Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2007

Planners give early ‘no’ to GE plans

E-mail this article \ Print this article


After legal wrangling delayed a decision nearly two months ago, the Gaithersburg Planning Commission rejected a an preliminary plan to add three buildings to the GE Technology Park in the Lakelands.

Developer AvalonBay Communities wants to construct three one-story buildings in a 20-acre portion of a 98-acre plot adjacent to Darnestown Road, but city planners said the proposal conflicts with open space and conservation guidelines approved in a 2006 master plan study.

Commissioners sent the proposal back to city staff for further legal review on July 25 after Barbara Sears, attorney for AvalonBay, argued that the terms of an annexation agreement for the site trump the master plan, and that the plan meets the annexation agreement requirements.

But in a three-page memo to the commissioners, city Planning and Code Director Greg Ossont cited Section 24-171 of Gaithersburg’s City Code, and wrote that though a plan meets the annexation agreement requirements, it doesn’t ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses.

The plan calls for two buildings on an open lawn between Route 28 and Lake Placid, while the third would appear on the east side of Main Street and behind the baseball fields at Lakelands Park, according to planning documents.

City planners say the plan’s proposal to remove 160 trees doesn’t conform with the special study that says all tree areas outside the floodplain buffer be retained.

The study was one of 10 conducted in different areas throughout Gaithersburg amid the city’s 1997 update of its master plan, which sets the city’s long-term planning and development vision.

Commissioners on Wednesday unanimously directed planning staff to prepare a formal resolution to deny the concept plan.

Chair John Bauer stressed that while the plan was rejected, there is still room to adjust.

‘‘I don’t think what we’re saying is there should be no development on this site,” he said.

Commissioner Lloyd Kaufman agreed, and added encouragement for the developer to continue working with city staff to forge an acceptable proposal.

Still, Sears maintained her position during Wednesday’s meeting.

‘‘To require that area ... be left open is excessive and violates the laws,” Sears said after the meeting. She said they have not decided whether to appeal.

 Top Jobs

 Search Directories

Search all directories

Resources

 Search Directories

Search all directories
or pick a category below to search now

Categories