The Planning Commission on Oct. 8 held its fourth work session on the city’s comprehensive zoning ordinance rewrite and discussed a suite of proposed changes affecting historic preservation, amenity requirements, nonconforming uses, subdivision procedures and a targeted map amendment near the Twinbrook Metro station.

Staff framed the rewrite as a draft zoning text and map amendment scheduled for formal filing on Dec. 1; the mayor and council must authorize that filing before the public review process begins. Jim Wasilak and colleagues presented the proposals and said the draft will be followed by public hearings and additional work sessions during the adoption process anticipated in 2026.

Historic preservation. Staff proposed multiple changes to streamline and clarify the local preservation code. Proposed edits include allowing limited administrative approvals for routine or minor changes to certificates of approval (COAs), extending COA expiration from one year to five years, and narrowing who may file nomination applications to the property owner, the Historic District Commission (HDC) or the mayor and council. The staff recommendation would also change owner‑consent rules so that an owner’s expressed approval would require a simple majority to file and rezone while an owner’s explicit opposition would require unanimity; the mayor and council asked staff to consider a three‑tier approach so an owner’s silence would require a supermajority.

Staff also proposed establishing a formal procedure to delist properties that have lost the physical characteristics that justified their designation; explicitly prohibiting “demolition by neglect” of designated properties and authorizing municipal infractions for violations; and narrowing when a full evaluation of significance (EOS) must be forwarded to the HDC — for example, only if a property appears in the city’s historic‑buildings catalog or staff finds it may meet designation criteria. Staff recommended that an EOS conducted within the previous five years should not be repeated for later triggering events to reduce duplicative work.

Amenity space. The rewrite would replace current “open area” and “public use space” rules with a single amenity‑space requirement defined to emphasize quality over raw quantity. Staff proposed a generally uniform 10% amenity‑space requirement where applicable, with clearer lists of what counts (for example, plazas, playgrounds, trails, public interior gathering spaces, parts of stormwater facilities designed for human enjoyment) and what does not (street rights‑of‑way, parking lots, driveways). For higher‑density mixed‑use transit districts, up to 50% of required amenity space could be resident‑only; staff also proposed a narrow exemption for residential projects that are 100% affordable at an average of 60% AMI or lower and within a quarter‑mile of a public park. Staff said the mayor and council were generally supportive of this direction.

Nonconforming uses and strategic nonconformities. Staff proposed reclassifying certain uses so they would no longer be permitted in proposed MXTD (mixed‑use transit district) zones. Specifically, fuel stations and drive‑thru facilities would not be permitted in the new MXTD zones; existing gas stations or drive‑thrus could remain as nonconforming uses subject to new standards. To reduce regulatory friction, staff proposed easing processes for nonconforming structures to allow certain safety, ADA, facade, stormwater or pedestrian improvements without triggering the full, more burdensome review; allowing replacement in kind when a nonconforming structure is destroyed by accident or natural causes; and permitting limited expansion of nonconforming uses (a proposed cap of 20% of the nonconforming use’s square footage at the time it became nonconforming, cumulative).

Subdivision and plats. Staff proposed clearer minor‑vs‑major subdivision classifications (for instance, minor subdivisions would include interior lot‑line adjustments and consolidations up to four new lots that front public streets and do not require utility extensions). That classification would enable streamlined procedures for routine plats. Staff asked whether the commission supported delegating approval authority for minor record plats to the chief of zoning (administrative approval) — state law permits delegation but requires local law to memorialize it. Staff also recommended transferring authority to accept land dedications from the planning commission to the mayor and council, removing rarely used cluster subdivision rules, and allowing pipe‑stem (flag) lots in limited circumstances to support infill housing.

Other changes and map amendment. Staff proposed simplifying the findings of approval used across project plans, site plans and preliminary plats to three objective findings tied to the comprehensive plan, adequate public facilities and conformance with zoning and other applicable laws. Staff also proposed that existing Lincoln Park neighborhood conservation plan remain in place but that new neighborhood conservation plan designations be eliminated in favor of using standard master‑planning processes. Finally, staff recommended a modest map change expanding the MXTD‑200 district near the Twinbrook Metro area (areas within roughly a half‑mile of the station) and confirmed mayor and council support for the rezoning direction.

Commissioner feedback and next steps. Commissioners generally supported many of the clarity and streamlining goals but asked for adjustments and clarifications: for example, how owner consent and silence would be documented and the exact supermajority threshold for mayor and council and HDC votes; whether COA expirations should be extendable; how amenity‑space quality would be measured; and safeguards on delegating plat approvals so future commissions understand the delegation can be revisited. Staff said draft text and map amendments will be published for public release when the mayor and council authorize filing on Dec. 1, followed by a formal public review and hearings in 2026.