Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Silver Spring supervisors reject zoning change to allow accessible apartments at Interchange Gateway
Summary
The Silver Spring Township Board of Supervisors voted 5–0 to deny a proposed zoning text amendment that would have allowed ‘accessible residential multifamily dwellings’ in the Interchange Regional Gateway Zone, after residents and supervisors raised concerns about the zone’s commercial character, noise, traffic types and a deeded Bossler family cemetery on the site.
The Silver Spring Township Board of Supervisors on Feb. 26 voted 5–0 to deny Ordinance No. 08 of 2024, a text amendment proposed by Statewide Partners that would have permitted “accessible residential multifamily dwellings” in the township’s Interchange Regional Gateway Zone.
Attorney Jamie Strong, representing Statewide Partners, told the board the amendment was intended to allow multifamily housing with universal‑design and enhanced visitability features on Lots 10–12 of the Delta Pointe subdivision along Winding Creek Boulevard. “The concept of this amendment … is to promote that residential component of the Medical Residential Campus but without providing the medical‑care component,” Strong said during the applicant’s presentation.
Why it mattered: Supporters argued the change would create housing designed for older adults and people with disabilities, and the applicant’s traffic and fiscal analyses estimated fewer peak trips than some commercial uses and a projected annual tax benefit of about $70,000 to the township compared with an office scenario. John Murphy, the project engineer, told the board the project would generate roughly “226 trips in the a.m. peak and 258 in the p.m. peak less than what was originally contemplated.”
Opponents — including multiple residents and several supervisors — said the Interchange Regional Gateway Zone was intended for regionally oriented commercial development and that allowing apartments there would depart from the Comprehensive Plan’s vision. Residents also raised practical concerns about noise from nearby I‑81, parking and school‑district impacts if units were not age‑restricted. Several speakers urged that any new use be treated as a conditional use rather than permitted by right so the township could vet site‑specific impacts.
Historic‑site question: The applicant and its engineer disclosed there is a small deeded cemetery on the parcel documented by a 1927 deed to Abram Bossler. The applicant said it has contacted family heirs and committed to preserving and providing access to the grave site; local historian Christine Musser said she and a volunteer will help maintain the plot.
What the board decided: After public comment and internal deliberation, Supervisor Laura Brown moved to deny the amendment; Supervisor Harry Kotzmoyer seconded. Chairman Carldon R. Machamer announced the motion carried 5–0. The applicant had asked the board to continue the hearing and consider making the use conditional rather than permitted; the board declined to continue and denied the amendment.
What’s next: Because the board denied the text amendment, the ordinance language will not be changed as presented. The applicant may return with a revised proposal or pursue other processes, but no ordinance modification resulted from this hearing. The record indicates the township staff and Planning Commission had reviewed and recommended approval earlier, but the Board’s action is the final decision on this application at this meeting.
