Well, today is October 6th, 2025, and we'll begin meeting number 24-25.

We're gonna start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Please join me as you're able.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation, unto God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Okay.

So today is a special day.

Uh once a month we do our certificates and proclamations, and so we're gonna begin.

We do have several uh proclamations and recognitions for folks in the community.

And so if my colleagues would join me.

Did you agree to take case on that?

Okay.

Again.

Afternoon, good early evening.

It's so beautiful.

It's kind of hard to imagine that's actually fall outside.

Sometimes I wish we can hold these meetings outside, but I'm not the mayor, so I'll stay in my lane.

We have to go back to that.

Yes, ma'am.

I have the honor to recognize one of our own.

Um it's I would what go so far as to say a native son returning home.

Today we are going to recognize Nicholas Lo Priato, Dr.

Lo Priato, Commander O'Priato, in his um in recognition of his recent earning his next rank, his promotion.

Um his father is in and mother longtime residence, and Nicholas did a lot better than I did in the Navy and sticking with it and uh to this day proudly serves at Walter Reed, taking care of uh many children as an orthopedic surgeon.

With that, I'll go ahead and read this recognition.

It says that the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland recognize and congratulate Nicholas Patrick Lo Priato, commander, United States Navy Medical Corps.

The mayor and council proudly recognize and extend their sincere congratulations on the promotion of Nicholas Patrick Loprial to the rank of commander in the United States Navy.

Your distinguished service, exceptional education, professional qualifications, strong leadership, and unwavering dedication have all contributed to the significant milestone in your naval career.

We thank you for your exemplary service to the United States and wish you continued success in all your future endeavors.

And please continue to accept my preferred patients.

Please come up.

Family, y'all come up too.

We have a new edition too.

You know, maybe it's still on the show now.

Oh, yeah.

Thanks very much.

Thank you so much.

Yep.

All right.

Okay.

Okay.

Um, and I will ask my colleague, Councilmember Jackson, uh, to join me on this proclamation.

I figured it would be a wonderful bookend.

Um we're honored to be able to read uh the proclamation for ageism awareness day.

Um, and why I thought it was important is that I am the mayor and council liaison to the youth commission.

And I am the liaison to the commission on aging.

And so I think that it was really important for both of us to to speak to this because ageism is a continuum.

It does not lie within one age group or the other.

Everybody can be impacted by it.

It is insidious, it's pervasive, and I think there's a lot that we can do in our everyday life to ensure that our actions do not make feet people feel less than um anywhere along the spectrum because of their age.

And I think there's a lot that we can do in our everyday life to ensure that our actions do not make feet people feel less than anywhere along the spectrum because of their age.

So that is my spiel.

So I guess we'll do these two.

Okay.

You want to start with that one.

Sure.

Whereas ageism refers to the stereotypes, how we think, prejudice, how we feel, and discrimination, how we act towards others based on age and whereas ageism awareness and preventing ageism are beneficial to all residents of Rockville, Maryland, by improving the quality of life within our communities.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim October 2025 as age and awareness month, and want to emphasize the profound impact of meaningful interactions and social connections on the well-being and healthy or and health of older adults in our community.

We call upon all residents, regardless of age, to recognize the contribution of both older and younger residents and promote programs and activities that foster connection, inclusion, and support for all.

Madam Mayor, we moved, I moved the proclamation.

I will second it.

All those in favor, please.

Hi.

Thank you for your question.

Oh, sorry.

Yeah.

Oh.

I think that we have Torrance Dawkins here, is what I was gonna say.

Oh, we do?

Is Torrance Dawkins here?

Yes.

Come on.

I apologize.

I didn't have that on the street.

Okay, all right.

So no one is here.

Okay.

All right.

Yeah, never mind.

All right.

I have great hair.

We can all accept that one.

I love the sense of humor of my colleagues.

All right.

So I have the honor of uh acknowledging youth sports.

I will say I am a sports mother.

Uh my house is like PT and uh physical therapy, and I I really uh think that uh sports contribute to confidence, they help our children.

Um and we also need to make sure it's safe for all.

Um I also want to acknowledge our recreation and parks team.

They plan incredible sports leaks for our children, but part of uh recognizing uh this sports week, which is October 6th to 11th, we're also committing to a bill of rights for children to make sure that's a sports are safe and uplifting, and the city of Rockville will be committing to this as well.

I also wanted to flag that there will be an event on October 9th, it's a countywide recognition event um during National Sports Week.

So please check out the county's page for that.

And I'll read the proclamation.

Whereas youth sports are vital to healthy child development, linking participation to improve health, academic success, social connection, and life satisfaction in line with Rockville's commitment to community well-being.

And whereas national strategies such as Healthy People 2030 and the National Youth Sports Strategy call on communities to expand access to safe, inclusive, and supportive sports, opportunities for all children and youth, regardless of background or ability.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville do hereby proclaim their support for the children's bill of rights, as well as October 6th through 11th as National Sports Week.

And we also affirm the city's commitment to ensuring that every child has the opportunity to play, grow, and thrive through sports.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council in the city of Rockville do hereby proclaim October 6th through 11th as National Youth Sports Week and call upon our residents, coaches, parents, schools, and community organizations to join in celebration to uplift our athletes to celebrate their achievements, to promote safe and inclusive and fun opportunities for play and for advancing Rockville's proud tradition of excellence of recreation and community life.

Councilmember Shaw moves proclamation, Dr.

Miles Seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Excellent.

And check out our Rockville leagues as well.

And now I'd like to invite up Torrance Dawkins.

Come on up.

Yes, please.

How are you, buddy?

You play sports?

Yeah.

Okay.

Do you want to say anything?

It's up to you.

No pressure.

No pressure.

So here we go.

All I can say is I've been uh coaching at the city of Rockville for I'm about to tell my age now.

35 years now.

I started out with wow, some of you guys might know Anthony Gumby and Yvette Yobas.

Yes, her husband, uh coast him.

You see what sports can do for you.

Oh yeah, it keeps me young.

As well as coaching with Sarah's daughter.

And now still going and I have my grandson, so I'm gonna keep on going and besides that, Derek and I'm not gonna let me go anyway.

We'll see you for the next for the next 35.

Yes.

Oh, thank you so much.

Thank you, thanks for what you do so.

I'm up there to you.

So I've got the honor to uh read the proclamation for Indigenous People's Days.

And it's important, as we often say here in Rockville before a lot of our programs, all of our work sessions.

We have to remember this land was not ours.

This land was not the city of Rockville land.

It started with the indigenous peoples who were here.

And it's important that we recognize that, and it's important that we honor their heritage throughout the city of Rockville.

And that's why it's important to remember that and why this proclamation of what's happening next week is so important.

Whereas the second Monday in October is recognized by the City of Rockville, Maryland as Indigenous Peoples Day.

And whereas this day honors the vibrant cultures, traditions, and histories of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim Monday, October 13th, 2025, as Indigenous People's Day in Rockville, Maryland, and call upon all members of the community to join us in celebrating with our family, friends, and neighbors.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Hi.

Ms.

Do we not have any?

We'll post all these on the website.

You don't need a pitch.

We had pictures all the time.

All right.

I am honored to give the next proclamation in honor of Diwali.

Whereas Diwali is a festival of lights and one of the major festivals celebrated by Hindus, Jains, and some Buddhists.

And whereas the festival lasts five days and is celebrated during the Hindu lunisolar month Kartika between mid-October and mid-November.

And whereas Bandi Chur Devas is celebrated by Sikhs on the last day of Dawali as the liberation of Guru Hargo Mind from imprisonment and will be commemorated on the same date.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of Rockville, Maryland, hereby proclaim October 20th, 2025 as Diwali in Rockville, and invite all residents to understand its principles and enjoy the celebration of the victory of light over darkness, good over evil, and knowledge over ignorance.

The city encourages everyone to share the principles of the festival of lights and to share love for all residents of Rockville and beyond.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

And before I read, I just wanted to underscore how vital economic development is for Rockville, especially as we deal with job losses from the federal government.

Growth only happens when all of us, businesses, leaders, entrepreneurs, work together to create new opportunities.

Whereas the economic growth and stability of the state affect all regions and jurisdictions of Maryland.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council hereby proclaim the week of October 20th through the 24th, 2025, to be economic development week in the city of Rockville.

In recognition of the importance of economic development and its role in supporting the business community, creating new and dynamic opportunities for residents and visitors and enhancing the fiscal health of the city.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Councilman Bank Rank seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say.

Thank you.

And you can say a few words.

So I'm Nancy Reglin and this is Beh Ma, and we're the chair and vice chair of the board of directors of Rockville Economic Development.

We've been very proud as an economic development agency to serve the city of Rockville since 1997 to make it a destination of innovation and vitality and to make it a great place for everyone here to live, work, and play.

So if you're not familiar with Ready, please make sure that you check out a lot of our presence online.

So Rockville Ready.org.

Or if you're interested in things to do around the city of Rockville, you can check out Explore Rockville.org.

Or if you're in the biotech industry, you can check out our new website, biotechcorridor.org.

And so at this time, I just want to say thank you for the support from the city of Rockville for economic development.

We continue to work very hard on all of yours behalfs.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, everyone.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I know she wanted to appreciate and honor National Arts and Humanities Month.

I also serve as the council liaison for the Cultural Arts Commission.

There's a meeting this week if you want to check it out.

But arts and culture and history have enriched our community.

The city of Rockville, you may not know this has walking tours where you can see where our artwork is.

And it's all throughout our public spaces, but also in some of the private spaces.

There also have been a number of events celebrating arts.

The F Scott Fitzgrad Literary Festival is coming up in October.

And I know that F.

Scott's gel is buried here, and we're celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Great Gatsby.

And just the weekend before last, my colleagues and I cut the ribbon on the new F.

Scott Fitzgerald Theater, which has been made more accessible, more sustainable, and including more opportunities for the arts.

So we are committed to arts and humanities here in the city of Rockville, and you can see multiple art galleries north and east and west of the city.

They have a fantastic gallery right in town center, and Glenview Mansion has a free art gallery that you can go and check out any time.

Now I will read the proclamation.

Whereas the month of October has been recognized as National Arts and Humanities Month by thousands of communities, cities and states across the country, as well as by the White House and Congress.

Arts and Humanities enhance the senses, stimulate creativity, and enrich every American.

Now, therefore, the Mayor and Council of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim October 2025 as National Arts and Humanities Month in Rockville, Maryland, and call upon our residents to celebrate and promote the arts and culture in our nation and to specifically encourage the greater participation by those residents and taking action for the arts and humanities in their own towns and cities.

Colleagues, can someone move the proclamation?

Councilman Van Crack moves.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Valerie Seconds, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

All right.

Welcome Karen Asken, who also serves as the chair of the Cultural Arts Commission.

We also have, while she's coming up, Great Rescoes.

These are nonprofit organizations that help to do a lot of arts.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

In listening to other people come up ready.

It dawns on me that Rockville really is an amazingly diverse place that is made better by us all working together.

So I'm very excited to accept this proclamation.

And I also want to thank the city for its longtime support of VizArts.

We um we really believe that the arts help us speak when words cannot.

And whether it's dancing, like Barry and Adam, you know, I don't know whether you've caught their great video online celebrating is it a new hotel?

Yep.

The Helton.

Um actually the mayor did it as well.

She didn't make it onto the video that I saw.

But you know, the arts are everything, dance is included.

Um so uh in honor of uh that it does we all rise together.

I let um our city manager know today that um VizArts is going to be offering free classes to furloughed um federal workers.

Um it's our way of saying come in, be creative, reduce your stress.

Let's um let's let's um focus on the positive things that the arts are all about.

So thank you and um I hope y'all sign up.

Well, you have been furloughed, but um make sure your constituents and your friends and your neighbors know that there's a place for them, and uh I look forward to seeing them.

So I have the honor of reading breast cancer awareness month.

And before I read the proclamation, I just want to remind everyone to schedule your mammogram and urge the women in your life to also do the same early detection saves lives.

Whereas October is referred to as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the United States.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the City of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim October 2025 as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month in Rockville, Maryland, and call upon all members of the community to join us in encouraging and supporting those experiencing treatment and celebrating our survivors.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Council Mel seconds.

All those in favor, please lose your motion.

Thank you.

So the next proclamation is something that's pretty serious, and that's bullying.

And it's important to address bullying.

I know we've got numerous members from a number of our Rockville schools here today, and that's important because bullying often starts in the schools, but bullying is everywhere.

Bullying is in the workplace.

Bullying is on the streets, it's everywhere, and it's important that we recognize that this is something that we need to stand up to.

And it's important here in Rockville because one of the worldwide proponents of kindness in the anti-bullying spirit is from Rockville, Maddie JT Stop.

We've got a park named after Maddie.

And I know Maddie's mom wanted to be here, but unfortunately, what she is doing right now is teaching kindness in actually programs here in Rockville.

And I think it's important when we're talking about bullying.

The way to combat bullying is with kindness.

I want to read a quote from Rockville's Matty JT Stapanic.

Kindness matters.

Be kindness for each other and for our world.

Kindness is a critical characteristic of peace.

And I think what Maddie would say, it's also critical characteristic of combating bullying in our society.

Whereas bullying is the most common form of violence in our society.

More than 70% of young people nationwide say they have seen bullying in their schools.

And 30% have admitted to bullying others.

Membership in either the bully or the victim group is closely associated with actually dropping out of school, poor social development, criminal activity, and other negative long-term consequences.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do here probably proclaim October 2025 as national bullying prevention month and ask that everyone be models for our children and adults to help combat bullying behavior through kindness, empathy, and compassion towards others.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Thank you.

Councilmember Jackson seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Hi.

Now I know we've got members of a number of our Rockville schools.

And if you'd like to come up, accept the proclamation and say a few words.

And I also want to thank you all for coming because it shows the dedication that our Rockville schools have with regard to bullying.

Do you guys want to say a few words?

Yep.

So I'm Dr.

Penn.

I am accepting this on behalf of Principal Powells at Rockville High School.

I can tell you one of Principal Powell's core values is to make sure that every student, staff member, and even parent, when they walk through our building, that there's a level of respect and that we lead with love, and we are imitating that for our students to show the same.

And so she definitely wanted to make sure that someone from the school was here to accept this tonight because it means so much to her.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And likewise, my name is Matt Martini.

I'm here representing Alicia Deene and uh Richard Montgomery High School community.

Um similar to what's been echoed tonight.

We feel that obviously academic excellence is what we achieve for in schools, but that's hard to do if kids don't feel safe.

And so we firmly believe that every student that walks through our halls undoubtedly feels safe, secure, so that they can just worry about kid problems, algebra test, English essays, and not worry about what's going to be said or done to them.

Thanks.

Thank you so much.

Uh good evening, um, Dr.

Bostick at uh Thomas Wood High School depressable there.

Um and I echo my colleagues here that every day we want our kids to walk into the building and feel a sense of belonging, and not only our kids, but our staff as well.

Uh we want everyone to feel like when they walk in that building, they have a sense of the lifestyle and mood that they're gonna feel each day, and that's important to us because if you're not psychologically safe or you don't feel safe, then it's hard to feel like you belong and you could be a functional member of a community.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

There you go.

That's very nice.

Thank you.

We will now move on to the proclamation, which is very timely for today because we'll be talking about the zoning ordinance rewrite.

And I want to acknowledge the planning commission because they do so much work.

If you ever watched a meeting, they're what they're reading packets that are quite dense, making very important decisions about our community, how we welcome new neighbors, how we do placemaking, and how we create a safe and welcoming community for all.

And so with that, I'd like to read the proclamation for planning, and I'd also like to thank our staff.

Tireless hours, lots of feedback from the community, and it's what makes Rockville a special place to live work in play.

So thank you.

Whereas change is constant and affects all cities, towns, suburbs, counties, rural areas, and other places, whereas planners can help navigate this change with data-driven insights and expertise that provides better choices for how people work and live.

Whereas community planning provides an opportunity for all residents to be meaningfully involved in making choices that determine the future of their community.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim the month of October 2025 as community planning month in the city of Rockville, Maryland, in conjunction with the celebration of National Community Planning Month throughout the country.

I'd like to welcome our planning commission member, Susan Pittman.

Welcome.

We'll move it.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

It's been moved.

I'll second it.

All right.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

All right.

Come on up.

Thank you so much.

Madam Mayor and Council members, thank you for recognizing the value of community planning.

Thoughtful, people centered planning has the potential to elevate the quality of life for every resident of Rockville now and well into the future.

Thank you for creating the context for our community to do this essential work.

And special thank you to the community planning and development staff.

You are instrumental in the work that we do and supporting our efforts.

And Jim Waselak is here tonight.

He's the long-term chief of zoning and is uh Chief Sherpa of the Planning Commission.

We appreciate you so much, Jim.

Thank you.

Jim, do you want to come up?

Yep.

Jimmy.

He likes to be behind the scenes.

No, no, you have to be in front of the scenes.

So it is my pleasure to read the proclamation proclaiming the October 2025 as National Disability Employment Merlin Awareness Month.

I said it before, but it repeats, uh, bears repeating.

Everyone can join the ranks of the disabled, whether from birth or because of the chronic disease, a car accident, or a sudden health issue like a stroke.

To this end, we have made wonderful strides in making the workplace more accessible, broken down barriers to those with a disability in the workplace, and through the landmark Americans for Disabilities Act, the ADA.

Disabilities no longer have to be a barrier for productive work for many Americans.

There are many nonprofits and employers who are cooperating in ways to help break down those barriers.

Among them is the ARC of Muggama County and SSEC, which stands for Seeking Employment, Equality, and Community for People with Developmental Disabilities, who partners with businesses like SurfPro to hire employees with disabilities for the mutual benefit of both employees and employers.

Sticking with the local Rockville theme, uh, I would be remiss not to point out our own sunflower bakery in Twinbrook, which enables pathways for employment for young adults and teens with learning dis uh uh differences through pre-employment exposure and workforce development, training in space free arts, culinary arts, hospitality, and related industries.

Now I'm honored to read the proclamation.

Whereas October 2025 is National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and this year marks its 80th anniversary with a theme, celebrating value and talent.

And now therefore, the mayor and council of the City of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim October 2025 as a national disability employment awareness month in Rockville, Maryland, and urge everyone to embrace the talents and skills that individuals with disabilities bring to our workplaces and our communities and affirm our commitment to an inclusive community.

With that, Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Thank you.

Councilmember seconds, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

So I don't think we have uh anybody uh scheduled.

I did talk to uh Sunflower, and they were uh they cannot be here today to celebrate uh this uh proclamation or accept it.

Umflower is a kosher uh facility, so they're closed on all Jewish uh holidays.

But it did ask me to read this brief statement.

Sunflower Bakery is honored to be recognized for our work in closing the employment gap for young adults with learning disabilities, differences, sorry.

Through our workforce development programs, we create pathways to employment that builds a more inclusive workforce, strengthens our community, and fosters a brighter future for our graduates.

Oh, you're am I going?

Yes, thank you.

Uh we thank my colleagues and Madam Mayor for the opportunity to present with my colleague a sobering yet necessary proclamation.

It's a recognition of October being domestic violence awareness month.

Uh, before we begin reading, I just want to offer a couple of lessons I've learned.

Um my journey dealing with domestic violence is one that society often doesn't see.

During that journey, I've learned two very important lessons.

One, domestic violence doesn't discriminate.

It affects all socioeconomic statuses, races, religions, sexual orientations.

Umbody is left immune.

Two, there are resources available.

Even here in Montgomery County, we have the Montgomery County Crisis Center and Abused Persons Program.

I personally benefited from their services.

Um, if for no other reason than to have an unbiased person hear a story, make some recommendations that prompted me to make recommendations as well.

Thank you.

Uh and like Dr.

Miles, I also uh come to this space with some lived experience, and it is not easy for me to share, but I am grateful for all of my colleagues uh and for their support in providing this opportunity.

I am a survivor of domestic violence.

I once believed uh I found a perfect partner, and that dream was suddenly shattered.

And I was forced to leave my home and facing a real daunting task of managing the mortgage alone.

And I became a landlord, not necessarily by choice, but by survival.

Uh and I came to Rockville seeking safety, a reputation that this city has rightfully earned, and one I am committed to upholding as a council member.

I understand the constant fear of looking over your shoulder and the struggle to break free, uh, a battle that I fought several times.

And the turning point was the unwavering support I found here through the Crisis Center, the Family Justice Center, nonprofits, and shelters, some shelters that I used for a bed sometimes.

Um the being empowered by local government and resources in my community.

I transitioned from a survivor to a council member, now shaping uh my housing and public safety policies and my insight and how I do uh insights and how I do form policies was shaped by my journey.

And so um I wanted to read the proclamation, whereas the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence reports that on average, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner in the United States, and victims of intimate partner violence lose a total of eight million days of paid work each year.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland to hereby proclaim October 2025 as National Domestic Violence Awareness Month and call upon everyone to speak out against domestic violence, to support organizations that assist domestic violence victims in our community and to help victims of these crimes find the assistance and healing that they need by sharing the 24-hour hotline at 1-800-799 safe.

That's 800 799-7233.

Uh, and the TTY number 800 787-324.

With that, maybe Madam Mayor, we move the proclamation.

A second.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

We'd like to uh call up Miss Judith Clark, who's done amazing work in the community with survivors.

Thank you, Miss Judy.

And as she comes up, just want to thank our colleagues for allowing us a bit of an audible to present this.

It means a lot to us both.

So thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hi, everybody.

I'm Judy Clark.

And um, on behalf of Women Who Care Ministries, we're deeply honored to receive this proclamation tonight.

And we're also proud to share Rockville's shared vision of safety, because we believe that every resident deserves safety, dignity, and freedom from fear and harm.

And our mission is to help victims break free from the clutches of abuse and to rise as survivors.

And in times like this, when so many of us are struggling on so many levels, we're committed to spreading encouragement, compassion, and light wherever dark tries to linger.

And that's why we're also grateful for once again, City of Rockville standing beside us and being the core sponsor of our upcoming Restore the Joy Empowerment Luncheon, which takes place on November 15th.

And you're all invited to attend.

And if you are a victim or survivor of domestic violence, and if you're a furlough worker, admission is totally free.

And you can find out information about that on our website at Women Who Care Ministries.org.

And we intend you, we invite you all to attend, not just if you are surviving domestic violence, but there are so many things going on, so many unprecedented issues going on during this time that we promise if you come, you too will be uplifted.

You will be uplifted and you'll be transformed.

And I, you, we all deserve a life that is filled with peace and joy.

Let's go after it with everything that we've got.

Thank you.

Thank you again.

All right.

So I'm reading the proclamation for LGBTQ a month.

So the City of Rockville recognizes the growing politization and attacks on LGBTQ plus inclusive curriculum in schools across the United States, and the need to reaffirm support for increased visibility and awareness of LGBTQ history.

We also recognize the many contributions of LGBTQ plus activists, organizations, students, and other residents who have contributed to making Rockville a welcoming and accepting place to live, work, and attend school, including the Montgomery County Pride Center, Live in Your Truth, Trans Maryland, Maryland Trans Unity, and Pride Prome.

We have made much progress in trying to see our LGPTQ plus friends and family and others as having the same rights, the same status and the same freedoms as everyone else in this country.

Sadly, those rights, status, and freedoms seem quite literally to be under attack.

From trans rights to marriage equality to even service in our military, everywhere you turn, it seems that some government agency or politician or group is trying to roll back time.

A brief story personally.

He is gay.

I watched if he went from a very closeted individual to living his full life as things changed around him for the better, as our society grew more accepting.

I recall his joy when he and his now husband got engaged.

That was real change, not, I believe, a coincidence that in October 1994, the first LGBTQ month was started.

Now he and his husband are thinking about moving full-time to Massachusetts, because there's also real change the other way.

These are real worries for the millions of uh LGBTQ plus people in the United States.

We cannot go back.

That is why I am proud to live in a state like Maryland that values everyone.

And that is why I'm especially proud to be living and serving in Rockville, where we not only stand for equality, but we embrace it as a city, and we wave the banner freely that Rockville sees and values everyone, regardless of who you are, who to choose to be, what you believe, or who you love.

Isn't it said before?

And I know it some hate to hear it, because it is true.

I'm proud of our diversity, and I hope that you are as well.

With that, I'll read the proclamation.

Whereas in January 1994, a teacher from a suburban St.

Louis, Missouri High School, Rodney Wilson, conceived an idea that a month should be dedicated to the celebration and teaching of LGBTQ plus history.

He gathered other teachers and community leaders to join him in this cause and selected the month of October as LGBTQ plus history month.

And now therefore, the mayor and council of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim October 2025 as LGPGQ History Month.

And that the mayor and council encourage all residents to participate in observances and celebrate the many contributions of notable members of the LGBTQ plus community and further commit to protecting LGBTQ plus students and ensuring that LGBTQ plus history is recognized and acknowledged.

With that, Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Aye.

And I believe we have uh several people to uh uh accept the proclamation and uh make brief remarks if they uh so choose.

Uh I call up Rebecca Murphy and Dominique Rizzuli of the uh Human Rights Commission and my friend Annie Messick.

Oh, and I'll forget he has a lot to say.

On behalf of the Human Rights Commission, we gratefully accept this proclamation.

LGBTQ plus history month reminds us that the struggle for equality is not ancient history.

It is happening right now in our schools, in our courts, and in our communities.

Last year, when this was introduced in Rockville, we celebrated it as a recognition of historic struggles.

Today, just 12 months later, federal attacks on LGBTQ plus history have intensified.

The Supreme Court decision now allows parents to shield their children from learning about LGBTQ contributions to our society.

The Park Service removed the word transgender from the Stonewall National Monument, attempting to erase the very people who sparked the modern equality movement.

These attempts at erasure make Rockville's stance even more vital.

History cannot be selective.

The LGBTQ activists who helped build our community deserve to have their stories told.

When our students learn about all Americans who shaped our nation, they feel safer, more accepted, and better prepared to contribute to our diverse democracy.

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to the mayor and council for standing firm when others retreat.

Thank you for ensuring Rockville remains a beacon of acceptance where we don't just tolerate our LGBTQ plus neighbors, we celebrate them.

So thank you, Madam Mayor and Council members, and especially Councilmember Jackson for inviting me tonight.

This month is an important reminder that LGBTQIA plus history is and has always been an integral part of American history.

Um, from Baron von Stuben, who transformed early American militias into uh disciplined army to Bayard Rustin, who organized the march on Washington, D.C.

with Dr.

Martin Luther King, to Marsha P.

Johnson, who started Pride with a riot at Stonewall.

Um countless modern history makers continuing the legacy of LGBTQIA plus individuals have stood at the forefront of the fight for civil rights and progress of this nation.

And at a time when our fundamental rights are once again being challenged with the Supreme Court considering a case that could overturn marriage equality.

I am proud to live in a county that uh supports everyone and not just those they deem righteous.

And I am not from Rockville, but I do live in a neighboring city, and I'm very proud to have two places that I very much love and very much consider home support everything in everyone in their community.

And would this month serve not only as a reflection on how far we've come, but as a renewed commitment to protect the rights, the history, the humanity of all who call this community home, and thank you guys.

It's already up here.

Okay.

Actually, we should probably rebrand it as walk and roll Tober.

Um, because it's really all about pedestrian uh safety, and pedestrian does not just equate into walking, it is rolling, it is all different modes of uh transit in that way.

And I think that Wachtober is absolutely critical to not only celebrate our ability to get places without uh the benefit of an automobile, um, but it also allows for um more of a uh a focus on things like all the years of impact of traffic violence on uh especially the Rockville community.

Um of the people uh that we will talk about um there's gonna be many activities.

Um the City of Rockville has always uh been proud to support all the activities within Waktober.

We even had a bingo card once, um, which we discontinued because it was about it dangerous intersections where you should go.

Um so at any rate, Waktober is truly it from the very silly, very funny to uh the ending event, which is uh memorial candlelight vigil for all those that we have lost due to to traffic violence.

So um I will proceed with the proclamation.

Oh, I should probably also say as council liaison to the Transportation Mobility Commission as well as the Rockville Pedestrian Advocacy Committee.

There are many different ways that people can get involved this October.

Um so here we go.

Whereas the state of Maryland was the first state in the country to designate walking as the official exercise in 2008.

And whereas Governor West Moore designated the month of October as Woktober in Maryland by recognizing the state's official exercise, walking, for its health benefits and well-being for all Marylanders.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council hereby proclaim October 2025 as Woktober in the city of Rockville, Maryland, and invite all residents to take advantage of walking for its health, recreation, and transportation benefits, as well as walkaners focused on pedestrian safety.

The city encourages everyone to find time to walk every day or roll every day and to make it a priority for residents of all ages.

Madam Mayor, I'm very honored to move this proclamation.

Hi.

Thank you.

And I don't think we have anyone, so I'll just accept it and share it with the commission and our pack later.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for joining us today.

We have a lot to celebrate.

I hope that you have felt more seen, more included, but also more uplifted.

We have a lot to celebrate, and I think this is a time where we wanted to make sure that we are showing our values and what we believe in this community.

So we will be taking a brief break, but we thank you for your patience and for joining us during our proclamation and celebration time.

Welcome, Rockville.

Today is still October 6th, 2025, and we're reconvening meeting 24-25.

We just did a series of proclamations and recognition.

And now we're moving over to our agenda review.

Ms.

Sarah Taylor Farrell, do we have any changes?

Madam Mayor and Councilmembers, there are no changes to the remainder of the agenda for this evening.

Thank you very much.

And now we'll have the city manager's report.

Mayor Ashley, members of City Council, good evening.

It's been a busy couple of weeks.

We gave away 400 native trees.

That's right, 400 to a bunch of residents in the city as part of our annual tree giveaway program.

We developed a brand new innovative composting system for the waste that's created by our Holter Culture Cultural Team.

And we are beginning the development of our budget.

With that in mind, we have a budget priorities survey, and we encourage residents to go on our website and fill that out.

That's all I have, Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for mentioning the budget priority survey.

We hope that by tomorrow there'll be 50 more responses.

And that's why Rockfell, in coordination with many folks across government, including county, state, federal, and municipal partners are taking proactive steps to support our community.

I just wanted to note we do have a website, Rockville MD.gov, backslash federal workers, and we're doing a couple quick things.

If you are using the city's uh child care system, uh federal employees and contractors with enrolled children may be eligible for delayed payment.

We also have uh manage water, and if you need help on utility assistance, uh please contact us as well as any help in negotiating rent payments.

Um, and we have a referral list of some food services if people need help with that.

In addition, um we can take with delay payment for or no penalties for animal licenses, and then we have something fun through Renew and Rise.

There's a Rockville program where if you want to join, you can uh do so at half price, and this also specialized program to offer wellness opportunities for people who need some help to de-stress through our record park programs.

Please check out our website, Rockville MD.gov backslash federal workers.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to uh agenda item six, which is boards and commissions, appointments and reappointments.

No, boards and commissions.

Um so we first have the cultural arts commission.

Will someone make a motion for the Cultural Arts Commission?

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I move to reappoint Melissa Beattie to serve a full three-year term to expire on October 1st, 2028.

Do we have a second?

Councilman Valerie Seconds, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Councilman Ben Greg.

Uh Madam Mayor, I move to reappoint Cynthia McKay to serve a full three-year term to expire on October 1st, 2028 to the environment commission.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I move to reappoint Seth Zimbo to serve a full three-year term to expire on October 1st, 2028.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Fulton seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Human rights commission, Councilmember Shaw.

I move to reappoint Rebecca Murphy to serve a full three-year term to expire on October 1st, 2028.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Larry Seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Councilmember Leary.

Do you want to do the landlord tenant commission?

Happy to.

I move to reappoint Luzolo Ganga to serve a full three-year term to expire on July 1st, 2028.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilman Shaw seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Now we have the recreation and park advisory board.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor.

I move to reappoint Kinsquit Scales to serve a full three-year term to expire on November 1st, 2028.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Rangrak seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

It's unanimous.

Thank you to all who have agreed to serve.

Next, we'll have community forum.

This is the time we want to hear from our community.

We encourage all persons to address the mayor and council and speak in a civil and courteous manner.

And members of the audience, please also be respectful to each other.

Each person will be allowed three minutes, and we ask that you stick to the three minutes allowed.

There will be a time clock in front of you, and you will hear an audible beep at the end of your three minutes.

Please state your name and whether you live in the city of Rockville for the record.

I'd first like to invite up Wayne Bresslin.

All right, thank you very much.

Um I'm representing Friends of Redgate Park, all 1,000 of Friends of Redgate Park.

And uh there's still a lot going on at the park.

The uh dog park, the shade thing.

People are definitely loving that, so that's really nice.

Um we had Saturday an event out at Redgate Park with about 150 people, kids' activities, native plants, walks by local experts.

And uh what really impressed me was people just are so excited about the park, but they still have a lot of questions.

And the biggest question is what's gonna happen with the park?

Um, and I tell them we have a master plan, and this master plan was probably one of the best examples of some community engagement by Rockville I've ever seen.

1,200 people filled out comments, they had meetings, they had this big event at the park where they presented the plan.

So, you know, we're really excited about that.

And when I tell them they get really excited.

Um yesterday, we had uh an event out there at Rockville Library where they showed the documentary about Redgate.

It's about the birds of Redgate, and it's also about the community effort to keep Redgate apart.

And all the chairs were filled, we were standing there in the back.

And uh, and again, when it came time for discussion, you know, a lot of questions.

What's gonna happen to the park?

And you know, we talk and tell them about the master plan and they get excited.

And uh it's just so impressive how our community loves this park and is excited about the master plan.

Um, they have good reason to be excited because there's a grant that was I learned about earlier in the week for Redgate Park for 1.5 million dollars.

And there's been some thoughtful discussion about that grant um prior to submitting.

But now that the grant's here on behalf of friends of Redgate Park, I urge you to move quickly to accept this grant formally, vote and and make this happen, and so we can really realize the vision set forth in that master plan.

And we can make Redgate an even more welcoming, a more accessible and more engaging park to our residents and to all the people that come from throughout the region to the park.

Thank you for your time and all you've done for the park.

Thank you.

Next, welcome Glenn Feldman.

Hello.

Welcome.

All right.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

My name is Glenn Felman.

I live in Rockville, 20853, but not the city of Rockville, unfortunately, right on the other side of Norbeck Road.

I am the publisher of the Montgun, and I'm here tonight, frustrated and deeply disappointed and asking for your intervention.

In early August, I filed a simple Maryland Public Information Act request.

I asked to show me the records behind the city's logo rebranding project.

I asked for the bids, the prices, the presentations, the process documents, and the law requires a response within 30 days.

That deadline passed with no word.

I followed up repeatedly.

I really didn't hear anything.

It was only after I involved council members of the mayor that two weeks late and after the deadline, the staff finally started to respond.

They admitted blowing the deadline and asked me for another 30 days, which with no choice I agreed to.

But even then the response was a mess.

They provided only three proposals, all from Maryland firms, as if just four companies had bid when actually there were 11, including the seven out of state ones, which I later obtained.

Key cost figures were redacted from the proposals as confidential.

But those same numbers were already public in your June 6, 2022 council packet.

After these delays and incomplete records, the city said I might have to pay now for the rest of it.

Eleven days ago, I requested a public interest fee waiver and a list of remaining records and fees.

I didn't hear back until 10 minutes after I walked into the building today.

Tomorrow marks the um end of the 30-day extension.

So now we're at twice the legal deadline, and I don't have close to a full response, although I really haven't had a chance to look at what I received, you know, a few minutes ago.

This is incompetence, it's arrogance, it's obstruction.

It tells the residents we will ignore the law, we'll hide what we want, and then we'll make you pay for it if you push.

From the partial records from what I've dug up from your website, troubling facts emerge.

Four Maryland firms bid, none were finalists or even interviewed.

The contract went to a Texas company, medium giant, owned by the Dallas Morning News.

I don't think any of their team even visited Rockville.

The previous council approved the contract via consent agenda.

There was no public presentation, no final proposal in the packet.

They greenlit it blind.

The RFP promised broad public input.

Instead, just small hand put handpicked focus groups.

We don't know who participated or what they said.

The Spitty City spent at least $25,000 over budget, although I think it was a lot more.

And I don't know how much more, although I just got the invoices, so we're gonna find out.

And in the end, the city settled for a logo that I don't believe everybody loves.

This is a failure of transparency and accountability.

It violates the spirit of the MPIA and the law, and I feel like your whole team needs mandatory refresher training on the law and openness.

Rockville deserves better.

I'm appealing to you now to intervene to demand staff approve the fee waiver, which I guess they did because they already sent me some documents today after saying they weren't going to.

I'm not sure.

And that they deliver all the documents to me by the end of this week.

Um that concludes my remarks.

I thank you very much.

But since I have an extra 30 seconds here, I just wanted to ask that uh you take that Rockville seal behind you and just slightly because it's cock-eyed.

It's just slightly cock-eyed.

It's been driving me nuts back there.

All right, thank you, folks.

Thank you.

Welcome, Drew Vra Diego Camar.

Can I take one to her later?

I'll I'll come to you last.

Thank you very much.

I need a neal Powell.

Well, good evening, Mayor and Council.

I am Anita Neil Powell, president of the Lincoln Park Historica Foundation.

And speaking, my comments today will only focus on the zoning ordinance rewrite work session, historic preservation.

And I'm not going to go through all the issues, and if I don't go through them, that means I'll support.

Anyone may file an application to nominate a property for historic um designation.

We support that only that only the property owner, HEC, mayor and council may file an application nominating the property.

A third property should a third party should not have the right to nominate someone else's property to be designated.

Um property owners are not required to consent to the designation of their property as historic.

We support only designate a property if the property owner gives his or her consent.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Thanks.

The term um demolition by neglect is a fine and its ordinance, but there are no other references to the term.

So we support the um so if the application is for the purpose of demolition, concept for HDC is approved.

Right.

So it should also come before the code enforcement team to ensure that proper attention is given to the property if approved.

And that does not continue to be left untouched because of the approval to demolish.

For example, we do not support letting a property um continue to be a so out in the community to which the demolition is has been approved.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Welcome, Amy Ackerberg Hastings.

Good evening to the mayor and council.

Um my name is Amy Ackerberg Hastings, and I've been a resident of the Twinbrook neighborhood since 1998.

A little bit later in this meeting, you're going to see a presentation on the Twinbrook Elementary School feasibility study that MCPS has been undertaking.

And you're going to get a real treat in that presentation.

I'm very excited about what you're going to learn.

I was a parent at Twinbrook Elementary School from 2013 to 2019.

Survived the Bayer Dresden boundary study, and now have been following along with advocating for renovation of Twinbrook Elementary School.

And so specifically I'm asking the mayor and council if Twinbrook gets on the MCPS CIP that's coming out next Monday to please support option four, which is a teardown and complete rebuild of the building, and to fund the community gym so that it the community gym that's there is replaced.

The building has a number of strengths still, but the weaknesses of the building that you're going to hear about in a little bit, overwhelm its ability to provide productive, safe, um, a productive, safe learning experience for students and for staff.

The community, the staff, Twinbrook Community Association, Twinbrook PTA, and MCCPTA all support option four.

Um, I've given lots of testimony about Twinbrook along with several other residents over the years, and you'll be hearing more testimony about it in the weeks and months to um that's really all I have to say.

Just thanks so much in advance.

Thank you very much.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

Please state your name and whether you live in the city of Rockville.

Okay, I'm all over the place.

So many thoughts going on here.

But uh as usual, I have to thank you for running uh open democracy forum, right?

And I also want to thank the good lord for making me um a Trumper, a mega American first voter.

Now, why didn't I start coming here to these meetings?

We were me and my mom, we my family were victims of um fair housing discrimination.

So um, my name, Dreva Diego Kumar.

I sort of live in King Farm, but I'm trying to get out of that get out of that funky joint as soon as possible.

Um I don't know how many of y'all really um participating in our problems or not.

Um thinking on that.

Um kind of warning all of y'all, you'll make a lot of mistakes.

Our country is gone to hell, counties are going to hell.

This is a facade, a mirage, our county.

You have these little spots of affluence.

But county's in terrible shape.

Now, last week, I should say you all today with your proclamations.

You know, proclamations are very important.

They are important.

You're poised, you presented it poised, polite.

It's a good performance.

I hope it wasn't a performance.

I know you all have really good intentions, so but there is a but.

I don't think you feel the pain.

You don't feel the pain like some of us do.

I believe.

I've requested a case manager system to resolve problems where you have somebody in person, you're just not filling out a form online.

Oh, go online, go to this one, go to that one.

Confusing Montgomery County, City of Rockville.

Who do I go to?

Case manager system, someone who will advocate for you.

Someone who will uh really work through the departments and the cross county and cross-city and and get results.

I think you all are very well-meaning.

A few weeks ago, a few months ago, I'll tell youngster Epstein Repstein, Joe Vogel, that uh adjacent to here.

When I come over here, I park right in this parking lot.

That's a nice parking lot.

I get a nice little safe walk.

I told them about that street here towards district court.

That is a dangerous street.

Well, since a lot of you don't realize it because you park here, or if you work in a county council building where um another Epstein Repstein Elriches, you park under underneath.

But if you have to go to court here and you walk up the street, the cars are coming by super fast.

So I think you did a proclamation today, Councilmember Valerie about Walktober.

Close this perimeter.

So when people park in that county uh public parking lot and they're walking up, they don't have cars coming by fast.

Okay, now I got so many things here.

I haven't even covered it.

But I talked about Chris Mason last week.

Thank you very much for your set his name wrong.

Thank you very much.

Like Chris Media or Make America or Middle Atlantic Support Network Shelter Network.

All right.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

Welcome.

Hello.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor and Council, for this opportunity to speak about ordinance to amend uh city code section 2347.

Um I live uh on 131 South Adam Street, right around the corner from here.

My neighbors and I recognize that City of Towns Rockville and Town Center is competing with nearby uh living in retail areas like Pike and Rose and Crown and Rio.

We know developers are interested in developing town center and have asked for the removal of parking spot requirements.

We know that there have been a lot of conversations about this, and there will probably be a lot more.

Um the neighbors of town center, thus in the neighborhoods, um, are concerned that changes to the city code section 2347 without proper definition and clarity will provide an opportunity for residents of town center to receive exceptions, exemptions, excuse me, and allowed to park in the neighborhoods.

This will push the burden of town center onto the neighborhoods without additional support.

The neighborhoods that surround T Town Center want it to be successful and want it to support growth.

The ability to spend time in town center was one of the reasons my wife and I moved here 15 years ago.

I believe given the opportunity of paying $300 to park in the town center garages or monthly fees or parking for free in the nearby neighborhoods, it will push a lot of people into our neighborhoods.

South Adams and other neighboring streets do have some parking capacity, but not much.

One of my neighbors did an ad hoc assessment on the city's current code.

South Adams can accommodate approximately 62 parking spaces.

Um we have 27 houses with two cars each, taking up approximately 54 spots.

That leaves about eight spots extra where we could accommodate additional parking.

However, each spot also has two guest parking spots.

We believe the way that the section 2347 is currently prepared for voting leaves room for future abuse.

We ask that before it is voted on that a closer examination and a more accurate definition with proper guidance of section C be done, since part D allows the permit to remain valid as as long as the holder resides in the area.

So for part C is the city manager may you issue a residential parking permit to persons residing on a property that is otherwise ineligible for a residential parking permit upon a showing of good cause.

And we believe there will be a lot of good causes for that.

Um the city manager may propagate guidance establishing the grounds of demonstrating good cause without this subsection.

Again, it's a very undefined uh set of information that we asked for more specification on before um assuming and voting on it.

And then again, the permit will be um there for the uh holder for as long as they reside in the area.

So thank you very much.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Would anyone else like to speak?

Okay.

Thank you.

I also want to acknowledge we received many written comments and have been shared with my colleagues.

We'll now move on to our special presentation.

We have with us the historic district commission, and they'll be presenting their FY25 annual report.

I'd like to welcome Sheila Bashiri and Chair of the Commission, Miss Anita Neil Powell.

I also want to acknowledge the other commissioners, Seth Dembo, Pete Falseman, Michael Goldfinger, and Mercy Shench.

Welcome.

Anita Neil Powell will be giving the presentation.

Fantastic.

I'll just be doing the PowerPoint to clear that up, didn't you?

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

I am Anita Neopow, Chair of the Rocky Historic District Commission.

Tonight I am joined by Commissioner Self Dimbo, Michael Goldfinger, Mercy Singhate, and Vice Chair Peter Falcement.

We also joined by Katie Gerbis, comprehensive planning manager and Sheila Pazieri, preservation planner.

Ms.

Pajeri will be sharing the HDC PowerPoint with you, and we'll be available to answer any questions you may have.

Tonight I will be providing Historic District Commission FY 2025 and your report from June July 24th to June 25th.

Next.

As a quasar judicial commission, the HDC is responsible for conducting.

For conducting monthly public meetings that allow public testimony from staff, applicants, and anyone else who wishes to testify on any application presented before us.

The HDC moved from virtual meetings to hybrid meetings, allowing commissioners and members of the public to participate in person at City Hall or virtually via WebEx.

Next HDC responsibility is to review and to act on certificate of approval applications for construction or exterior alteration to historic properties.

It is also responsible to review and to act on evaluation of significance applications that are submitted for the purpose of demolition and to determine if it is if it meets the adopted criteria for historic or cultural significance for historic designation.

Finally, we must review and act on historic designation application to determine if the property meets the criteria for historical or cultural significance.

Next okay, thanks.

The HDC accomplishment for FY 2025.

Included the following includes the following.

Certificate of approval applications were approved.

The HDC commissioners attended five specialized training.

The HDC staff moderated and presented at two statewide events.

Next is the second year that HDC hosted a historic preservation month event.

This year event was called Sustainability and Historic Preservation.

The preservation was held at the Great Great Brick Courthouse.

The staff transitioned applications to and developed standard operating procedures for the My Government Online MGO platform.

HDC was awarded two grants from the Maryland Historical Trust.

Next we held in partnership with Civil War Trail in a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new historic signage of an African American Civil War soldier, Mr.

Zed Thomas.

We updated the narrative for the African American History Walking Tour on the City of Rockville website.

After many years of asking, we finally have included Carver Junior College as part of the walking tour online map and brochure.

We updated and installed a new historic signage for Carver Junior College again after asking for many years.

This was the first historic sign installed in Rockville and can now be viewed as part of the walking tour itself.

We updated historic signage for FEDA cottage.

Next we will continue to consider all applications.

Next request objectively and fairly and make decisions based on the required standard guidelines and adopted criteria.

We plan to continue implementing the historic preservation work plan.

Next.

Thank you for your attention.

And if you are available on the third Wednesday of the month, 7 o'clock p.m., we would like to invite you to attend the historic district commission meeting.

The meetings are held at City Hall in our WebX.

Thank you and good evening.

Thank you very much for the special presentation.

Just wanted to uh say thanks on behalf of this entire body that we appreciate all the work that you all do and know that we'll have some important discussions about uh some of the things that you all have looked at at your July meeting this evening.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Ms.

Sheila Bashiri, do you have anything you'd like to add?

No, except for I do have the best HDC in the state, I do believe.

Yes.

Love it.

Co-sign.

All right.

We'll now be moving on to our consent agenda item.

Adoption of resolution to adopt Rockville's 2026 state legislative priorities and legislative bond initiatives for the Maryland General Assembly session to begin on January 14th and end on January 13th, 2026.

This is an item that we discuss in detail at a previous meeting with input for all of my colleagues.

Do we have a motion to approve or any questions?

Councilman Bashaw.

So moved.

Do we have a second?

Councilman Valerie Seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Excellent.

Thank you.

And I know Miss Moran and Jeff will be working on with our D17 to schedule some tours as well as follow-up on our priorities.

Thank you.

We now have agenda item 11, action item, adoption of an ordinance to amend city code, Section 2347, permit issuance fee term, et cetera, to expand residential parking permit eligibility, and to provide a mechanism for the city manager to grant exceptions.

Welcome, Brian Barnett Woods.

Do we have Brian here?

Who's presenting this, Mr.

Mahalick?

Mr.

Woods, are you gonna do it?

We can move on if needed.

I think we just need a couple of seconds, Mayor.

Thank you.

No problem.

He's busy walking for Walktober.

He's walking for Walktober.

Thank you.

Or he was checking on a traffic calming issue or something.

Something like that.

Everyday hero.

Thank you, Mayor.

I apologize.

Uh good evening, Mary and Council.

Uh thank you for having me.

It's good to see you this evening.

I feel like I've been here a lot in the past month, so it's kind of nice.

Um I'm Brian Barnett Woods from the traffic and transportation division in the Department of Public Works.

I'm joined by Dr.

Mahashafi and uh James Woods, Director of Public Works.

Maybe we're not joined by Amara.

Um he's virtual.

Um we're here this evening to discuss a code change for section 2347, permit issuance, fee term, et cetera.

Uh the proposed changes are included in the event agenda packet on page 91.

Uh this change is to address a specific issue that the city has come to learn about over the past several months related to residents who are not currently eligible for residential parking permits.

Uh there are Rockville residents today that live on streets in which which prohibit on street parking, and the nearest streets to them are residential parking permit restricted.

Uh in these instances, these residents and their visitors, uh, whether it's a social visitor or someone like an electrician or a plumber, um, there is no recourse for them to find parking on nearby streets because they can't park on their street and they can't park on the nearby street without a permit.

Uh the proposed language would apply to these properties in Rockville, so that they may obtain residential parking permits.

Additionally, the proposed language would also provide a mechanism for the city manager to issue a residential parking permit by exception in the case of an unforeseen circumstance.

Please note that this language will neither eliminate any existing designated residential parking permit areas, uh, nor create any new residential parking permit areas.

Uh city staff shared this code, code change in two virtual public meetings over the summer, and this topic was shared with the Transportation and Mobility Commission who voted to support the change.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate uh all of your work on this.

I want to open the floor and see if anyone has any questions.

Okay.

Councilman Van Grack.

Um thanks for putting this together.

I know that, like when you're adjusting code um language and trying to get it right.

One question I had is with regard, I mean, we've heard from a number of residents that have some concern about how this could open up, either the floodgates or issues.

How do we define the good cause?

Because the good cause, I know from code drafting, can be a pretty broad area, and it looks to me like it's not clearly defined here.

How are we defining it so that there is some rubric to understand that it wouldn't be a floodgate or at least give residents concern about how we're um addressing the issue of additional permits?

Because while we're not necessarily, as you've said, creating additional residential streets, we have to be careful that we're not flooding the existing residential streets to prevent those who live nearby from being able to have access to their own streets.

Sure, great question.

Um we would follow the in the administrative procedures for when traffic and transportation the city uh designate a residential parking permit area.

There are a list of items that we look at to make sure that if we're providing a new residential parking permit area, is this going to create the problem further down the line?

Is this to address a specific need or something that's happening in general, like an ongoing issue, or is it just temporary?

And so there's a list of items that we would look at and consider um if there were to be someone who to have a special circumstance or request, and we kind of reference that process and approach and see like, is this an issue that maybe is an unforeseen circumstance that that should be granted it, or is this something where it's just someone who's asking for a permit because they think it could be convenient?

So then I guess the question is what I mean, I I guess that's the issue.

Is an unforeseen circumstances I just happen to really want there, or what is the definition of an unforeseen circumstance?

Because we're just kind of punting that definition to uh to have, you know, because we're putting the onus on the city manager.

I know he's sitting right there.

We're putting the owners on the city manager to decide what is an unforeseen circumstances, what merits good cause, and I think that's some of the concern that we're hearing from members of the public that without a standard as to what is an unforeseen circumstances and what merits it, they're concerned about an over use of permits.

Um, because the whole purpose of residential permit permits to exist is to make sure that people live there can park there.

Has there been any discussion of some type of rubric or sure?

Um so when we talk about unforeseen circumstances, we would probably look at something like the property itself and whether it's geography or location, there is some reason that they are not eligible for the existing permit um based on maybe where their frontages or if there are corner property or something like that, but not based on you know whether the demand of that individual property is seeking for it.

But as how it is written, it's kind of open because it is unforeseen because we haven't yet envisioned what that uh the that piece or parcel of property would look like that would kind of merit needing a permit, because if it's within a permit parking area, then it would be eligible to get one.

Um, or under these these changes, it's on a street that prohibits parking, but the next street over is a permit parking area.

If it's on a street that is not residential permit parking, um they wouldn't be eligible to get one.

And if they're on a street that isn't residential permit parking and their nearby streets are residential permit parking, they still would not be eligible because their street they would be allowed to park on.

Um so it's I mean, a pretty niche scenario where we haven't quite seen it yet.

Thank you.

Uh just wanted to note because when I first saw this, I saw 100 properties.

I wanted to know how far and wide across the city you're talking.

Sure.

Um so I just wanted to share and please feel free to add.

Um what I learned is the eligibility applies to a hundred properties citywide, and it will expand to about 64 residents on Redland Boulevard, five on Manichae, uh, some North Horner's Lane, Park Avenue, near North Horner's Lane, Halpine Road and Um Three through 18 Maryland Avenue.

So it's very it's it's not like everywhere.

There are very specific places that you've analyzed to see what qualifies.

Um is there anything that will be put like that map will be put on the city's website just so people can see uh so that you don't have a flood of inquiries about this?

It just provides more transparency on the areas that you're intending.

Yeah, sure.

Um so we have a map of the eligible residential permit parking districts right now.

I think in the map um GIS part of the website, but we could add this layer to that as well, so that if you are on one of those properties, you could see, you know, whether it's highlighted or something like that, that you'd be eligible to get a permit, even though your street itself doesn't say permit parking required.

Thank you.

And I think it would also help residents who are concerned that there's going to be a flood of cars and they're not going to be able to park just to see what really is going to be happening here.

Um I also wanted to acknowledge that I know that there's 64 uh residences on near Redland Boulevard.

Uh do you want to speak to the that's a pilot and say anything about that?

Um sure.

So the let's see, we're currently doing a demonstration project on Redland Boulevard.

And while this code language would impact some properties on Redland Boulevard, the code change wouldn't have any impact on the outcome of the demonstration project.

Uh the study's still ongoing, so we don't have all the findings yet.

When we do have those, we'll prepare a memo that'll be shared with with this group and the city manager as well as all the residents who've contact us with questions or concerns.

Thank you for the clarification because I think it residents we received a couple of concerns uh in emails thinking that this was automatically saying that the pilot was going to go through or the demonstration project, and you're still in a data collecting.

Yeah, that's true.

And you've already made some adjustments.

I understand based on feedback.

Yes.

Thank you.

And the other comment I would make is because you are you may have a lot of people and maybe buildings.

Will you be looking at analyzing permits by number based on the capacity of neighborhood streets?

Let's see.

Like if you're giving out a hundred, I'm just imagining in the future giving out a uh 50 permits for that building, for example, or just theoretical number.

Sure.

But there are only 10 parking spaces.

What would you do on a neighboring street?

So most of the permit parking um in the city, there are permit parking districts.

And so there are many streets within that area that permit holders can access.

And so similar to right now, many houses might have one or more permits, and we wouldn't restrict that, and we've continued to do that.

If there's a need for more streets to be under a permit parking, there's a current process right now that uh including a petition, and sometimes it goes to the Transportation Mobility Commission, sometimes it's administered or done administratively, um, and we've continued that process.

We need to expand the number of streets with permits, but that's a separate process from this year.

Thank you.

And you will just be doing some sort of monitoring to see how this process goes and if any adjustments, that's I think this should be some analysis on the data.

Yeah, most things.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Yes, thank you, uh Mayor.

And I think uh you asked uh one of the questions that I uh was uh going to ask is well um just to uh go further into it.

So the uh King Farm Citizen Assembly, you had communications with them and they actually requested more parking or yeah, so as part of the public meeting, we had sent out a message to all of the community organizations and HOAs in areas with Park Parking districts, which include King Farm.

Uh, one of the comms they had requested was whether they could um add additional streets in the King Farm community to be permitted, um, and that would go through this other process of designating streets as residential parking permit areas.

This code change wouldn't impact that.

And so I let them know that if those residents were interested in doing it, um, I sent them to the information of filling out the petition and the administrative procedure for designating a street as a residential parking permit street.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

I see councilmember Larry and then Councilman Bashan.

Hi, thank you, Mr.

Burnett Woods.

Um I think that the entire permit parking process should be something that this mayor and council looks at rather than just this one small component.

I had the opportunity to be uh present at a transportation mobility commission meeting uh where the last uh petition to increase or to increase permit parking uh was taken up.

Um I was really um challenged by a lot of what I experienced in this process, much of which uh reflected some deep seated biases um and not as I'm used to um a lot of very concrete data in the transit uh and transportation world.

I'm very used to like these many feet and this, but all during this process, there was no real sense of how many on-street parking spots are needed because there hadn't been an effective assessment of who has actual on-property parking options versus who doesn't.

This particular permit area, some people have dri driveways, some people don't.

There was no um assessment because I think there is a way to say um, you know, and I think somebody spoke during community forum, um, you know, that here's the number of spaces and everybody's got about two cars.

Well, I think the calculus does shift if you don't have a driveway or any other way um to do to park on your property.

Um, because I think maybe some folks take uh it for granted that everybody's got that and and they don't.

Um and again the the petition process um needed to be smoothed out.

Um there were some challenges, people didn't quite know what they were signing in the moment.

There were two different permits being uh requested.

Um then finally, um, because I watched it all through and through this process, um, I saw how mayor council need to discuss or approve unless a certain time period lapses and then it goes into effect with no action from this body.

However, um I don't recall, and I went through my inbox and did many searches that we we ever as a body received notice that the clock was running on that.

And so I only knew about it because I had been at a transportation and mobility commission meeting.

So I I am really struggling here.

That the process itself has some some improvements that can be made.

And I think that we need to address those before we get into whether or not there's a permit-only area budding.

Thank you.

Councilmember Shaw.

First of all, I just wanted to thank staff for um taking on this issue and your review.

So I had a question to follow up on some of my colleagues' uh questions around the scope and the impact.

Um based on your review, you indicated about a hundred properties.

Are there any new developments in the pipeline that could impact those that number?

I know with multifamilies, uh, there's already uh regulations around around parking.

Um, but if you could provide if if you could project if there's if that number is going to increase uh sure we can get that information, we would have to check with uh community planning.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any other questions?

Councilman Van Grack.

So one other question following up on um what what um my colleagues have said, let's if we go forward with something like this, and it turns out that there's a certain section of the city that is being overwhelmed, unlike we would have predicted what is the fail-safe?

Is the fail safe to adjust this and bring back the permission from certain areas to have permits?

How can we protect ourselves as we go forward from something like this?

And there's an area of the city that is overwhelmed.

I think if an area does become overwhelmed, uh we'd have to revisit this and then see where these new permits are being given out.

Um maybe it is a question of is there additional streets that need to be permit parking only, or maybe it's a different consideration of where the parking permit districts, the the boundaries for the individual ones are, and that they should be shifted.

Um there are other options that we could look at to kind of see how this changes people's parking behavior um over time thank you.

I think this goes to some of the comments we were asking about just monitoring data because this is new.

Um is there a possibility to build into this process just an annual review to make sure that the process is working?

It doesn't have to be anything overly formal, but that there's going to be a pause and see are there areas where there are challenges and things that we have to adjust.

Yeah, we could add into this, it may not be every year, and I would recommend because currently parking permit districts are renewed on three year cycles.

Okay, and so that we can do it with that and see how many new rules permits are being issued.

Yeah, I think that that sounds great to me.

I don't know what my colleagues think, but I'll also just say because it's new, maybe the first year at least you're analyzing to see did we get this right?

Do we need to make any adjustments?

Okay.

And then we got some comments uh from the King Farm community, and I know some comments on uh South Adams.

Just to note um the South the demonstration project is totally different issue.

There have been uh things that have been adjusted there, and you're continuing to monitor over the next two weeks.

Uh, and then regarding South Adams, you're not taking away any parking there.

And the it's my understanding that based on the maps that you're not necessarily permitting parking in that particular street, um, but given adjacency, but if you could clarify that as well.

Sure.

Uh so for South Adams Street, they currently do have residential parking permits.

This change won't remove that uh residential parking permit status.

Um is there an adjacent property that now will have access to that street?

I don't think they're we'd we'd have to double check the maps, I'm not sure at the top of my head.

Okay, I didn't see it on the map, but I just wanted to flag that concern.

Councilmember Valeri.

My last comment, I promise.

Um it kind of piggybacks on what I said previously, and I'd like to put to my colleagues that um part of this code change also includes you know the fees that are assessed with permit parking.

And I really struggled with this issue because again, um coming from a neighborhood where um a lot of people don't have a driveway or any way to park on their property, it is essentially um uh a selective tax for somebody to um have to pay for permit parking when there is no other option in the home that they have.

So um, in an interest of uh fairness, um, because I think that that is inherently um not equitable or just um I would like to see that we no longer have permit fees, uh permit parking fees.

Um I I also you know yeah, I'd be amenable if the all the permit fees went toward vision zero project, so maybe we're not as car dependent, but um more so I would like to um at least eliminate uh the fee because there's something just that is really bothering me with the fact that in order for somebody to park in their neighborhood, um they have to purchase something.

It's just really bothering me on this one.

Can I ask um how much the fees are?

Is it like $10?

And uh sure.

The fee is five dollars per year, and then if you start at the beginning of the cycle, it's $15.

And then if you're uh two years into the cycle, it would be ten dollars or five dollars if you're one year remaining.

So $15 over three years.

Yeah, and does that pay for the mailing of the fee?

Like how is how you're determining that fee is that a cost recovery mechanism?

Is there a way to make it more accessible?

If you don't have that answer, you can get back to us.

Yeah, I don't have that, I'll probably uh defer to Jeff.

It's really supposed to cover some administrative cost.

Does it cover everything?

It's it certainly does not.

And if someone has a financial, I mean if their money's tight, you guys have a process for that.

We always have an income qualifying aspect to it.

Um I'm I'm open to exploring Councilmember Valeria's idea and to get more information about um how we can make it accessible for people so it's not a burden.

Um Councilmember Fulton.

I was just gonna say I would love to have my colleagues' feedback if you're just generally okay with just looking at after a year to see how things are going, and then after that it'll be every three years with the permit cycle.

Is everyone okay with just that analysis?

Yeah, okay.

Councilmember Fulton.

No, I just I wanted to share that this this particular parking issue is interesting, right?

Because we always worry about the parking permits are there to make sure that people that live there can park near their house.

And it seems to me that and the and the thing we're always guarding against is sort of uh visitors or people coming for like that don't live there, taking the parking for people that live there.

But here what you're doing is actually solving the problem of there not being parking for people that live there, right?

Um, so it's actually um not creating the problem that people fear, it's actually solving it for other groups of people, which is an interesting nuance.

Uh and that's why it makes sense to me.

Um, I'm also interested in the in the fee issue as well, just find learning more about it.

Um I mean, the other way to not have to pay fees is to not have permit parking at all.

But uh that's a different conversation for a different day.

Thanks.

Councilmember Shaw.

Uh just a quick question.

Um I would like to see how many folks do use the we the fee waiver, uh, the income um qualifying waiver.

Um I'm just curious to know.

Because five dollars may not you know seem like a lot of money, but I would just be curious.

Colleagues, any more questions?

And do you seek to take this item up tonight?

Um there, I know we are waiting, we'll get some more information and there'll be an opportunity to make some adjustments after you if they find that there needs to be.

Um does anyone want to introduce Councilmember Miles?

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I introduce the ordinance.

Thank you.

Councilman Van Greg.

Oh, do you want to can you read the rest of it?

Oh I can I can read it for you if you'd like.

Yeah.

Okay, so he introduced the ordinance to amend City Code Section 2347 permit issuance fee term, etc.

to expend residential parking permit eligibility and provide a mechanism for the city manager to grant exceptions.

Is that good?

Yes, madam mayor.

Thank you.

So introduced.

Yes, thank you.

Councilman Fulton, do you have something?

Please.

Um I move to waive the labor period.

Thank you.

Councilmember Shaw.

Oh, I second.

Okay.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Okay.

Those opposed.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sure.

Councilmember Fulton.

I move to approve the ordinance to amend City Code Section 23 47 permit issuance fee term, etc.

to expand residential parking permit eligibility and provide a mechanism for the city manager to grant exceptions.

Thank you.

So we have a second.

Councilmember Jackson seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Actually, thank you.

It's been passed.

Appreciate that you're going to be looking.

Oh, sorry.

Opposed.

Me, yes.

Thank you.

Ms.

Sarah Taylor Ferrell, did you get that for the record?

Thank you very much.

All right.

So it's passed.

If you could also, I know you're gonna do some analysis, but if we could also just track complaints, I think that's an important part of the equation.

Thank you.

All right.

Now we'll be moving on to work session agenda item 12A.

We welcome Montgomery County.

We're gonna be discussing Montgomery County Public Schools, Twin Brooke Elementary Feasibility Study Presentation.

I can tell you that this is a long time coming, lots of advocates in the community, and super excited to see you and hear from you in terms of all the ideas you're gonna be presenting.

I'd like to welcome uh Barack Matite as well.

Adrian Saunders, project manager for MCPS.

Thank you.

Madam Dr.

Mao.

A few quick words while they get set up.

Sure.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I just want to uh echo the thanks uh to not only this mayor and council but previous mayor and councils for um raising twin brook, never forgetting about it, and particularly your advocacy, Madam Mayor, just to for the record, just let folks know that you've been finding the good fight, as well as uh us in the in the um in the previous years.

But thanks for all the work you've done on this.

Thank you, and I want to thank community.

Um really has been long time coming, and we so are excited to see you here today.

So, with that said, um, we look forward to the feasibility study presentation.

Welcome.

Good evening.

Thank you, Mayor Ashton, council members and staff for having us here tonight.

Um we're pleased to be able to share with you our presentation on the Twin Brook Elementary School feasibility study.

Uh it's been great working with the community on this, and uh we hope that you'll enjoy what we have to share and uh would love to hear your input on this feature potential project.

Thank you all.

I'm now introducing uh our team members who all hit us tonight.

Uh from MCPS, we have uh director Julie Morris of uh planning and construction.

We also have our senior planner, Robin O'Hara.

And I would like to introduce Cooper Carey Architects, architect on the project who'll be delivering the presentation part of our presentation tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you and welcome.

Good evening.

Thank you so much, Adrian, for the introduction, and thank you, Madam Mayor and Council, um, for our your ability to allow us to present.

We're very excited to be here.

Um my name is Maureen Weckert, I'm a project manager with Cooper Carey.

And my name is Heidi Leinbach.

I am a project architect with Cooper Carey.

Okay, so we'll go through the um agenda.

I think you can see this on the screen up here.

Um so we're gonna start with a quick introduction.

We'll go through our process and timeline for this feasibility study.

We're going to share with you our proposed concepts and then our what we heard from the community, their feedback, and then we'll end with our next steps.

A little go into our introductions really quick.

So just just quickly, I'll let you know that um Cooper Carey is the architect here, but um, we're just representing a few people that are um that are part of this process.

We also have a team of engineers, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, structural, civil, who are all very much involved.

Um, and then last but not least, we have the community, and that is they are a huge part in um making and developing what you're gonna see here on the screen today.

So we want to thank you and acknowledge that um their robust um you know engagement with with us during this process has really um really improved the design, and we're so we're so thankful for their involvement.

Okay, so our process and timeline.

So um a feasibility study.

Uh we'll just start off with kind of what what that means.

Um a feasibility study is um a plan.

It's it's a um an approach is it's to develop um an analysis of the existing conditions to understand what the the pros and the cons are or the opportunities and the challenges are of the existing conditions, and then to evaluate those conditions based on a set of guidelines from MCPS to determine a single approach that will be used for later uh design uh establishment.

So this is not a design.

And in general, it's to set up a budget so that this can be put into the CIP for development and to a design later on.

We follow four steps in the feasibility process.

We call them the four eyes.

And that's what the illuminate phase helps us to do.

So we had a number of community and staff meetings that you can see up here throughout May and June.

Then we moved into innovate.

Innovate is the purple bar.

And innovate is when we start to put pen to paper and start to develop concepts.

So you can see we will share with some of these those with you this evening.

And last is implement, and that's the blue bar.

And that's when we put everything that we've learned.

We package it together, we put into a report, and that's what gets delivered to MCPS and the state, and will be you know incorporated within the CIP development.

Okay, now we'll go into the proposed concepts.

So the state requires that MCPS look at four different approaches within a feasibility study.

The first approach is option one, renewal.

And that's where we take the existing building and we really just renovate it.

We do very sort of light touches to the to the building and very little light touches to the site as well.

Option two is a less than 50% demolition approach.

So if the building is 80,000 square feet, we're looking to demolish less than 40,000 square feet and then rebuild new construction to meet the MCPS ed spec.

Option three is more than 50%, so that's obviously the opposite of the option two, where we're develop uh demolishing a little bit more than 40,000 square feet of the building, and we're building back to meet the ed spec.

Option four is new construction.

So that's when we demolish the entire building and we really start from scratch on the site.

So we're going to walk you through our concepts a little bit more detail in the following slides.

So this one is option one, renewal.

Um can you guys hear me okay?

Let's try it again.

All right, the first one is option one, the renewal summary.

Um in this one, as Maureen had said earlier, we're keeping the existing building, the existing site circulation, and the existing uh paved play areas, but we're going to be doing meaningful interventions into the building to bring it up to the current building code, current MCPS standards, and uh current accessibility standards really.

Um in this one, we'd be doing a complete building renovation and replacing things like the electrical and the plumbing systems.

We'd be doing things like adding a new elevator so that way both stories of the of the small two-story portion of the building are accessible for students and staff.

We'd be looking at adding in things like gender-neutral restrooms into the building.

Um, and we'd be maintaining, as I said earlier, those existing paved play areas and all the existing site circulation.

So the bus drop-off is highlighted in yellow.

Um, the the car drop-off or hicular drop-off is in orange on the screen and it's a dashed line, and then the service shares the same path as the bus drop off, but it exceeds behind the building a little bit if you can see that.

Um, in this one, um, we've identified areas in the building that are highlighted in magenta that would receive a higher level of renovation that would need to either bring them up for accessibility standards, or we would be moving walls in order to meet the current MCPS educational specification program requirements.

Um those areas are, as I said, highlighted in purple.

We also have to do that on site because certain sidewalks are no longer meeting current accessibility standards.

So we've highlighted certain areas on the site as well that would require maybe the sidewalks to be regraded or certain elevation changes to to happen in order to meet current standards.

And you can also see that second story portion of the building, which is a lower level.

We'd be doing a small renovation in that area in order to fit in an elevator or a lift in order to make sure that second story is accessible.

So option one in this slide, we've identified criteria that we heard from our clients at MCPS, but we mostly heard from the community.

So we've identified things like whether the solution that we've gone through addresses accessibility, whether it makes the plate areas visible from the main roads.

Does it have civic presence?

Does it meet sustainability criteria?

Does it have clarity of circulation?

And does it, you know, how does it line up as far as cost goes?

And also whether it meets certain MCPS educational program needs and whether it meets the site needs.

And so in this one, you can see the colored bars.

The bar that you know we're meeting at 100% is whether it addresses accessibility, the rest of the bars you can see meet at 50% or lower of these criteria that we've identified with the community.

But the pros on this one is that you're getting you know a brand new brand new building systems, brand new building finishes, uh, sprinkler system added, um, and the community size gym is retained, which we heard is a really important issue for this community, and that it's also cost effective, which is always important to everyone.

But on the downsides is that we know it's not going to accommodate the full program from MCPS as what a modern day school, if it were built new today, would would be required to meet.

So rooms that we weren't able to accommodate were things like a dual purpose room or a music room or additional spaces for kitchen support.

Um so we knew those areas weren't going to quite meet the spec.

All right, so option two.

Um you can see from the site that now we're starting to impact the the way the site lays out.

Um so you can see a little bit on the left hand side, there's a dashed line, and that is where the building would be proposed to be demolished.

And a little bit also towards the right hand side where you see the paved play area and the paved to play ground.

Um, those areas are what we would call the demolition areas, and then we would essentially build new construction, which we'll see on the next slide.

Um we were also reorienting the uh the bus loop.

So the bus loop in yellow is now coming off of Wainwright Avenue, and the parking would be off of Ridgeway.

Um the service would still be up towards um where the existing kitchen is.

Can you fan?

Sure, thank you.

All right, and so the new construction is in yellow on this slide, and the existing is in white with the same magenta color used to highlight the areas where we would have some accessibility, toilet room upgrades, and interior reconfiguration.

So in this scheme, um, the entire building is going to receive the same level of upgrades that the previous iteration showed.

So as Heidi explained before, the mechanical systems, the electrical systems, the sprinkler, etc.

Um, and then this is where the biggest impact is is with the yellow with the new construction.

This is a one-story scheme.

Um, so we're trying to uh eliminate the accessibility issues by wrapping around and creating an enclosed courtyard with a new um a new wing in yellow on the right-hand side.

Um, and then we're we're also addressing the one of the biggest um challenges of the site, which is the entrance.

If you've ever driven by there, it's really hard to tell how to get to the front door of the building.

So we're really making that a main presence on uh Wainwright and Ridgeway and having that accessibility and vision or visibility too from the admin to see oversee all that you know people coming and going from the site.

Um and then when we look at the criteria, you can see these bars start to move a little bit.

Um, because this is a new construction opportunity, we're going to be able to meet the MCPS specification a little bit more.

Um, where we end up falling short is because we have spaces that are being renovated.

Um, so we have some things that are existing that we're not necessarily going to be able to address without a full, you know, a full new build.

Um things that um examples of that are the library media center, um, is currently in the center of the building and doesn't have daylight.

Um, so to be able to solve that, we would have to you know really kind of start over from scratch on that.

So that's why this bar isn't completely filled in at the very top.

But we are meeting the site needs.

So we have all of the play areas, we have all of the accessibility addressed on uh within the site.

We also address accessibility within the building.

That's the third bar down.

Um we have the a better view, or sorry, we don't have any much better view of the of the play area because the building is where it is and the large part of it sites the play areas to the back of the building.

So unfortunately, that play area visibility is pretty similar to the first scheme.

Um we start to have a little bit more civic presence because the the front of the of the building is uh is sited at the main at the main street, um, and their sustainability bar is um going to move up because we are able to have better envelope, um, you know, better systems, um, more efficiency.

Our clarity of circulation is going to be a little bit better too, because we have um uh fixed some of the internal circulation problems by uh through this new construction.

However, the cost is where we start to escalate because we uh start to have more impact on the site, so it's going to end up obviously costing more.

Um again, the pros are very similar to the first scheme where we're gonna have you know new systems, um, we're gonna meet the ed spec, um, we're gonna keep that community sized gym.

Um, the things that are going to be a little more challenging in terms of cons is having that again that visibility to the playgrounds and not being able to 100% meet the ed spec regarding your daylight within those internal rooms, such as the media center and the resource rooms.

For option three, we are now doing a scheme that is involves more than 50% demolition of the existing building.

So in this scheme, we're demolishing the one and two story classroom wing that's on the north side of the building or to the right side of your plan and replacing that with a two-story wing.

And and this one also reorients a lot of the site circulation.

So in this one, similarly, similarly to the last one, we are trying to establish one single entrance to the building.

So in this case, the single entrance to the building is being established primarily off of the Wain Wright Avenue side of the building, although the student drop-off is able to branch off of Arden's Avenue.

But we in this one have both both of them sort of converging together so that way students coming by bus or students coming by vehicles can enter through a single entrance.

And then there's also service access off the back of the building that no longer has to be shared with any other vehicular circulation.

Um let's move ahead.

So in this version of the plan, we have a two-story wing that is shown in yellow, uh, primarily uh to suit classrooms and toilet and art rooms.

Um we're keeping administration towards the center of the building and doing most of our renovations that you can see in magenta at the center of the building to accommodate the current MCPS standards, and then adding a small wing off to the back because the current kitchen space is undersized based on the current standards.

So adding primarily onto that back for the kitchen space.

And then in this slide, you can see the second story part of the wing where we're just again primarily classroom space and toilet space.

But the genesis of this plan was really in hearing from the community that they wanted us to maintain as much open space as possible on site.

So the benefit of having something that's two stories that can have an elevator leaves a large portion of the site open for play area or just grass, just unprogrammed space around that site.

So we're taking up a little bit less of the site itself with the building, but making it uh making the site open for you know more activities outside.

Um in this one, once again, we're meeting the most of the educational specification needs, but because we're dealing with an existing building, some of the spaces are larger or a little bit smaller than what you would want in a new construction.

We're meeting all of the site needs because we're adding in additional paved play areas and mulch play areas, um, addressing again all accessibilities.

Play area visibility is also not fully addressed in this version of the plan because most of the the pay or the play areas are in the back side of the building.

Sustainability is creeping up a little bit because we can have a higher performing building envelope, so that way your mechanical and electrical systems aren't working quite as hard.

Clarity of circulation is pretty good in this one because you're you're basically asked to go up or down to get to most of the classrooms.

Um, and then the cost on this one is creeping up just slightly from the previous version because we're demoing more of the existing building and then building a larger edition in exchange.

So similarly to the other versions, we have a sprinkler system that's getting added to the existing building.

We're able to maintain the community sized gym, which of course we heard is very important and used a lot.

And you're getting a really simple internal circulation, which we saw as a pro.

But as a con, we're still have a media space in the center of the building that's not getting any daylight.

And that you also have multiple parking lots, which you know, certainly if you've been to the school, you know you drive up for the first time and you're not sure am I parking on this side or on that side.

So this also has a similar concept where there's a few different parking areas to accommodate the amount of spaces that we would need for a school of this size.

Okay, and this is our last option, which is the replacement option.

In this scheme, we demolish the entire existing building and we replace the building and the site elements.

Um you can see that the building footprint is in white, and that's a new L-shaped uh design, which uh fronts Ridgeway and has more of an internal open opening towards Wayne Wright.

Um we've centered the the bus loop and the parking at the main entrance, which you can see in the orange triangle in the center of that L.

The again we're trying to limit any traffic off of Wainwright, and that's why we have queuing coming off of our dens so that we could help to alleviate any congestion on that road and service again, also fronts Ridgeway.

We've also located the building closer closer to Ridgeway to be able to provide that civic presence.

Um this is a two-story building.

Um, and you can see from the ground floor.

Um, when you first enter, you have more of the school spaces to the left hand side.

So you have classrooms that um bend and form that L.

And then towards the right, you have more of the the sort of shared spaces and the community spaces.

You have the library media center, which gets shared often, um, and then also the gym and the multi-purpose room.

The gym has that presence relative to the parking lot, and then both the multi-purpose room and the gym spill out onto the the play areas as well.

And you can see that most of the fields happen uh kind of downhill towards our dens and and keeps everything sort of in a in a very sort of orderly fashion across the site, and all of the play areas have visibility from the street.

Um as you go up, um you can see that the right-hand side of the building is more of a two-story.

That's um the gym and the multi-purpose room are going to have higher volumes.

Um, so we've kept them as a sort of a one-story portion, and then there's two-story elements and program areas that are stacked, um, additional classrooms and instructional spaces on the left-hand side as well.

And then you can see again how these um criteria bars start to move for option four.

Um, in this option, we're since we're providing a brand new building, then we're able to meet all of the MCPS ed spec needs both in the building and on the site.

Of course, all accessibility will be built, um, it's new construction, so we'll be following the current codes.

Um, the play area visibility, as I mentioned, is um is very clear from uh from the site and and um from the surrounding areas.

We have that civic presence along Ridgeway, and of course, sustainability is going to be the highest it is among the four options.

Um, clarity of circulation, you know, it's it's brand new construction, so we're gonna have very clear way of traveling, you know, within the building and across the site.

Um, and the cost is and on this option is obviously the highest because we are impacting the most area on the site.

Um, from a pro standpoint, you know, we're this is brand new construction.

So we're going to be able to have everything brand new, and that obviously comes with a um uh a lot of benefits.

Um is completely accessible.

We're going to have a smaller building footprint because we went vertical on this one as much as possible.

Um, great adjacencies within um, you know, within the building, and great visibility and community gathering space as well.

Um, and the and the cons on this is that is that cost, it is um definitely a higher impact.

Um one of the other um cons to this one as opposed to the other three is that that community-sized gym is no longer within the base design.

It is um considered an ad alternate, and it would be something that we would you know um have a uh a consideration once it gets further into design with that partnership with um with the city.

Um and then the circulation, you can see that that sort of longer queuing off of our dens for vehiculars is a lot longer on site, and so that was something that was brought up during our our community meetings as a possible concern.

But we do we do still need to have some some bus traffic off of Wayne Wright, also.

We can't keep all of the traffic off of Wainwright, unfortunately, from an engineering standpoint.

So that's how we've ended up with this solution.

So those are a few of a few of the sort of the pros and cons for this option.

And so you can see in summary how these four options start to compare to each other.

Let you look at that for a moment.

All right, so what does this look like in terms of a timeline?

So we have option one, which is really the smallest amount of scope happening on the site.

We're touching very little of the site.

We're really only keeping the renovation to the interior of the building.

So from a design standpoint, it is going to be a faster design.

So we have you can see that a timeline, this is not also tied to calendar years.

It's really more of just an overall number of months.

So you can see that starting from the design development and schematic design, we're going to be essentially a year or so within design and potentially about 24 months in construction.

As we move into options two, three, and four, we're going to need a little bit longer for design and uh and probably a little bit longer for construction.

I would mention that these are very much estimates at this point, and there's a lot of other factors that are going to be go into account when it comes to how this actually pans out within a calendar year.

All right, so we're gonna quickly go through what uh what we heard from the community meetings at each of the the um touch points in the process.

At community meeting number one, um, it was really our chance to get to know the community of Twinbrook.

There was staff and parents attending this meeting.

We were able to do an interactive activity with them to get to know what kind of things we needed to know about Twinbrook and how they were utilizing the school currently and what their current thoughts were about the building and where were their pain points, what do they think worked really well in the building?

Um we got to hear it quite a lot.

So what we ultimately heard was was that you know they were really interested in preserving the open space.

They love to use their soccer field and their and softball fields and all the playgrounds, and that those were utilized throughout the weekend and after school.

Um we also heard that we really need to consider the relationship with the city of Rockville and how do we work here to build a successful relationship.

Um and I think as we said earlier, handicap access is a bit of an issue on site, and that not every student, every parent can get to all the paved play areas or the most play areas.

Um then we also hear that the building is just considered old and dated, and that we've heard some of the building systems can be a little bit problematic for facilities management.

Um, and then I think the thing that we heard a lot was about after school activities.

There's girls on the run, there's a lot of soccer going on, and that people are in this building seven days a week or around the site seven days a week, and that there's also after school care.

So a lot of parents will be coming there up through 6:30 at night to pick up their students.

And that one unique thing, especially given your your conversation earlier, is that a lot of the parents in this community actually use public transit and walk to the school, and that maybe vehicular traffic isn't the primary consideration for the school despite being in a more suburban community.

Okay, so then we met um again for community meeting too.

Um, and this is where we were within the innovate phase, and this is when we were starting to put pen to paper.

We showed a few concepts to the community, and we had some really great feedback.

Um, so share with you the that feedback.

Um, so again, the the community gym and the and the parking um, very important to the community.

We heard a lot of the um activities that would happen on site, the number of uh of families that would show up to events, um, very um special to the community.

Um also that traffic again on Wainwright Road was gonna be a big concern for them.

It's a one-way road, it has um parking on both sides.

How are we gonna get buses in and out?

How are we gonna make it safe for everybody?

Um, the visibility of the playgrounds was a big concern, and in fact, that had us um actually flip the entire design of option four the next go-around.

So this was a huge um a huge you know amount of feedback that was very uh very helpful in how we continued to um evaluate the site.

Um the bus loop configuration, again, having that visibility from the um the main entrance.

So the bus loop and the parking could be viewed from the front door.

And then one thing that was very unusual, which was something that we wouldn't have picked up had we not heard from a parent and then actually experienced it when we were on site is that there is an existing turnaround, the bus loop down by the daycare, and there would be you know some parents would come in and then back out, and it was a big safety concern.

So short of you know being able to control people's um, you know, how they operate, we just needed to make sure that the design then influenced it in a way that it was a much safer configuration.

So that was really great feedback from our first meeting showing some of our design um options with them.

So for community meeting number three, um, we presented our revised designs back to that community to get more feedback.

And in this one, we certainly heard what they were saying about the daycare drop-off, and that influenced a lot of our decisions regarding site circulation and how vehicular traffic was entering and leaving the site.

So we made a lot of changes like that.

Um option number four, we showed a revised placement, which is matches what you guys saw tonight for the building.

We also got to explore what what we got to see about the building, which is the existing conditions.

We were allowed to come to the school before this meeting, go into every room, every closet, get on the roof, go with our our civil and mechanical and structural engineers to just see how the building was currently functioning, see what the condition of the building was.

And then we also got to really dissect the the current program as far as what should be provided in a modern school versus what's currently provided, and then that way we could identify any sort of shortcomings that the current building had and try to address those in options two, three, and four, where we were either replacing or adding on to the building.

So we saw, you know, there was a lot of um common traits within those approaches.

We were, you know, always going to be addressing the accessibility issues on site, whether we were doing option one or do option four.

Um we wanted to make sure and prioritize things like the soccer field and the softball field and all those play areas on site to make sure that those were able to be used throughout the week.

Um, and then of course, when it comes to the building, getting brand new building systems in again, whether we were doing option one or a full replacement with option four.

That's right.

So for what we heard from the school was that TwinBook is really a great community, and that the school needs to reflect that community at the highest standard.

Um, and and that you know, they really wanted to see if we could get in things like larger classrooms, more open space, get a community garden going in on the site somewhere.

Um, we also heard a lot of um advocates for sustainable building features, like getting, you know, we heard a lot of things about just replacing the entire school to make sure that the building was as sustainable as possible going forward.

And then again, we heard um not only about the daycare that's adjacent to the site, but could we get a daycare on site?

Um so there seems to be a need or at least a want in the community for having additional daycare opportunities.

Um community meeting number four happened not too long ago.

Um, and we presented basically the same content we presented to you this evening.

Um, and so we shared with everybody the the options, um, how we got there, and then how it evaluated uh the the criteria or how we evaluated it based on the criteria that we was established at the beginning of the project.

And what we heard was that again uh Twinburg is an amazing community.

I mean, you have some amazing advocates in your community, um, and we really appreciate hearing from them and and hearing why you know Twinbrook is so special and why this is such an important project for them.

Um, sustainability is a big again came up as a as a um a big question and and uh concern for the community, especially the stormwater, and how are we gonna you know um address that in the actual design, um making sure that the the plans were actually accommodating the growth and really understanding from MCPS's standpoint how they got to the design numbers that they um that they were providing.

Um, and then finally we got to the point here now how can they advocate more?

What's the next steps?

Um, how can they, you know, where can they speak and what are the um what are the opportunities to advocate for this project?

Um so the next steps are um the uh capital improvement uh plan is getting finalized.

Um so October 13th is when it will be published.

Um and from then uh there'll be a number of different work sessions and hearings.

Um, and we shared this with the community that they're um welcome to come and uh sign up and speak on behalf of um Twinbrook Elementary School and how they can do that, some other um people that they could reach out to and um all the steps essentially that that comes with uh the the community or the capital improvement plan um and that timeline, and then eventually we're getting to the November 20th timeline for when the decisions will be made at the school board level.

I think that might be it for our presentation, and so we're ready for any questions.

Thank you.

I just want to say that was incredibly thorough, and I appreciated that you share with us the pros and the cons being objective so that we can provide feedback as well as sharing the comments that you got from the community.

That's super helpful.

Um I wanted to thank you.

Thank thank you, MCPS for looking at this.

Uh, this has been, I believe I was talking earlier about 25 years in the making.

I know I have been involved for about 15 years of those, and I see some advocates in the room who have been PTing together for a long time with Amy and Hackerbeck Asking Hastings and um Vincent Russo.

Uh, just this community does deserve so much more, and there have been iterations of let's just put some fresh paint on it and put some duct tape.

Um, I'm not kidding.

Uh so I think this community has been so patient, but also they know what they need.

Uh, there have been situations where we can't get programming that's much needed in this community like linkages to learning until we get more program space capacity.

So I just want to acknowledge that this is a community in great need, but has an amazing heart.

Uh I know that uh Prince Brook Hellner and uh Miss Aguilard have been doing everything they can with what they have.

Uh seen they've organized beautified Twinbrook Days and everyone in the community is painting and you know, just rolling up their sleeves to get involved.

So I just I wanted to honor this community to say this has been a long time coming.

I know Councilman Villa, you're at children, your your son went there, and you've been involved in this journey as well.

But I just wanted to give some additional context to what the school has been through.

Um I have been through stages where children were on the floor with specials.

Um so I think that's been more than patient, and I I for me, I just note that option one is not exciting at all.

Um it just seems more like the tape, you know, although I appreciate that there's some new systems being updated.

So I I just I think that we really need to get the spaceful linkages to learning and give this school a brand new building.

Um, and so I'm leaning towards option four, but I do want to just point to the questions that you've asked my colleagues and I to weigh in on, um, and I'll just note those very briefly as we give our comments.

So uh the approach is outlined in the feasibility study.

Um, does mayor and council have a preferred approach, right?

We'll have we have the four options.

Uh recognizing that the feasibility study is complete, are there additional on-site considerations?

Uh, and then also the community has expressed that the existing community-sized gymnasium is a tremendously valued asset, and they'd hate to lose that and exceeds the standard MCPS educational specifications.

Um, so is a question of would mayor and council be supportive of the city helping on some costs for the community-sized gymnasium.

I know that um I always have to say we need to also check in with our finance team uh on these things, but I wanted to, at least on the last question, share with everyone that there's some precedence for the city of Rockville getting involved and and having a strong partnership with MCPS.

We have counselors in schools uh every day throughout the city.

Um we have helped on linkages to learning at Maryvale and have a linkages light program uh just with I think one or two days a week at Twinbrook.

Uh and at Bayad Rustin, we did, I think the number was about 400,000 to help them.

Please verify the numbers, Mr.

Mahalek, but it was around that amount to help them with a community-sized gym.

So there's some precedence there of our city getting involved to help the county.

I know the county has very tight budget as well, because I know that you get their funding from them, and then MCPS has to do with what they can given all the needs around the entire county.

So I want to acknowledge that as well.

Um, but I I I would be interested in seeing you know what year and timing this might be and how the city can consider what we can do.

So we we've been good partners to the Rockville Volunteer Fire Department, recently helped them last year.

I do think that it's it's time to help Twinbrook to realize this dream.

Um so I I wanted to to start there.

For me, I like four.

I do think I do, you know, given if it works out in budget and my colleagues support, I would like to consider the city being involved in the community-sized gym.

Um in terms of the additional site considerations, I just wanted to note a couple things.

I think sustainability is a big factor, and I've seen I've worked on as a parent uh and the advocate and a PCAR on Biodestin, and I've seen what's possible uh and how they have an art space and a music space in Twinbrook does not have that.

I've seen how it's been green and sustainable, and it just brings new life to the community, and it'll save MCPS money over time in terms of the sustainability cost.

So I do hope that's considered.

Um I did also want to note that um in addition to the community's uh gym that we talked about earlier, there were some concerns about Wainwright, and I understand where the community is coming from there.

Um this is a question for you.

I know you were trying to deal with the constraints of this of the site.

Um, however, Wayne Wright, I think it's a one-way and it's narrow compared to some of the other streets.

Would that create a problem for the buses who may need to go in a different direction?

Because in some of the areas in the Twinburg community, you really have to once you have to you have to go all the way around.

So I was just from a workflow perspective, and if a sustainability perspective, does that create a problem for the buses to just take them on a one-way street out?

Um, and I also know residents may be concerned about is there enough space to navigate a bus given that there's parking on both sides.

Yeah.

Probably the bigger I think you've got to do that.

Did one of you want to take the transportation question?

No, you're not from transportation department.

Did we we yeah, from I would say from a site entrance and exit standpoint, we're comfortable with the buses coming in and getting out of the site.

Um, in terms of the the you know, pathway to the school and from the school, I think that's something that MCPS transportation department would need to evaluate.

Um, and I know that they you know have to plan routes um every year, so I think that's something that they would you know have to take into consideration if there is a you know a difference in what currently happens now.

I'm not entirely sure if there's a bus that goes down waiting right at the moment.

Um but yeah, we we do feel very comfortable that we've and we we have the ability to engineer buses coming in and and and off of the site.

Um I know parents were concerned about you know, now you've got cars, and what if they park too close?

Um, and what if you take up spaces?

So we we understand and hear that, and I think there's you know opportunities to work around that, whether it's you know, a certain part of the day that there's not parking in one or two spots, so we don't you know cut off um the buses from being able to turn safely.

Um so those are things that would be evaluated once we get to the design fees.

Thank you.

And I hope that you like we'll take a bus there and just kind of see how tight it is, because I I it is quite tight.

Um, but in general, this is beautiful.

I'm excited Twinbrook deserves this, and I I hope that it happens soon.

Councilmember Valeri.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you to the entire team.

Um I had the opportunity in full disclosure, that was my red and white striped back in that one photo.

Um, and it it was I am not surprised at the level of engagement and advocacy because um having seen it in person through the entire time that my son went to Twinbrook Elementary, um, and having you know lived in the neighborhood for as long as we have now, um it is very much uh uh indicative of how important um Twinbrook Elementary is.

And I will just say just for full disclosure, uh Twinbrook Elementary is the hub of Twinbrook south of Beers Mill, because there is an other schools north of Beers Mill.

I'd like to say that you know that South of Earsmill is the hub of everything, but no, we have great schools to the north of Beers Mill.

But um, similar to what you noted, um it really is, you know, is one of the original post-World War II literal community schools where you had the school in the middle, you had the residences around you, and the intent was for everybody to be able to walk to the school and walk home.

Um now, you know, times have shifted and liability concerns have shifted, so there's a lot more differing transportation needs, but you still do have a a neighborhood that um, as you noted, and as census data shows, has does not have as much access to one car, let alone two cars, um, more so than any other area in uh the city of Rockville.

Um and in general, that it's something that that Twinbrook likes.

Um we like to be able to walk to wherever we need to go, whether it's dropping our kids off at school, um, you know, except for middle school as a whole, having to drive their thing, but um we'll work, we'll work on JWX.

But um, it's you know, I'm biased, of course.

I'm gonna say, yes, we absolutely deserve this, but as someone who when we moved into Twinbrook over 15 years ago now, um this had already been uh uh an advocacy point at that point.

And even that was like, you know, you talk to the older residents, and you know, you get the kind of like weary glaze.

Well, we've been trying for so long.

And so um, I I say that not because I don't think that um y'all know that, but I think also too for residents on on that note.

Just pause for a second so we can get back online.

I'm gonna say maybe I should stop talking.

It's Simon God.

Um just if uh if someone can tell us if we're on a y'all know one moment, please.

Yes, exactly.

That's what I was gonna say.

We're gonna wait until you can record again.

That was my magnum opus moment.

That was weird.

That has never happened while I've been on council, right, Dr.

Miles.

First time this is the everyone is saying all the all the generations before us that we need this.

I don't know.

I want to believe that I don't know.

That was wacky.

Guys, shall we take a quick bathroom break?

Yeah.

Or do you do you I probably would be helping?

She needs to she needs to make sure it's recording all this.

So just five minutes, no more.

8 35 back in our seats.

With you or without you, however, we really need you as a um MCPS and the county as a very strong partner.

Um, so we really appreciate this opportunity.

Um, I have found, and it was really well illustrated in the presentation, that honestly the orientation of the building on the property is one of the biggest, if not the biggest problem.

Um, so you know, from that standpoint of you know, regrading um the site for those who are unfamiliar, Twinbrook Elementary has some significant hills which then have some significant lows in it, and that comes into play with something that I raised at the last meeting, which was stormwater management, um, acknowledging that climate change is is really changing the way that storms are uh interacting with a community like Twinbrook, um, where the water table is already extremely high.

Um, so I think that from that perspective, um option number four makes the most sense.

We're looking at this as an investment that will set up Twinbrook Elementary for the best flexibility going forward in the future.

And so making the that kind of investment by only doing uh a little bit, or you know, as Madam Mayor joked around with the you know, duct tape, um, while it might be a good temporary measure, I think that in order to make it the best investment for MCPS um as well as the county, that we need to do the the we need to proceed forward um with an option that does set this uh Twinbrook Elementary up for success um in the future, whether it's success of like the infrastructure, um, but also includes success for the students as well.

Um I can confirm the community-sized gym, extremely important.

And again, it kind of does touch on that um Twinbrook Elementary being in the middle of uh the southern part of Twinbrook.

I think that it's just it's a very uh unique school in that way, um, but it is very reflective of the community feel to everything.

Um I have one question and then I can I'll go through my three answers, although I'm sure everybody probably knows.

Um I did already remark, um, I would fully endorse option four and really believe strongly that that should be the one that's advanced forward into the design.

Um I think that uh aside from the community gym, um I agree with Madam Mayor that really looking at ways to integrate uh green building features that would produce more cost savings from an energy perspective because that's um not going that's not changing anytime soon, anyways.

Um, but it's also a reflection of how to set this building up for success going uh down the road into the future.

Um I absolutely based on um the city's precedent of uh working with MCPS and um the county to invest in other public schools.

Um I would absolutely as a council member, as me speaking on behalf of myself alone, be supportive of the city covering the additional costs that would be required to provide a larger community-sized gym.

Um I think that is one of um, and I think you noted it quite accurately, that is one of the features of Twinbrook is really that this is our meeting space, and while we do have a rec center, it the the school is is also in the heart of the neighborhood.

So um it really is a place for everybody, and again, because the Twinbrook Elementary community, which then goes on to Julius West and RM, it's it's also part in the city and part outside the city.

So for it, the community gym space to be in Twinbrook Elementary actually opens up the door to more after school programs for all the kids of Twinbrook Elementary together without having any sort of competing.

Well, do you live in Rockville proper or do you not?

Um, because you know, as someone and I know uh Amy as well, um, because our kids were in the same uh class, our kids don't look at it as like, oh, you live outside the city, oh you live inside the city.

They just want to hang out with their friends, you know, and I think that there's something absolutely pure and and lovely about it, and I think that's why the community gym fulfills that need as a border community um quite quite well.

My only question honestly is, and if you don't know this off the copyright, it's okay.

Which option, I'm I'm gonna guess four, but maybe up two and three.

Which option creates the spaces that are needed to bring link just to learning to Twinbrook Elementary.

Yeah.

So um Robin O'Hara, senior planner.

Um, the Ed spec includes uh linkages to learning as an ad alternate in all situations.

Um option four would clearly have uh all the components for linkages to learning, but of course those are funded through a separate pot.

So um it would be up to uh HHS to uh fund that.

Okay.

And that and I appreciate that.

Thank you.

I just wanted to make sure that um you know that that also for the viewing public as well to to know at which I didn't know at first, that um there are going there are specific space needs in order to truly implement this.

So on that note, I will stop talking so the power doesn't go out again.

And thank you all uh a lot for for this presentation.

Okay, Dr.

Miles and then uh Councilman Van Greg.

All right, I'll I'll I'll make it quick again echoing the thanks to the community and all those who have advocated on behalf of Twinbrook Elementary School over the years.

I was a question, I'll answer your questions, but one of my my my overarching questions and um certainly Madam Mayor can probably chime in on this one as well.

What I didn't get a sense of is to what extent the options particularly two, three, and four would accommodate additional students that that'd be an issue in the future.

Um I think we have had experience with Barrett Rustin where there was an there was uh advocacy from this mayor or previous mayor and council to make sure we built beyond today's numbers and we're already in back in trailers or so-called portables, whatever you want to call them at Bayard Russell right now.

So I guess the question is to what extent is this meeting current school capacity needs versus future, and then I have some follow-up comments.

Sorry.

Um, so uh a couple of things.

The assumption is that um it will have sufficient capacity for the current projections, but also the core spaces are being designed uh at least in the feasibility feasibility study.

Um if this were to go forward in in design, we might even increase that to 740 as sort of a base as to not necessarily assume that 740 students are coming, but that if they were to at some point in the future, you wouldn't have to adjust things like the multi-purpose room to accommodate a larger student population.

So it's sort of the base, how small would we uh design a school building?

Thanks for that.

I think my only point would be to um, and this is just me talking, I'm not a designer planner, what have you.

This is just speaking from anecdote and seeing what I've seen around the city, and keeping in mind with our housing crunch, most of our growth in housing is going to come from in field, so communities like Twinbrook as they change over, probably one of the more affordable sections of the city.

So uh certainly a prime location for if a start of family, if there is a certain such thing as a start of home, even those are really exist in Twinbrook, but I'm just being mindful of potential population growth in the future being very um thoughtful about that.

So that's all I have to say on that.

Other things I'm just gonna make some brief comments about the questions that you uh asked.

I was looking at the uh schematic on packet page 119, kind of summarizing the core options side by side.

And my preferences are based mostly on finances and presumed timeliness.

Um I do recognize that the state as a whole is gonna in the budget crunch, the county are going to be in a budget crunch.

Um, and I think aspirationally, you know, go big, oh bold, you know, do it right the first time.

But I do want to make sure we're at least my my comments are based um in part on the economic realities that I foresee both now and in the future.

To that end, it looks like when I look at that uh summary of PEC page 119, you get almost the best bang for your buck for option two.

It doesn't meet all the needs, but like pound for pound, it looks like it does okay.

Um I asked staff, I think these questions were ultimately answered by um you all the presenters about what the true cost is between options two and three.

I think they say it was nominal, maybe four million nominal by MCPS standards, it's a lot of money to me.

But um I think um I just it just looks like you know, option two seems the most reasonable.

I will defer to community input, but I think both from the amount that of construction that would need to be had, so think about the timeliness.

It seems like option two would be easier to construct, and it seems like it meets a number of the criteria, though I recognize not all of them.

Um I think that's all I had.

I think that it was just another um sort of comment when I was looking at the projected construction times, they all seem to be 24 months, which seems a bit weird because one of them is like a full on demolition, start from scratch and the others are just sort of I wouldn't say duct tape, but I think you know it seems there would be a stark difference between you know demolishing buildings, building something new versus adding, but again, I'm I'm I don't I'm not a construction engineer, so I'll I will stop.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Van Grack.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um this is a long time coming.

Um as I'm sure the folks from Montgomery County public schools know, when the facilities conditioning indexing came out earlier this year, Twinbrook elementary school score was 0.555.

That shows that it is absolutely necessary that we turn and make this and rehabilitate the school.

It's necessary.

The community's been asking for it.

And just as my colleagues have said, I don't know that there, I don't know that there's an elementary school that is more central to the community than Twinbrook Elementary School.

And I also don't know that there's more um a better use of our dollars than making sure that we have the right spaces, both outdoor and indoor at our schools for our children.

Um and the detail that went into this report is uh is critical.

I agree with council member Valeri, that I I uh option one is band-aids.

That that's really not what we need.

And hearing from the community and looking what we have here, option four really does seem like it checks off all the boxes.

Now, obviously, one of the questions I did have is because this elementary school is so central to our community.

I wanted to be clear because on the potential schedule, options two, three, and four look like they're similar.

Is it true that if we're truly doing a full demolition, that we're not going to be losing any time if we choose the option four versus the middle ground options of two and three Julie Morris MCPS.

So in these options, students would move off site to a holdings center.

And with the demolition and additions, it does take, it may not take quite as long, but there's still is extensive site work involved.

And the other consideration too is disruption to student learning.

So whereas the projects maybe take less than 24 months, the idea of moving the students over a winter break may not be as easy as at a summer break.

So that would be decided.

But typically the the timeline for for construction of that type for any of those options two through four would be a 24 month duration.

Okay, so you don't anticipate that if option four is chosen, which is the larger rebuild, the more significant, it won't take a significantly longer time than one of the middle ground rebuilds of two or three.

So other elementary school recent projects are taking 24 months, um, such as Joanne Lelick, which is um the largest elementary school um size-wise that we've built thus far.

Excellent.

Thanks.

Um in looking at option four, it really does seem to check off all the boxes.

We're addressing, I think, the best egress and ingress um around the community.

Um, and we're really looking for the site planning, which also checks off the boxes.

I think that you know, if we're going to be looking at option, option four seems to do it right.

I also will, similar to um what Councilmember Valerie said and the mayor was talking about, um, a community size gym is critical, especially when you have a elementary school like Twinbrook.

And so to the extent that there is either a legislative bond option or the city's contribution to be able to provide that to this community, I think's important.

I know how much this community gym that's there right now is utilized by the community, and to lose that aspect for the community, I think would be a loss.

And if we're going to check all the boxes, which I think we can do with option four, um, I think it's important for us to make sure that we maintain this community center, which is Twinbrook Elementary School and their community-sized gym.

Um that being said, I also want to just pivot slightly because I know we have folks from MCPS here.

We talked about the facility conditioning index score for Twinbrook, which was 0.555.

Unfortunately, that is actually not the worst facility conditioning index score for Rockville schools.

Thomas Wooton High School has a facility conditioning index of 0.625.

And it's the only school in the county that has a poor index rating for its plumbing and its H of X system.

And it was taken off the CIP um budget for Montgomery County.

Um, I think it's important, and we've got to make sure that our kids have the right school.

And I applaud what's happening in Twinbrook.

This is what needs to happen.

I want this the city to support, but in talking to MCPS Cuzier here, I just want to note the Wooton community is likewise hurting um by us leaving the students in that condition like we've been leaving the Twinburg community as well.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, um Mayor.

I think many of my colleagues have said much uh that I agree with, so I'm I'm not really gonna re-write uh that.

But thank you for the presentation and for being here tonight.

Um also thank you to uh my uh colleagues who've been here a long time uh and to the uh community for advocating so hard uh for for Twinbrook.

Uh it's really a special community, and uh I think that you know it's been a long time coming, uh as many of uh my colleagues and others in the room can uh attest.

Um just I just want to say kudos to you guys uh for the engagement process.

I think you went through a really thorough engagement process and uh really really engaged the uh community.

Um the the people of Twinbrook um have spoken pretty pretty clear clearly in those um uh sessions and elsewhere, and I support them 100%.

Uh I think option four uh is the way to go.

Um, having been to Twinbrook and the surrounding community, um, I I saw the need for a larger gym uh that can really uh accommodate uh these communities' needs and uh accommodate larger uh gatherings.

So I support uh uh a larger gym 100%.

I think the doubles in the details uh in how uh we can partner with you and uh that we can actually fund it.

Uh but I support you know making that a goal.

Um Dr.

Miles actually asked the the question which I wanted to ask, which was uh, you know, is there uh an a room on uh targeting?

But we've already answered that question.

So just let me look at the uh the questions.

Option four is what I'm for on number one.

Um number two, I don't have a really anything to add.

And number three, yes, I'm for the the larger gym.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fulton and then Councilman Masha.

Um didto all of the kudos and all of the thanks to the community and MCPS to answer the questions.

Um, I live and breathe all day, every day making hard trade-off decisions here and in my day job, and I'm so excited I don't have to.

Option four.

Like I don't have to make that trade-off, y'all do.

So I support option four.

Like, and I think the community deserves it.

Uh that's so refreshing.

Thanks, Dr.

Miles for being the voice of reason on that one.

Um, I also uh think that the community gym is important, and I would want to explore ways to support that as well.

And I don't have anything else other than the sustainability people already talked about.

Thanks.

Thank you, Councilman Bushell.

Um I also want to echo my colleagues and thank the community.

Um, thank you for the excellent presentation.

Um I I am also leaning towards option four.

Uh that seems to meet most of the needs of the community and um the needs that were shared throughout the engagement.

I did have a few questions.

Um I was curious.

Well, first off, thank you for uh capturing all of that information from the four different sessions.

I was curious how many community members uh joined uh and and where they're from, if they were all from Twinbrook, uh, or if there's any kind of information, demographic information about who joined the the meetings.

Was that captured?

So in the in the four community meetings, we had a variety of participants.

Uh we collected information when they were there that many were parents, grandparents, staff.

We also had a specific meeting for staff uh between community meeting number one and community number two.

And um a lot of people were from PTA.

We also had uh your council member there at our last meeting.

And uh, but it seemed like most of the people there were parents and grandparents of students that were currently there or alumni of Twin Brook itself that still lives in the community.

Do you have um like the number of how many people attended or anything like that or any data?

Anyway, yeah, so we do.

We have the sign-in sheet.

So each night that we were there or had a virtual meeting, we took attendance, and we have that also in the in the study, so those people will be published.

But um we had anywhere from 15 to 25 participants at each one of these sessions, and then for the staff meeting, we had a good portion of the staff.

It was right um, I believe after school, if I remember correctly.

So most of the staff was still around and was able to attend.

Okay.

Um, and also my other question, if you can jump to the slide where it's a summary of um all the things that you were all the um different items that you were exploring.

Yes, that one yes, that one.

Um could you just share a little bit more um between option two and option three, just looking at this, it does look like option two has a little bit more than option three, generally speaking.

Um, but I know that option three it has a larger cost.

Um and I I assume that's because of the demo.

Can you just share a little bit more detail on that?

Sure.

Well, they are quite similar.

Um it becomes down to a configuration of the site, I think, where it you start to see the nuance of that, you know, whether it's a one-story um addition uh on option two or the the two-story edition for option three.

Um the play area visibility.

Um you can see a little bit difference here in the reason.

I think that we had this um a little bit in more in favor of option two of having more visibility is because we sort of squeezed over the building and we you know, we cut one of the wings off, so you can kind of see a little bit more behind the back, but it's it's pretty nuanced here.

Um in terms of sustainability, again, they're very similar where we have um envelope, building envelope um that's going to be upgraded.

But um until we you know did a very high level or a very detailed level, sorry, um analysis of sustainability, it'd be hard to really uh say which one is is more sustainable.

Um, I think we could probably come come to a pretty even match on both of those.

Um so I I think it comes down to um, and we heard actually both sides of the story here from staff, um, why one might work better than the other regarding you know circulation or preference of where rooms are relative to each other.

Um things that came up were on option two.

Um, you know, we we put kindergarten and and uh pre-K towards um the right hand side of the site, which is where that uh the sort of uh loop happens.

Thank you.

Um if you go to the floor, there you go.

Got it.

Um, so you can see the kindergarten and pre-K or over there.

Um, what that does, it is um one of again, another uh community comment that there were so many we didn't be able couldn't speak to each of them.

One of the community um comments came up a number of times.

Do we have enough kindergarten rooms?

Um, and what this allows for is flexibility.

Um, so that if there was an additional kindergarten room, um typically MCPS would just use a standard classroom as a kindergarten room.

So that really allows that flexibility to happen and still allows kindergarten and pre-K to be grouped near each other.

Where on the flip side, if we look at option three, this has kindergarten on the left hand wing in the white bar.

Um, so what that does is it has what's nice about it is it has a kindergarten and pre-K rooms you keep the smaller kids together.

But what the downside is then you have less flexibility.

Something else that came up that we really wouldn't think about unless you're there on a day on a daily basis is that admin is in the center of the building.

Um and this it might be just you know, uh more of a singular, you know, response here, but um the students crossing across the main admin building or admin uh suite um was something that they actually um the staff didn't think was uh one of the best solutions because it becomes somewhat uh distracting.

Kids want to say hi, but they also have to get their work done.

Um so it again, it was more of a nuanced um uh feedback here.

I mean, there was a lot of give and take.

Um, I think that uh I think that the takeaway from both options two and three is that although it looks like we have three different colors here, the um the idea would be that this would be a brand new building.

It would feel like a very cohesive design.

Um there's a ton of schools that get additions renovations done to them, and you walk in and and you you don't think that this is a renovation, it feels brand new.

And so I think we we did want to make sure that that is um you know communicated that this wouldn't feel like a band-aid approach for either of these two options, um, that it would feel like a new school when you walk in on day one, and that the students would feel um like they have you know a new a new design um to celebrate them.

So um just I don't know.

Hopefully that answers your question about it does.

Thank you.

Um, and just one more quick question.

Um, was any were any of the engagement sessions conducted in Spanish?

Okay, and then the other um the other point is um I do agree with my colleagues, I believe all of us agreed um around the community size gym.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Valeri.

I just wanted to note um, because it it is kind of tough to see um in the slides, but I knew from um the session that I went to where uh by the way there was active translation um that was identified as a need, is that option three with the second floor was not a preferred option for uh teachers.

Um, and I think that that's actually a component of this that at least in my at my table where discussion was fast and furious that you know there is you know the design here, but then the practicality of what is going to work best for teachers and the students and having that that second floor.

Um, that was what I I noted from from the discussions uh with the folks at my table.

Thank you to my colleagues for the very thoughtful comments.

Um I wanted to just add briefly uh to the comments about thinking for the future.

So um the city of Rockville does have some new housing projects that are on in play uh that may be a part of your development watch.

But there's some new things coming, and so I would just encourage collaboration to uh really look at the data right now.

It's showing that the Twinburg population will be decreasing over time.

I don't think that is possible, but you all are the experts.

Um we are seeing a lot of turnover in neighborhoods and as well as some new construction.

So I just wanted to flag that and appreciate another analysis of projections.

Um as Councilman Miles said, we've been in a situation where you know College Gardens was built, and then they had portables.

Bide Weston was built, it had portables, Julius West was built.

It had Richard Montgomery.

There's a trend.

Um so I maybe thinking earlier in the development watch process to see what is happening, and our staff can help you with that uh so that you guys can get those numbers.

Um I also just wanted to note um since we're also we are Rockville.

Uh my colleague was talking about other schools in need of help.

Um Meadow Hall uh has uh index of 0.576.

Uh just wanted to note them.

It is also a school that serves um uh uh higher farms rate, as well as having um you know disparities.

So I wanted to flag that school.

In addition to Twinbrook, um, it it does have a very high issue.

There are three three Instagram accounts dedicated to tracking the issues that are happening at Twinbrook.

Um and obviously I mean at Wooton High School.

Um so I just I wanted to say these are the three schools within the city that need the most help and helpful continue to now that have Twin Brook feasibility, have those come up in the near future as well, um, at least for some planning to so that we can see progress in that area.

Um, I did want to just close out with some next steps.

Um, I know that you guys are gonna have some meetings of Q community members are watching.

Um, there are some capital improvement timelines that if we can go to that slide here, people can see.

You can still give feedback.

There are facilities and boundary public hearings on October 23rd, 28th, and November 4th.

Um, so there's opportunities for the community to provide input on this process.

And I want to thank everyone who's worked on it, everyone who's advocated for it, and everyone has already testified, and everyone who will.

Um, I can't wait to see this new school.

Thank you for your time.

We really appreciate you coming to meet with us.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

We are now moving to our next agenda item, which is 12B.

Zoning Ordinance Rewrite.

We're gonna go into a work session reviewing the remaining topics, including a medity space, landscaping, signs, non-conformities, findings, subdivisions and plats, neighborhood conservation plans, historic preservation, and recommended rezoning near the Twinbrook Metro station.

I will note that we have another meeting coming up uh in December.

So there's going to be some additional analysis of the zoning recommendations as well as a summary of community input received to date.

Staff sharing their recommendations.

So just want to thank staff for the incredible work that you all are doing on this.

I know it's a ton to reimagine our planning.

We recognize planning month.

Um, but this is uh really exciting to see how we can bring our city forward and update our code.

I hope I gave you enough time.

All right.

I'd like to welcome Holly Simmons, Jim Waselik, and John Foreman from our planning department uh and Katie Gorbis as well.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and members of the council.

It's a pleasure to be here with you this evening uh for your fifth in a series of work sessions on the zoning ordinance rewrite and comprehensive map amendment.

Uh we do expect that this is the final work session uh which provides input to us as we're putting together the draft uh zoning ordinance and comprehensive zoning map.

Um did want to review the process and let you know kind of where we are right now.

Um after I tell you the topic areas, uh bit of a grab bag this evening uh topic areas that we needed some direction on from you as we're putting together the draft uh in time for our December 1st date to bring it back to you uh as a final draft for authorization.

So as you can see, we've we've been through a lot, uh, which is actually the beginning of the process, uh, the process of putting together the zoning text and the zoning map that's all in blue, uh dark blue.

Uh we are at the red spot right now, which is work session number five.

The light blue session section will be expanded once we get to uh December 1st and the authorization to file.

Uh there will be public hearings and work sessions with both the Planning Commission and the Mayor Council as we move toward adoption.

So I just wanted to remind everyone that the zoning ordinance will be a zoning text amendment.

Uh you have processed many of those uh in your tenure, and this will be no different.

It'll start out with an authorization to file.

So provided that the draft that we put together for you is acceptable, uh, you will make that determination that it's time to move forward through the public review process.

And we are scheduling that for December 1st.

Um I will say you will see some things in that draft that you haven't seen at work sessions.

Um, things that we felt we didn't necessarily need direction from you specifically.

But generally, all the things that you've given us direction on will be incorporated into that draft.

Uh one of the things we are putting together at that time is a document that will show the changes from the current code to the new code.

So it'll be easy for everyone to just take a take a quick look at it and uh know what's changed generally.

I did want to note that uh for the comprehensive map amendment, you had directed us to conduct some neighborhood outreach, and we have done that, uh, and we will be providing some recommendations to you uh as a result of some of the neighborhood concerns and things that we've heard from the community as part of the comprehensive map amendment that will also be up for authorities authorization to file on December 1st.

So with that, I'm joined by my colleagues uh Holly Simmons and Katie Germis to walk you through the work session topics, and we're gonna kick it off with Katie and historic preservation.

Thank you, Jim.

Good evening.

Nice to see you all.

So as we get into our first slide here, Holly, can you advance?

Thank you.

Um, just a reminder of kind of how we got here and a little bit of background that I think kind of primes the discussion that we're gonna have later this evening.

Um, the historic preservation work plan is a document that was endorsed by this body in May of 2023.

Um, and it is what it sounds like.

It is a work plan.

So it kind of outlines our division's priorities, tasks, and how staff are allocating our time and resources over the years from 2023 to 2033.

Um the historic preservation work plan contains six different thematic action items or work items, um, and one of those specifically calls out six updates to make to the zoning ordinance.

So the slides that you're gonna see here tonight and your staff report, the vast majority of the proposed recommended changes come directly from the historic preservation work plan.

These have already been flagged as things that we know are problematic or no need to be investigated in some way.

We do have a couple of um action items or proposed changes in your staff report that you'll see staff are recommending those changes.

They're not necessarily called for in the work plan, but over time we've noticed that maybe we can revise some things to make it a little bit better there.

Um, the other thing worth noting for you all is that the Historic District Commission has reviewed these proposed changes.

They did so at their July meeting, um, an attachment to your staff report.

Um, it's not a full scratch transcript, but it's a pretty detailed summary of what that discussion was with that body.

Um we had some commissioners tonight, one orally and then one written, uh, provided testimony kind of as individuals or on behalf of other organizations that they are involved in.

The HDC did not make a formal recommendation to pass along any feedback to you all as a body at their July meeting.

So you'll see kind of what the discussion was.

You'll be able to see what generally folks agreed with and didn't agree with, um, but there was no formal action taken by the HDC at this point in time on the proposed revisions that were going through today.

So now we'll go ahead and dive into what those proposed changes are.

Um certificate of approvals, we call them COAs informally.

Um, those are essentially the permit that allows exterior work to happen on historic properties.

Um, any historically designated property must get a certificate of approval before doing any exterior work.

Um so this runs the gamut from really minor work to like significant, I'm adding uh two-story addition to my home.

They all need this certificate of approval in order to allow that work to happen.

And when we evaluate a certificate of approval, we're looking at the Secretary of Interior Standards for historic preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration.

And so, what are the national standards that we want to employ with changes to our historic properties, as well as looking at our local, we have technical guides for exterior alterations, which is a little bit more curated to Rockville specifically and our historic districts.

So, as I mentioned, any alteration has to come through the HDC through a certificate of approval.

There are very, very limited exceptions where staff can approve.

Those exceptions are limited to fences, signs, and trees that are diseased or hazardous.

So if a tree is halfway falling down, we'll go ahead and approve that as staff and not require it to come to the full historic district commission.

The other thing to note with certificate of approvals is they expire after one year.

So if you got your certificate of approval on January 1st of 2025, when you hit January 2nd of 2026, if you have not done that work, it has expired, you have to come back and do that process all over again to get approval once again for that work, even if the scope of your work has not changed.

So our proposed revisions here, first is we would like to create a process where staff can administratively approve certain certificate of approvals for work that's deemed to be minor or common.

So when I say minor or common, I know that can mean a lot of different things to different folks.

Our proposal is that in the code itself, we would specifically write out what that work is.

So there's no gray area.

You either are one of these listed things or you are not.

And if you are not, you go to the full HDC.

Some of the things that we're talking about here, minor alterations to previously approved certificate of approvals.

So let's say you come to the HDC for a certificate of approval for a new window, new windows to be installed in your home.

And when you come, you have to give us the specific make in model for lack of a better word of that window.

And perhaps after you got that certificate of approval, the manufacturer no longer produces that exact window type.

If you were, say, to come with a compatible window type that's slightly different because you got approved for this one specific make-in model, something like that, if it still you know meets all of our characteristics, if it's consistent, it's just model A instead of model B, we would want staff to have the ability to go ahead and sign off on that without bringing it through the full Historic District Commission.

Um, other things that we're looking at, minor landscaping.

I mean, right now, truly, if you plant a bush in your garden bed in the front yard, that needs a certificate of approval to happen.

So allowing some of those things to move forward quicker, um, mailboxes, exterior light fixtures, maybe a basketball hit your front porch light and you want to replace it with something a little bit nicer, you need a certificate of approval to do that right now.

Um, one that we see a lot of right now is the installation of utility meters or devices.

Um, so if your HVAC system that has an exterior unit goes up and you need to replace that, that is an exterior alteration.

You need to come to the Historic District Commission for that.

We would love to be able to sign off on that.

So if your AC goes out in the middle of August, you're not waiting a full month or more in order to get approval to get that replaced.

The other proposed revision that we have here is extending the expiration period from one year to five years.

So this would be consistent with many of our other CPDS permits that through the ZOR, we are proposing extending the expiration to five years.

Um, frankly, recently we've seen this come up as our economic climate continues to evolve and change.

Folks thought they were gonna have funding to do project.

Um, and then something has happened and things have fallen through.

We think it makes sense to extend that expiry expiration period through five years.

Local designations.

Um, so right now, anyone can file an application to nominate any property in the city that they would like for local historic designation.

You don't have to have any affiliation or tie to that property.

Um, right now you actually don't even need to tell us why you think that property warrants designation.

Anyone can do it.

It's a very simple form.

Um, we also do not require the owner to consent to nomination or designation of this project or of the nomination for designation.

Um, so because there no consent is required, there have been cases that have come before this body, some of those while you all were serving, others before your time, where the owner was pretty adamant that they did not want this to happen.

And the historic district commission and ultimately the mayor and council were forced to make a decision here about what do we do?

We have a property saying, I don't want to do this, but we also have these guidelines in place that say perhaps it meets one or more of our designation criteria.

It puts folks in a bit of an uncomfortable spot.

Um and we've had a lot of feedback over the years of we need to look at this and figure out if this is exactly how we want this system to work or if we want to make any changes here.

Um, so our proposed uh revisions here are twofold.

One, we'd like to limit who can nominate a property for local historic designation.

Um so it would be limited to the property owner, the HDC, or the mayor and council.

If there's a third party who is interested, if I don't know, Jim is interested in having a property designated, he could then appeal to the property owner, the historic district commission, or the mayor and council and say, hey, I think you should investigate this property.

I think it has some merits.

It would then be brought to that body, and that body could make a decision on whether or not that's something that they wanted to entertain.

We've seen this process work before.

That's how for Courthouse Square was nominated.

Peerless Rockville flagged it for the Historic District Commission.

The HDC said, yeah, actually, we think you're right.

We think that has a lot of merits there.

And then that formally started that process that many of you remember because it was not too long ago.

The other proposed revision here is kind of creating two bars of the what happens depending on if the owner consents.

So we're proposing that if the property owner consents to the designation, that we need a majority vote of the historic district commission and a majority of vote of the mayor and council in order to move forward with that designation.

That is our current process right now.

We simply need a majority.

So in the instance of you all, there's seven, we would need that four.

Staff's proposal here is that we have a higher bar in cases where the property owner does not consent.

So in this proposal, you'll see we have a unanimous vote.

Doesn't necessarily have to be unanimous.

Maybe we want a supermajority.

Maybe you all direct staff of I don't want there to be any difference, depending on owner consent.

You know, we're bringing this forward for you all to consider.

But our thoughts here is it raises the bar a little bit to reflect the fact that this is something that's happening to a property owner that's augmenting their property rights without their consent or with their direct opposition to it, but it still allows preservation to move forward in instances where we have a truly exceptional resource that we are at risk of losing forever if we don't act as a body.

Um delisting is the process of removing a property from the historic district zone, which would essentially remove that property from our local register of historic places.

Right now, we do not have the ability to delist a property.

And so as a result, we have structures that are physically no longer existing that are still on our local register.

A great example is the Black Next Door, the district courthouse building.

That was the 1977 Rockville Library.

It is still on our register.

So when you look up and you see it, you're gonna see that.

And then naturally people will be like, great, where's the library?

And you say, well, the library's not there.

It's gone.

Um so we want to create a process that would allow for removal of the historic designation, design historic district designation in a very, very certain situations.

So in the case of the library, the structure no longer exists.

Obviously, if there's a structure that's no longer there, we don't want that to be retained on our register.

We also think there may be cases where if the site or structure has lost all of those physical characteristics that justified its designation, it may make sense to remove it from that register and to delist it.

Um, our proposal here is that not anyone could nominate that process to take place.

It would be limited to the mayor and council or the property owner.

This is not meant to be a, I'm tired of this, I don't want to have to follow these regulations anymore.

This is meant to be in truly exceptional cases where we have a site or structure that is no longer here, or say there's a fire and the structure is largely destroyed in that fire, we want to be able to update our local register accordingly.

Demolition by neglect.

Um, so this is a defined term in our ordinance.

The definition is failure to maintain property or any component thereof located in a historic district so as to jeopardize the historic integrity of the property.

So it's a defined term, but it literally pops up nowhere else in our zoning ordinance.

So we know what it is, but it doesn't say what we do with it.

Staff's proposed revision here is to expressly prohibit demolition by neglect and enable a municipal infraction to be levied when we do find a case of demolition by neglect to be present.

So this is over time the intentional and willful lack of maintenance, lack of upkeep into a property so that it loses all of its historic character.

And our last slide here is dealing with evaluations of significance, which we often shorthand to EOS.

Um, so the evaluation of significance is the process whereby we review a property to determine if it meets any of our nine designation criteria.

And evaluations of significance are triggered in two instances.

They're triggered if somebody files an application nominating a property for local historic designation.

We just talked about that a couple slides ago.

But it is also triggered any time a structure is proposed to be demolished.

Um, in here in our current code in Rockville, any and all structures proposed for demolition, regardless of their age, regardless of their condition, must undergo a full evaluation of significance by the historic district commission.

When I say that, I mean like you had a structure last year that was built, and for whatever reason it's time for it to come down, that still needs to undergo a full evaluation of significance.

Um, this is a pretty intensive process from the staff perspective.

We are looking into the entire property history, all of the transactions that have impacted that property.

We're looking into all of the owners.

Was any of those owners someone who was influential in Rockville or someone of historical note?

We're looking at all of the events.

We're looking at ancestry records, we're looking at old newspaper clippings.

It's really quite a heavy lift from the staff perspective to do a full workup associated with an evaluation of significance.

And frankly, this is a bit unusual.

We've um looked at a lot of other codes in the state, in the region, and nationally, and this is pretty uncommon where absolutely everything needs to undergo an evaluation of significance prior to demolition.

So our proposed revisions here.

Um we are proposing that any time a demolition is proposed, an evaluation of significance application is still filed.

Um, but we will only bring that to the HDC for a full hearing before them if that property is identified in our historic buildings catalog, which identifies properties that we believe have merits that meet historic designation in the city.

Or if as staff are reviewing, we believe that it meets one or more of our designation criteria.

In those instances, we believe it needs to go to the full HDC.

We need to have a full public hearing, it needs to be noticed as such.

That's a big decision.

We want the HDC to make that decision.

In cases where it's pretty cut and dry, perhaps in newer buildings, um, buildings that are kind of functionally obsolete and have lost kind of all of the character that they might have.

Um, there are instances where we don't believe we need to go through that full evaluation of significance with the HDC.

And in those instances, we're proposing that staff could administratively sign off on that evaluation of significance, allowing that project to move forward.

The other change here with evaluations of significance is right now there is no limit on how often those have to be done or need to be done.

So in theory, um, I can nominate, I'm gonna pick on Jim.

I can nominate Jim's property for historic designation.

We go through a rather lengthy process, you all decide nope, Jim's property does not meet any of these designation criteria.

We are not nominating it.

The next day I can nominate Jim's property for historic evaluation again, and we start that cycle all over.

Um, for our certificates of approval, we have limits there.

We say you can't just keep submitting the same thing over and over and over again, expecting a different result that doesn't exist currently for evaluations of significance.

So we're proposing adding that in by saying if we reviewed this structure in the preceding five years, we don't need to go through this full effort again.

If it's been more than five years, yes, we do.

Things change.

Perhaps that structure has come into the period of significance.

Perhaps something different has happened, new information has come to light, but really meant to prevent duplicative work because there's kind of a loophole built into our current code.

So that is the summary of the ideas and proposed revisions that we have for you all.

Um you can see on the slide here, we have seven different questions where we'd like to suggest some feedback and some direction from you all as a body.

These seven questions go in order of the slides that we just um talked through.

So I'll turn it over to you to give any feedback and direction to staff.

Thank you so much.

And I know we're gonna divide up the sections.

We have several other sections to get through.

Um I think you guys did a fantastic and thorough job trying to bring us into the present.

I think the code was uh pretty outdated.

Um, and I just want to say very, very good recommendations.

Um, I'm I'm gonna I'll go through and then I'll just watch hands to see who wants to go next.

Um for the timeline of COA.

Um looking at that's the um certificates of approval, I think that that is that addresses question one.

Is that right?

Yes, both questions one and two have to do with certificates of approval.

Yeah, so I I I love the idea of extending that to five years because people may not be able to budget something, or sometimes a contractor can't even fit you in in a particular time period.

So I think that makes a lot of sense.

Um, I also support the administrative approval of minor changes to the site.

Um, I did have a question about I saw some commissioners commented and looking at the attachment as well as some of the letters we've got of just being able to keep a log that you share with the HDC.

Uh it streamlines the work for them.

Absolutely, but at least they have the transparency on that.

Yep, and that's something we could certainly make a standing agenda item on their meetings that staff can give a report out of.

Here are the things that were administratively approved since we met last.

Okay.

And I know there's a lot of talk about the third parties, and I know this is controversial, but I do think that you know, there it especially there's a higher bar that may be needed in certain cases.

I will just say that anyone can do it.

There's no criteria currently.

Uh you could not like a neighbor and nominate their process, and then it can take 210 days.

I I that's that's rough.

Um so I just think that um the process you outlined where someone can come to HDC or mayor and council, the owner can come would help to address.

Now we haven't had a lot of that.

I want to say that hasn't been an ongoing issue, but I do think that um having their expert bodies who have to actually go through the process be the ones to actually do it make a lot of sense.

Um I just wanted to note that.

Um, and I'm watching for hands, uh, colleagues.

I see Councilman Van Greg next, and then Councilmember Leary.

Um, and then Councilmember Jackson.

Um the requiring of unanimous consent, I do really um you know, understand.

We and I think the number three will help to address a lot of the challenges that you've seen, but I also say there's something else that we haven't talked about.

I know state law allows 210 days.

That is long.

And unfortunately, there are some of the most egregious examples where it was over 210 days, and someone has to deal with financing, they have to deal with.

I I just think that we can't be late again.

And also, is there a way for us to cut that time?

Because 210 days is almost a year.

So I I just have concerns.

I think we haven't addressed that in my opinion, um, because that really changes things.

So I even if someone wanted to designate their property, 210 days could throw their financing project off, um, as well as their their timing for contractors.

I just I wanted to raise that, and I don't know if you guys had a chance to look at that or talk about that.

I don't see it here.

Um the unanimous consent for approval of authorities.

I think when there to me, there seems to be a difference between someone who is neutral, and sometimes you have corporations that are not going to get involved and say, yes, I want this, but they're neutral.

Um but it was clumped in with the people who didn't want it.

And I think that should be separated.

If someone is neutral and they it's like, you know, it's and I think that applies more to commercial properties than like an individual home.

Um that that I don't I think neutral is not necessarily a bad thing.

Um and I see Ms.

Bashiri.

Uh you have a lot of experience in this.

I also appreciate everything that you do on this work.

Um, I I think that needs for my my own opinion should be treated differently.

I also um wanna make sure that there is a higher bar.

Um, but I have concern about another body dictating what the mayor and council could do.

So I have a challenge with not having unanimous on HDC has an impact on what mayor and council can do.

I think I was open to the supermajority idea that you mentioned for may for mayor and council, but I think unanimous is a very, very, very high bar.

And if you look at the past, I you know looked at the past history.

Um that that is challenging to me.

But but at the same time, I think three will help address because with the the bodies will know this is some a path we really want to go down.

So I think that will avoid some of the challenging situations.

Um the delisting procedure and protocol makes total sense to me.

Um I you said the mayor and council could propose.

I also want to see why not allow HDC to recommend delisting because they're there are a lot of experts, they're experts watching this plan you're pulling together and they see all the things that come through.

So I I wouldn't want to limit it to just us.

Um the demo by neglect made sense to me.

Um I I there was something about integrity in the language we shared, and I think that there was a slippery slope between those two pieces.

I couldn't quite um, you know, I don't know if you want to speak to that, but I think that sometimes if it doesn't have integrity, then there's a there's a slippery slope when people can inadvertently get to demolition by neglect.

And we would say, okay, it doesn't have integrity, so we can wipe it out.

They definitely are similar ideas and concepts.

I think the biggest differentiating factor here is demo demolition by neglect would only apply to properties that are already designated historic structures.

So, but you're absolutely right.

We would only demo by neglect in the case of a structure that has lost its integrity, right?

So one of the reasons that we're proposing adding in that integrity requirement to our designation requirements is to make sure we are not nominating and designating structures that have lacked integrity, so that as soon as they are approved, they meet the warrants for demolition by neglect and then are enforced in that way.

So they are definitely connected, but I think the main difference is one is before the nomination process, and one is once it has been designated.

Okay, yeah, I just wanted to be very careful that people don't inadvertently get there.

All right.

Um, the EOS that you talked about, I thought that made sense.

Um I was wondering if you are thinking about just a list of the properties that are up for demolition, that that might be an easy way to also address the transparency of what's going on.

I I agree that if your house is one year old, or I don't know, that's something happened, there was a fire, like, and then you have to demo demolish it.

Going through a whole lengthy process seems wild to me for something that we know is not historic.

Um I totally support the the the um effort you're trying to do to make that much easier and not overburden the HDC because it's not historic.

Um so, and then I also supported the five-year um piece that you noted there.

Um, one thing that came up to me also is this I don't know if you guys discussed the issue of like how many vacant historic properties are there throughout the city and what are we doing about that through education and support?

Um, because there are some some gems and some maybe not, uh, but I don't think that we have you know talked about that collectively.

Uh, and then not relating to designation in particular.

I'm going off the question sheet here, but I do think that not everything has to be designated, we also can do some nice placemaking work through signs.

Um, and I I know we've talked about this before, but would love to see what are the next five to six, seven historic signs that we should be thinking about throughout the city is that Twinbrook pool.

What is that process for getting that?

People are trying to scramble to people who don't write grants to write grants to get these historic signs, but if this is part of the city, why don't we have a targeted list of what we want to do?

Uh and then add that to our walking tour.

So I wanted to raise that as well and see if that's something that came up through your discussion.

Okay, I saw Councilman Van Greg.

Thank you.

Um, I do have some questions, but I'll go down the line so we can kind of go in order and not jump jump all over the place.

Um, allowing administrative approval makes all the sense in the world.

Um we got to streamline the process.

And first, uh uh along those lines, I'm gonna say the same thing I said to the MCPS.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

The the the historic uh process definitely needed reform.

We've seen it.

You've got an input from the historic district commission.

There are really streamlined processes that are going to make this whole process better in the city.

So I know this was Herculean effort going through that, and I want to thank you.

Number one, yes, um, I agree.

Just as what the mayor was saying, extending the expiration date of the um certificates to five years makes all the sense in the world.

Um, I also agree that number three, with regard to third parties and parties is a nuanced issue.

Um, while we want to make sure that we're hearing everything, we also don't want to allow some unfortunate situations that have happened in the past.

And I think the solution where we're giving the historic district commission and the mayor and council uh the ability and the property owner, the ability to do that, people can petition to the commission or to the mayor and council to do so.

And if the mayor and council or the historic district commission aren't going to be supportive of it at the outset, they clearly aren't going to be supportive of it later.

So we're really again streamlining the process without creating a different outcome.

Um, with regard to the unanimous consent, um kind of similar to the mayor, I think there's a nuanced issue here.

I think all unanimous consent, if there's no owner consent designation, again might be too broad.

Because just as the mayor said, I believe there's really two different categories of no owner consent.

Obviously, if the owner consents, just as you have a simple majority vote goes forward.

But I truly see that there's a difference when the owner is agnostic and even given opportunities to give consent or reject consent, stay silent versus those property owners who are vocal about do not give this designation to my property for one reason or another.

And I think that distinction is important because number one, having historic designation, for example, does cost significantly more to a property owner.

And I don't want to necessarily put um this onus on people.

I had conversation with Councilmember Valeri, and we were both talking about the fact that you can literally force someone into a situation that's cost burden on them.

And if they're telling us, hey, this is a problem.

Similarly, if someone has purchased a property and then there's uh has a mindset and we've stopped that, again, financial constraints and other restraints.

But if someone's staying silent as opposed to giving consent, I view that as different.

I know that in the past, I think I would have voted differently in certain situations if the owner had come before us in some either written or in the public hearings and said differently.

What I would propose is a nuance here.

And it's similar to what the mayor was saying that if there is no consent from the owner and a specific adverse, do not give this designation, that's where I think the unanimous consent of approval from the mayor and council from the historic district commission is merited.

Because we're essentially forcing that upon a property owner that has specifically said to us, please don't do it.

However, if the property owner is agnostic, meaning they've been given the opportunity to say yes or no and hasn't said anything, I don't know that unanimous consent is required.

Potentially that's a point where we can go with the supermajority that you're mentioning.

Therefore, we have three categories.

One with the owner consent, majority, one where the owner is agnostic, meaning they've been given the opportunity to consent and reject, they've said no, we're at a supermajority, and then there's the final category.

The owner has said, hey, this is not something I want, and we're essentially forcing it against a property owner that feels differently.

And I think that category nuance can also be helpful for what we want to proceed.

Because if there is known that a property owner who is specifically saying, I don't want this designation, maybe because of cost, there could be a situation where third parties could get involved, help with a grant or funding to get that owner to either consent or be agnostic to be able to get a lower vote count to maybe have it designated.

So we're essentially forcing uh pre we would be presenting a situation where we have these three categories, and I think that each merit different votes.

So that would be my slight tweak with regard to the fourth category that I think has a distinction with a difference.

Now uh the questions five and six, this is where I have my question.

And uh I completely understand creating a delisting procedure and protocol.

I think that's important.

But it goes to the demolition by neglect.

And I understand there's um uh municipal infractions, because we don't want that designate, we don't want any intentional neglect.

However, we also have to realize that we live in a world where things happen and we live in a world where someone may either through a foreclosure or a family moving out, or any issues that happen and neglect happens.

It might be intentional, it might not be intentional.

And the question is prohibiting it, I'm fine with that.

But the question is what are we gonna do if we get to a point, you know, we weren't on top of it, there was a neglect, and now the historical structure that exists doesn't fit the purpose anymore.

Can that be, I mean, have we thought about rolling that into creating a delisting procedure?

And what do we do in that situation?

Because if we have a neglect situation and the property is now need to be rebuilt, and that's cost prohibitive, no one's gonna want to purchase that property, and we now have potentially have a derelict property in Rockville that no one wants to purchase and no one wants to renovate.

Have we thought about how we'd integrate the idea of either maybe a delisting or the demolition by neglect situation?

Because we certainly don't want to have a situation that because of a designation, we have a, I don't know what you'd call it, but a sore spot in the city.

Has that been thought about how we do that in the code?

Yes and no in that quite level of detail, no, but we do know and acknowledge that these two things are connected to one another, right?

So in the instance of we do have a demolition by neglect case, if it is a historic property, that would then lend itself to potentially being delisted.

So if it has gone so far down, and let's say um, I don't know, the owner has left and is not accessible or whatever, and it's been you know five years, ten years, whatever it is, that would be an instance where we could then choose to delist because we recognize that the hurdles to overcome what would be needed to stop that demolition by neglect, we might not be able to achieve.

I think the other thing that's important to note here is the proposed code change would allow us to levy a municipal infraction, but just like other parts of our code, it does not require us in every instance to do that.

So there would be some degree of working with our enforcement agencies, working with our city attorney's office to determine is this something we're gonna let if it's someone who I don't know, lost a job and we know that they're really struggling on their feet, are we going to be quick to levy that fine?

Probably not.

We'll have you know some degree of interpretation there.

That addresses it perfectly.

That's exactly what I wanted to try to make sure that we're looking at, because I think five and six can go together, whereas we're not creating a hurdle that's gonna be um a detriment to the city properties and the city overall.

Um so then um, and finally on under seven, just like my colleague uh the mayor before, um, I think um that makes all the sense in the world.

Thank you.

Councilmember Valeri.

Okay.

Um I might be a little bit shorter um than my colleague, but because um, no, and I I give him uh a hard time because you know, he's a good dude.

I'm putting a timer on just for a competition.

Fair enough.

So I'll go through similar um to what Councilmember Van Grack did.

Um I am very supportive of allowing administrative approval of minor changes to sites.

I am supportive of extending the expiration date to five years.

I am more than supportive of eliminating third party uh nominations.

Um I I struggled with some of these um and I should probably pause very briefly um before kind of rolling ahead.

Um I spent, as Mr.

City Manager knows, um, some time looking at how did we get to this point that we are, right?

With the ZOR, how does the um uh historic preservation work plan input into this?

And um I really appreciated the answers um that I got on this.

Unfortunately, it didn't assuage my concerns that it has seemed to to me, to appear just to me, that there is a focus on preserving buildings and not actually history.

And my challenge with that is that do you need a physical building every time if you are doing everything you can do to capture history?

So maybe I'm overthinking this, but I apologize.

This is how my brain sees history.

There is an aspect of history where yes, it's very cool to walk through an actual courthouse, but the site of Hungerford Tavern, which Hungerford Tavern, which no longer exists, is no less cool to see the sign that says, you know, George Washington, you know, it was here.

So it's really uh um how are we going to focus on capturing in a neutral way, um, so that future uh generations know the complete and unvarnished everybody's history.

Here's all the facts, and then you can determine, right?

I don't think we have that right now.

And with no shade intended toward Ms.

Bashery and the very hardworking Historic District Commission, but that's a historic district commission.

We're not even really talking about a history of Rockville Commission, right?

Like we're so intent on these buildings, um, which by the way, there are new technologies like LIDAR, where we could like recreate and walk within um what we believe a building could look like.

Um that it's really hard for me to look at the approval process when um we're not doing some of the basics well, not yet.

Um, for instance, the uh historic signage.

Um I know that myself, my colleagues, Madam Mayor, have brought up a couple examples of historic signage that could be installed tomorrow, frankly.

And there seems to be sometimes intermediaries who determine what history is relevant to capture and when.

And that is bothersome to me for a multitude of reasons.

And I think that's why I do want to see more of the neutral arbiter of Rockville history be the city and maybe not an intermediary.

Um to that extent, I think that's where my elimination of third parties from nominating properties comes from, because you need someone that uh has no other incentive to capture history besides the fact that it is the right thing to do from a civic sense.

Um to that extent, I also agree with creating a delisting procedure protocol.

Um thank you for acknowledging something that was built in 1977, because yes, that is an antique, I say as I was born that year.

Um, but yeah, no, I think it makes sense to to have an actual procedure and protocol.

Um prohibiting demolition by neglect uh undoubtedly, and I hope that um I don't know how the interaction between um uh Ms.

Bashiri's uh department and code enforcement, but if there's some sort of like, you know, tick sheet, like, okay, like we really need to keep an eye on X, Y, and Z.

Um, then maybe we can catch some of those demolition by neglect.

Um, so I would be curious about that.

Um I completely agree with modifying the criteria.

I cannot believe that this has been the process for uh a full EOS, even if it had been built like five years ago, like I not that that's gonna necessarily occur, but um I honestly think a lot of this, these issues that have challenged some of us, and I'll fully admit being extremely challenged by some of the stuff.

We would not be here if there was a truly neutral voice for history, because right now the process seems fraught with um influence and um ulterior motives, and maybe that's just me, and maybe that's just where I see certain signage capturing history goes up very quickly, and other areas where it doesn't go up very quickly, but maybe that's a uh a good discussion to have at a future date about how we actually want to preserve history and that just building.

Thank you.

Were you okay on the rest of these questions?

Yeah, okay, good.

Okay, perfect.

And Madam Mayor, and Councilmember Jackson, and then Councilmember Fultz.

Thank you, uh Mayor.

And I'll uh re brief.

I wish you had kept the uh the timer on.

I would like to see uh how I have it.

Councilmember uh Valeria stacked up to Councilmember Van Grek.

Um, so uh on the questions.

I'm a yes on uh one, two, three, five, six, um, and seven, although um I'm a yes, but uh I would like to see more detail uh as it uh gets the as we develop it and and the language um so that we we can actually see what staff would be um uh approving, not approving, uh you know, moving forward with the uh um with the AC DC.

Um the number four is the only one that gave me pause.

Um I like uh what the mayor and um uh council member Vancraft were talking about with the agnostic uh care category.

When the owner is against I do agree that it should be a higher threshold.

I'm just not sure that it should be unanimous um because I know how hard it is to uh get a unanimous vote.

And I and that's uh I think the uh the purpose of it is to be deliberately hard.

But are we making it too hard?

And so I don't know, I don't have the answer as my colleagues for uh a guidance, but that's the only thing I think looking at the numbers and and you know, thinking about uh what to do gives me a little bit of pause and I would like to uh uh investigate further just because unanimous is really hard to get, especially on uh two um uh two bodies.

And that was that I yield back very good.

Councilmember Fulton.

Under that time, here I go.

Um first of all, just overarching.

I think Councilmember Valeria made some good points on historic preservation that I think we should talk more about.

And I I was struggling because we had the presentation earlier, but we're talking zoning here.

Some of that other stuff is very relevant, but if I'm keeping my remarks to zoning, uh I am in favor of everything here.

Yes, one, yes, two, yes, three.

On for the consent, um, I very much like uh the position that would say unanimous you unanimous vote is required if there is objection.

Uh unanimous vote of mayor and council.

Um I would do a supermajority for um neutral or no comment.

I think that really is an elegant solution.

I would note for a lot of the feedback that we got, people were very concerned um that unanimity would have been required for the bank building and it wouldn't have gotten designation under this middle ground compromise, it still could have.

Uh so that wouldn't be a challenge under this middle ground.

I wanted to point out for people.

Understanding I was on the opposite end of that issue, but it does solve that problem.

Uh so to be clear, in favor of unanimous if there is an objection at mayor and council.

Everything else I am good with.

I did have one question that I think is an appropriate zoning question uh that came up somewhere, but I didn't see it here.

In our code, we do not actually have the criteria for designation.

There is a reference to something old that is not in the code.

As part of the zoning ordinance rewrite, can we include that?

Yes, and staff are proposing that as well.

So we only flagged issues here that we felt we needed direction for you.

That'll seemed like a no-brainer to absolutely everybody.

So it's in your staff report.

We do propose codifying those nine criteria.

So then I'll just offer one thought on that.

Um the code itself says that historic designation is for the purpose of many things, but also in the strengthening the local economy and stabilizing and improving property values.

So when we are looking at those criteria for designation, we should include consideration of those issues as part of that analysis.

Thank you.

Councilmember Shah.

Who was first?

Dr.

Maldusha.

I think she was first.

Okay, Councilman Shaw.

Um so I just want to thank staff uh for the excellent presentation.

Um I do support one and two.

Um, with number three, can you just share some examples of third parties in the past?

Uh the most recent that I can think of was Peerless Rockville nominated a handful of sites many years ago.

I don't remember the years off the top of my head.

So one of them was in 2022.

Um that one ultimately did move forward and was designated.

I believe they also designated a different structure that was not, or they nominated a different structure that was not designated around that same time as well.

Okay.

So I also can I just um based on the chart I have, it shows peerless in the last 10 years on this chart.

I think they had um the there was one on Falls Road that they did, but they may be more in the then the Yeah, great 500 Great Falls Road was in 2022.

But and then there was no other like neighbors nominated.

It's either peerless, property owner, HDC, um all the ones over the past 10 years.

In the last 10 years, yes, we did not look further than 10 years back.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, so I do support three.

Um for number four, I would like to see more voting options, um, as my colleagues have shared.

And then I support five through seven.

Can I also clarify one comment for the bank building?

There was, I don't think there was a supermajority.

Uh, I think I'd have to look back, but I think it was there was there was at least two abstentions and a no, right?

Yes, it was four to one with two abstentions.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Councilman Miles.

Thank you, madam mayor.

I think there's some merit in going last.

Um, I can just make it easier.

Of all the comments I've heard, I think they're pretty much summative.

And I think we got to somewhere where I can certainly agree.

I actually support all the staff's recommendations, but the nuance expressed by my colleagues uh makes sense.

So I mean, I've just make it easy.

I'll just associate myself with the comments of uh a colleague to the right, Councilmember Fulton works for me.

I just want to pause and see if you have any questions for us.

I don't believe so.

Okay.

All right.

So we are moving on from historic preservation to amenity space.

As you all are aware, um, we have many requirements in our zoning ordinance that uh kick in at time of development.

These include things like parking and loading, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, which you all dealt with in brief on August 4th during work session, landscaping and screening, signage, things that are addressed in your staff report for this evening, but that we won't touch on during this presentation, and then one that we did want to focus on our proposed amenity space.

So currently, where uh where we require something akin to amenity space, our zoning ordinance takes a two-tiered structure where we require open area, and then in certain instances, a subset of open area that we call public use space.

And this is really intended to capture active and passive recreation areas that would be accessible by the public.

However, currently we do have an issue.

We are obtaining the quantity of these public use spaces in open area, but not the quality that we would desire.

So we do have a couple of proposals to address this discrepancy, kind of fill the gap between getting the quality that we're getting and the quality quality that we would like to see.

So we are proposing that for residential and mixed use projects in the mixed-use districts, the residential medium density districts, and our proposed residential high density zone, that we would require a new feature called amenity space.

So this would entail reducing the quantity of space that we're requiring slightly, but increasing the quality, really focusing on tailoring the criteria that we require for this space, ensuring that the space is contiguous, amenitize active and passive recreation areas, really clarifying the definition of what actually qualifies as amenity space, what's in, what's out.

And we did work with our recreation and parks uh colleagues on a more um strict definition of amenity space.

And we think that this would help to ensure that residents are still served by these by these areas on private development sites while also reducing some of the strain on our public facilities.

Um I would note also that in most areas we are proposing that these spaces still be accessible to the public with certain exceptions, um, including if a swimming pool is built, we don't think it would be appropriate to require that that be open to all members of the public.

It could just serve residents of a development or in office spaces, some of the area could be available just for employees in the office space, and it would not need to be available to all members of the public.

But in general, we are proposing that it still be publicly accessible.

We also are proposing some flexibility for our mixed-use transit district zones, understanding that those zones are intended to be our densest, um, most walkable, highest cost, um highest demand land.

So we thought that it would be appropriate for 50% of those spaces in the MX TD zones to be available only to residents of the development.

For instance, if a developer wanted to provide rooftop amenity space, but didn't want to make that rooftop space available to all members of the public, they could use up to 50% of their requirement in a rooftop or interior amenity space that is not accessible to all members of the public while still ensuring that the other 50% is.

We are also proposing that this requirement could be met if it's not met on site through dedication of land through a fee and loo, etc.

So that is really our proposal at a high level.

So our question is just generally do you support restructuring our requirements from a broadly defined public use space to our more narrowly defined amenity space as described.

I'll watch for hands, uh, but I'll go since I don't see any yet.

Um Council McCarla, do you want to go before me?

Go ahead.

Oh, sure.

Okay.

Um I I think this is great because I know sometimes people will put like a strip in an unusable space, and it's like it qualifies, but it doesn't help anybody.

So I appreciate what you're trying to do here.

Um I just had one question uh because I was thinking about some of the diffing housing types that you know are coming throughout the city, and I wanted to see what would happen in that case.

So, for example, if this would be for um uh five dwellings, for example, um, or like if it was a sixplex, uh, the land is area is small, but they may not have space for an amenity.

What would you do in that situation?

Because there are some missing middle housing zones that we've created, and I wouldn't want to be unrealistic.

I maybe there needs to be a higher bar for that, but I just that was one of the scenarios that came up for me that I wanted to see how you explored.

So we do have certain exceptions that we've drafted into the requirements, including um for an application up to five dwellings.

So it really wouldn't kick in until you have six or more dwellings on a site.

Um sixplexes have been discussed, correct?

And it could be on a smaller lot.

So that that's why that came up from because I remember that from the comprehensive planning process and some of the things that we've talked about, that there will be some zones with more housing types and which we know we have limited infill spaces, so that I thought the bar might be a little bit too low on that number.

Absolutely.

One of the other exceptions is an application covering a site area that in the MXTD zone would be one acre or less.

I think again, understanding that that space is at a premium, or in all other zones, 20,000 square feet or less.

So if the area is 20,000 square feet or less, it would not apply.

Yes, correct, which is roughly just less than half an acre.

Okay.

I just want to make sure if we looked at the scenarios of the some of the missing middle housing, that we are not going to inadvertently say can have housing here because we need so that that I just wanted to be careful on that.

Um and then also um senior housing and affordable housing.

I did get why we want to allow amenities there, but I just also wanted to be careful on where we are in affordability uh and and not inhibiting having a additional affordable units.

Um so that that came up for me as well.

Um another thing that I didn't see addressed, but is related to this when projects come through, sometimes they're creating new roads, and um they have they dedicate the roads, they turn them over to the city because we don't really allow private roads in the same way we used to, right?

As I think.

Um but the road, the land that they're dedicating to or giving to the city, like some things like the space or like the tree count doesn't count towards what they have to provide, and I that has created some friction in the past where um they still have to put it that they can't count the street trees, and I wouldn't, I wasn't sure if it also has the same experience with amenity space.

I just want to be careful that if someone is dedicating land to the city that that doesn't inadvertently hurt them in terms of what they have to figure out with the rest of the land.

Um so I'm not asking for an answer now, but just if we could think about those scenarios.

Uh, but generally I support this.

Thank you for this.

Councilmember Valeri.

Okay, I'll be I'll be super super fast.

I love the idea of being more um specific on what we mean by amenity space.

Um, I have one question on this and then one comment.

Um, how where do you see the the intersection of or the difference rather in amenity space versus green space?

Because I could see in certain um uh situations or in certain focused development that you know, a very um uh what's the word I'm looking for?

Um it's getting late.

Something like a uh like a pollinator garden where there's like a a space for people to um kind of you know rejuvenate, whatever.

I could see that being possibly seen as both.

Does that make sense?

Okay.

Is that is that kind of how you would determine it as well?

Like it would it be in that case green space and or an amenity space, or when you say amenity, you you very specifically because I was trying to figure I didn't catch this when I read the um staff notes before, but um does it have to have something above and beyond like a a basic um I don't know uh a basic park.

So it couldn't just be open green space, it would have to be open space with like a picnic table.

Okay.

No, thank you for the question.

Our working definition right now is um amenity space is an area within a development site designed to meet the active or passive recreational needs of residents, patrons, employees, and the general public, and that it includes but is not limited to, and a whole slew of things included in that list are various different types of active and passive recreational spaces, including natural and forested areas and water courses.

So that is on the list, and then following that list of you know, five or six uh eight different things which are included, we have a list of six things that are specifically not included.

Okay, that that's actually extremely helpful because I you know, personally I I find that to be an amenity if there's a place that I can just kind of relax.

Um, the only other thing that I um just as feedback, I I'm not sure that I want to concede on uh uh an amenity space for a hundred percent affordable development if the afford a hundred percent affordable residential development is located within a quarter of a mile of a public park or publicly accessible amenity space.

I'd be really careful with that because again, everybody's got to make that that calculation and development, but to me, I think that, and maybe it'll look different in the future that just simply because a developer is 100% affordable, that a a lesser quality or residents would not um deserve the same kind of amenity as a market rate building.

What would you do in a situation if the development is right across the street from a park for anybody?

For anybody.

I'm just curious.

I was just curious because we do we do have 67 parks.

I know that as we grow that would there's a number you're trying to hit with number of parks per space per person, but I was just thinking of I know in the past there's been discussions about uh deserts and equity areas, but I was just curious what would you do in a situation where there's like literally a park across the street or within a five-minute walk.

So, as currently drafted, that would impact how we would treat an application for resident residential development, which is 100% affordable at an average AMI of 60% or less.

So, what our specific proposal is that those projects would be accepted from these requirements so long as they are located within one quarter mile of a public park or publicly accessible amenity space.

I will say that that is something we had many conversations with our colleagues in recreation parks and also housing and community development.

Currently, our public use space requirements do not apply to affordable housing projects at all.

If they're 100% affordable, they're 100% accepted.

So this is slightly more stringent or less stringent than what we currently stringent's not the right word.

This exception is uh slightly more narrowly tailored than what we currently have.

So not as many projects would be accepted.

It is more based on the proximity to a park.

However, in other instances where they don't meet those other criteria around affordability, they would not be accepted as is currently proposed.

So what would you suggest put a park at the facility when there's a park across the street?

Or think about I don't know what what are options because I could see them being like there's a park right across the street.

That it is very possible that that would be uh something that the applicant would say, as currently drafted, they would be subject to these criteria if they did not meet one of the other exceptions.

So the only time where, again, in the draft that we currently have, the only time where that park proximity comes into play is a with with a 100% affordable development.

Um and there are many different ways that they could meet this requirement.

It's not just the natural and uh forested areas and water courses, maybe they're providing publicly accessible interior gathering spaces, areas for historic resources, um, some portions of a stormwater facility that include walkways, bridges, landscaping, etc.

So there are a number of different um ways in which this requirement could be met, but that that uh locational factor is really only considered again in the draft for affordable housing.

I I just wanted to raise it.

I think I would love additional thought on that when that comes back again, because there we do have a lot of parks.

We need some in specific areas, and I just want to make sure like we have buffer requirements, we have uh you know, sidewalk that we're thinking we're trying to do pedestrian safety, and then we have stormwater, and then like where is do we have land to build homing housing on?

I I just wanted to ask that question.

Councilmember Jackson and then council member Van Grack.

Thank you.

Uh I'll be brief.

Uh first thanks uh for the uh presentation and for the explanation.

And I associate myself uh with the comments of the mayor and uh council uh member of uh Valerie.

Um that I I think you know we just need some some more detail and thought on the affordable housing uh issue.

Uh but uh as for uh how I feel about the question.

Uh yes, uh I definitely definitely afford it.

Councilmember Van Greg?

Um uh uh I agree with the proposal.

The only thing I just want to clarify, I know it says require most spaces to be publicly accessible.

I just want to make sure that's there.

I know that there's been a number of recent projects where there's been some actually amenity kind of public use space, and the community around that area is very happy about that.

And so I just want to make sure that we're not creating an amenity space just for kind of a locked gate community, because a lot of these development public spaces and even amenity spaces.

I mean, for example, in the Rockshire Development, there is kind of an amenity space that's gonna be put in the public area.

Um, and being able to have some of the neighboring communities, people walking by utilize those public spaces, I think are important for the city.

Councilmember Shaw.

Um so just to echo my colleagues, um, I do have a few, I would like to see some more information.

Um could you clarify when it comes to like club rooms and offices and gyms and like studios that are inside of development, but may be accessible to the public.

Can you clarify how how um some details around that, like how this would apply?

Absolutely.

So, as proposed that definition again, where we kind of said broadly, here's what we're looking for, and here's the list of things that are included.

One of them is publicly accessible interior gathering spaces.

So, under our working definition, that would qualify those spaces.

And so, publicly accessible means that you don't need a key card to get in.

You could just walk in, or you do need it.

Or someone can let you in from the public.

I don't know that we have those details in our current draft.

Um, I might ask Jim to chime in.

Or another another example is an amenity like a um a lot for bicycles, right?

Uh, and then you can pump your bike, right?

For for air.

Um, and that may be on the first floor, and it's somewhat accessible, but folks in the building may pay for it.

Is that uh because there's there's so many different types of amenities that are accessible to the public.

Yes, I I think that's exactly right, and we are probably not going to come up with every single option.

So that I think part of the definition that comes into play there is the amenity space includes but is not limited to.

So we're really looking to that broadly.

Here's what amenity space is.

It is areas within a development site that are designed to meet the active or passive recreational needs of residents, patrons, employees, and the general public.

It's included but not limited to.

Here's the list.

And I think we could probably use our best judgment when it comes to these kind of side cases that maybe we didn't anticipate, but our definition doesn't exclude them, and it seems like it meets the purpose and the intent of that definition at the time of development if an applicant came in and proposed it.

Um, do you think this would have any impact on fees for use using space that's amenity space?

Like, for example, a clubroom, which is can be accessible to the public.

Fees for using the amenity space are not something that we're currently addressing.

Um I don't think as drafted, there's I don't know that I have a good answer for that at this moment.

Okay.

I I would just like to have some more information on this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Miles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I support uh number one as outlined by staff.

Thank you, Councilmember Fulton.

Ditto.

Thank you.

Um to Councilmember Shaw's point, there is a community in the Montrose, a building in the Montrose community that has um uh like a it's like a rec center and a pool.

And because the community does not have a recent anymore because there's a child care facility, people have been buying into this facility that's like $25 a month, and they've made it available to the public.

Is that what that qualifies a public amenity?

So you don't have to live in that building to use the pool and the club room, but you could pay a monthly fee.

Is that considered a public amenity?

Because we have to pay to get into our swim center.

It would be in because we've been dealing with that community, we know that that facility was built for all of that community, including the single family as well as the apartments.

Okay, so that would qualify.

Okay, thank you.

We're ready for the next issue.

All right, so we are moving on out of our kind of general development requirements uh topical area into nonconformities.

So our zoning ordinance also addresses what we call nonconformities, these are uses and structures that at one point did conform to our code requirements, but they no longer conform to our code requirements.

So we have kind of two buckets of recommendations all incorporated in this slide.

The first one deals with changes to the use table, um, which have the potential to create non-conformities, and the other bucket uh deals with changes to the regulations governing nonconformities.

So that first bucket with the changes to the use table are the first bullet points under the current and proposed headings, and then the second bullet point under current and the next three, the second, third, and fourth bullet points under proposed are more in that process area.

So to deal with the uses first, generally it we try to avoid creating nonconformities.

However, there are certain instances in which it is strategic and purposeful to go ahead and create nonconformities.

So two examples that we did want to highlight are where we are proposing to create nonconformities in our mixed use transit district zones, specifically related to drive-throughs and gas stations.

So currently within the mixed use transit district zone, a gas station is a special exception.

So it requires that additional process before the Board of Appeals, additional findings, etc.

Drive-throughs, which are specifically limited to banks, pharmacies, restaurants, and cannabis dispensaries.

These are currently allowed within the MXTD zones, except for restaurant drive-throughs, those are not permitted within the MXTD zone.

The rest are permitted, but they need to be located within a building or structure.

So typically we're talking about a parking lot or a parking garage, perhaps not interior to a building, although someone could propose one inside of a building if they if they so chose.

So we are proposing that these no longer be permitted within our mixed use transit district zones.

Understanding again that this these zones are intended to be the most walkable, the most transit-oriented, and these autocentric uses are perhaps not appropriate for those types of areas.

This is a recommendation we did develop in coordination with both our comprehensive planning staff who looked at this from a comp planning angle and our environmental management division staff who were looking at it from a climate action plan angle.

So if these nonconformities were created, the uses could continue, but they would be subject to our nonconformities regulations, which I'm going to dive into in just a moment, or they would need to be brought into further conformance with our ordinance.

So moving on to the second bucket of recommendations that we have, which really deal with our non-conforming uses and structures, regulations themselves.

We are proposing a number of changes, simply stated because these regulations as they currently exist are quite confusing and they are overly restrictive.

So currently, if you wanted to make even minor modifications to your non-conforming site that are things that perhaps we would want to encourage, things like pedestrian and bicycle improvements, stormwater improvements, facade work, maintenance for safety and ADA improvements, or work that would actually bring the nonconformity into greater conformance.

Currently, our code requires you to go through a process over and above what you would typically have to do.

So for example, we had a car wash that came in in 2022.

They wanted to take out some of the car wash bays and put in, I think they were vacuum, vacuum stations, which we did believe that you know that is reducing the nonconformity.

They're coming into closer conformance with our requirements.

But because they were nonconforming use, they needed to go through a not what we call a non-conforming alterations process, in addition to the site plan that they required.

And we believe that under the proposal that we are putting forward, instead of having to go through the level two site plan and the non-conforming alterations process, instead they would be able to proceed as a minor amendment.

And since this is something that we would like to encourage and we would like to make the process easier, that is where this recommendation is coming from.

So additionally, under our current ordinance, you would not be able to, for example, rebuild your business in the event that it is destroyed by natural disaster.

If it burns down tomorrow, we say you cannot replace it in kind.

So we are proposing that that would be corrected and to allow in kind replacement for nonconformities that are damaged or destroyed by natural disaster.

And we are also proposing to allow nonconforming uses to expand by up to 20%.

Currently, this is not permitted.

You are not able to expand your nonconformity.

But we think that if you do go through an additional process, that nonconforming alterations approval process, that that would be appropriate to allow and consider expansions of nonconforming uses up to 20%.

So there would be a little bit of a higher bar there, but there would be a path to expansion.

So we are requesting feedback on both of these buckets.

Do you support creating strategic nonconformities in the MX TD zones?

And do you support simplifying and reducing the regulation of nonconformities as proposed?

Scanning, see if anyone wants to go first.

Dr.

Miles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh, yes and yes.

Okay, you've got three more three total on that side.

Sorry.

Can I ask a question?

So are you saying like we would uh if there's a I don't know, like drive-through McDonald's or Wendy's, like that would if that burned down, or they wanted to put a Wendy someplace?

Because you said you said cannabis, yes, but food, no.

So I just have a concern about that.

So if there were a current non-conforming restaurant drive-through, for example, in an MXTD zone where it is it's currently non-conforming and it burned down tomorrow, then we under this proposal we would be allowing for it to be replaced in kind.

So it has to burn down for that, but you couldn't have anything new.

Natural natural disaster.

Yeah.

I I just someone uncomfortable banning uh restaurants.

I mean, I think that that's a model of food.

Um, and especially when there's like people are trying to get through quickly.

I we would allow it for cannabis and pharmacy, I would allow it for food.

I mean, this is a an area people travel through, so I'm just gonna share it.

Generally, I'm okay with the other things you're saying, but for food, I'm I wouldn't limit that.

And you can put housing on top.

I I wouldn't I wouldn't limit that because I think that is a form of how many times have I, you know, we all been so busy and didn't have time to go into a restaurant we and park.

We just needed to get food and go.

Um, and we're right near 270, and there's a lot of travelers in the area.

That's that's my only concern about it, but I like the other parts of this.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I have just a couple of questions.

Uh can you uh tell me you you we talked about fire, but what do you do you have a definition of that natural disaster or is it broader than that?

Bear with me for just a moment because obviously a fire could be caused by somebody throwing a cigarette anyway.

I I don't want to you know take up too much time, but just you know, I think we just need to look at the the language that we use and make sure it's broad enough to cover a range of you know accidents or incidents that could happen.

Yes, so I did locate the language currently in the draft, we're writing a structure housing and non-conforming use that is destroyed in whole or in part by flood fire explosion or other accidental damage may be repaired or replaced in kind.

Okay, so that that's that's in that question.

One thing I would be curious about, and um is we say uh allow non-conforming uses to expand by up to 20 percent.

So I'm just trying to wrap my head around why we would allow non-conforming uses to be expanded by 20 percent.

It's an excellent question.

Um we thought that it would be reasonable to allow some moderate expansion of the non-conforming uses so long as they did meet that higher standard for the non-conforming alterations process.

However, if that is something that ultimately mayor and council say no, that is inappropriate, we certainly would take that in as the direction in the draft.

Um currently, we do not allow expansion at all in our ordinance.

All right, well, thank you.

Well, uh anyway, uh I'm yes uh on one and two.

Uh I would like some more information on that um expansion, just uh I don't really understand it, and I wouldn't uh want to be I want to have clarity and and really feel comfortable, but yeah, um uh yes on one and two councilman Van Greck.

So I uh I am yes on one and two, but I want to expand a little bit because uh I know that in some of these areas we're expanding the rights and use of landowners, which I think is great.

I actually similarly I agree with the mayor, you know, expanding those areas and also expanding up to 20 percent.

I also agree with.

I want to make sure that we're not restricting it because there's a lot of MXT areas in the city.

I mean, we're talking twinburg, we're talking town center area.

We have a lot of areas where we want to allow the landowners and the developers to be creative with what they're doing.

There's a lot of things that can be done with some of these nonconformities.

And I also agree that it's confusing and overly restrictive within our code.

So creating more strategic, I just don't want us to be too restrictive, similar to what the mayor was saying.

And you know, similar to what uh Councilmember Jackson was saying with regard to this 20%.

I think it's great, but I don't want to make sure that we're not disallowing some creative use that can really uh bump up, you know, what we can do for our residents in these MXTD areas.

Thank you.

I was gonna also say banks have like if you think about there was a new development on North Washington, and the bank creatively put the drive-thru right behind the building.

Um, and it really good use of space is not taking away extra, but it's a use that allows them to have the functionality and the customer service.

Um, so I I want to in this area of like we need more economic development activity.

I did want someone saying I'm not coming there because I can't do that.

So I just wanted to flag that.

Council exactly.

Councilmember Shaw.

I support one and two.

All right, thank you all.

So moving on to subdivision and plots.

Um, a quirk of our zoning ordinance is that we also include subdivision regulations within the zoning ordinance itself.

Many other jurisdictions separate these two out, but we do not.

Um, so subdivision at a high level deals with um any time a new lot is proposed or any time lot lines are moved, we're really dealing with the subdivision process.

So generally, this portion of the code has offered a lot of room for improvement.

It's something that we did not touch very much at all in the last um update to the zoning ordinance back in 2009, which has been really exciting to think about the ways that we can reorganize and help to make it more accessible and clear.

One of the things that we're going to get into is a bit of a structural change.

It really relates to the second bullet point in both the current and the proposed sections, but I'll touch on it now just because it is more of a structural, um, something that we're doing structurally, is to define a major and a minor subdivision.

So currently, uh, much like demolition by neglect, we include a definition for minor subdivision, but then we do not utilize it really at all in our subdivision regulations.

And so creating these two buckets, the minor subdivision and the major subdivision will help us to really organize all of these different processes that we already do when it comes to subdivision, but that we aren't clearly addressing in our ordinance.

So we have outlined here are the things that we think are minor.

They're all things that we do normally anyway.

We're just not including them specifically in our ordinance.

And that is based on research that we did into other jurisdictions and how are they defining their minor and anything else, anything bigger, anything bolder, that's a major subdivision.

So this deals the miners primarily deal with things like moving interior lot lines, um, consolidating two lots into one, subdividing up to four lots, so long as there's no extension of public facilities and they front on a road.

So those are things just to keep in mind as we move through this, that that's one big structural change that we are proposing that really won't change our process very much.

So to address the first bullet point, currently our subdivision regulations allow the planning commission to accept dedication of land.

Really, we think that this is more aligned with the mayor and council's financial and long-term maintenance maintenance um responsibilities, the policy and budgetary implications there really are better suited to the mayor and council than the planning commission.

So we are proposing to place that authority to accept land dedication on behalf of the city with the mayor and council as opposed to the planning commission.

Coming back to our plats, currently the planning commission is um approves all PLATs, including what we're proposing to call minor subdivisions.

However, the state does allow for that authority to be delegated from the planning commission down to an administrative level.

So we are proposing to allow administrative approvals of those minor subdivisions as allowed by state law.

I will say that we are proposing to write this into the zoning ordinance, but this is something that has to be acted on by the planning commission.

They have to affirmatively delegate that authority to staff.

This is something that we are proposing to broach with them at their next planning commission meeting on Wednesday evening.

So we do not yet have information from them, but we did want to include that proposal in this presentation.

We are also proposing to remove cluster subdivision provisions.

These were very popular in the 60s, 70s, even into the 80s.

The city has not seen a single cluster subdivision since 1996.

Most of the ones that were developed, all except for one, actually were west of 270 on really large parcels of land.

We don't foresee that there will be any demand really for those cluster subdivisions going forward.

We are also proposing to allow the creation of new pipe stem lots.

Currently, our ordinance prohibits the creation of pipe stem lots following about 2006.

So we have a visual of what are we talking about here.

So these are existing pipe stem lots in the Twinbrook neighborhood.

You can see there is a long stem that allows access to an interior lot that's kind of situated behind other lots.

We really do think that this would allow for utilization of underutilized land, maybe properties that are significantly larger than the minimum area required by the zone that will afford access.

I know there may be some concerns about the accessibility on these properties.

And I do want to say that as if any of these were proposed, they would go through a full subdivision review, including by the fire marshal, who certainly would flag any access issues through that review.

And so our requested feedback on each one of these bullet points relating to land dedication, allowing the record plots for minor subdivisions to be approved by the chief of zoning, certainly subject to planning commission delegation, eliminating cluster subdivision provisions and permitting pipe stem lots.

Can I ask a couple overarching questions?

Um for the we're eliminating the cluster subdivisions.

And I to my understanding when I asked the question, the cluster subdivision allowed the development of Ivywood, Saddlebrook, Horizon Hill, Falls, Well, Jefferson, a lot of properties on west of 270.

Are you saying that we don't have land like that to allow that kind of uh cluster subdivision again, even if smaller, or that there would be another process by which could be followed to get to that?

One of the things that we are proposing is to allow cottage court developments, which are um smaller, smaller single unit dwellings clustered around a common like a common open area.

We are proposing that those would be allowed in the RMD infill through up through the other residential medium density zones.

Um so those would not be permitted in the single unit detached zones, R400 through R40.

But I do think that that would capture some of the intent.

Um the cluster subdivision regulations really reduced the lot size by a marginal amount, and they were required, they are required to be proposed on larger properties, and we really just don't have that many kind of large green field development areas available.

They could be as small as five or six thousand square feet, right, with the cluster.

So in the R60, I believe the smallest lot size allowed is 4200 square feet.

However, the cluster regulations require that they be on development sites of five acres or larger.

Okay.

All right, that's helpful.

I was just also thinking about potential tiny home trends and how do we deal with that?

I didn't want to not consider that as a thing.

So that's helpful.

Um, for me, I need more information about the pipestone lots.

I and I, you know, why did they get rid of them in the past?

Uh, you know, I one of the things I heard was the fire marshal stuff, but I would like I would want to look more into like what kind of what other lots are there, what are we dealing with here?

Why are we reversing something that previous bodies?

Maybe it's a good thing, but I would like more information.

So I'm I don't feel comfortable on that one just yet, although I'm I'm open to exploring.

Um, and then there was something about number two.

I think that you haven't gotten, have you gotten planning commission feedback on that?

I think that was your planning to, but you haven't gotten it yet.

So what do what do you really want us to weigh on on this now when you haven't talked to the planning commission?

If you do not feel comfortable weighing in until after the planning commission has oh, you guys simply like to weigh in first and then see what they say, but we'll bring back their recommendation too when during the final drafting.

Yeah, I would like to see what they say.

Of course.

For me, and I was fine with number one.

Councilmember Valeri, and then Dr.

Marl.

Okie doke.

Um, this is actually an exciting one.

Um, and uh, you know, nonconformity.

I'm a big fan of that generally.

Um placing the authority to accept land dedication, absolutely I agree with that.

I think it makes the most sense right to be with mayor and council.

Um you're waiting on number two, if I heard that correctly, um, on feedback from the planning commission on that one.

Okay.

So I guess we'll put a pause in there.

Um I'm actually I don't see um the benefit of eliminating cluster subdivision provisions because we don't know what the the future holds, and um there might not be at this time something that really uh strikes me.

But I know that there are um some areas in North Carolina where they're doing um cluster subdivisions, but in smaller spaces.

I looked up, I think um I can't remember what the one new burn um was one of them, and I think that it's actually kind of an interesting way, and I don't um maybe this is what you were getting to, uh, Ms.

Simmons about um that the the what did you call them cottage cottage?

I almost said cottage core.

Cottage course.

Thank you.

It's not cottage court, Mars.

Um, yeah, no, I I think that that kind of gets to the same thing.

The other thing that I think of is um uh Washington Grove, too, and the way that it was built into like with a um a single kind of uh shared space, and then it is allows for basically um preservation of a lot of green space, but in particular trees.

So I'd be interested in and keeping that around.

Um, and I while I I I definitely can appreciate a lot of the community's concerns around pipe stem lots.

I will say that it allows for I think the tremendous flexibility of infill in uh twinbrook, as you outlined, and I I think um on that map, I think that was Rockland, not Roland.

Um, just if anybody is uh lean along at home and is like, where um but I also see it as some as a way to um get to where I think we should get throughout the city, which is allowing all these infill varieties um and permitting them will expand um housing options uh throughout the city.

So I am all about the pipe stem.

Why not on cluster subdivisions can't hurt?

Waiting to hear from planning commission, and yes to number one.

Dr.

Miles and then Councilmember Jackson and then Fulton.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I'm in favor of one through three.

I have a personal version towards pipe stem lots, but I can be overrule uh from the context of um meeting the need to get as many housing units online as possible.

Um I'm more yeah, just more about aesthetics and anything else.

Uh so long as the safety concerns can be met.

I guess I can't really stand in the way of progress, but I just let you know where I'm at.