Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rockville holds second public hearings on zoning rewrite and map amendment; Newmark neighbors oppose high-density rezoning
Summary
At May 4 hearings on a comprehensive zoning rewrite and map amendment, dozens of residents urged lower-density designations (RMD‑10 with 40‑foot height limit) for a 9.75‑acre parcel near Newmark Commons; the parcel owner offered RMD‑15 as a compromise. Staff scheduled additional hearings and committed to neighborhood outreach.
Rockville held its second set of public hearings May 4 on a major zoning ordinance rewrite and an accompanying comprehensive map amendment. The hearings combined broad review of the draft text (ZOOR) and a detailed, often emotional public record on proposed rezoning for a 9.75‑acre parcel adjacent to Newmark Commons (parcel ID 17).
Residents from Newmark Commons and Markwood spoke repeatedly in favor of a lower‑density option — RMD‑10 with a 40‑foot height cap — and urged that any vehicular access to their neighborhoods be limited to emergency ingress only. Speakers highlighted concerns about impacts to tree canopy, wetlands and stormwater, noise from nearby I‑270, potential traffic spillover, and the presence of unmarked historic burials at the site. "Please don't do this," one resident said, arguing higher density would be incompatible with the established neighborhood.
Tower Dawson LLC, the property owner and developer, said it supports a rezoning to RMD‑15 as a compromise that would reduce density from the initial RMD‑25 recommendation and make development more economically feasible while preserving the agreed emergency‑access limitation. "Tower Dawson supports the rezoning to RMD‑15 ... as a compromise," a developer representative said, adding that access from the south (Tower Oaks) rather than Don Mills Court is their preferred approach.
Staff emphasized the rewrite's major changes to Articles 1–5 (definitions, administration, measurement, appeal processes and zone structure), and reiterated that state‑mandated notice elements (including newspaper publication for certain hearings) remain in place even as the city expands electronic outreach via Engage Rockville. Planning staff also announced a May 11 additional public hearing and further work sessions; they committed to meet with neighborhood groups (including Newmark Commons board) before the next hearing.
Why it matters: The ordinance rewrite rescopes how Rockville measures height and density, clarifies administrative and appeals procedures, and adjusts which projects are eligible for staff approval — changes that will shape housing production, neighborhood compatibility standards and development timelines for years to come. The Newmark/Markwood debate illustrates the tension between the city's desire to add housing and neighborhood demands for compatibility and protection of natural and historic features.
Next steps: Staff scheduled another public hearing for May 11 and expects to publish a final staff draft of the zoning ordinance and map on June 1, with a possible adoption date of June 29; several council members asked for follow‑ups on floodplain impacts, notification procedures, and whether time‑limits or “shot clocks” should be considered for certain approvals.
