Montgomery News

City of Gaithersburg Mayor and City Council met July 16.

Here is the minutes provided by the Council:

1. CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Session of the Mayor and City Council was called to order at 7:30 PM with Mayor Jud Ashman presiding.

Attendee Name	Title	Status
Jud Ashman	Mayor	Present
Ryan Spiegel	Council Vice President	Present
Neil Harris	Council Member	Present
Laurie-Anne Sayles	Council Member	Present
Michael Sesma	Council Member	Present
Robert Wu	Council Member	Absent

Staff present: City Manager Tomasello, Deputy City Manager Enslinger, City Attorney Board, Assistant City Attorney Johnson, Planning and Code Administration Director Schlichting, Public Works Director Johnson, Parks, Recreation and Culture Director Potter, Economic and Business Development Director Lonergan, Legislative Affairs Manager Marquina, Long Range Planning Manager Robinson, Elections Clerk Klingler, Police Officer II Day, and Municipal Clerk Stokes.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The pledge was led by members of Boy Scout Troop 1429.

3. REFLECTION

Mayor Ashman called for a moment of silence.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. Regular Session held July 2, 2018

Motion was made to approve the above minutes.

RESULT: APPROVED [3 TO 0]

MOVER:          Ryan Spiegel, Council Vice President SECONDER:   Neil Harris, Council Member FOR:               Ryan Spiegel, Neil Harris, Michael Sesma ABSTAIN:        Laurie-Anne Sayles ABSENT:         Robert Wu

5. APPOINTMENTS

A. Resolution of the City Council Confirming an Appointment and Reappointment Made by the Mayor to the Community Advisory Committee and Senior Advisory Committee

This resolution confirmed the City Council appointment and reappointment made by the Mayor to the Community Advisory Committee, Diane Deitz (appointment), 219 Chestertown Street, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878, two-year term and the Senior Advisory Committee, Carolyn Bass (reappointment), 8 Cullian Court, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878, two-year term.

Motion was made to approve the above resolution.

RESULT: PASSED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Michael Sesma, Council Member SECONDER: Ryan Spiegel, Council Vice President

FOR: Ryan Spiegel, Neil Harris, Laurie-Anne Sayles, Michael Sesma ABSENT: Robert Wu

6. STAFF GUIDANCE

A. Proposed Design/Naming of Park at 601 Orchard Ridge Drive

Deputy City Manager Enslinger presented the above. Over the past year, staff had been working on developing design and construction plans for the parkland located at 601 Orchard Ridge Drive. The development included a public meeting in March 2018, to receive feedback on the proposed park design. Prior to the formal submission of the site development plan which is tentatively scheduled for August 20, staff wanted to provide an overview of the proposed design and begin the process of naming of the park. As part of the sixth amendment to the Annexation Agreement (X-129 - March 8, 2013), MedImmune, LLC, dedicated the parkland and provided $200,000 to assist with its development. In addition, MedImmune was given the opportunity to propose potential names for the park. MedImmune provided the following list of names:

•   Discovery Park
•   Discovery Trail
•   Discovery Woods

MedImmune indicated that their preferred name is Discovery Park. Staff sought comments and direction from the Mayor and City Council on the proposed name. Several Council members would prefer a more creative name reflective of the local community, but were not opposed to the name. It was noted that a full site plan will come before the City Council on August 20 as part of the public hearing process. The picnic tables and shelters will not have a rental aspect, but will be handled on a first-come-first-serve basis. Staff stated that there will not be dedicated public parking. Concern was expressed with the impact of on-street parking on residential neighborhoods. Staff noted that as part of the sixth amendment annexation agreement, the City was required to add 20 parking spaces onto the street. A resolution to officially name the park will come back before the City Council.

B. 2019 Maryland Municipal League Legislative Action Requests

Legislative Affairs Manager Marquina presented the recommended Legislative Action Requests (LAR) for the City of Gaithersburg. Each year, the Maryland Municipal League (MML) evaluates submitted LAR from its membership. This year’s LAR deadline is July 27, 2018. The requests are presents to the MML Legislative Committee for consideration. The Committee selects the legislative priorities and the membership approves them during the MML Fall Conference. MML’s primary mission is to actively support and sponsor legislation that directly impacts the goals and responsibilities of Maryland cities, towns and their residents. Each year, the City partners with the League in its advocacy effort to strengthen the City’s presence in Annapolis, Maryland. Council Vice President Spiegel was recognized by his colleagues for his leadership and advocacy in Annapolis, Maryland. Staff presented the following for the Mayor and City Council’s consideration:

 Maintain Local Authority Over Small Cellular Tower Siting and Fee Authorization

Staff recommended that the City support local control over small cellular tower siting and fee authorization. During the 2018 legislative session, Senator Middleton and Delegate Davis introduced SB1188/HB1767 Wireless Facilities - Permitting and Siting, which would have preempted the authority of local government in managing rights-of-way. Limitations would have prevented the City from determining fees and pole height, as well as limited our ability to execute franchise agreements. MML has encouraged municipalities to pass ordinances as a way of illustrating the ongoing active engagement with the wireless industry, negating the need for statewide legislation. It was noted that the City of Gaithersburg has already passed an ordinance and is actively engaged with the FFC at the federal level.

 Statewide Legislation Requiring a County to Share Revenue Generated from a Bag Fee Collected Within a Municipality

Staff recommended that legislation be introduced to compel Montgomery County to share revenue collected within the City’s municipal boundary. Currently, the County is collecting $3.2 million in bag tax fees. In Montgomery County, the.5 cents tax fee goes towards the county’s water quality protection program. Despite outreach and education efforts, that number remains steady.

Staff has proposed that the County share the revenue collected. The additional revenue stream would assist the City in meeting the obligations of its MS4 permit as well as addressing the issue of Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) not contributing directly towards the costs of stormwater mitigation. While MCPS would argue that it is exempt based on being a state agency, the County is responsible for paying all utility fees which under the City’s definition, would include fees related to stormwater mitigation services.

Background was given stating that only the County has taxing authority which removed the City from the discussion table. It was suggested to possibly do a local bill that only applied to the County program. The City is seeking to recoup some of the cost associated with MCPS impervious surfaces which was not addressed in the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the County. Several Council Members concurred that it makes more sense for the City to explore and address tax duplication and seek to introduce a local bill. It was noted that tax duplication varies within counties and some municipalities are satisfied with their program and that is a reason legislative action requests hasn’t moved forward. It was stated that MML is focused on legislative proposals that affect most if not all municipalities around the state, which has been a challenge. It was suggested to visit the broader bill for stormwater fees and the sharing of revenue from the bag tax. This bill should not only include counties but the school system.

 Statewide Legislation to Limit the Use of Certain Types of Bromethalin-based Rodenticides

Staff recommended that legislation be introduced to limit the use of certain types of rodenticides to prevent homeowners from using this product. The City has experienced two recent cases in which the block form had been used on private property but was distributed beyond by other animals. The EPA requires that Bromethalin-based rodenticides products marketed to residential consumers must be sold as a block or paste bait and packaged with an EPA approved bait station. Currently, the bait stations are refillable and the blocks can be sold separately. A refillable product such as this lends itself to misuse.

It was stated that this product is too readily available and should only be allowed to be used by licensed exterminators and those properly trained. Others were not sure whether this legislative action had a shot at becoming a MML priority. It was noted that the City cannot regulate this issue, but it would have to go through the State to provide the protection and assurance to communities that the League represents. Staff mentioned possibly going the local route if it is not supported and suggested raising the municipal infraction, which is capped by the State at $1,000.

Staff will draft the LARs and circulate to the Mayor and City Council and also pursue the City advocating in other ways.

7. PUBLIC COMMENTS

1. Chris Ramirez, Gaithersburg resident, stated that he is undocumented but protected under the federal program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Mentioned that he graduated from Gaithersburg High School and plans to attend Montgomery Community College in the fall to pursue a career in business and stay near his family. Expressed disappointment that the Mayor and City Council has not responded to their concerns. He mentioned ordinances adopted by other municipalities such as Rockville and Takoma Park.

2. Carol Schleicher, Rockville resident, noted that said municipality has passed a community trust ordinance. Mentioned the diversity of Gaithersburg and asked the City to protect the rights of all.

3. Filipe Pineda, Gaithersburg High School student, moved from Mexico and has lost many family members due to crime. Stated he and his mother applied for asylum.

4. Summer Simmons, student at Gaithersburg High School, spoke on behalf of her family and classmates and asked that they receive the same opportunities to achieve an education and remain in this country.

5. Thelma Luna, Gaithersburg resident for 25 years, but came to the City as a refuge. Asked that the City pass a law to protect its citizens.

6. Claudia Quinonez, member of United We Dream, asked elected officials to protect all residents of the City and adopt a community trust ordinance.

7. (inaudible) Chavez, Gaithersburg resident, stated she is protected by the DACA program. Asked for local government officials to protect all people and pass a community trust ordinance.

8. Silvio Renzi, Kentlands resident, stated he is familiar with discrimination and asked that the problems be resolved. Added that there are many issues and asked that all work together.

8. CONSOLIDATED PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 6C of the City Code, Entitled, “Elections”

B. Resolutions Amending Sections. 27, 29, 29A and 33 of the City Charter, Entitled, “Qualifications of Voters; Registration,” “Filing for Elected Office,” “Write-In Candidates,” and "Counting of Votes; Runoff Elections," Respectively

C. Adoption of Regulations for City of Gaithersburg Elections as Provided by Chapter 2 of the City Code Entitled “Administration”

City Attorney Board, Board of Supervisors of Elections (BOSE) member William Snyder and Elections Clerk Klingler, presented for the above consolidated public hearing for Charter Amendments, Code Amendments, and Regulations regarding City elections. BOSE Chair More was in attendance. As a follow up to the 2017 City Election and in preparation for the 2019 Election, the BOSE met to debrief and a joint work session with the BOSE was held on February 12, 2018, to discuss updates to the City Charter and Code to improve the Election process. On June 18, 2018, the City Council voted to introduce changes to amend Sections 27, 29, 29A and 33 of the Charter, Chapter 6C of the Code, as well as election Regulations. Notice of the public hearings was published on June 20, 2018. The goals of the amendments are to:

1. Extend the Election cycle from 45 to 75 days and the period for availability of absentee ballots from 30 to 60 days;

2. Add a recount provisions (done by other municipalities);

3. Implement a same-day voter registration (voters could show up early voting or on election day and vote that same day);

4. Clarify existing provisions of the Code (deletes “slates” and adds regulations of “joint campaign activities” and clean-up Code provisions); and

5. Change Campaign Guidelines to Election Regulations (ensure enforceability).

During the Mayor and City Council meeting held on June 18, 2018, staff was directed to amend Section 6C-22 to extend the deadline for acceptance of absentee ballots to five (5) calendar days after Election Day.

The following three amendments to the Charter were recommended by the BOSE as follows:

 Sec. 27. Qualification of voters; registration - proposed revisions would allow for same day voter registration during early voting and on Election day.

 Sec. 29. Filing for elected office - amendments would require an original petition from candidates and extend the election cycle from 45 days to 75 days.

 Sec. 29A. Write-in candidates - revision would correct site to Sec. 15 of the City Charter.

To extend the deadline for absentee ballots acceptance after the close of polls, requires an amendment to Sec. 33 to extend the deadline to certify election results.

 Sec. 33. Counting of votes; runoff elections - amendment would extend the deadline to certify election results from forty-eight hours to seven (7) calendar days

In addition, the following amendments to the City Code were recommended by the BOSE:

 Sec. 6C-1 - amending definitions of independent expenditure and political committee

 Sec. 6C-1.1 - making section gender neutral

 Sec. 6C-2 - amending notification of certification of candidate requirements

 Sec. 6C-3.05 - amending notification of certification of candidate requirements

 Sec. 6C-3.1 - amending poll watcher ID and adding enforcement of campaign regulations

 Sec. 6C-3.2 - adding campaign regulations

 Sec. 6C-3.8 - adding campaign regulations and correcting section reference

 Sec. 6C-5 - amending campaign finance report due dates

 Sec. 6C-6 - deleting reference to slates

 Sec. 6C-7 - amending campaign finance report due dates

 Sec. 6C-8 - deleting reference to slates

 Sec. 6C-9 - amending campaign finance report due dates

 Sec. 6C-10 - modifying penalty for failure to file campaign finance report

 Sec. 6C-13 - adding person

 Sec. 6C- 16 - adding clarifying language

 Sec. 6C-18.1 - updating reference to the Maryland Annotated Code and City Code

 Sec. 6C-21 - extending the period for absentee ballots from 30 days to 60 days

 Sec. 6C-22 - clarifying the due date for absentee ballots

(Memorandum from the BOSE was provided to the Mayor and City Council with the recommendation that all absentee ballots had to be received by the close of the polls on Election Day. The City Council made a modification to have ballots postmarked by Election Day, but received within five days of the election requirement. BOSE member Snyder stated there are concerns with relying on the postal service to provide consistent handling of the ballots, either late or in different batches. Mentioned that in past experiences, some ballots had no postmark or it can’t be read. Stated that certainty around Election Day that the results on election would be the results. The BOSE were concern that the change would create an uncertainty and were in favor of counting all ballot received on Election Day. Further mentioned that someday the City will look to do mail ballot elections which have to be factored in. City Attorney Board noted that the five days pass the election would be longer than any other comparable jurisdiction. The current Code requires 48 hours. The proposal is to change it to seven days.)

 Sec. 6C-23 - making section gender neutral

 Sec. 6C-24 - clarifying documentation of receipt of absentee ballot applications

 Sec. 6C-25 - providing that first absentee ballot, if more than 1 is received, will be counted

 Sec. 6C-27 - making section gender neutral

 Sec. 6C-28 - providing that poll watchers must be at least 18 and a registered voter

 Sec. 6C-29 - amending requirements for poll watcher identification

 Sec. 6C-30 - clarifying poll watcher language and correcting Code reference

 Sec. 6C-30.1 - updating provisions for voter assistance

 Sec. 6C-30.2 - adding new provisions for a recount of ballots

(Petition for recount to be filed within five days of certification of results; Allowed when margin of loss is 1% or less; Petition to include an affidavit setting forth fraud, mistake, error or irregularly in vote count; Recount to include: manually retabulating the election total reports; rescanning the ballots; and manually retabulating all ballots; Recount process to be open to the public; and City to pay all costs of the recount.) It was noted that the City Code stated that if there is a tied vote, a runoff election would occur in 14 days. If there is another tie, that it is done by a flip of the coin.

 Sec. 6C-31 - making gender neutral, correcting Code reference and qualified voter language

In regards to regulations, language from existing campaign guidelines was used to create the regulations to address areas of concern such as:

 Campaign Materials:

 Prohibits use of City seal, logo, tree graph in campaign materials

 Clarifies use of title of office in campaign materials

 Debates:

 Clarifies that debates must focus on citywide issues

 Clarifies that organization sponsoring debate must be an independent, non-partisan, non-profit organization that does not endorse candidates

 Sponsoring organization cannot have an affiliation with any candidate

 Allows for separate debates for mayoral and council candidates

Other areas of concern in the regulations were:

 Regulations include new section on Joint Campaign Activities

 Defines joint campaign activities as activities that two or more candidates conduct together such that they share costs or resources for the activity

 Authorizes joint campaign activities, subject to:

 Joint materials must include authority line for each candidate and each candidate must report their share of the costs

 Joint events, each candidate must report their share of the costs

 Endorsements, allows candidates to individually or jointly endorse other candidates, but prohibits use of official city letterhead for endorsements

 Reporting of joint campaign events

 Contributions at joint events can only be made to individual candidate

 Expenditures for joint events to be made on individual candidate reports

 Campaign finance system updated to include joint activities type for joint events so that expenses are clearly shown

There were questions in regards to campaign reporting, violations and fines which are at the discretion of the BOSE based on the violation. There was further discussion about the deadline for absentee ballots, the certification of results, delay of swearing in elected officials, availability of the election packets and the collection of signatures. It was noted that all forms have to be approved by the BOSE for use during the upcoming elections. Other discussions were in regards to campaign apparel at polling sites, which staff had included some restrictions in the policy and is optional to include in the regulations. In response to a question about early voting, staff replied that the City would use the County registration form and train judges to complete the form and ask for an ID for registration. The voter will be provided with a provisional ballot to complete and the City’s election staff would coordinate with the County to ensure that the voter registration was valid and counted. There were concerns with administrative tasks holding up the process and the delay to certify the results. Clarification was given that while the City Council could vote to allow seven days to provide the official results or it could be certified sooner. Staff responded to questions about the number of postmarked absentee ballots received after the 2017 election which were 14 on election day, 27 the day after and then two days later, 7 more were received. Staff mentioned that in 2017, the post office did in error send 34 absentee ballots to the County instead of the City.

There were no speakers from the public.

Motion was made to hold the Mayor and City Council record open until 5 p.m. on July 27, 2018 (11 days), with anticipated policy discussion and adoption on August 20, 2018.

RESULT: PASSED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Michael Sesma, Council Member

SECONDER: Ryan Spiegel, Council Vice President FOR: Ryan Spiegel, Neil Harris, Laurie-Anne Sayles, Michael Sesma ABSENT: Robert Wu

9. FROM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

Laurie-Anne Sayles

1. Thanked all the speakers from earlier in the evening. Mentioned that the Mayor and City Council have discussed how they would handle the concerns regarding undocumented Gaithersburg residents. Mentioned that staff is researching what the City can do.

2. Attended the SummerFest event.

3. Attended the Germantown-Gaithersburg Chamber of Commerce (GGCC) Public Safety Awards Breakfast.

4. Attended the ribbon cutting for the newly renovated Kentlands Mansion Gardens.

5. Worked alongside the Muddy Branch Alliance to help members of the Church of the Redeemer complete their day of service.

Neil Harris

1. Attended the ribbon cutting for the newly renovated Kentlands Mansion Gardens. Mentioned that he was married there.

2. Announced that the Economic and Business Development Committee has asked him to provide remarks about transportation at their upcoming meeting.

Ryan Spiegel

1. Echoed comments about the GGCC event mentioned above. Stated that this event is used for recognition of heroism, community building and policing.

Michael Sesma

1. Mentioned that the Kentlands Mansion held its first event in the gardens since its renovation over the weekend.

2. Recognized Police Officers John Duke and Nathan Provost who were honored at the GGCC event mentioned above.

Ashman

1. Announced the upcoming work session scheduled for Monday, July 23, 7:30 p.m., at City Hall, to receive an update on Herbicide/Pesticide Use on City Properties for Weed Control.

2. Notice was given to the public that the Mayor and City Council will not conduct a work session on Monday, July 30.

3. Announced that the next Regular Session of the Mayor and City Council is scheduled for Monday, August 6, 2018, 7:30 p.m. at City Hall.

10. FROM CITY MANAGER

City Manager Tony Tomasello

1. Mentioned that staff is moving forward with the process for establishing a permit parking program. Stated that a survey has been developed that will be distributed to residents.

11. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE

Economic Development Director Thomas Lonergan

1. Reported on the vacancy rates in Gaithersburg for the first half of 2018. Mentioned that the Economic Toolbox Grant and other incentive programs continue to separate Gaithersburg form area competitors.

12. POLICY DISCUSSIONS

A. Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of Gaithersburg Granting Approval of Sketch Plan Sk-7837-2018, Known as Market Square, for Approximately 21 Acres of Property Zoned Mixed Use Development (MXD)

Long Range Planning Manager Robinson presented the above for policy discussion and final action. Stated that Kimco Realty had submitted Sketch Plan application SK-7837-2018. The application proposed to establish a new sketch plan for the Market Square shopping center, in accordance with Section 24-160D.9(a) “Application for the MXD Zone and sketch plan approval” of the City Code. The Application proposes up to 1,200,000 square feet of commercial / non-residential uses and up to 1614 residential units on approximately 21 acres. The proposed sketch plan provides a mixed-use community divided into nine “Blocks” including residential, commercial, and retail uses. The sketch plan further envisions an appropriately scaled and located proposed open spaces and a street grid that promotes and enhances connectivity to the surrounding area for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. The plan was designed based upon the goals and vision of the Kentlands Boulevard Commercial District Special Study Area Master Plan. The joint public hearing on SK-7837-2018 was held on April 16, 2018. The Planning Commission, upon review of the record and the Staff Analysis, gave a recommendation of approval during their June 6, 2018 meeting. The City Council’s record closed at 5 p.m. on Friday, June 22, 2018.

Since the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and in response to comments received from the Commission, the Applicant has revised the Sketch Plan as follows:

 Addition of Commercial Child Care on Blocks A through J (all blocks) as an allowable uses.

 Deletion of towns and 2-over-2 units from Blocks A, C, and D as allowable uses

 Addition of a “Local Thoroughfare” graphic designation for Kentlands Boulevard.

 Addition of descriptions of each of road hierarchy types noted on the Sketch Plan

 Addition of Note 6 regarding the intent for multi-sided architecture:

“Whereas retail buildings typically have a “back” for service, mixed-use buildings are typically designed to relate to adjoining uses on multiple sides. Due to the configuration of the Property, the street grid, and the adjoining uses, each development Block will be thoughtfully designed during the Schematic Development Plan (“SDP”) process to relate to the location and will include multi-sided architectural details.”

 Addition of Note 7 regarding the importance of Kentlands Boulevard:

“Kentlands Boulevard is an important thoroughfare and one of the primary frontages and access roads to the Property. Although we don’t own or control Kentlands Boulevard, we encourage improvements to this main roadway and will participate in stakeholder conversations and will not place any building rears or service entrances along this roadway.”

Several questions on behalf of residents and architects from the community were shared. It was expressed that the architecture language was vague. It was suggested to have front all around rather than having backs to the building with services on the interior. Staff responded that architectural decisions are made in conjunction with the road hierarchy and their function. It was noted that all roadways and alley ways should tie together regardless of its ownership. Staff noted that the Planning Commission were not in agreement on whether single-family housing types should be allowable uses in Blocks A, C, and D and recommended that the City Council decide if these residential styles are appropriate. The goal of the applicant is to mix multiple types of residential in with commercial development to create a more urban downtown core. Staff stated that the plan is for a long-term vision that would occur in phases and over a more than 20-year period. The plan strives to be harmonious and complimentary but also seeks to be unique and will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Further, in response to questions, staff stated that as part of the preliminary subdivision review which is the schematic development plan phase, establishing the final heights, appropriate setbacks and other details will occur at that time. Concerns were expressed in regards to the parking garages for Block B and E, shifting the proposed open and green space and additional parking for other blocks.

Planning and Code Administration Director Schlichting reminded the Mayor and City Council that particulars at sketch plan are not available; it is intended to be a concept plan. The plan is very preliminary, lacking details at this phase. The next steps will generate more details and come before the Mayor and City Council and Planning Commission several times.

Stuart Barr, Lerch, Early & Brewer, representing the applicant, stated that all the appropriate questions and parking requirements, will be taken into account.

Motion was made to approve the above resolution.

RESULT: 

PASSED [UNANIMOUS]

MOVER: Ryan Spiegel, Council Vice President

SECONDER: Laurie-Anne Sayles, Council Member

FOR:  Ryan Spiegel, Neil Harris, Laurie-Anne Sayles, Michael Sesma 

ABSENT: Robert Wu

B. Resolution of the Mayor and City Council Granting Approval of Schematic Development Plan SDP-7712-2017, Known as Kentlands Square Infill Sites, for Approximately 1.8 Acres of Property Zoned Mixed Use Development (MXD)

GIS Planner Eby presented the above for policy discussion and final action. An application had been submitted by Saul Holdings Limited Partnership, requesting approval of Schematic Development Plan SDP-7712-2017, in accordance with the MXD (Mixed Use) Zone Section 24-160D.9.(b)(2) (Application for schematic development plan approval) of the City Code. The property is located within the Kentlands Square Shopping Center, along the drive aisle connecting 84-96 Main Street with 195 Kentlands Boulevard. The application proposes to add three commercial infill sites totaling 16,000 square feet on a 1.8-acre area of the shopping center. Staff pointed out that the southern Site E also includes a proposed drive thru.

A joint public hearing was held October 16, 2017. On December 6, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval of SDP-7712-2017 one condition in addition to the two recommended by staff, requiring the proposed drive thru aisle to not cross any sidewalks. During the January 16, 2018 Mayor and City Council Policy Discussion, the City Council expressed its desire to see how the applicant would satisfy the Planning Commission’s proposed condition regarding the drive-thru, and voted to re-open its record indefinitely. Following the Mayor and City Council’s January 16 meeting, the Planning Commission also re-opened its record and the applicant later submitted a revised drive-thru layout and an updated statement (Exhibit 61 and 62). The Planning Commission closed its record on March 9, 2018, and reviewed the revised layout at its rescheduled March 28, 2018 meeting, recommending approval of the plan with two conditions. During the April 16, 2018 Mayor and City Council Policy Discussion, the City Council expressed concern with the proposed revision to the drive-thru. Following a failed vote to approve the plan, the City Council voted to re-open its record indefinitely.

On May 16, the applicant submitted a second revised drive-thru layout (Exhibit 94, superseded by Exhibit 99). The Planning Commission closed its record on May 25, 2018, and reviewed the second revised layout at its June 6, 2018 meeting. In response to concerns about evolving transportation choices and the proposed plan’s interim nature, the Commission added a third condition to its recommended approval, which requires the applicant to re-submit the plan for further consideration unless construction has begun on at least one of the infill sites within five (5) years of the SDP approval.

Staff stated that said plan compared to the prior design, the drive-thru lane was reconfigured to physically separate it from the adjacent drive aisles to avoid potential vehicle stacking that may extend pass the drive-thru entrance. In addition, the drive-thru lane had been separate from the associated customer parking. Access to the adjacent parking is via one entrance only and the area adjacent to the drive-thru lane. In response to the traffic circulations from the City Council, the drive-thru has been reconfigured to provide several options for exiting the drive-thru lane which utilizes both the secondary drive aisle and the central driveway.

The Mayor and City Council record closed at 5 p.m. on June 22, 2018. A second revised draft resolution, including all required findings for SDP-7712-2017, were submitted for final action. The applicant was thanked for going through the process to satisfy concerns, answer questions, improve connectivity, and encourage pedestrian and other non-vehicular circulation. It was stated that the short term plan shouldn’t derail longer term efforts to deal with the major development of the lots. It was asked that the applicant ensure that there is indoor and outdoor seating. It was expressed that the plan is not compatible with the idea of new urbanism and mix use. Concern was also expressed with setting precedence for approving drive-thru lanes.

Motion was made to approve the above resolution.

RESULT: PASSED [3 TO 1] MOVER: Ryan Spiegel, Council Vice President SECONDER: Laurie-Anne Sayles, Council Member

FOR: AGAINST: Ryan Spiegel, Neil Harris, Laurie-Anne Sayles Michael Sesma ABSENT: Robert Wu

13. FROM CITY ATTORNEY / DEPUTY CITY MANAGER / OTHER STAFF

No report from staff.

14. CORRESPONDENCE A. Staff

B. Outside

15. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the session was adjourned at 10:18 PM

http://gaithersburgmd.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=3698&Inline=True