Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

One. It's April 9, we are about to start our planning board meeting. But before I begin with our agenda items this morning, I wanna respond to some comments made by the county executive at a Friendship Heights town hall meeting this week. Let me start by saying community engagement is foundational to the work we do here at Montgomery Planning and at the Planning Board. And I'm proud of our engagement work including the innovative ways we have developed to bring new audiences and diverse voices into the planning process.

We will not stop this work, and we will continue to evolve and advance these efforts. The county executive's rhetoric that evening about planning in the board specifically around community engagement and feedback has become too common, most of which is not supported by facts or reality. I invite everyone to be part of the solution when it comes to tackling the challenges and opportunities that we face now and in the decades to come. We wanna hear from all residents during the planning process. That includes for master plans, the development applications, and policies.

While we may not always agree, we value you and your perspectives and are committed to making sure that your voice is part of our process and that we are all working collectively for what is best for our county. And before we start our agenda items, I don't know if any other board members wanna say anything. Commissioner Petto.

Good morning. You know, I'm talking to many people that they may listening to us. Many of you know that I have worked for government for more than forty years. Half of that has been with the commission and the other half has been with the county executive in Montgomery County. This lead to our county executive, we may not agree in everything that we do but we don't need to attack each other and say lies.

I witnessed both where I was at Montgomery County government and at the commission, public community and community engagement is the cornerstone of what we do. It doesn't matter where we are. And I was reading the comments that was made early this morning at 06:00 and, you know, seriously, it hurt me. That is not true. I have the planning department work closely with planning department.

I have worked closely with the park department. And community engagement is something that we don't take lightly. And saying that we don't listen to people, that's not true. It's not true, I can attest to that. We may not agree when any decision zoning is made.

We have a lot of people that agree and a lot of people that they don't agree. As the planning board body, we have to make a decision. When we make a decision, some people are happy with our decisions and some people are not happy. That doesn't mean that we didn't listen to you. We did listen, we made compromise, we made made changes, and then eventually we made a decision.

Any decision you don't have 100% agree. And those that they don't agree, they may think we haven't listened, some of them, but we did listen. This is a continuing battle and county executive knows that. He's sitting at the, you know, top of the government and saying that planning board is not doing the right thing is not right. This has been continued for the past three years that I have been in the commission.

And I'm requesting respectfully from our county executive to stop slashing and saying bad things about the commissioners, about our chairperson, about the planning staff, about the park staff, and in general about the commission as a whole. We are an independent agency and we are demanding respect. Thank you.

Yeah, 100% agree with both our chair and Commissioner Petter. I just wanted to add or do a few comments to this. First, to echo, I think, some of the sentiment here. The comments from the county executive to the Friendship Heights community were wildly offensive to, in particular, to staff. In particular, to the staff in this building who are extremely talented, hardworking, thoughtful, compassionate people, and from where I sit, are doing all this work for the right reasons.

They're doing all this work because they believe in our communities, and they believe that our can be even better, and they believe in trying to solve hard challenges. Now, if the county executive wants to join us in trying to solve hard challenges, he's welcome to do so. He is welcome any time to talk to us. He's welcome any time to talk to our staff, because our staff want nothing more than to solve some of the hard challenges that our county faces. And by and large, I think we're sort of in agreement about what those challenges are.

Mhmm. He has never this county executive has never reached out to me personally. To my knowledge, he's never reached out to anyone other than the chair on this board. I highly doubt he's reached out personally to any of our staff in a meaningful way with regard to these master plans. And we can see that in the misinformed comments that just came through with the Friendship Heights community that we've seen in the past.

Things about the Friendship Heights plan in particular because he said these in the context of the ongoing Friendship Heights sector plan that our staff is working on. I just wanted to to detail quickly the extensive community engagement that our staff has done. This is from a published public community engagement report everyone has access to, including the county executive and his staff. I'm just going to quickly read out all of these events. And I apologize, this can take a little time because there were a lot of events and engagement.

Two kickoff events, an existing conditions presentation, a hands on activity with the Youth Advisory Council. Two workshops, one in person, one virtual. Two focus groups for parents in particular. Focus of this plan. So we reached out to parents for a specific focus group.

One focus group for renters because renters were unrepresent were disproportionately unrepresented in the larger outreach, which is not surprising because it's harder to reach renters oftentimes. We had a specific focus group for renters. What else did we have? Three separate questionnaires. A workshop last fall with small group discussions, a focus group for business owners, web based visioning exercise, many, many, many other presentations to community groups, I counted over two dozen.

All in all, over 1,300 direct touch points with members of the community. Direct touch points with members of the community over a year and a half. So, you know, he this county executive seems to think that the way that things were done in the past, which which was largely getting a small group of people together in an advisory group, having them vote a few things is is somehow superior, or at least a replacement, but somehow superior to how we do things today. People involved with planning would agree that a lot of the practices in the past were highly unequitable, left out a lot of other people from from the process, including certain types of advisory groups when they're done in a vacuum. It empowers certain groups, it disempowers other groups.

It's hard for many folks to participate in the planning process. We've learned a lot since 2000. We've learned even more in the past fifty, seventy, a hundred years. And this staff has one of the most high quality effective engagement programs. It's certainly in the region, I think nationally, the work that we do here is exemplary in the preliminary recommendations of the Friendship Heights plan, which largely reflect what staff has heard from the community.

It's in the community engagement report. So it's clear to me this county executive either did not read the community engagement report or the preliminary recommendations or he didn't understand them. And if he didn't understand them, that's that's okay. It's okay not to understand highly technical jargony things that we as planners often do. That's why planning staff has started the Community Planning Academy, another incredible initiative that planning staff has started up to further our outreach, to further empower residents throughout the county.

If he would like to participate in that Community Planning Academy so we can learn more about what we do, that would be fantastic. If his staff would like to do that, we welcome them with open arms. I somehow doubt that's going to happen. I agree with the rest of what Commissioner Pedraim said, that it would be nice if we could talk to each other in civil ways. It would be nice if we could collaborate constructively. To assume that all of us are in this for the wrong reasons and to assume that we just make things up on the fly is not just offensive. It's completely detached from reality.

Please. Oh, one just

the great thing about working with the smart people in the planning board is the fact that they've said everything I intended to say anyway. So I just wanna associate myself with their remarks and say a couple of other things. The the comments by the county executive were fearmongering, not problem solving. Alright? We're I've come comes from working with the county government and the planning commission for decades.

I come from more of the advocacy side in affordable housing. I've spent my entire career in affordable housing and working desperately hard across the county and and at HUD and at at the regional level, at the federal level. I've literally traveled from Alaska to Puerto Rico working on affordable housing before I came here to the commission. The comment some of the comments by the county executive indicating that we do not care or not concerned with affordable housing are, to parrot my fellow commissioners here, not just inaccurate, but insulting. And it upsets me quite a bit given the fact that I've spent my career doing it and currently run a public housing authority in which we house over 1,300 families in Rockville, part of Montgomery County, and port in over 400 from Montgomery County alone through our voucher program.

I'm currently working on refinancing a 121 units directly next to Montgomery College to offer opportunities for families to be able to go and get education and improve their lives and improve the housing that they have and offer housing for families. Over 400 people live in that apartment complex. We have another one with 236 units that we're working on right now to refinance. I've spent my entire career working on making housing more affordable for people. And we may disagree on the policy aspect about why and how to do that, and that's fine as we've mentioned here several times.

But to say that we're not concerned about it is insulting. It's insulting to me personally. As the as many of the other commissioners had mentioned, the comments were also insulting to the work that the staff does, and that's not good leadership, and that needs to be pointed out. The only other things that that I have to say there is that in addition to being fearmongering rather than problem solving, most of the comments were inaccurate both about what we do generally and about the specific Friendship Heights plan. Commissioner Linden went over all of the community engagement that has been done.

I said as I said, I come from over the advocacy side. I've worked with planning commission before I came here to be on the board. I've always found the engagement wonderful from the staff. I've always found them receptive to comments and receptive to questions and potential updates to master plans and to projects that they're doing. Never, as an advocate, got a 100% of what I wanted, but you're not supposed to. So it never happens that way. So the the comments were disappointing, incredibly incredibly disappointing, disappointing to both me personally, I think, the staff, the commission, and to the work of the board and everyone we have here. And I just wanna make sure that that's that's pointed out. Thanks.

Thank you. Any other comments or questions?

I have comment. I'm not aware of the county executive's comments, and so I would reserve comment. I've had the opportunity to meet the county executive twice and during the confirmation process. And my experiences with the county executive were positive during the confirmation process, and my communications and contact with the county council have always been positive. So I would reserve comment, but I do respect the fact that County Executive Elrich is the County Executive. And so, I refrain from commenting, not having an opportunity to see his comments or contemplate making a comment about them. Thank you.

Thank you to my fellow Board members. Now we'll start the official official part of our board meeting this morning. The first item is item one a adoption of resolutions. There are two this morning that commissioner Petunom and I can't vote on, so the other three board members need to. The first one is one nine one zero one Darnestown Road administrative subdivision plan, and the second is 19101 Darnestown Road forest conservation plan. Do I have a motion for approval of those two resolutions?

Move to approve the Darnestown Road Resolutions and the Forest Conservation Plan.

Second. All in favor? Aye. And there's three ayes and two abstain. So the ayes get a win. So the next is approval of minutes. We have one we have three this morning, February 1226 02/26/2026. Oh, 03/05/2026, and there's a fourth one, March nineteenth twenty twenty six. Do I have a motion for approval of these four minutes?

Moved to move to approve the four minutes.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. The ayes have it, five zero. The next, we have three regulatory extensions this morning, Woodlawn Estates preliminary plan amendment and forest conservation plan extension request number three. The second is Bennett Road properties extension request number four for preliminary plan and preliminary slash final forest conservation plan. And the the third is Meihan Village preliminary plan and final force conservation plan extension request number four. We have a motion for approval of these four these three extensions.

Move to approve the regulatory extension requests.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. The ayes have it. Aye. Five zero. And next, we have our roundtable discussion. Chair? Sorry to interrupt, but we had a corrected resolution, item one c. I'm sorry. I missed that one. So we have item one c is a corrected resolution corrected resolution for Chaverton Solar Victoria LLC forest conservation plan. Do we have a motion for approval?

I have a question on that. I think I I'm pretty sure I voted against that, and so I'll probably be abstaining here.

Commissioner, it's up to you that at this point, this is essentially a ministerial act. If you would like to abstain, obviously, that is your prerogative, but you can do as your heart desires.

Do

I have a motion for approval of this corrected resolution?

No. I'll move to approve the corrected resolution for solar.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

Aye.

Aye. All

I oppose.

Oppose? Okay. I'll oppose one. So it's 401.

No. No. It's 410.

410 for the corrected resolution. All done with these preliminary matters, and so next is the planning director's report. Good morning, mister Sartori. Look forward to your report. Thank you.

Good morning, and, thank you for having me this morning. For the record, Jason Sartori, planning director. I did want to begin by, first of all, thanking the board for your comments this morning on behalf of the entire planning department and the work that we do. As some of you have noted, I think many our staff, we do what we do because we love this work. Some of it is really hard.

And we hear from a lot of people, a lot of different perspectives. And it is really difficult to incorporate all of that into the work that we do. And you see it because you have to make the same part decisions that we do as we prepare our plans. And so we really do this work because we love being in the community. We love engaging people.

We love thinking about what the future could hold. It is very unfortunate because the comments that the county executive made only serve to cause confusion and chaos and further complicate the planning process, which is already complicated enough, rather than try to engage community members in fruitful, forward thinking conversations or to try to support the work that we do and supplement the work that we do, which is really perplexing because we actually work have really great working relationships with county agencies. And they are integral parts in the work that we do, especially in our master plan efforts. And they are partners. And the exact process that the county executive was slamming involves staff from the county agencies as well.

His often repeated comments about the planning process actually demonstrate to me a warped and inaccurate recollection of long ago efforts that have long since been dismissed for not being inclusive or comprehensive. And he seems to pine for these antiquated methods that are inconsistent with current planning and equitable engagement best practices that we, in the planning department, are very proud to be employing and have actually been recognized numerous times as being leaders for doing that. So to county residents who may be listening, I join the board members in trying to make it clear that we want to hear from you. We want to understand your perspectives. And we want to learn about your concerns and your hopes and your dreams for your communities.

And while you may not see your specific comments reflected exactly in our recommendations plans or the policies that we try to move forward, I can guarantee you that we everything we hear, every note and every comment that we receive, it all gets very seriously considered and contemplated within the context of the many diverse perspectives that we hear from and the many other important factors that are necessary for us to take into consideration. And so again, I thank Chair Harris, Vice Chair Linden, and the board for your comments because we really, really appreciate your leadership and your support.

Just one more thing that your thought I want to again talk to our county executive is that we work not only very close with the community, we also work with his own agencies. So, saying bad things to us is saying bad things to staff of his own agencies because they are almost every week they are here and working with us alongside with us. All many of the department. So again, I am really seriously asking our county executive to stop saying what he has always been saying about us, planning board, planning staff, and the commission. I think it's time to stop it.

Thank you.

So thank you again. I will this will be relatively today, but I wanna take a little bit of a or a look ahead as I I typically do, but then kind of in an odd way, take a look back because it's been a couple of weeks since I've come before you as we've changed the board schedule. So I'll talk a little bit about women's history month, which was last month, and then give you a quick update on where we are with the FY twenty seven budget and then one personnel update for the planning department. So next Monday is sine die, the end of the legislative session. And you'll be briefed later this morning by Jordan Balcombe Coburg on on where some of the bills that we've been tracking stand with just less than a week to go.

So, you know, we'll we'll get an update on that. Later this month, we have a a good contingent of planning staff that are going to Detroit. We have a few people who are presenting at the conference and a number of us that will be going to this is the American Planning Association's National Planning Conference later this month. And it's a great opportunity for us to learn from our colleagues from across the country and get to just even collaborate and find ways to have conversations and learn more about what other people are doing elsewhere. Then we have the Net Zero that pencils out speaker series event.

I'll talk a little bit more about that in a second on April 30. And then this seems really far ahead, and it is. But I just wanted to make you aware there was another ZTA introduced that we've been collaboratively working with counsel on. You saw two ZTAs recently that were adopted, that made modifications to the expedited approval plans for BioHealth Priority Campus and mixed income housing community plans. This is another ZTA that would make modifications to the expedited approval plans for signature business headquarters, making that one that would be more accessible to more projects.

And it's been introduced, but it was intentionally delayed because of the budget cycle and process. The public hearing for that will be at the July. So that'll be coming to you in the coming months. So as I mentioned, here's some additional information about our upcoming very exciting speaker series event. As a reminder, this speaker series is hosted by the planning board in partnership with our planning and park staff.

There will be three events focused on sustainability. And the first event is scheduled for Thursday, April 30. And it will begin with the dessert reception at 05:00, followed by a panel event hosted here in the auditorium. This first event will be a dynamic panel moderated by Vice Chair Linden on how innovative design, smart financing, and integrated planning can make sustainable development achievable and cost effective. Panelists will come from Red Brick LMD, Montgomery County Green Bank, and Perkins Eastman.

And they'll share real world examples about delivering high performance, low carbon projects while demonstrating how sustainability goals can align with financial feasibility, market realities, and long term value. So the discussion will highlight the role of public private partnership public private collaboration, creative financing mechanisms, and thoughtful design in accelerating Montgomery County's path toward net zero development. And this event, along with the two that we'll have later in the year, is free and open to the public. So I encourage everyone who is listening to encourage as many people as possible to attend. Looking forward to this one.

So I wanted to share a little bit about how we celebrated Women's History Month during the month of March. It really was a great month of employee enrichment events. And I want to thank and give kudos to Robin Brittingham and her team, which included Bianca Bonilla, Vincija Vichaju, Deborah Almeda, Catherine Coelho, Sandra Lancaster, and Melissa Tompkins. And as per usual, this committee produced a thoughtful and inviting program of events for our staff. And one very special event included a special guest, Maryland Secretary of Planning, Rebecca Flora.

So history month lunch and learn last month at Brookside Gardens was an inspiring conversation with the secretary. Her decades of leadership and sustainable development underscore essential role of women's voices in shaping a resilient Maryland. She highlighted the state's new eight Sustainable Growth Principles, which is a framework that is very similar and closely mirrors what we do here at Montgomery County. And she reminded us deliberation must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations. That was a quote from her, a message that really deeply resonated with our work.

Secretary Flora emphasized the importance of elevating planning statewide, strengthening cross jurisdictional collaboration, and ensuring gender diversity in environmental policy. Her career, from pioneering LEED certified projects to advancing climate action strategies, demonstrates how women continue to transform the planning field and mentor the next generation of leaders. We're really grateful to Secretary Flora for her partnership. And I also want to acknowledge and thank Christina Sorrento, who you see in these pictures, for guiding discussion and also deputy director Bridget Breuer for serving as emcee for this energizing event. So thank you to them.

How we promoted our celebration of Women's History Month on social media and give a kudos to our communications and engagement division for spotlighting several of the department's women leaders across our different social media platforms. So you can see each graphic here features an inspiring message reflects their impact, their leadership, and the value they bring to planning work in the county. By elevating their voices, the department honors both their individual contributions and the broader importance of women shaping the future of Montgomery County. So these particular graphics feature Bridget Breuer, Christina Sorrento, Carrie Sanders, Robin Brittingham, and Larissa Cleven. And they were posted to our social media pages on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn.

And as we recognize Women's History Month, I thought it would be important to honor the women who shaped Montgomery Planning and the commission from its earliest days. So one of of the most influential was Caroline Freeland, a true pioneer whose leadership helped define modern planning in our county. Her service as the first woman on the planning board and the first female chair of the commission a powerful precedent. And her legacy continues to influence our work today. Freeland made history in 1963 as the first woman appointed to the Montgomery County Planning Board and the first female chair of MNC PPC, serving in both roles until '71.

A trained planner and active Bethesda resident, she helped guide a transformative period in the county's growth. During her tenure, at least 15 master plans were adopted and public parkland more than doubled to 16,000 acres. One of those new spaces, Edgemoor Park, which is now called Caroline Freeland Urban Park, was added to the 1970 Bethesda Chevy Chase master plan at her urging. At its dedication, the park was praised as, quote, a monument to freelance concern for beauty and good use of land for those who live and work here now and in the future. Her leadership expanded open space, shaped community planning, and opened doors for women in public service, leaving a lasting imprint on Montgomery County.

And as you know well, that park just got a refresh recently recently from the parks department and is absolutely beautiful and is a real treasure to that community. Yep. I just wanted

to add I'm so sorry. Go.

Oh, no. I I was just gonna ask the question. I'm looking at the year she would have been the chair during the Wedge and Corridors adoption. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. '60 yeah. Mid sixties? Yeah. That was the Wedge and Corridors adoption. That's an that's fascinating.

Yeah. So Yeah. She obviously has had a very important impact on. Yeah. Okay. Because we still, you know, point to concepts from that play.

Live in a city that's on the corridor. Yeah. Know. It's very part of that part of that process. That's interesting.

This is really important stuff. I just want to also note that just to support what you said about the park and the refresh and how nicely done it was. I've only been there twice, but each time I was there with my family, my kids. And it is completely, in the best way possible, overrun with kids enjoying every single part of that. As you can this picture, you know, it has, like, good shade opportunities to sit down, which is not always the case in some areas.

And a great combination of active spaces, natural spaces, some open spaces to run around. It sort of perfectly captures what a great urban park can be. So kudos to the park's team and everyone else who is involved with that effort. It's a great, great amenity for the community.

So, I was a deputy director of parks at that time. So, that was one of my projects that my staff are doing. The interesting part is that I didn't know that it was I knew that it was Karen Freeland. I just didn't know that she was the first woman chairing the planning board. So, this was really refreshing for me. Thank you. I was just smiling to that. I said, oh my god.

I will tell you that we did a deep dive on, you know, the commission and the department history. And you are the nineteenth woman to be on the planning board. So, I'm not going go through the full list, but I just wanted to acknowledge that.

Should treasure number 19. 19.

You should play that number in the log.

In the country I come, when I was in elementary school, you know, you have here like 100 is the top number. When I was in elementary school, 20 was the top number. So, 19 was close to like 89. So, I think Well,

want to make it clear, there is no top number when we're talking about the number of women who will serve on our board. We will

I know. I'm just There's

joking. No

I know.

I know. Thank you. So continuing with the theme of trailblazing women who broke barriers at Montgomery Planning and at the commission, I wanted to touch on a few more female firsts from faces you might recognize. Trudy Morgan Johnson, Mary Wells Harley, Gwen Wright, Rose Krasnau, and Tanya Washington opened doors and strengthened the agency we are today. These female first paved the way for future generations, and we're proud to celebrate their lasting impact on our organization and on our county.

So Trudy Morgan Johnson, who's pictured there, was the first woman to serve as executive director of the commission. Patty Barney, who's not pictured, was the first woman to serve as secretary treasurer. Mary Wells Harley was the first black woman on the planning board, serving from 2009 to 2017. And Gwen Wright was the first woman to serve as planning director from 2013 to 2022. And then here we have Rose Krasnow, who was the first woman to serve as deputy planning director.

Farrell Hamer was the first woman to serve as acting planning director in 2006. She's not pictured here. But Tanya Washington Tanya Washington Stern was the first black woman to be acting planning director. And Deborah Borden, our current general counsel, was the first black woman to serve in that role for the commission. And I personally feel very fortunate to have worked with and learned from and gotten to know several of these commission leaders.

Our department and our work products are better because of the leadership they provided over the years. And we are grateful for the many talents, experience, and expertise that they've shared with us. And I'll say, as the father of two young women, I can also appreciate the importance of women leaders like these in all levels of government, public sector, private sector, as role models for future generations of female leaders. And so we celebrate them last month, this month, and every month. Yes.

I'd like to share a comment on your presentation. I'd like to also acknowledge the importance women and their role in planning. I often joke with my wife and friends that if it wasn't for women, men would live in caves. And there's no one more invested and interested in the progress and the health and and well-being of our communities than women. And it's very inspiring to see how women have played a role in planning and development in our county that has made it one of the most livable, well organized places in America. And I'd like to commend their work. Thanks.

It's a good correlation to know.

We have a few also women for Parks Department that made history. Our current director, Mehdi, she's the first Hispanic know, woman director for the Parks Department, I believe. You know? Of course, your history is better, but I think that's what they did.

It's all good. Okay. So I did wanna just give a real quick update on the, FY '27 budget. I don't think much has changed from here from what you've seen previously. We came before you a couple weeks ago with the budget, and we will actually be before you in just a little bit here to make one revision to the planning department's nonrecommended reductions.

But I did wanna highlight that this week, Tuesday, yesterday, and now today, the county council's been having public hearings on the the budget. The PHP committee will be reviewing our budgets on April 23. It's a Thursday. And then the full council will review the budget sometime in May with the two councils having to meet to review and adopt the combined commission budget. And then the council will adopt by resolution the full budget at some point late May, no later than June 1.

And then our budget will come to you for your adoption on June 17 by the full commission. And lastly, I wanted to turn to a personnel update. I wanted to ask you to join me in welcoming Kimiya Zalfagarian to the department. Kimiya joined the West County Planning Division as one of the lead reviewers on the regulatory team. She brings more than twelve years of planning and design experience in private and public spaces.

She worked for RTKL, which is now Arcadis. And she also worked at Perkins Eastman, Fairfax County, and the city of Rockville. She earned a bachelor's degree in architecture from the University Maryland and is AICP certified. So welcome to Kimiya. I don't nope, she is here. Thank you for joining us. And that is it. With that, I'm complete. If you have any questions, happy to answer.

Well, as always, thank you for your very informative reports. I really love the Female First and Trailblazers in the commission. You know, they always say, you must know your history. So, you know, and it's just so important to know where we came from, whose shoulders we're standing on, and and who we should be continually uplifting. So thank you for that, and welcome Kimiya.

Thank you for joining this great commission. We look forward to how your work can help move us forward. And and so and as you talked about, we're in the midst of the budget season, and it's gonna be a tough budget season, but we're we're starting the meeting with with many of the council members discussing our budgets and looking forward to the PHP on April 23. Any other comments or questions from my fellow board members? Hearing or seeing none, we're going to take a two minute break and then start with item number seven, the Planning Department Budget Follow-up.

Thank you. And welcome back. We're on item number seven, the planning department budget follow-up where miss Karen Warnick, you'll be going through this item with us. Oh, or miss director Sartori has been going through this.

Yes. I'll I'll take the the lead on this. And this shouldn't take too long. But again, for the record, Jason Sartori, planning director. So as you know, a couple weeks ago, we did present with the other parts of the commission, our budget.

We talked about the county executive's budget and the reductions that we needed to identify in order to be able to meet the county executive's budget. And just as a reminder, the amount that we needed to find was $1,100,000 in reductions. So this, what you're seeing here, is the the budget as we requested it officially on January 15. Overall, it was a 2,300,000.0 increase, about eight and a half percent. Now the evening before we presented to you first thing in the morning, we had received some questions from council staff that we didn't get to get to until after we had our session with you.

Those questions got us thinking a little bit differently about what we had come forward to you with. And so we wanted to come back with some modifications to reflect the appropriate responses to those questions as well as consistency with parks. And so you'll see here what we are asking now to be our reductions. And I'm going to pull up the next column here so you can see the overall effect. So this this column here is the changes that we're making to our request, and this is what the new request essentially would be with those nonrecommended reductions.

Again, that you'll see the reduction here is $1,100,000. Right? So what we've changed from what we showed you a couple weeks ago is this, first, this $65,000 reduction to the base budget. This was a major known commitment for an upgrade to our cybersecurity systems. It was a shared expense with Parks.

Parks had offered it up as a reduction. And so it didn't make sense for us to also include the 65,000 that we wouldn't be able to use without the other side too. So we're offering that up as a reduction there. But what that meant was it freed up some other things that we could put that $65,000 elsewhere. So if you'll recall from a couple weeks ago, we had made a slight reduction to master plan support.

We're no longer making that reduction. So we're asking the council to keep the increase in master plan support full at the 200,000. And the other thing that we did was we did put the remaining amount that we got from that $65,000 change into the climate resilience functional plan as seed funding is how we're kind of what we're calling that. It would just be something to help us get that effort started even if we wouldn't have the climate initiatives planners who would be leading that, we have a team of people who could at least start laying the groundwork for that. So when you start looking at our tiered restorations, I'll make a general comment about this afterwards, kind of in line with what the chair mentioned earlier.

This doesn't change. These are still the first tier or these first three positions. We're asking for that to be our first priority in restoration. Second tier, there was a slight modification to this also. We added the engagement specialist to the second tier.

Just on further reflection, I mean, the importance of this role, we want to be able to express that to the council. That is the person who would be taking over management and daily administration of the community planning academy, which, you know, for the time that we've had this running has been led by the equivalent of two division chiefs in Khalid Afzal and Chris Pifer and our deputy director. So we'd like to be able to hand that off to someone at at a more appropriate level to be to be managing. And then lastly is the flat out reductions. Again, that's 65,000 and this other position and the the other funding for these one time initiatives.

Now just to just generally say, as we as chair Harris mentioned, we've begun our conversations with council members. It is going to be a very, very, very bad budget year. And we think rather than even being able to have a conversation about restoration of these things, it's gonna probably be more of a conversation around additional cuts. And so we will continue to do everything we can to make sure that we're able to move forward with the work program that we have today and responsibilities that we have day in and day out while also finding opportunities here or there to pursue some of these new initiatives where we can. But I just wanted to come back with this update.

Have a question. I know I missed your presentation that time, but I think I have caught up. Diversifying the economy, assessing the future need for industrial land. I sort of have a heartburn that this is not in any of your tears. Are there things that are more important than this?

Is there any way that that's I don't know. If board agrees, I don't know. But I think that that's important. Anything for our economy has to have a priority, you know. I know that it's going to be tough.

In my opinion, it's either even more important because we do have some programs for climate resilient function plan. I know that commissioner Lindem probably doesn't like what I'm saying. But I personally prefer to see the seed money go to economy. If you don't have economy, you know, it's going to be hard to be protecting even the climate resilience. I think it's important to have the economy. That's something I put on the table. Either way, I'm fine. But I think that that for me, personally, has more priority.

So, you know, not to be put too negative of a spin on all of this, where we are with this, but I suspect that we're probably not going to get anything from our restoration list. However, there is something that gets communicated when you put something in a restoration as opposed to a reduction. So it it does talk about then the priority of it and the importance of it. And so that's why we felt it was important to move that that position that would be the community planning academy. You know?

We could do something something similar with diversifying the economy. It could be a portion of that that we move to tier two. But the other thing, and I'll I'll turn to to Bridget to see if she has anything to add to this, I believe that we have some capacity within our research and strategic projects team and existing budget and funding that we get to do certain research tasks to be able to get started on that as well. So it wouldn't be that it wouldn't be something we would pursue. It just may be something we pursue slower but without this funding. And we would ask that it would still be added to our work program even if we don't get this funding.

That's exactly I'm sorry. Sorry.

Richard Boyer, for the record. Commissioner Petitwan, thanks for calling that out. It is a priority for us. And our research and strategic projects team, there is some capacity for them to start the work and to make sure it's not forgotten because it is so important. So thank you for calling it out.

Yeah. Yeah.

Oh, I just yeah. I just wanted to comment a little bit too. I I I tend to I tend to agree. We we've got an economic issue. I think there's argument to be made that that we have more housing, you have more people, they spend more money, and you got an issue and you get an economy.

But for that, we also like, for some there there there's been an uptick in in overall research on industrial land and the reuse of that land and the reuse of brownfields and other types of plots nationwide that I think we can lean on as as well. I used to work in the brownfields program at at HUD on the redevelopment with brownfields. That it's moved a little bit from the old super industrial, very polluted, almost super fun sites to sort of the re you know, what you need to do to cap and cover, you know, less polluted. And I think that's most of what we end up with in Montgomery County. So I think there's some options there to to lean on research from other areas to to sort of spur the the industrial lane because we do have some.

And I drive I drive Goudy almost every day. And if you get about a block or two onto Goudy, you start hitting the old industrial just all the way down that. And there's been redevelopment along those lines that I think is is good and better for the county. And I think there's some ways to do that. And then in climate resilience, we do have some implementation option there to really be able to sort of address these things.

So I think either way, I think it's got to think the I think you're probably right on the reductions in the tiers this year. Just number it's it's hard to argue with numbers that don't look that don't look all that great, but I think this is probably the a reasonable way to sort of get at the the number that we need to that we need to get at. I did wanna make and I think I made this comment last time when we were talking about the park side too with with the cybersecurity and the importance of making sure that we don't forget that. And I I don't wanna put a you know, ask for a report or anything, but if we do have a roundtable sometime in the next couple of months on sort of what our cybersecurity existence and posture is, again, part of my previous position with Federal Home Loan Bank system was in cybersecurity. And it's it's it's all it's all money that doesn't seem to do much on a balance sheet until you get hit with a ransomware attack.

And so there's there's something to be said for sort of knowing what our posture is there and what our potential exposure is on cybersecurity. It's it's it's low risk, but high hit when the risk happens. So it's just something to keep in mind. I understand why we're putting it on the reduction, and I I support it. It's just something to make sure we're keeping an eye on. On.

One more thing. I totally support the and I hope you get it, the $200,000 for master plan support. That is the basis of the work that we do and it's extremely important. So, I'm hoping that we can get that.

Okay. So, a couple of comments here. I appreciate your comment about the economic development, the industrial It's important, and we will make sure that, you know, as as said that we they believe there's opportunity to start some of that work. And and I behind the scenes, not behind it, but we're also looking at we are working with the Department of Economic Development both on the local level and in at Yep. And at the state level, trying to figure out, how we can do some things to help sort of jump start or speed up the process for, potential projects that may come into the, county.

They also and the local and the county's Department of Economic Development, they they are getting themselves together. They're getting their team together. You have the new director, and you have some other, board members they're putting together, and they're really pushing for that. And we're we're, you know, meeting with them. And and so that you should know that we're pushing.

They're pushing. So that is a high high priority. And, also, commissioner Hedrick, we'll get Parks also talk about cybersecurity. But I thought they we agreed last time that they are with this position that they did have, hired recently, that they were able to Yeah. Make sure take care of this in the shorter term and focus on it as and then hopefully when we get more funding down the road, we can beef that Yeah. That up. But they they are on it with I I believe that they Yeah.

I have I, yeah, I have absolutely no doubt. It's a it's a fast moving field as well. So it's one of those things too that if you're you're the options for next year are gonna be different from the options of this year, and you have some you know, you it's not that there's no rush, but there is changes, and it's it's not the the end of the world to to bump that funding. But I was saying, we if we get a chance sometime in the next, like I said, couple of months with one of the roundtable meetings, it might be worth discussing briefly the the cybersecurity posture of of the commission as a whole in both the parks and planning department.

I I think that would be a good discussion topic and because it really is is so much more than IT. It's a communications piece too. And what we've seen recently is a number of applicants who are getting letters not just by email, but in the mail from me telling them that they owe us a certain amount of money. And sometimes it doesn't go to the applicant or the primary goes to, like, you know, a secondary contractor on or, you know, a consultant on the project. And, you know, fortunately, they've been able to get in touch with us.

Is this real? But it is getting more and more sophisticated in the tools that people are using to a lot of that is outside of our control. So in terms of There's nothing that our IT system can do to prevent that. So what we can do is from a communications perspective, making sure that the people who we work with know this is how you'll receive communication from us if you owe something or you won't or this is, you know, just there's a lot to it. And I think it would be a great discussion.

100%. Great. Good. And we'll make sure that that is an item going forward. Okay. Thank you. So any other comments or questions? If none, do I have a motion to approve the planning department's revised admin fund request?

And I'll move to approve the updated request.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. Five zero. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And we're gonna take a just a very short let's switch over, and we'll do item number five, water and sewer category change request administrative delegation twenty twenty six dash two group where staff is recommending approval. Thank you. Good morning. We're on item number six. It's the update to the climate assessment templates, checklist, and process.

And we have Ben this morning to provide us with this update.

Thank you. For the record, Ben Berber with the Design Placemaking and Policy Division, and I am bringing before the board this morning a briefing on some recommended updates to our climate assessment templates, checklists, and process. Staff has recommended the board support the updated checklist and templates for climate assessments. We'll discuss what these are and why they are in a moment. And also recommending that the board appoint that the either director or the division chief of the Environment and Climate Division can be the board designee for submitting climate assessments to the council.

As a little bit of background, Bill 3,425 was approved earlier this year and takes effect on 06/10/2026. It did a few things for climate assessments. One of them combined existing categories of community resiliency and adaptive capacity into one new category that is called the community climate resilience. It then went on to define community climate resilience, climate hazard, as well as greenhouse gas emissions sequestration and some other things. And then the final thing it did is it granted the board the ability similar to how OLO can, they can appoint designees to submit these climate assessments rather than the board needing to do it itself.

Getting into the template changes, Montgomery Planning and its staff maintain two climate assessment templates, one for conducting assessments for master plans and one for zoning text amendments. They're very similar. This is really just making, again, necessary updates. Any time that the words community resilience or adaptive capacity were found, we're removing it and we're replacing it kind of in kind with community climate resilience just to, again, follow what the build changes were. The checklist that Montgomery planning staff maintain, this gets into all the different factors that are used when determining impacts to climate from a greenhouse gas emissions standpoint and a resiliency and adaptive capacity standpoint.

Almost no change to the greenhouse gas emissions checklist. The real changes are on the resiliency and adapt capacity checklist. Again, we're just basically renaming that checklist to match the bill. As staff, we did look at that checklist to make sure that there didn't need to be any changes. We felt that all of the factors were still relevant, just needed to be sort of approached with the right terminology.

So those are the changes there. And I've already covered all that. So the final part of the bill was the ability for the board to set a designee for submitting climate assessments. Planning staff is recommending the board do this. For one, it provides planning staff with a lot more flexibility, particularly if you allow there to be two potential designees, both the planning director or the chief of environment and climate.

In case one of them is out, the other could act on the behalf. What I do want to make sure, both for the public and for the board, we're not trying to take the board necessarily out of the process altogether. What this would allow us to do is submit the climate assessment in the time required, which is seven days prior to the council's hearing. We will then come to the board basically later that week with the zoning text amendment recommendations. To that will be that climate assessment.

And if the board has comments, concerns, or recommendations on the climate assessment, you can still make them to us and we can still get them in your transmittal with the zoning text amendment. And so it's our opinion that functionally there's not much difference from what happens now. It actually just kind of expediates the process on staff's end a little bit. And a lot of that is just because the transmittal deadlines are not aligned. We have until the public hearing to submit zoning comments.

The climate assessments are due a full week prior to that hearing. We're trying to just kind of get that extra week back in there. This is sort of a complicated flowchart, but some people are visual. This is basically just showing we have a five week turnaround from when these things are introduced to when the council public hearing happens. I think what's kind of most important to sort of realize is that the board hearing on the current timeline falls in week three.

We're able to push this to week four, again, giving us that extra week to do this work that we really want to do and want to do well and would love to have that extra time to do. So, conclusion, staff has recommended the board support the updates to the templates that were included in the packet attachments, as well as to allow the designation of the planning director or the chief of environment and climate division as designees. With the board's approval, what we will do is we'll actually get a policy document typed up and circulated for the signature of legal counsel, the chair, the director, basically just stating that that's what we're going to be doing going forward, if you support it.

K. Thank thank you for your presentation. Yeah. I'm supportive of, you know, the change in the checklist. And as as you said, as long as is the climate assessment and can comment on it before, you know, it goes to the, the council or for their public hearing, then I'm I'm fine with that.

If you so the I'll leave that there there. But if you really is five weeks just too is it if that is that just too tight for I mean, maybe in the in the just to change the whole piece to get more time if you really need more time.

So the five weeks is it's in the code that basically you have five to ten weeks. I think it's listed as thirty five to sixty days from introduction of a zoning text amendment to when the council has to have its public hearing. And we have to act before that so that we can get our comments on the record for them. You know, most of the items that come in, they are shooting for that thirty five days to keep the process moving so that it doesn't turn into a longer process. We've talked with counsel staff, and that's their prerogative when they set those hearings.

And I don't think it would be very useful for us to recommend extending that through that portion of code. I don't think there would be an appetite to do it. And so I don't know if it benefits us to recommend it. I think the only other change that we thought could potentially have been made is to just align the deadlines so that the climate assessments do at the same time the ZTA comments are. I think there was concern there, however, that during the adoption in 2022 of the climate assessment legislation, a lot of the environmental advocacy groups wanted that climate assessment before the hearing so that they would have time to see it and provide their comments at the public hearing on the climate assessment.

So this was sort of the best way that we felt we could meet both worlds is if staff, through its designee, could actually meet the requirement of submitting the assessment, we can move it back, not having to have it posted a week before and then the board hearing and the circulating transmittal. All that's of eating up necessary time, we could just go straight to having staff submit this assessment to counsel and then we just bring it back to you the following week with our zoning text amendment comments, which we can get transmitted in a more timely manner.

Yeah. So I yeah. The folks that need to see the climate assessment of the public, whatever, it's good to get to them earlier. I'm I'm I'm fine with this. I just maybe after more, like, in the next year or two after there if there have been a lot of these, just we use it as a data point to say, hey. We need more time. Right? I'm I'm okay with this now, but, you know, we're just starting to do the climate assessments. And and this past year or so, there have been lots of ZTAs. And if there's significantly if if it still stays that way and we feel we need more time, I we should raise our hands and ask for more time.

But I'm I'm but maybe after more data points. So that that would be my recommendation. Okay? But with I'm I'm I'm comfortable with today, but let's monitor it and see if we need to change.

I'm curious if we know whether there are so with ZTA specifically, are there county is there a county agency or office or team that also does a climate related or environmental review for for ZTA specifically? Or is it it simply comes from from us?

So we do them for Office of Legislative Oversight does climate assessments for bills.

Okay. Okay. Got it. So without our assessment, the public doesn't have anything else that they can read related to the ZTA's. Okay. That, yeah, I, I think I agree with the chair. That sounds fine for ZTAs. But just to clarify, are we suggesting this designee will apply for master plans as well or just the ZTAs?

So I think the beauty of a designee is it, in theory, could, but we don't have to. And I would imagine for master plans, we probably wouldn't because the board's already transmitting the master plan. And honestly, if there is a ZTA and a climate assessment that has more consequence such as like the data center one we took recently, a staff we may still choose to bring it before the board before sending it because of its importance.

Yeah, that was what I was going to suggest, that that sounds good as long as for the ZTAs or whatever that it's going to be done at the staff level. If there are serious consequences or, I don't know, serious is hard to say, or if there are a lot of controversy, I think it is important that it comes to the planning board. The simple ones, most of the CTAs are simple ones. And, you know, you guys can decide about that. Yeah.

So, yeah, I think that my preference would be that for master plans, we don't use the designee kind of the process that we're describing for ZTAs. I think for ZTAs, it makes sense given the tight time frame. But, know, obviously, like, with CTs, obviously, at your discretion, as we were just talking about it. I think that all sounds good.

Yeah. I would just say that I think what we would like to see us move in the direction of I mean, you've seen the master plan process play out where you've approved it, and then we come back a few weeks later with the climate assessment. And part of that is because we need to see what the final recommendation from the board is to complete that. However, I think the code actually is the same. We're required to transmit that climate assessment on those master plans within seven days of their public hearing of that, which, you know, we transmit it, and they have to keep that public.

They post it. It has to be publicly available for thirty days. So it gives us that time. Preference and I'm looking over to Christina Sorrento, too. I think she would agree with me is that we want those to be kind of transmitted at the same time. We want your assessment of the master plans to include it to be informed by a climate assessment that is conducted in tandem with the master plan. And as you make modifications, we'll be working like, just want it to be more of a collaborative ongoing like, again, kind of occurring at the same time process and be informed all the way through by the climate assessment, not just after the fact.

So should we then codify that that the master plans, they will come to the board?

So I could, if the board chooses, make sure that policy document that will circulate for signature states that the designee only applies to zoning text amendments at this time. As

we give you the yeah. Okay. Great. Okay. I'm all good. So is there a motion to approve the update to the climate assessment templates, checklists, and processes, including approval to have a designee for ZTAs?

Yeah. I'll move to support the staff's recommendation for the updates of the templates, checklists, the designees.

I second it as we discussed.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it, 50. You're good?

Alright. Okay, thank you. Alright, so we're going to we can just a quick switch over and just less hopefully a minute, and we'll go with item number seven item number five, which is the water and sewer category change request. Thank you. We're on item number five, water and sewer category change requests.

And this morning, we have Haley Johnson presenting this item. Thank you.

For the record, Haley Johnson, environmental planner with the environment and climate division. Today, I will be presenting the second quarter twenty twenty six dash two water and Sewer Amendments. State law requires that the Planning Department make recommendations for these requests based on whether the application conforms to the sewer and water service recommendations of the county comprehensive plan. The state wishes to avoid the extension of this type of infrastructure to low density areas that have not been planned and zoned for the service. With such a large and diverse county, it is not feasible or sustainable to provide service everywhere.

Generally, it is the master plan that determines the areas that receive service. Here is an example of planned sewer service envelope from the only master plan showing which areas are planned to receive sewer service. Administrative request their water and sewer service from W6 and Sewer 6 to Water three and Sewer 3. This request is to support the development of the new Spring Gardens Wastewater Pumping Station. The property is zoned RNC and is within 2,006 Damascus Master Plan area and within the Little Bennett Creek Watershed.

The larger site was part of a previous category change request that received conditional approval for a Water three, Sewer three category change under cluster development. Since that time, WSSC Water has purchased this smaller portion of the land from the previous applicant and a new request is needed for approval for the public facility. The Master Plan acknowledges that Little Bennett Creek Watershed is a unique situation on the sewer service system. The older pumping station built to provide sewer service to a limited area is small and now near capacity. The master plan also anticipates the need for additional WSSC water owned and operated pumping stations.

The proposed water category change is consistent with the master plan. As well, the Planning Board voted to approve this site for WSSC pumping station on 11/17/2020. Montgomery County DEP recommends approval of the category change to Water three, Sewer three as does planning staff. This concludes the staff presentation. We ask that the Planning Board transmit their comments on this case to the county executive who will make the final decision. Montgomery County DEP is present to answer any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Johnson. The only question I had is on your map, where is the pumping station that this replaces out of curiosity?

Just across the street.

Yeah. I see. Okay. Great. Great. Thank you. I have no other questions.

I do have a question just for my own study and edification, maybe that of the public's. When you change from w six and s six to w three to s three, what does that mean specifically?

This is Tim Williamson, planning specialist three with DEP. The current sewer category water and sewer categories, w six and s six, which designate the property as intended for private on-site systems like wells and septic systems. So the change to w three s three is approval for public sewer and public water service. It indicates indicates too that there needs to be some extension of mains or infrastructure built. If it were w one and s one, that indicates indicates that that the infrastructure is already in place and they just need to connect.

That's a just to clarify question. For the the s the s three essentially means that there may

be a

needed extension public infrastructure to attach to the to the to the units or the buildings, whereas s one is just from the building to existing infrastructure? Correct. Yeah. Let me show This is a replacement existing pump station that, unfortunately, right now is sitting in a floodplain. It's to be it needs to be enlarged because we have additional development on this side of Damascus that's gonna flow into it.

Is like, are you increasing the capacity by factor five, ten, 15 to do you have a sense of capacity or are you adding? Out of curiosity.

I'd have to look that up.

Okay. No worries. No worries. Okay. Any other questions or comments from the board?

That was in the information that was provided to you with the site location

issue. Thank you. I I I didn't recall, but maybe it was there. Okay. So do I have a motion to approve the water and sewer category change request?

I move to approve the category change request.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

The ayes have it. Five zero. Thank you so much. And now we'll go to switch over and go to item 10, legislative update, house bill twelve fifty two, Department of Housing Community Development, Montgomery County study. Thank you.

Good morning. We're on item number 10, legislative update. We have Jordan Balcombe Colbert here this morning to talk us through, house bill twelve fifty two, Department of Housing Community Development, Montgomery County study, and any other questions that the board may ask about the legislative session. So welcome, miss Balcombe Colbert.

Good morning, planning board members. Again, Jordan Balcombe Colbert, senior government affairs analyst in the office of general counsel for the record. We're about four days away from sign and die, which is the last day of legislative session. The next time you see me, I will be bringing our annual legislative final report. This morning, I have h b twelve fifty two, Department of Housing and and Community Development, Montgomery County Study, MC nineteen twenty six.

This bill is being sponsored by the Montgomery County house delegation on behalf of delegate Ryan Spiegel. As you may recall, this bill requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to conduct a study and make recommendations regarding availability and affordability of housing in Montgomery County. County. Few amendments have been made to this bill since its move through the house chamber. The department shall submit to the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the Montgomery County Planning Department, the Montgomery County Executive, and Montgomery County Council interim findings and recommendations on or before, 02/01/2027 and 02/01/2028.

These are new dates, to give a little bit more time for the requirement deadline as well as the requirement report, in its findings and recommendations for the final report under this section is now due 02/01/2029. So this is pretty much a clean bill. The bill previously voted to the board previously voted to support this bill with amendments to include some language, by adding actionable before the recommendations listed within the language of the bill. And although our amendment didn't quite make it into the bill, director Satori wanted me to wanted us to give us updates to the board. The bill was successfully voted, recently out of the senate education energy and environment committee as favorable.

It's now on third reader, on the senate floor, and it's slated to pass in the senate as well and make its way to the governor's desk. Please let me know if you have any questions for me or director Satori.

I have a question. How is this different than the things that you are doing?

Yes. So we've talked with this actually came about as a result of us giving a presentation to the delegation on some of the housing work that we've done. And we received a question at the time whether we would be amenable to having assistance in doing further research. And so given the limits that we have in terms of staffing and funding, we said we would welcome others also working with us to go further. And so this is kind of we don't see it as a duplication of what we've already done.

It's a, you know, how much deeper can we go to try to understand, you know, how we can move forward with housing production and more affordable housing in the county. And it's all stuff that will feed directly into some of the housing work that we're doing.

So you need their data, their information, to complement the work that you are doing? That's basically you didn't have those? You couldn't pull those information from the resources that you had? Or was not good enough?

Well, it's in part, some of it will be it's not I don't think it's so much the data that we don't have. It's there's also some validation that comes from having a state agency come to some of the same conclusions or to, you know, investigate things a little bit further or from a different perspective. So,

yeah. Okay.

Thank you. I will say that the changes that you see here, one of the Part D2 allows those who are identified, which is, again, the planning department, the planning commission, the county executive, and the county council, the opportunity to review these draft reports and then issue a statement that would, I guess, then be included, a written response to those findings. As a result of that being added, we're fine with that, being given that opportunity, that's why those dates were pushed off. And for two reasons. One, able to give them a little bit more time for those reports to be generated to be given to the parties to be able to respond, to make comments, and then for that to be included in the final reports.

But also, to ensure that those reports are being reviewed by one county executive administration. So under the original timelines, one would have occurred under county executive Elrich, and then the other two would have come under a different county executive. And so this just ensures that there's one consistent voice coming from the county on that.

Can I ask one more question about the time frames? So initial interim findings, first, now early February twenty twenty seven. So what is that? Nine months from now. An entire extra year for an additional kind of still interim report?

Yeah. So I've spoken to Delegate Spiegel about this. And he's very intent in making sure that this is something that we can, with each of these interim reports, that they're kind of viewed as annual reports that have actionable items within them. So in discussing the change in the date specifically, one of the things, you know, he wanted to make sure was that we don't push it back too far such that there couldn't be legislation that comes out of even this very first report. If there's something that's identified that needs to be done at the state level within the next legislative session, February 1 still gives them time to be able to introduce that.

Okay.

Yeah, I think that makes a fair amount of sense. So it looks like potentially two opportunities for some state action. Even three, really, because the

two interim and then the final. So there's and it gives that opportunity to say, okay, are things changing over time? Right. Right. Okay. Yeah. Thanks.

This is just a one time thing? Because it says that after the third year, there's no need anymore.

Let's hope we're going gangbusters then with housing. Right? I will say.

Really don't understand this. Okay? I don't need to understand.

And I think that

knowing that there is some hope or intent to feed maybe into the state legislative session in some form or fashion. I mean, this obviously is going to focus on our county, but there could be some value in seeing some broader applicability. I mean, we'll see how this ends up being used. But it does seem like, knowing that it's not exactly annual monitoring, but annual updates and refinements, I think that is a useful part of this process.

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. No. Please.

Go ahead.

Jordan, would you mind bumping it back up to page one? I was trying to remember what the one above identified development prospects. Yeah. That was the that was the makeup. I I you know, this is this is not specific, and I'm not suggesting we try to pressure or anything, but they're gonna be doing this study.

I think it's important when we have the discussions with them and we're communicating with them that, you know, kind of to to commissioner Petaweedman's point, issues about zoning and things like that have kind of been done to death. Like, we know the we know the makeup of available housing pretty well. We know zoning issues fairly well from, like, many cities that are and and locations that are fairly comparable. I think it's an opportunity to also encourage a little bit more focus on some of the other issues that haven't gotten as much attention, particularly, in my opinion, housing finance for particularly small scale apartments and multifamily. We talked about attainable housing.

We have some stuff that we can share on the attainable. You know, it's the it's the necessary but not sufficient conditions. To go back to my academic days, like, without the zoning, you can't do anything. But with the zoning, that doesn't mean anything happens. And so I think that particularly with finance and the structure of finance, we used to have a financial system, and we still do have remnants of it that treated one to four unit buildings the same.

And they still do to a certain extent. And I think that it's worth sort of digging into a finance and where there is available financial structures with either builders, potentially homeowners, something in the quad or less range is probably within the realm of of someone to do on a piece of property they own, something like that, introducing the credit unions, introducing things like, you know, organizations like that, community banks that have an option of financing that. Because without financing structure, can't build anything. And what we have currently is a single family financing structure and mortgage structure and a very large scale mortgage structure. And that middle is not nearly as well developed as it as it was once.

The other, of course, and I think this is more in commissioner London's area as well, but we've talked about it a little bit when we talked about single stair and building codes and the issue of of things with, like, you know, fire safety and stuff like that. That is very important, but we've taken not only a belt and suspenders approach, but a belt suspenders staples tie, like, we've just just to have layered on and on and on and on safety concerns in which we have the development of technology and building techniques that allow for, you know, segregation of fires within buildings and slowing down and excess and egress and things like that. And I think it's worth encouraging the state when they're looking at this to not only focus on zoning and makeup and availability and things like that. We all know we've known that. We've kinda done that.

But to really dig into some of the future prospects that we're going to have issues with, I think, in the future on financing and building codes. I think it's worth encouraging some research along those lines.

Okay. Great. Maybe that's a discussion with the, I don't know, the people that when DHCD starts this. That's a suggestion encouragement. They get the decision on this.

And I would say the thing that kind of excites me about this is oftentimes we see legislation at the state level dealing with housing, and we're told, oh, don't worry. It's really not because of you. You you guys are doing a great job. But then we dig into it, we realize, oh, but this has an impact on how we do things. And it's going to force us to change this or change that.

And it's not perfectly aligned with what we're trying to do. This being something that's focused strictly on Montgomery County allows us to have something that is focused on us. And we can then be, as a county and as a commission, and be partners with the state in trying to find ways that we can all be doing something that advances. So this might identify things that need to be done locally. And then we'll be able to work with the council to pursue those things. So this is just a great opportunity to have something focused on us. And it then may be something that can be transferable to other jurisdictions across the state.

No. I I I'm very supportive of this. And when they do start this, director Sartorian, maybe it's even though it's focused on only on Montgomery County, but if they can have some similar dataset of in neighboring jurisdictions so that when they we talk about Montgomery County, how they come to compare. So we may go just say something happens in our county by increase of 10% or decrease of 10%. Well, are we are the other jurisdictions serving or or even an increase of 10%, but the other jurisdictions are increasing by 50%.

It's you know, someone could point out, well, you're increasing, but but relative to your peers, you may not be. So that's something we could talk with them, later. But but this is all great, and I'm very supportive. And and I do we need vote on this? It's going it's moving forward, but anyway but, you could when you talk to delegate Spiegel, you could say we enthusiastically hope that it moves forward, I

think. Anything

else for us, miss Balcombe Colbert?

No. That's it. This bill is slated to pass. It's the clean bill. I don't see any concerns. It's on third reader today as of today, and it'll it'll probably pass either today or tomorrow, in terms of the senate and then make its way to the Governor's Office. I don't have any other updates to give you unless there are questions from the board.

Any other questions for me? What and I'd like to end this piece here by saying thank you for all your work during this past legislative session. It's been a long session, lots of bills, and I would appreciate all your help in, you know, getting them to us, getting your you know, the thoughts on how we should move forward with them, and it's it's been very helpful. So thank you.

Thank you. I appreciate that. We'll see you all next time.

Okay. Thank you. Alright. We're So gonna just take, yep, take a one minute break and start with our next item, item number eight, which is resolution of adoption of the Clarksburg Gateway sector plan. Thank you.

We're on item eight, resolution of adoption for the Clarksburg Gateway sector plan, a very positive plan that we're looking forward to hearing about today. And this morning, we have Don Ziegler and Clark Larson presenting this item. Thank you.

Good morning, Chair Harris, commissioners. Again, for the record, Up County Planning Division and Clark Larson. I'm the lead planner on this plan, but we had a big team working on it through the years. I'm excited to be here with you. Also a little sad because this will be the last time we sit before you as part of this plan update process.

Although we'll see you again as we start to implement the plan. So that's requesting your approval to recommend adoption to the full commission of the Clarksburg Gateway sector plan. As a reminder, in this red boundary, the sector plan updates a small area of the 1994 Clarksburg master plan. You can see the concept plan from the 'ninety four plan on the left. And on the right is sort of an aerial of how things look today in their leaf on splendor.

And so we are up in the upcounty area with the red star you can see in the the region. Also, with the plan area context, we're situated at the north end of the growth corridor for I 270. You can see that shown in the black arrow pointing to the red area for the plan area and some context around the plan area surrounded by the Clarksburg community, the recent Cabin Branch neighborhood development, Germantown to the South, and of course, as we know, the Comsat Laboratories property within the planned observation extended corridor. It has many recommendations to connect neighborhoods and local streets through streets, paths, and trails, also seeking to preserve and enhance natural features and stream conditions as development occurs and whether development is not occurring. Recommendations seek to expand and enhance parks and recreation amenities and also preserve and celebrate historic community assets.

So this little diagram here on the left is sort of how the plan all fits in its relationship. The vision statement is really capturing all those ideas together to balance the future development with preservation of natural and historic resources to attain a more complete, connected, and sustainable neighborhood in Clarksburg. This looks familiar to you. This had not changed through the county council's review and approval. It's essentially a breakdown of the framework of how all the recommendations and structural elements fit together so you can see alignment of proposed roads as they connect with Observation Drive, crossing over I-two 70, and the configuration of how we expect new development and intensities and relationships within the community to occur as future development occurs or as, you know, things stay the same in various neighborhoods within the sector plan area.

From the June 2023, when we kicked this process off, we you've seen this schedule before. Really, what's recent is earlier this year, the county council's public hearing review and approval process between January 2026. We're now before you again. And with your recommendation, we'll move forward to the full commission's final adoption of the plan of actually next week, April 15. Amendments that the council made to the planning board draft, I just wanted to briefly go through these so that you and the public are aware of what changed since you last recommended the plan to the council.

There's a whole new economic development goal and implementation section that talks more about prioritizing employment development, especially with the CompSAT property. A minor zoning change to increase the maximum total and residential FAR floor area ratio by 0.25% for just three properties at the north end of the intersection at Shawnee Lane in Observation. And that was by request of the property owner, and the council supported that small increase to expand the potential, you know, small scale development that's being planned there. The council revised interim travel lane time frame and design guidelines for Observation Drive, essentially removing an interim parking lane recommendation and that it could happen sooner if a corridor connector bus line were not put into place. The council added the potential for the planning board to apply residential setbacks along I-two 70 for any approved exceptions to a recommended 50 foot tree buffer.

So that is to say that you could recommend that a development set residential uses back further if there's no tree buffer. Of the exceptions are more visibility for employment centers, offices. Typically, you're going to have that 50 foot recommendation. But if that is accepted, that you the plan also supports you increasing residential setbacks. So that'll be at your discretion when we get there.

The council revised the green cover calculations to be based slightly increases the maximum area that is counted towards that 35% but also excludes green area to be counted within environmental buffers and any land dedicated to I-two 70. They added an overall goal of eight

acres for new parkland that comprises the Constellation Parks. You might remember some

of that discussion. Initially, there was a recommendation for dedicated an eight acre park, eight to 10 acre, that was changed to a constellation series of parks. But the council still wanted to have that overall goal of we should try to attain eight acres among either one or many parks comprising that Constellation Park network. Council also recommended a possible location for the community recreation center in the plan area to identify a school reservation site on Westville Baltimore Road, which is reserved for a potential Lythcombe East elementary school. The school district has not expressed a desire in the short term for that location for a school.

The council just wanted to have, I think, a place to consider for a community recreation center, although that still is open to within the plan area or surrounding as it's deemed available and necessary. Also, the council sought to prioritize a major institutional or commercial tenant to be located

specifying that it should be integrated with mixed use development of housing, retail, amenities, and parks as practicable. So that just really further strengthened the interest and support for that sort of development on

COMSAT COMSAT rather than any solely residential or smaller scale development. So it's a master plan guidance for future development there. So that's really a summary of the main amendments to the planning board draft. And with that, I'll leave you with our staff recommendation to approve the resolution of adoption, to recommend adoption of the county council's amended and approved Clarksburg Gateway sector plan by the full commission next week.

Thank you so much. This was, I'm I'm really excited and proud of this, master plan as I am of all the ones we do. One of the things that council had mentioned when they, approved this is that they were really happy with the board and staff for this they said working out all issues, most of the key issues before they came to the council. So I I applaud both you and the board for, you know, really really working this plan. You know, it's a broad plan.

You know, it's not only the housing commercial, but we really focus on economic development. And there were some key issues, which roads you put in, not put in. But we looked at the big picture about you know, and the key on top of all this was economic development, which is the county needs so much. So I I appreciate all your hard work. I saw it in your timeline is three years. You know, I don't know if people realize three years is, you know, you you spent lots of time on this, you know, needed timing, engagement, thoughtful process to go through this. And so, I really appreciate all your hard work and thank you for that.

Thank you. It does go fast, though.

Well, three years is almost the time I have been in the hopefully, it is development ready because not all the time you have a big piece of land and you have hopefully developers that ready to go and working with us to make our vision happen. So, I'm really excited because this to me looks like that's something that I can see, I can go. And even though if I'm not on planning board, I can just go there and enjoy and see the fruit of the work that we have done. So congratulation to all of you. I'm hoping that and I'm sure you do, you stay involved working with the developers to happen.

The implementation is very important. And also the roads that we have promised because that's

provide some kind of relief even for those that they are

not, promised you know, in the planning area for this master plan, but by construction of Observation Drive and other work that we are doing there, I'm hoping that it creates some relief. So congratulations. And I'm really looking forward to see this vision hopefully come alive soon.

Well, thank you. I'd like to add that we will certainly have relationships with the developers and property owners, but also we have really good relationships with community residents and advocates in the area. So that will be ongoing. So we're going to stay in touch with everybody as it goes forward.

I'm hoping that I see some of the development plan coming here. And you'll be there Absolutely. Helping us to moving it I'll be here. Yeah.

I want thank you for those comments. We have been in discussion with multiple groups like Clark has stated here. And I do want to go back and just, one, thank you again for the comments made this morning. I think to your point, this plan is also reflective of what you all were describing. The plan where we're at now is not where staff started with our first draft.

And at times, we were in disagreement with you as we moved through that process, but it was always professional, respectful. I appreciate your points of view and where you were coming from. And that's a part of this process. So again, I just want to say thank you and I think this plan and its recommendations and where we landed reflect the process you described this morning.

I invite county executive to join us to see that, to create such a good work took three years. You just had all of the timeline and showed that how much of the coordination we have done with the public. And this is the one that I can say from day one that I have been here, I have followed through and I have witnessed what you guys have done. And I have witnessed the changes that we made. A lot of things, I know you were not happy but we did it and we put a smile on our face and we thank each other for whatever that we did because we have a plan now that we we think is workable and helps the county county's future.

Thank you.

Like Mitra said, we make y'all's jobs harder, but we appreciate that. No. I think Mitra is exactly right. I just wanted to support her comments. I think this is a great plan. I think it went really well. I think the engagement, the outreach, and what we came up with at the end really is a well done plan. This was great. Think it

worked really well. Just wanted to add my thanks as well. Echo everything that's been said. I really enjoyed the collaboration on this partnership. You know, obviously, there were, you know, as you alluded to, there were differences of perspective at different moments. The fact that we worked through that and did so, I think, successfully and, to the chair's point, resolved many of the big ticket items before it got to council. I mean, that's I think that's a job well done on everyone's part. And particularly, you and the team for just the long amounts of time, the huge amounts of engagement, a lot of hard work. So thank you, and look forward to the next one.

Compliment you on an outstanding plan. I particularly like to compliment the efforts you made so that the planning board could go out to the site and visit with the site. The planning board hearing directly from the majority landowners in your coordination with them, which was really important, and the public outreach that you did. The coordinated efforts that you put forth are illustrative of your community engagement and understanding of the community and want to serve the community. So, commend you on that. Thanks.

I'm sorry, I'm going add one more thing. This project, I remember it was how many comments, specific comments. Every single comment. It was 300, 400, I don't remember. It was like about eight, nine pages of specific comments from everyone. From agencies, from the community people, what their comment was, if it was incorporated, if it was not what reason, and the response that has been given to them. We are gonna be glad to send that to the county executive to see. Okay? Thank you.

You said this, as you hear, a great endorsement here. Thank you for your hard work again. And so, do I have a motion to approve the resolution of adoption to recommend adoption of the county council's amended and approved Clarksburg Gateway Sector Plan by the full commission?

I'll move to adopt the resolution and recommend adoption for the full commission.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. Five zero.

Thank you so much. So we're gonna go to our last item, which is item number 11, closed session. According to the Maryland annotated code, journal provision article three dash three zero five b one to discuss appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation of performance or performance evaluation of an appointed employee or official over whom it has jurisdiction or any other personnel matter that affects one or or more specific individuals. And the topic to be discussed is employment matter. And then also according to Maryland annotated code general provisions article three three zero five b seven to consult with counsel to obtain legal advice and staff consultants or other individuals about pending or potential litigation.

The topic is potential litigation and possible options. Do I have a motion for approval to go into closed session to discuss these two items?

Yeah. I'll move to go into closed session.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it. We're gonna go into closed session and then we'll after that, we'll end our board meeting. So and we'll see you next Thursday. Thank you so much for everyone. Enjoy your weekend.