gaithersblog.net

It was a long Council meeting, eight minutes short of three hours. The bulk of the time was taken up by public appearances. Most of the speakers were concerned about the day labor center issue, and there were quite a few speakers on affordable housing. There were a couple of speakers on the Hair Bar demolition and some a strongly negative opinion stated on the Asbury bonds.

• The decision on the Hair Bar demolition is deferred; there will be a public hearing of the HDC. Henry Marraffa demonstrated yet again that he doesn’t understand historic preservation.
• The redevelopment deferral ordinance was introduced for consideration on a 3-2 vote.
• The GE Tech Park special study area master plan was adopted with the special condition of “comparable density and mix” on a 3-2 vote.
• The Asbury Bonds were authorized.
• The Council discussed a possible text amendment on height limits in the CD Zone. The Council agreed that there should be a public hearing. This, to my eye, would appear to be an echo of the text amendment requested by Jody Kline at the 01/03/06 Council meeting [minutes, video] and mercilessly trashed by the public and the council. At the time, Mr. Kline insisted that his client wasn’t interested in developing an 8-story building (perhaps it was 9-story?). In last night’s meeting, oddly enough, Mr. Kline has a named client — Fairfield Residential — interested in redeveloping the site that is now occupied by the Broadstone Apartments (formerly Stratford Place) with a project that would require a height waver. Odd how these things get snuck in at the last minute on a Council meeting right around a holiday.

There was also extensive discussion, during the “from the Mayor and Council” segment, regarding the status of the day labor center activity. I’m not certain I could summarize it in any fair manner, and I highly suggest that everyone who hasn’t already seen it to watch the discussion either on Cable Channel 13 in the City, or on the web using Windows Media Player. However, it is worth noting, I think, that according to Mr. Humpton, the County has said that they will not fund a center that is not within a walking-distance radius of the current ad hoc site. For the first time, I believe, the Mayor and Council began to seriously question this requirement, for which no overt justification has ever been cited other than the high concentration of “affordable housing” (also known as old, run-down apartment complexes) near OldeTowne. The fact that many day laborers already get to the current site by bus and car does not seem to be taken into account in this reasoning. Mr. Humpton was directed to find out more about the reasoning behind this restriction.

Watch it here. Windows media player required.

The agenda for tonight’s planning commission meeting is available on the City’s website. There are several items on the agenda, and I have not had a chance to read through them. They are:

• T-372 — Ordinance to amend Chapter 24 of the City Code
• SDP-06-002 — Request to amend the previously-approved Schematic Development Plan SDP-00-002, The Crescent at Quince Orchard Park.
• AFP-06-032 — 825 Still Creek Lane in Lakelands
• AFP-06-035 — 441 Lynette Street
• AFP-06-033 — 135 Thurgood Street in Kentlands
• AFP-06-031 — Fields Road Elementary
• AFP-06-040 — Crown Pointe

The Crown Pointe issue is discussed in the article “Crown Farm Pointe houses ruled too high” in today’s Gazette:

The Planning Commission last reviewed the case on Aug. 2 with the project’s builders, NV Homes and Ryan Homes. The city had previously asked the developer to adjust the homes’ elevations.

The plans that came back Aug. 2 did so by changing the angle of the rooftops. That in turn eliminated many of the ornamental windows that Planning Commission members wanted in the roofs, as well as other minor elements of the architecture.

‘‘Not to mention that the houses weren’t attractive anymore,” Ossont said. ‘‘So it was a completely different product than what the Planning Commission had approved.”

The disparity was drastic enough that city planners do not feel comfortable simply moving the project forward to final approval. Thus, the commission will look at the revised plans tonight, 7:30, at City Hall, 31 S. Summit Ave.

I doubt I’ll have a chance to read through the background materials before this evening, so I invite anyone who is familar with any of these agenda items to leave thier thoughts in the comments.

Another item in today’s Gazette tells the plight of some Lakelands residents displaced by the fire there a few months ago:

[…]

The situation — which has forced several families to rent apartments or buy new homes — has taken longer than expected to resolve, Loveland and city workers say.

They blame the delay on original building plans, which were not immediately given to authorities. Those plans were required to apply for new building permits.

Loveland said the complex’s original architect, Lessard Group Inc., did not hand over building plans for nearly three months after the fire.

In late July, they agreed to submit them, he said.

‘‘We couldn’t apply for a permit, we couldn’t get the reconstruction rolling, until we had those plans,” Loveland said.

[…]

Some of the affected residents were, IIRC, at the August 21st Council Meeting to ask the City for help.

Today’s Gaithersburg Gazette has a story on developments in the day laborer situation:

The owner of a parking lot in Gaithersburg where day laborers gather has decided to no longer allow the workers to use the site.

‘‘The neighbors have said it is a problem, they requested this,” said Paul P. Meehan, the property manager of the parking lot at 117 North Frederick Ave., where several dozen day laborers wait each day for work.

[…]

S&B Partnership, which owns the parking lot and plaza which houses the Maryland Exchange Company, an Enterprise Rent-A-Car, ethnic grocers and a restaurant, could not be reached for comment.

For the past two years, S&B has allowed the 50 to 75 mostly Latino workers to gather each day to stand in the lot, which is also next to Grace United Methodist Church, until 9:30 a.m., before the plaza businesses open.

At 9:30 a.m., police clear the men out.

While Meehan and police said that day laborers will not be specifically targeted, the law does affect where or when the men can gather.

Trespassing, a misdemeanor, has a penalty of up to 90 days in jail and a $500 fine, according to city police.

[…]

The Rev. David Rocha, the lead advocate for the day laborers, told City Manager David B. Humpton last week that the men who wait at the site are prepared to stand their ground.

‘‘It looks like there is a current that wants enforcement only. If the only solution is enforcement, our only option is to let ourselves be arrested,” Rocha told The Gazette Tuesday.

[…]

At least five Walker and Brookes avenues residents — those closest to the informal parking lot site — called for action from S&B.

‘‘The city has tried and the city has failed,” said Walker Avenue resident Clark Day, who was also on the task force. ‘‘We have no reason to believe that the city is going to be successful.”

Humpton maintains that officials are currently looking into four potential sites where the men could gather, but he acknowledges that Gaithersburg is running out of options.

‘‘It’s going to take others to come forward with sites,” including the faith-based community, Humpton said. ‘‘We need to broaden the table and maybe have a shift in the paradigm of who is looking for a place.”

[…]