Planning Commission holds record open on Quince Orchard apartment amendment after resident concerns about traffic and safety

The Gaithersburg Planning Commission on March 19 held a public hearing and voted to keep the record open on ASDP‑09/2024, an application to remove condition No. 2 from a previously approved schematic development plan (SDP‑73602‑2016) for property at 913 and 917 Quince Orchard Road. The amendment would permit construction of a 304‑unit apartment building in the MXT (Mixed Use Development) zone under a revised plan the applicant presented.

Planning staff (Jasmine) framed the hearing as public‑comment only and said staff would not take final action that night. The Mayor and City Council had reviewed the application as a courtesy and determined it to have a minor effect; the council directed the Planning Commission to hold the hearing and make a final decision on the amendment.

Attorney Jody Klein, representing the applicant, said the proposed amendment removes a previously required second phase that had been conditioned on resolving infrastructure connections with the adjacent Sol (SAUL/Sol) property. Klein said the applicant pulled the building footprint back, eliminated the phase 2 wing and submitted a single‑phase plan; he told commissioners Sol has reviewed the revised plans and is “comfortable with what we're doing.” Klein said the proposal reduces complexity tied to the earlier phasing condition and asked the commission to remove the phase‑2 condition.

Architect Chris Huffer described plan changes: reduced unit count (applicant compared the prior approval of 365 units to a proposed 302 units in the presentation), reduced building height (from a seven‑story design previously approved to roughly four‑and‑a‑half stories in the revised proposal), relocation of the parking garage to below grade, and a proposed right‑in only access from Quince Orchard Road in addition to a right‑in/right‑out from Great Seneca Highway. Huffer said the design preserves through‑block access and places active uses along the street to support future adjacent development.

Mickey Cornelius, the applicant’s traffic engineer, described updated traffic analysis and coordination with the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA). Cornelius said counts were taken in May 2024 and that the updated plan generates “a little over 100 peak hour trips” compared with higher estimates from the 2018 approval. He said SHA would not permit a right‑out at the new Quince Orchard access but allowed a right‑in; the state asked that any right‑out movement be made via existing circulation through the colonnade and surrounding access easements.

More than a half dozen residents — primarily from the adjacent Colonnade community — spoke in opposition or urging additional conditions. Michelle Rubinstein, president of the Colonnade Community Association, said the association is “determined to protect the colonnade and the safety of its residents” and urged the developer and city to pursue additional measures, including reconsideration of access points, traffic calming, speed‑limit reductions and a traffic signal at Booth Street and Quince Orchard Road. Other residents — including Andrea Tishon, Robert Rogers, Arun Charles Cohen, Patricia Brown and Mark Feldman — echoed concerns about pedestrian safety, the proximity of the new access to the Great Seneca intersection, existing narrow neighborhood streets (Arch Place, Granite Place, Booth Street) and the need to preserve or renegotiate cross‑easements with the Sol property.

Commissioners asked clarifying questions about whether the hearing was limited to removing the phase‑2 condition (staff confirmed it was), the alignment and design of the proposed right‑in, the state’s constraints on right‑out movements, how the project relates to the Sol property access easement, and whether trip generation assumptions account for changes in commuting patterns. The applicant and traffic consultant said counts were new (May 2024) and used updated ITE rates, but also acknowledged trip‑generation manuals may lag recent shifts in travel behavior.

After public comment and discussion, the Planning Commission voted to keep the public record open. A motion passed unanimously to hold the record open and set final action for a later meeting; staff will prepare a final analysis and recommendations for the commission’s April meeting. Members of the public were encouraged to submit written comments for the record.