; placing a condition on the use permit that would limit the size of the congregation; impact of the synagogue on the neighborhood; and what type of religious event would require on-street parking. Commissioner Hill referred to a letter sent addressing loud singing coming from the property on Monday night about two weeks ago. Rabbi Shlomo Beitsh explained that during their services, they are not allowed to use a microphone or listen to any music. He stated that there was no service that night. In response to Commissioner Hill, Matt Shanks, Fire Code Inspector with the Inspection Services Division, explained the Fire Building Code requirements of a structure. A structure must be designed to the potential use or the maximum capacity for that structure. This building has a footprint of about 1,200 square feet. The way the building is constructed, both floors have to be taken into account, which amounts to approximately 2,400 square feet. The applicant is required to renovate the building in order to bring it into compliance with all applicable building, fire, and life safety codes. The applicant is required to install a sprinkler system in order to comply with applicable fire code requirements. The building must comply with the Fire and Building Code requirements to determine the maximum number of people in the facility as well as the exits and how they are designed. The more people in the space, the more exits are needed as well as a fire escape. The building itself, has to accommodate the total occupant capacity. Charles Baker, Chief of Inspection Services, explained the building code requirements. He explained the structural modification that would bring the building into compliance with the Fire Building Code requirements. Commissioner Tyner inquired about the Tree Save Plan. He asked if there would be any disturbance to the trees with the construction of a fire escape. Mr. Chasten explained that the applicant would be required to replace additional trees. He noted that the Forestry Plan has been approved. Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac inquired about the type of signage allowed outside the facility. Mr. Chasten stated that the applicant would have to go before the Sign Review Board to request approval for signage. Ms. Block explained the sign requirements. The following citizens testified: 1. William Meyer, 804 Leverton Road, testified that this use has been going on for five years without a use permit, by the applicant’s own admission. He asked how staff would be enforcing the use permit regulations. Mr. Meyer addressed the life safety code issues. Mr. Meyer pointed out that the use of the second floor of the structure should also be addressed. Mr. Meyer said that this issue erupted when the applicant wanted to expand the child daycare from 8 children to a child daycare center of 20 children. Mr. Meyer said that he assumes that the number of 8 children did not require a permit. He asked how much traffic this expansion would generate in the morning and the evening. 2. John Kalter, 1701 Mark Lane, testified that he lives two blocks away from 216 Rollins Avenue. He attends an occasional service at this synagogue and he walks there each time. He said that it is of great value to him and many people in the neighborhood. Mr. Kalter stated that his experience when he has attended service Saturday mornings is that there is a maximum of 15 people who attend the services, and on other occasions there are more, which is extremely rare. It is a very small congregation. He stated that there are many Israeli people in the neighborhood and they feel very comfortable with this service. If this synagogue were to be curtailed, he would feel a great diminishment to his quality of life in the neighborhood. It would also be a burden for many neighborhood residents. In response to Mr. Van Grack, Mr. Kalter stated that, rarely, would there be 20 or 30 people inside the house at one time. There are two occasions per year where there are more people and they move out to the back yard where everybody is happy and laughing, but he would not consider that as a party or a burden on the neighborhood. 3. Katherine Schwering, 3 Lorraine Court, testified that no one knew the synagogue was in operation for five years, partly because, they presumed the City would not allow it. Ms. Schwering stated that the first notice she had that the house was not a residence, was a sign in the front yard that was later removed. She assumed that the City would inspect the property and she asked whether the applicant had permission to operate a synagogue out of his house. The answer was no. Ms. Schwering stated that the first she knew that it was not intended to be a residence, was when she received the notice from the City that the applicant was requesting to expand the number of children of the daycare facility from 8 to 20 children. There were no complaints about the use because many neighbors did not know about it. Ms. Schwering stated that everyone on her court is opposed to the use permit. They do not feel there is a true need for another synagogue and there is a parking problem. Her neighbor is lobbying to put up parking signs. The extra parking is for private residents. Ms. Schwering noted that most people do not walk to the synagogue. They park elsewhere. They do not want anything that would increase traffic and add to their liabilities. It is a very busy street. She said she also has concerns about the use fitting into the neighborhood because the neighborhood already has a problem with maintaining the residential nature of it. They have had to call the police a number of times for Federal Plaza Shopping Center. 4. Anthony Bur, 623 Muriel Street, addressed the issue of walking versus driving. He showed pictures taken in August 2008 on a Saturday morning. The pictures show that beginning early in the morning, from 8:30 to 9:00 am, the street is empty of cars, both in front and opposite the house, and as the morning progresses, additional cars emerge. He noticed that all of the people getting out of those cars were going to 216 Rollins Avenue for the Saturday services. Mr. Bur stated that this situation was happening before the use permit was submitted. Mr. Bur stated that, beginning on Labor Day, there was no traffic for six weeks or more, except for one week in October, and he assumed that that was in preparation for tonight’s hearing. It raises the question that if the use permit is approved, would they then revert back to parking on the street in front of the house. Mr. Bur stated that each Saturday, five or eight cars park on the street and they also park in the apartment parking lot. He said he also observed cars driving into the neighborhood and dropping family members or friends on each of those Saturdays. He noted that at least two cars did that. 5. Susan Kirschenbaum, 200 Rollins Avenue, testified about the parking situation. She talked about her daycare at 200 Rollins Avenue and the fact that the applicant is operating a daycare without a license. In response to Commissioner Tyner, Ms. Kirschienbaum stated that she speaks Hebrew. She said that her daycare has been in operation since 1984. In response to Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac, Ms. Kirschienbaum stated that she informed the applicant that he must apply for a permit to operate his daycare center. 6. Patrick Curtin, 608 Rollins Avenue, testified that they were the very first residents in the neighborhood. He is there on behalf of his parents who are against this application. He said that there are many Jewish establishments within the area. He spoke about the parking, which is believes is not an issue. He said he has a real concern about the expansion; the structures are very sound and can accommodate 30-35 people. There are enough religious organizations in the area. Mr. Curtin stated his concern, which is where does it stop. 7. Patricia Ellaurie, 315 Lorraine Drive, testified that her backyard is directly behind the two properties that are used as a child daycare facility and synagogue. Ms. Ellaurie stated that 214 Rollins Avenue is also used by the Rabbi. She said she is directly affected by the synagogue. A few years ago there was noise at 11 or 12 at night. She spoke about the noise and said she called the police twice that night. The police arrived and spoke to the Rabbi about the noise. After that, there was quiet for about five minutes, and then the noise began again. She said she called the police once again. So, saying that there is never any noise at that residence is not true. This happened again last month and she has written to Mr. Chasten about the incident. Ms. Ellaurie stated that, to say that there is no noise, singing or drumming, is not true, because her bedroom faces the back of the applicant’s house. Ms. Ellaurie addressed a large sign that was located on the front lawn of the applicant’s property. After she had called the police about the noise, the sign disappeared a while later. 8. Amid Berger, 218 Rollins Avenue, testified that he moved to the neighborhood almost three years ago from Gaithersburg. Mr. Berger explained that the reason why he moved was to help out the Israeli Center. He noted that he feels a bit responsible for some of the concerns of the neighborhood. Mr. Berger explained that he is very involved in the Israeli community in the area. Therefore, many people come to his house for holidays and parties. Some of the people are here for the wrong reasons. Because they are very sensitive to that community and to the people, they are very careful about anything they hear. The majority of the people are from the neighborhood. He stated that he has about 15-20 people come to his house every Saturday. He is also negotiating with a business nearby for additional parking. In response to Commissioner Hill, Mr. Berger stated that he was the blame for the noise reported on that night in October. Ms. Ellaurie pointed out that she knows that this property is in the R-75 Zone and it is residential, which concerns her. If the use permit is approved, why does she have to call the police, when services are supposed to end at 8:00 pm? Ms. Ellaurie stated that the applicant does have parties outside and she knows it is not just 15 people. Commissioner Wiener questioned staff why the City has allowed the operation of the synagogue for five years without a permit. She asked why this is constantly happening and is not being enforced. Mr. Wasilak responded by explaining that the City does rely on complaints from citizens. The City does have Code Enforcement officers who are out in the neighborhood, but they really do rely on complaints from citizens. If they find things out there that are different or they know has come about, they do inform staff. Ms. Block stated that this application is a prime example in that the applicant came in for one permit and staff found that the synagogue was not in compliance. The Commission and staff discussed concerns about the use permit transferring to a new owner of the house; the synagogue not being in compliance with the use permit requirements and fire code regulations; the parking situation on the street; the applicant owning the neighboring property, and further clarifying Condition 1 regarding permitted times and days of operation of the religious services. In response to questions from Commissioner Tyner, Mr. Van Grack stated that the applicant owns 214 Rollins Avenue and it is his residence. He said that the applicant also owns 216 Rollins, which is where the child daycare was operating with 8 children before the applicant submitted the special exception for a childcare center. Mr. Van Grack answered a question from Commissioner Hill as to whether the synagogue would be willing to restrict its hours and he would recommend to them that there be no restriction on the hours of operation. Mr. Van Grack stated that the applicant has a permitted right to operate a synagogue out of 216 Rollins Avenue and they are coming forth to the City to formalize the use and they will meet the code requirements. The services have been operating for a long time and there have not been enough complaints to bring it to the attention to the City. He said he understands the concerns of the neighbors, but he feels they do not have the right to do anything about it. Commissioner Hill stated that in one of the letters submitted by one of the neighbors, who wrote that one of her concerns of this application is that it is the opportunity to expand non-residential activities in a home that is clearly located in the midst of a residential zone. She wrote that she believes that residential zoning is in place for the protection of the individuals and families who live in our neighborhood. Commissioner Hill further stated that the Commission must make a legal finding that this use would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of the neighborhood. He asked Mr. Van Grack why the Commission should make that finding. Mr. Van Grack explained that the Mayor and Council of the City have said that there is a right to have a religious institution operating under these circumstances. If there is an objection to that, it goes back to the codification of what the Commission is dealing with and he believes that the Commission has no discretion, for he believes that the use is an absolute right; the synagogue has been there for five years and they should be allowed to operate the synagogue as described at 216 Rollins Avenue. The Commission further discussed concerns about Condition 1 in the staff report regarding the use and operation of the synagogue; limiting the size of the congregation, complying with the noise ordinance, the fact that no one lives in the house at 216 Rollins Avenue; the use altering the character of the neighborhood; parking issues; limiting the hours of operation; limiting the impact on the surrounding residents; encouraging the applicant to work with the neighborhood; that some individuals drive to services in lieu of walking; possibly restricting the times of religious services of the Sabbath and principal religious holidays; that the appearance of the house remain residential; limiting the façade changes to the house; and, according to the Mayor and Council, this use is a permitted use. Ms. Block explained that the use is permitted and the Commission has no basis to find that the use is not permitted. The Commission does have the right to look at how the synagogue operates such as how close is the synagogue to the neighboring house; whether the windows are open during services; and if the services extend many hours beyond the regular hours of operation. Commissioner Tyner moved, seconded by Commissioner Hill to approve Use Permit USE2009-00712, Chabad Israeli Orthodox Synagogue, per staff recommendations subject to one additional condition, “That Chabad Israeli Orthodox Synagogue is encouraged to work with the neighborhood to try to reach an accommodation concerning the ambient noise level of all synagogue operations”. After reviewing what the results are and how the synagogue accomplishes the Fire Marshall’s requirements and the next application through which the Commission will be making recommendations to the Board of Appeals, the Commission can fully explore what has been discussed this evening. Mr. Chasten asked Commissioner Tyner that he feels that Condition 1 in the staff report needs to be further clarified because it states that use and operation of the synagogue will be limited to religious services on the Sabbath and principal religious holidays. Commissioner Tyner said he had no problem with Condition 1. Ms. Block explained that there are no synagogue operations during the week. After further discussion, the motion passed on a vote of 4-0-1 with Commissioner Hill abstaining, based on legal advice to the Commission and that he cannot, in fact, make the finding that there is something distinct about this particular site. He is very concerned about the impact of this particular institutional use on the neighborhood embedded within a residential structure in the middle of this particular area. Commissioner Medearis left the meeting due to a prior commitment. COMMISSION ITEMS Old Business Mr. Wasilak reported that he prepared a draft letter to be sent to Montgomery County Public Schools’ (MCPS) demographer for Planning Commission review. Commissioner Hill mentioned one specific detail to address, which is the fact that the current projected enrollment in 2 years is significantly less than the permanent enrollment. He asked about the trigger mechanism that creates that situation. That is the particular detail he would like the MCPS to explain to the Commission and the public. Mr. Wasilak explained that based on discussions staff has had with MCPS, it really depends on the size of kindergarten class to a large degree. He stated that Park and Planning does a survey every few years and they update the generation figures. The Commission discussed concerns regarding the projected enrollment regarding Beall Elementary School, such as the economic downturn; and asking staff to make the changes of the draft letter through email to the Commissioners. Mr. Wasilak provided the Historic District recommendations on Fleet Street for the Commission review. New Business Mr. Wasilak reported that at the Mayor and Council meeting on Monday evening, it was pointed out by William Meyer that the Planning Commission Annual Report had not been completed. It will be coming to the Planning Commission soon for review. The crux of Article 66B, is that the report intended to convey to the Mayor and Council all the planning applications and inventory of actions taken by the Planning Commission for calendar year 2007. The Commission discussed Commission term limits. The Mayor and Council voted to enact term limits on commissioners across the board. Ms. Block explained that it is a policy in order to give citizens a chance to serve. Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac questioned how the policy works for a person who is appointed to fill a Commissioner’s term. Ms. Block explained that she understood the policy means that it limits the number of re-appointments, not the number of terms. Chief of Planning Report Master Plan Update Mr. Wasilak reported that there was no worksesson on the Master Plan this evening because Long-Range Planning staff informed him that they had to go back to senior staff to make sure they everything was in its correct form before they forwarded the information to the Commission. Mr. Wasilak stated that the Commission will have a worksession on the Master Plan at its next meeting on November 19. He noted that the Mayor and Council will have a Discussion and Instructions to staff on the Zoning Ordinance at its meeting of November 17, and on December 8 will be the Introduction of the Ordinance, Adoption of the Ordinance is scheduled for December 15, 2008. Mr. Wasilak reported that the public record for the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan closed last Friday and there were 28 comments received by the Mayor and Council. He noted that worksessions probably will not begin with the Mayor and Council until after the first of the year. Commissioner Tyner inquired about the upcoming Commission retreat. He stated that the Commission needs to have a hash-out session on some of the issues. Commissioner Tyner asked about the Bethesda Traffic Management proposal for the White Flint area and how the Rockville Pike plan would be affected as well as impacts on the City. Commissioner Tyner recommended that the Commission review the proposal regarding future development. Commissioner Hill commented on whether City staff has visibility into the West Gaithersburg Development Plan and Life Sciences Center located across the road from Fallsgrove and its potential impact. The Commission discussed the Draft Zoning Ordinance and the Planning Commission’s Rules of Procedure. Minutes The Commission deferred the minutes of Meeting Nos. 25-08, 4-08, 5-08, 6-08, 7-08, 8-08, 9-08 and 10-08 until the next Commission meeting. FYI Correspondence Mr. Wasilak stated that the next meeting will be November 19, 2008. Commissioner Pakulniewicz-Chidiac stated that she would not be present at the meeting. ADJOURN After further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 10:06 pm. | |||||||||