Subscribe free to our daily email newsletterContributor Opinion By Noreen Bryan: Development Review Process Unfair To Citizens
Jun 22, 2009 9:00 - 5 Comments
>In the last six weeks we have been trying to assess the Victory Housing proposal to build a large apartment complex for independent seniors (60+) on the Fleet St. property behind the historic houses. Whether you are for or against this development there are many things that you need to know about how your city is helping developers and keeping citizens out of the process.
Lack of Public Discussion of Use of Publicly-Owned Land
The county and city have been working to develop this parcel for ten years. In that time there has never been a public discussion where citizens can express their views on the use of this land, which is the last remnants of mature forest in the center of town. This is a precious piece of public real estate. It is our land-yours and mine. There are undoubtedly many different views on how this land can best be used to enhance our city. We need the chance to assess and discuss a wide range of alternatives. Our government-city and county, elected and staff- have put forth three land use proposals. All of these have been conceived in the back rooms of city hall and the county office building. Citizens have never been allowed to participate in that process. Citizens’ first knowledge comes when a development is already well defined. Citizens are the last to know but the most impacted by development decisions.
City Talks for Months and Years with Developers, Minutes with Citizens
The developer for the Fleet St. property has been working with the county and city for at least three years and probably more. In that time the developer has had open access to the county executive, Rockville’s Mayor and Council and the staffs of both governments. And these officials have given freely of their time. The county and city has worked with the developer while all other participants have been excluded- citizens, other developers, the press, In fact the Rockville Zoning Ordinance provides for a Development Review Committee (DRC) of all key personnel from around the city. The DRC works with a developer before he/she submits a development application. The DRC answers questions, provides guidance on the zoning ordinance and Rockville code and specifically advises the developer about where their proposal might not be in accordance with law and regulation. In all that time the doors of government are wide open and it appears that everyone is willing and ready to help. Is there comparable help for citizens? NO! Citizens are not told about a pending application. They are excluded from meetings of the DRC. They first learn of a proposed development just before the formal application is submitted. In the case of Victory Housing some citizens knew for a few months of Victory Housing’s intent to go forward with the development. Others did not know at all. Then the doors to the Mayor and Council and all the Commissions and Boards are slammed shut under the new ex parte ruling issued in 2008 but never openly shared with citizens.
Schedule and Timing- Developers Have a Ten to One, up to 100+ to One Advantage
A comparison of developers’ schedule and timing compared to that allowed to citizens shows the gross bias in favor of developers. In the case of Victory Housing the developer spent 3 to 5 years putting his proposal together. But the city has given citizens only a month to review the proposed abandonment of Mt Vernon Pl. Right-of-Way and 3 months to review the Special Exception Application. The developer has roughly 10 to 50 times as long as citizens. The developer trumps citizens in lead time and in access to the Mayor and Council, the Planning Commission, the Historic District Commission, the Board of Appeals and all other city commissions, boards and city staff. They have huge staffs of experts-lawyers, architects, engineers, etc who are paid for all of their efforts. By contrast, the citizen is unaware of a project until it is finely honed and very quickly thereafter the door is shut to communications with everyone in city government except the staff. Citizens must figure out how to review, assess, discuss their views, organize the community and get the word out to the community all on their own time, after a full day of work and in a severely compressed schedule. Their time is unpaid. The final blow is the 3 minute constraint at public hearings and meetings. Citizens have to figure out how to condense all of their views into three minutes of testimony. How does that compare to the glossy lengthy presentations allowed to developers.
Citizens are not getting a fair deal! It is time for a change!
Noreen Bryan
This contributor opinion is by Noreen Bryan.
This is a contributor opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such opinions for consideration — the more voices the better. We especially welcome people who disagree with us. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!
Ms Bryan’s opinion piece spells out clearly what is a one-way street that favors everyone but city residents. In the 2007 City election, some tried to highlight how developers have significant sway and access with and to elected officials and City staff. Those making accusations were branded as running a “dirty” campaign. What Ms Bryan points out is exactly what many were afraid would happen. The taxpayers in our City are afforded less and less opportunity to speak out against plans that favor development over quality of life. We continue to pay more and get less. Perhaps that message will resonate a bit louder and clearer this November when vote are cast for a new Mayor and Council.
As a Rockville resident, I believe I receive notice about development change status hearings, close to where I live. However, if citizens only get 3 minutes to express their opinions, then the comment by JJ seems on the mark. Citizens should see how each City Councilmember and Mayoral candidates how they feel about this and then we citizens should vote accordingly. I agree with Ms. Bryan that 3 minutes is too brief, and I will ask potential City Councilmembers and potential Mayoral candidates about this, and it will be included as part of why I will vote the way I will.Also, it would even be better if potential City Councilmembers and potential Mayoral candidates would express their views here on how they feel about citizens having only 3 minutes to comment.
I collaborated with Noreen on drafting this posting. Just to make clear, the “three minute” limitation and the other points of lack of parity and equal time have existed, but what makes this especially egregious is that now the City is enforcing the “ex parte” rule, which states that once a formal application is filed, there can be no comment on the application outside of the public hearings. In the past citizens could speak about it at Citizens Forum and Mayor and Council drop-ins. Citizens could meet with council members. Now these options are off the table. Also keep in mind that if citizens want to present sketches, presentations, etc., it must be made within the three minute time limit. Meanwhile developers and city staff can present for hours. The Mayor and Council Rules of procedure say that “all parties are afforded an equal opportunity tocomment and address issues and facts that are raised in a particular case, thereby better enablingthe Mayor and Council to formulate its decision based upon the record” but this is not the case! See page 7 of http://www.rockvillemd.gov/government/mc/mc_rules_of_procedure.pdf.
I do applaud the requirement in the new zoning code that major development projects hold a community meeting–it’s an important way to ensure the neighborhood is informed and we can discuss options and concerns before decisions are final. However, I’ve been to a couple of these community meetings and they’re a disappointment. I’ve encountered locked doors, insufficient seats, no agenda, but worst of all, no facilitator–no neutral party to manage the meeting, ensure everyone’s voice is heard, and prepare an agenda and minutes. As a result, the meeting is disorganized, a few people dominate the discussion while others are ignored, little is accomplished, and everyone gets frustrated. To be successful and productive, these meetings must be held in neutral places (not the developer’s office) that are conducive to large discussions and led by a skilled facilitator. These are highly charged meetings and require more than just leaving it to the developer to manage (they usually don’t have the skill to do it right and are typically biased in their perspective, thus establishing an environment of conflict from the start). I hope that City staff or elected officials will take the opportunity to attend so they can evaluate these meetings and develop a different approach so that we can work better together.
Have you all seen the presentation on the Green Building Code?The City environmental staff claims that there will not be an increased cost of construction associated with building a new home or even adding an addition to your house. I suggest everyone look into this proposed regulation prior to the adoption this fall.