Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves ZTA 2608 to allow limited reinstatement of lapsed nonconforming uses
Summary
The Montgomery County Planning, Housing, and Parks Committee approved Zoning Text Amendment 2608 to permit reinstatement of certain nonconforming uses abandoned less than five years, with neighbor notice, DPS inspections and hearing-examiner review; the committee adopted a technical clarification and kept an annual-report requirement at staff's suggestion.
Chair Fridson opened the meeting July 13 by introducing Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 2608, a proposal to allow the reinstatement of previously lawful but now nonconforming uses under narrowly prescribed conditions. Council staffer Nadeau summarized the proposal, saying a nonconforming use "is considered abandoned if it ceases operations for at least 6 consecutive months," and that the ZTA would allow reinstatement for uses abandoned under five years through an application process resembling a conditional use.
Nadeau said the application would trigger the usual public notice (including property posting and notice to owners, HOAs and civic associations within roughly a half-mile) and that objecting neighbors could request a hearing within 30 days. "DPS must submit written comments to OSA within 30 days," staff added, and planning would provide a written recommendation noting potential conflicts with a master plan. The hearing examiner would issue a written decision within 60 days if no hearing is held or 45 days after the close of a hearing.
Planning staff and the planning board recommended three technical changes: require that reinstatement be limited to the most recent prior nonconforming use, remove redundant language about "no substantial adverse effects," and delete an annual reporting requirement. Planning argued the county does not keep an inventory of all nonconforming properties and that impacts would be site-specific; council staff noted DPS requested the annual report to help monitoring.
Committee members debated burdens on small businesses versus the need for oversight. Council member Geronda asked who would track the annual report; staff explained the applicant would file a short affirmation and DPS would inspect if the report was missing. Planning's representative Ben Burbert urged clarifying that DPS's review should reference the "prior nonconforming use" to avoid counting an intervening legal use as the prior use. Chair Fridson moved and the committee agreed to insert the word "nonconforming" into the DPS comment language on line 81.
On the question of annual reporting, members acknowledged a trade-off: reports create some administrative work but help ensure the special permission is used as intended. The committee left the modest annual-report requirement in place, noting the number of eligible properties is likely limited under the five-year window.
Without further objection the committee voted to approve ZTA 2608 as amended. The clerk reported three votes in favor and none opposed.
The committee forwarded ZTA 2608 to full council as approved with the technical clarification on DPS comments and the existing monitoring language intact.
