Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents urge Rockville council to block high‑density plan adjacent to Newmark Commons
Loading...
Summary
At the council's March 23 community forum, multiple Newmark Commons residents urged the city to reject recommendations for high‑density development on a 9.75‑acre wooded parcel, warning that new access and taller buildings would worsen traffic, erode tree canopy and harm a nationally‑recognized historic neighborhood.
Dozens of Newmark Commons residents told the Rockville City Council on March 23 that a 9.75‑acre wooded parcel next to their neighborhood should be preserved and not opened to high‑density development.
"Why would you allow anyone to take a 9.75 acre wooded plot of land marked by wetlands and throw up incompatible high‑rise and flood our streets with more cars?" asked Alex Belita, who identified himself as a resident of Newmark Commons, during the community forum. Belita said the plot is part of the neighborhood’s heritage and urged the council to protect it.
Several other speakers who said they live in Newmark Commons or nearby repeated the concern about traffic and compatibility. Susan Knowles told the council that planning staff had not flagged that council direction to consider lower‑density infill options was not reflected in the Planning Commission staff recommendations. She urged the council to treat ‘‘compatibility as a consideration for any new development vis‑à‑vis an adjacent existing residential neighborhood.’’
Longtime resident Steve Plotkin recounted a 1984 city study that recommended against allowing vehicular access from the site through adjacent neighborhoods and suggested the city reconsider acquiring the parcel for park use. Patricia Reber warned that permitting access could create a new north–south route across Rockville that would significantly increase local traffic and pose public‑safety concerns near schools and a nursing home.
Several speakers pointed to the Planning Commission’s footnote offering an RMD‑25 recommendation with conditions that could lower density where new vehicular access would be permitted, but argued that the provisions still allow for building forms they consider incompatible with the existing neighborhood.
Council members took public comments and deferred final decisions to the formal planning and public‑hearing process. The draft comprehensive plan and any rezoning would return to Planning Commission and council review; members asked staff to include the neighborhood’s testimony in the public record and schedule follow‑up briefings. The public record for the city’s FY2027 budget and planning discussions remains open through April 13, 2026, staff said.
