Germantown Forward Planning Board Draft - February 2009

ger
mant
Pl
ownF
anni
orwar
ngBoar
d
dDr
aft F
ebr
uar
y 2009
T
echni
cal
Appendi
ces
Technical Appendices
Sector Plan for the Germantown Employment Area:
An Amendment to the Germantown Master Plan
Source of copies:
The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
8787 Georgia Avenue
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-3760
Online version:
Germantown Forward
http://mcparkandplanning.org/germantown/GermantownForward.shtm
montgomery county planning department

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
Technical Appendices
Sector Plan for the Germantown Employment Area:
An Amendment to the Germantown Master Plan
Prepared by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

8787 Georgia Avenue
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-3760
SECTOR PLAN FOR THE GERMANTOWN EMPLOYMENT AREA:
AN AMENDMENT TO THE GERMANTOWN MASTER PLAN
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: PLANNING FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3

APPENDIX 2: GERMANTOWN PLANNING AREA DEMOGRAPHICS ......................................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX 3: SCHOOL CAPACITY ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................................................................15
APPENDIX 4: GERMANTOWN HOUSING REPORT.................................................................................................................................................................17
APPENDIX 5: CHURCHILL TOWN SECTOR .............................................................................................................................................................................35
APPENDIX 6: TOP 100 GERMANTOWN BUSINESSES (RANKED BY EMPLOYMENT)..............................................................................................................49
APPENDIX 7: MAJOR RETAILERS IN GERMANTOWN (RANKED BY EMPLOYMENT) .............................................................................................................53
APPENDIX 8: WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY .......................................................................................................................................................................55
APPENDIX 9: ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................................57
APPENDIX 10: CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES TABLE ................................................................................................................................................65
APPENDIX 11: GERMANTOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES .........................................................................................................................................................69
APPENDIX 12: HISTORIC PRESERVATION ELEMENTS .............................................................................................................................................................83
APPENDIX 13: DENSITY DISTRIBUTION...................................................................................................................................................................................97
APPENDIX 14: CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................99
APPENDIX 15: STATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CORRIDOR CITIES TRANSITWAY (CCT) STATIONS........................................................................................113
APPENDIX 16: BIKEWAYS......................................................................................................................................................................................................115
APPENDIX 17: TRAIL CONNECTIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................................117
APPENDIX 18: RECREATION NEEDS ......................................................................................................................................................................................119
APPENDIX 19: PARKS AND OPEN SPACES.............................................................................................................................................................................121
APPENDIX 20: GERMANTOWN AMENITY FUND PROJECTS..................................................................................................................................................129
APPENDIX 21: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ...........................................................................................................................................131
APPENDIX 22: URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT LEGISLATION .......................................................................................................................................................135
APPENDIX 23: TRANSIT MIXED-USE ZONE ...........................................................................................................................................................................161
GERMANTOWN EMPLOYMENT AREA SECTOR PLAN: AN AMENDMENT TO THE GERMANTOWN MASTER PLAN TECHNICAL APPENDICES 1
PLANNING BOARD DRAFT – FEBRUARY 2009
APPENDIX 1: PLANNING FRAMEWORK
From the Germantown Master Plan, 1989
The Germantown Planning Area is located in residential transitions from the more densely that Germantown develop into a ―new community‖
Montgomery County, Maryland, some 25 miles developed corridors. Gaithersburg, Germantown, similar to new communities such as Reston and
northwest of Washington, D.C., along Interstate and Clarksburg are the three corridor cities Columbia. Unlike these new communities,
Highway I-270. It contains approximately 11,000 designated by the General Plan along I-270. however, Germantown could not be developed by
acres within a three-by-five mile area. This planning Diagrammatically, a ―corridor city‖ as originally a single developer, because the land ownership
area is bisected by I-270 and is bounded by Great envisioned in the General Plan was to have a was fragmented among many different parcel
and Little Seneca Creeks and their tributaries. single center of employment and shopping holders. To offset this problem, a new community
activities surrounded by residential development. was proposed where the County government
The General Plan for Montgomery County, known The residential area decreased from high-density, would seek to coordinate the efforts of many
generally as ―On Wedges and Corridors,‖ was adjacent to the core, to low-density, at the edge of individual landowners to create as cohesive a
adopted by the Maryland-National Capital Park the corridor city. ―new town‖ as could be achieved within the
and Planning Commission in 1964 and approved existing powers available. This approach was a
by the Montgomery County Council in 1969. Its Several events have occurred since the late ―first‖ in the United States. Local government was
purpose is to help establish overall policies for 1960‘s to alter this idealized concept for a corridor going to attempt to guide and stage development
development of the Maryland-Washington city. The rapid rail transit system envisioned in the through its planning, zoning, subdivision and
Regional District and to relate these policies to the General Plan has not been extended through the capital programming processes.
metropolitan framework. Corridor Cities and the roadway network proposed
in the General Plan has been modified. These The major objectives of the 1974 Master Plan
The General Plan envisioned development changes, plus the land use policies of the City of were to:
radiating outward from Washington, D.C., in a Gaithersburg, have resulted in a multi-nodal
series of corridor cities along the major Corridor City development pattern. Despite these support the development of Germantown as a
transportation corridors, with wedges of lower events, the principal purposes and objectives of distinct community having its own identity;
density between them. The basic concept of the the ―wedges and corridors‖ concept are still valid
General Plan is to focus growth along the I-270 and remain the basic policy guide for the County. surround Germantown with a greenbelt of
and I-95 corridors and to prevent urbanization of parks;
the wedges between these radial corridors. The The intent of the 1974 Master Plan was to fulfill
intent is to preserve those areas for agriculture the objectives of the General Plan. More establish a Village Center and Town Center
and open space uses and to provide low-density specifically, the 1974 Master Plan recommended Concept;
concentrate employment areas along I-270 very small portion of the existing and approved Current development in Germantown, to a large
and the B&O railroad; housing stock. extent, is a response to the economic forces that
were present during its early years of growth, the
balance traffic generated by the land uses Some development has occurred in late 1970‘s and early 1980‘s. During the late
with the capacity of the transportation system; Germantown that is not consistent with the 1970‘s and early 1980‘s, the energy crises
intent of the 1974 Master Plan; therefore, affected the entire housing market, and sewage
provide a broad range of housing types and more detailed development guidelines are treatment capacity limitations restricted the local
prices; and needed to assure that the objectives of the market for development approvals. Housing prices
1974 Master Plan are achieved. throughout the County escalated rapidly. Interest
provide policies for staged development, rates rose so high that the market rate exceeded the
based on the provision of additional sewer Experience now indicates that a new legal limit in Maryland. In order to bring down interest
service and transportation capacity. community, encompassing land in many rates, builders further increased housing prices.
ownerships and evolving over several years,
This Plan confirms the spirit and intent of the requires stronger implementation measures The high interest rates and rising prices, coupled
1974 Master Plan while recommending than those of the 1974 Master Plan in order with Germantown‘s location on the suburban
modifications that respond to a series of changes to assure that the objectives of this kind of fringe, resulted in a strong market for townhouses.
that have evolved during the past thirteen years: community can be realized. Housing at the developing edge of a metropolitan
area is generally less expensive as the purchaser
The population characteristics of those now Two supermarket-anchored convenience retail is trading price for a longer trip to and from work.
living in Germantown are significantly different centers have been built in the Town Center. Townhouses met the needs of first home buyers
from those projected during the development These shopping centers have absorbed the for a relatively affordable house. Thus, there was a
of the 1974 Master Plan. market for retail uses in the Churchill Village strong market for townhouses during the period of
Center and have delayed the development of Germantown‘s early growth. The duration of these
The lifestyle and composition of Germantown the Gunners Lake Village Center. economic conditions contributed to the existing
households are different from those predominance of townhouses in Germantown.
anticipated in the 1974 Master Plan. One significant objective of this Master Plan is to
Townhouses and other single-family attached improve the appearance of Germantown, which The economic uncertainties during Germantown‘s
units have become the predominant housing includes the predominance of attached homes, as early growth created significant financial problems
type for reasons primarily related to the well as the lack of landscaping and other visual in the building industry generally, and in
private sector market that produces the amenities. It is important to understand the Germantown in particular – builders were
housing stock; as a consequence, single- background of Germantown‘s recent development concerned about their survival. Builders‘ attention
family detached units currently represent a in order to put this objective into perspective. focused on producing a readily marketable
product. Builders‘ concern about quality and
diversity of product were not considered as
important when they were defaulting on their
loans and declaring bankruptcy.
As a result, several subdivisions in

Germantown were built by a succession of
builders. Each successive turnover decreased
commitment to and awareness of amenity
features shown on site plans. In response to
this condition, the Planning Board and County
Council ultimately established requirements
for site plan enforcement agreements signed
by the developer and created staff positions
for urban designers responsible for
compliance with site plans.
Another factor affecting Germantown‘s

present appearance is a result of its
agricultural heritage. The extensive farming
activities in Germantown have created bare
fields with mature trees only in the stream
valleys. As a result, the only vegetation in
most subdivisions is that planted by the
builders and the residents. It will take a few
more years yet before these trees make a
significant contribution to Germantown‘s
appearance, but ultimately they will make a
difference.
Many objectives expressed in the 1974 Master This Plan modifies the 1974 Master Plan in the appearance of Germantown is also reflected in the
Plan have been achieved, particularly in terms of following four areas: guidelines in that chapter.
public facilities. These successes are the result of
the combined efforts of the community Housing Mix: The intent of this Plan is to promote a In addition, each of the Village Centers, with the
organizations, the Planning Board, the County mix of housing types that can accommodate exception of Neelsville Village, is recommended to
Council, the County Executive, and the actions of families of varying ages and income levels and be developed under the Planned Development
the responsible agencies. The Germantown allow opportunities for them to continue living in Zone. The requirement for both development plan
Campus of Montgomery College has been Germantown as their needs and tastes change. At and site plan review will provide detailed review of
established; police and fire stations have been present, Germantown lacks an adequate supply of Village Center development. The Neelsville Village
built; and the public ownership of the greenbelt of detached homes. The land use and zoning Center is recommended for a new RMX
parks has increased. The Planning Board‘s staging recommendations proposed in this Plan respond (Residential Mixed-Use) Zone, which will also
of development has deferred development on land to this concern. provide for a detailed review of development plans
where public facilities were not programmed, or through project plan and site plan reviews. The
where premature development would preclude the Specifically this Plan recommends reduced zones recommended for use in the Town Center
development of the Mixed-Use Center. Because of residential densities in several environmentally are zones which require site plan review prior to
this previous withholding of zoning in a staged sensitive areas to densities that result primarily in development. The zones recommended for the
manner, the recommendations of this Plan to single-family detached units. Further, a range of Mixed-Use Center, the Retail and Service Park and
reduce residential densities in certain areas can lower densities are recommended so that a variety the potential Regional Shopping Mall require site
still be implemented with a minimum of rezoning. of lot sizes can be achieved. The Plan also plan review.
Also, the designation of highway alignments in the recommends that the percentage of attached
master plan has enabled rights-of-way to be homes in most subdivisions be lower than Community Facilities: The intent of this Plan is to
preserved by the Planning Board through the currently permitted. provide appropriate locations for community
subdivision process. facilities. Since the adoption of the 1974 Master
Community Identity: The intent of this Plan is to Plan, there have been significant demographic
On balance, it does not seem wrong to conclude develop a greater sense of community identity. changes, as well as changes in the nature and
that Germantown today is a qualified success, in (See Figure 3.) A positive sense of ―place‖ at the scale of community facilities desired by residents.
terms of the Master Plan‘s objectives, but that it Village and Town levels is very important. To date, For these reasons, the number, location, and
can and should be improved as it moves further community identity is focused on individual and nature of community facilities have been re-
towards completion. It is the intent of this Plan, fragmented subdivisions. The development examined to assure that the recommendations of
through its various recommendations and guidelines and the recommendations of the this Plan meet the existing and anticipated needs
development guidelines, to improve the visual and Townscape Design chapter of this Plan respond to of Germantown residents.
functional quality of Germantown. this concern. The importance of the visual
This Plan proposes the construction of six new Balance Between Housing and Employment In addition, the internal roadway system is
elementary schools, two new middle schools, and Opportunities: The intent of this Plan is to provide designed to facilitate intra-Germantown travel
a new high school. The total number of elementary greater opportunity for people to both live and which, in turn, will reduce work trip miles for those
schools recommended in Germantown has been work in Germantown. A reasonable objective is living and working in Germantown.
reduced from 28 to 12. This reduction is a result that expressed in the 1974 Master Plan: 25
of the reduced average number of school-age percent of the resident work force of Germantown The comprehensive development of a new
children per household, and the increase in the should also work there. The 1987 Census Update community is a complex undertaking at any time
enrollment capacity at the new schools. The Survey1, however, indicates that only 10 percent of or place. It is particularly difficult in Germantown
number of senior high and junior/intermediate the resident work force works in because of the fragmented land ownership
schools also has been reduced from three to two Germantown....This is due primarily to the fact that pattern. With multiple developers, and limited
of each. Because of the increased size of new residential development has occurred at a faster police powers, it is not easy for government to
elementary schools, the minimum size of the pace than employment development. The ensure that a single, coherent development
school sites is recommended to be increased from transportation analysis done for this Plan has program for the entire 11,000-acre area can be
10 acres to 12 acres, including 10 acres usable estimated that about 30 percent of the resident achieved. It is certainly more difficult than if
for school buildings, parking and recreation work force will be working in Germantown by the Germantown had been developed by a single
facilities. time development is built out. owner as in other new communities. In those
instances adjustments to the development
The reduction in the number of school sites could Although there is no direct means by which program can occur on almost a daily basis.
adversely affect the adequacy of community government in a free society can ensure the
recreation facilities because the estimates of the achievement of this objective, the Furthermore, the sense of long-term commitment
1974 Master Plan of local park needs took into recommendations expressed in this Plan will at and accountability are inherently stronger in a new
account the recreational opportunities of school least provide the opportunity for its realization. community built by a single developer instead of
fields and courts. This Plan addresses this Furthermore, the recommended increase in the by a series of smaller developers. Smaller
increase in local park requirements. percentage of single-family detached housing and developers are generally more focused on the
the provision of a broad mix of housing types and marketing needs of their individual subdivisions
prices will increase the opportunity for more than on elements that would improve the quality of
Germantown employees to live in the community. Germantown as a whole. The Germantown
situation creates the need for an extra special
public commitment to orchestrate the coordination
of private development within well-defined public
policy guidelines.
1Research Division, Montgomery County Planning Board
There are several factors beyond the control of the
County government that could influence the
outcome of this Master Plan. The likelihood and
effects of these influential external factors are
difficult to predict because they would result from
actions or factors not subject to County
government control, such as the actions of the
Federal government, changes in energy supplies,
and changes in lifestyle. In addition, technological
research and invention are capable of changing
patterns of everyday life but are also beyond the
control of County government.
These larger political, environmental, economic,

and technological factors are global or national in
nature. While beyond the scope of this Master
Plan, they would nonetheless significantly impact
the County.
The Comprehensive Growth Policy Study considers

several broad County-wide trends that are beyond
the control and time frame of this Master Plan.
The results of this Study may be useful in
suggesting future modifications to the
recommendations expressed in this Master Plan.
APPENDIX 2: GERMANTOWN PLANNING AREA DEMOGRAPHICS
Research & Technology Center (RTC)
2005 Census Update Survey

Planning Area # 19 SINGLE-
Population Density: 4,658 people/sq. mi. FAMILY TOWN- GARDEN HIGH- ALL
Est. Land Area: 17.1 sq. miles DETACHED HOUSE APT. RISE TYPES
Household Population 26,365 36,940 16,275 0 79,580
P % Female 50.1% 52.5% 54.7% 52.2%
O Age Distribution:
P % 0-4 Years Old 8.3% 9.0% 7.8% 8.5%
U % 5-17 Years Old 25.1% 19.9% 14.0% 20.4%
L % 18-29 Years Old 8.8% 14.7% 22.1% 14.3%
A % 30-44 Years Old 27.3% 31.3% 27.2% 29.1%
T % 45-64 Years Old 26.7% 21.0% 23.8% 23.4%
I % 65-74 Years Old 2.6% 2.5% 3.2% 2.7%
O % Over 74 Years Old 1.2% 1.5% 1.9% 1.5%
N Average Age (years) 31.9 31.5 33.5 N/A 32.0
Race:
% White 59.5% 51.7% 56.8% 55.3%
% Black 9.4% 27.0% 25.3% 20.7%
% Asian or Pacific Islander 28.0% 15.3% 8.1% 18.2%
% Other 3.1% 6.0% 9.8% 5.8%
Hispanic or Latino and Race1
% Hispanic or Latino 1 9.1% 15.9% 24.4% 15.4%
% Not Hispanic White 52.0% 41.4% 43.1% 45.3%
1 Those of Hispanic orgin may be of any race.
Planning Area # 19 (continued) SINGLE-
FAMILY TOWN- GARDEN HIGH- ALL
DETACHED HOUSE APT. RISE TYPES
Language Spoken at Home
P Persons 5 Years and Older 24,175 72,800 33,610 0 15,015
O % Speak Language Other than English 36.3% 41.2% 44.7% 40.3%
P % Speak English less than "Very Well" 10.3% 10.8% 19.6% 12.4%
U Educational Attainment:
L Persons 25 Years and Older 15,570 23,620 11,600 0 50,790
A % Less than High School Diploma 3.8% 6.6% 8.0% 6.1%
T % High School Graduate 20.2% 34.0% 33.1% 29.6%
I % Associate or Trade School 6.0% 9.8% 9.6% 8.6%
O % Bachelor's Degree 34.5% 27.0% 29.9% 29.9%
N % Grad, Professional or Doctoral 35.4% 22.6% 19.4% 25.8%
Number of Employed Residents2 14,790 22,500 10,450 0 47,740
% Females Who Are Employed2 72.0% 78.9% 72.3% 75.3%
Women with Children Under Age 6 2,270 3,270 1,460 0 7,000
L % Employed 2 57.5% 64.5% * 61.5%
A Work Location:
B % Montgomery County 72.6% 70.7% 78.0% 72.9%
O % Prince George's County 3.0% 3.2% 3.2% 3.2%
R % Elsewhere in Maryland 5.0% 3.6% 5.6% 4.4%
% Washington, D.C. 12.2% 13.0% 8.6% 11.8%
% Virginia 6.8% 8.5% 4.3% 7.1%
F % Outside MD-VA-DC 0.4% 0.9% 0.4% 0.7%
O Work Trip:
R % Driving 84.6% 83.7% 82.4% 83.7%
C % Alone 76.8% 73.4% 77.1% 75.3%
E % Carpool 7.8% 10.3% 5.3% 8.4%
2 Ages 16 and older and employed full-or part-time.
% Public Transit or Rail 10.1% 13.0% 13.5% 12.3%
% Walk/Bicycle/Other 1.2% 1.0% 2.2% 1.3%
% Work at Home 4.1% 2.3% 1.9% 2.8%
Average Commuting Time to Work (minutes)
Overall 32.8 33.7 31.1 N/A 32.9
By Car 30.0 30.2 27.1 N/A 29.5
By Public Transit 57.5 58.6 59.0 N/A 58.4
Households by Structure Type 7,590 13,100 8,355 0 29,045
% Total Households by Structure Type 26.1% 45.1% 28.8% 100.0%
Average Household Size 3.48 2.82 1.95 2.74
Tenure:
% Rental 1.2% 8.0% 57.1% N/A 20.4%
Average Monthly Costs:
H Homeowner $2,023 $1,349 $1,027 N/A $1,507
O Renter * * $1,010 N/A $1,034
U Residence in April 2000:
S % in Same Home 58.9% 50.1% 28.0% 46.2%
I % Elsewhere in County 29.2% 30.0% 37.2% 31.9%
N % Elsewhere in Maryland 2.4% 5.7% 7.3% 5.3%
G % D.C or Northern Virginia 2.8% 3.0% 2.6% 2.9%
% Outside Metro Area 6.6% 11.2% 24.8% 13.8%
Median Years in Same Home 6 5 2 N/A 4
Average Age of Household Head 46.9 43.4 43.3 N/A 44.3
% Households with Foreign Born Head or Spouse 43.7% 36.8% 33.8% 37.7%
% Households Speaking Spanish 9.3% 14.8% 19.5% 14.7%
Households by Type:
% Family Households 93.8% 77.2% 57.2% 75.8%
% Married-Couple 87.3% 62.6% 33.9% 60.8%
% Single-Parent 5.3% 12.4% 18.0% 12.2%
% Nonfamily Households 6.2% 22.8% 42.8% 24.2%
% Householder Living Alone 6.1% 21.1% 39.0% 22.3%
% 5+ Persons 21.1% 14.2% 2.3% 12.6%
Average Number of Cars 2.4 1.9 1.4 N/A 1.9
% of Households with Computers 98.1% 93.8% 86.8% 92.9%
% of these visiting M-NCPPC website 36.9% 28.6% 24.7% 29.8%
2004 Household Income Distribution:
% Under $15,000 1.0% 3.8% 6.5% 3.8%
% $15,000 to $29,999 0.5% 4.5% 13.8% 6.2%
I % $30,000 to $49,999 4.8% 12.2% 32.0% 16.0%
N % $50,000 to $69,999 5.6% 25.4% 20.3% 18.9%
C % $70,000 to $99,999 24.2% 27.3% 18.0% 23.8%
O % $100,000 to 149,999 38.4% 21.7% 8.2% 22.1%
M % $150,000 to 199,999 18.2% 4.3% 1.2% 7.0%
E % $200,000+ 7.3% 0.7% 0.0% 2.2%
$116,560 $75,495 $48,765 N/A $76,655
2004 Median Household Income
% of Households Spending More Than
30% of Income on Housing Costs:
% Homeowners *14.6% 21.8% 18.0% N/A 19.0%
% Renters * * 35.3% 38.9%
*Insufficient data for reliable estimates.

Montgomery County Planning Department, M-NCPPC June 2006.
GERMANTOWN POPULATION PYRAMIDS, 2005-2030
Round 7.1 Cooperative Forecast
New units by type Student generation by level
Cluster Single detached Townhouse Mid-rise Total units K–5 6–8 9 - 12
Clarksburg 0 73 1,208 1,281 66 55 47
Northwest 0 0 1,413 1,413 59 55 47
Seneca Valley 0 80 5.995 6,075 269 243 206
New development total 0 153 8.616 8,769 394 353 300
Redevelopment of Rolling Hills -95 -35 -50
Apartments* (Northwest cluster)
Redevelopment of Middlebrook Mobile -70 -25 -40
Home Park* (Clarksburg cluster)
Deductions for redevelopment -165 -60 -90
Total Master Plan student generation 229 293 210
*The Master Plan (MP) total subtracts students currently residing in Rolling Hills Apartments (468 garden apartments) and Middlebrook Mobile Home Park (200
homes). These communities are replaced in the Master Plan by lower yielding, mid-rise units included in the units shown for the Clarksburg and Northwest
clusters.
APPENDIX 3: SCHOOL CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Montgomery County Public Schools, December 12, 2008
Enrollment at elementary schools in the three future development. In addition to elementary Again, there are no capacity projects currently
clusters affected by the Germantown Employment school enrollment growth, planning has begun for planned to address these space deficits.
Area Sector Plan is projected to exceed capacity at an addition at Clarksburg High School and a new
most schools. Middle school enrollment is middle school to serve the Clarksburg community. Seneca Valley Cluster
projected to remain within capacity at most cluster Dates for the opening of these projects will be
schools, with the exception of Kingsview Middle determined in the future. In the southern portion In the Seneca Valley cluster all elementary schools
School in the Northwest cluster, and Neelsville and of the Clarksburg cluster an addition to Fox Chapel are projected to be over capacity in the next few
Rocky Hill middle schools in the Clarksburg cluster. Elementary School will relieve over enrollment at years. Planning is beginning next year on an
High school enrollments are projected to remain that school when it opens in August 2011. addition to either Lake Seneca Elementary School
within capacity at Northwest and Seneca Valley or Waters Landing Elementary School. At the
high schools, but exceed capacity at Clarksburg Northwest Cluster middle school level Roberto Clemente Middle
High School. Following is more detailed School (shared with the Northwest cluster) is
information on school capacity in the three In the Northwest cluster Spark Matsunaga projected to remain within capacity, as is Martin
clusters that serve the Germantown Sector Plan. Elementary School faces the greatest over- Luther King Jr. Middle School. At the high school
enrollment, followed by Great Seneca Creek level, Seneca Valley High School is projected to
Clarksburg Cluster Elementary School. In addition, most other cluster remain within capacity. In the Seneca Valley
elementary schools are over capacity to some cluster a future elementary school site, named
In the Clarksburg cluster new development is degree. Only Germantown Elementary School is ―Waring Station ES,‖ is located on Waring Station
increasing enrollment far more than in the other projected to remain within capacity. At the present Road, directly across from Roberto Clemente
two clusters. In August 2009 a new elementary time there are no capital projects proposed to Middle School.
school, located in the Milestone community, is address over-enrollment at these elementary
scheduled to open. This will relieve some of the schools. At the middle school level Roberto Most of the additional residential development
pressure at Cedar Grove, Clarksburg, and Little Clemente Middle School is within capacity, but foreseen in the Germantown Employment Area
Bennett elementary schools. However, additional Kingsview Middle School is projected to being Sector Plan falls within the Seneca Valley cluster.
elementary schools will be needed in the coming exceeding capacity in 2012. At the high school The presence of the Waring Station ES school site
years to accommodate build-out of the Clarksburg level, Northwest High School is within capacity, but in this cluster provides the option of a new
Master Plan. The Clarksburg Master Plan includes is projected to begin exceeding capacity in 2014. elementary school in the future, if needed by build-
four additional elementary school sites for this out of the master plan development.
Figure 1, left: Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan
Figure 2, above: Parking lots and large blocks within the
Sector Plan area
APPENDIX 4: GERMANTOWN HOUSING REPORT
Research & Technology Center (RTC), 2008
Germantown 2009 and Beyond – Housing to the Town Center is key to the future vitality of There is very little residential development within
create a Vibrant, Sustainable, Mixed-Use Germantown, workforce housing can also be the study area, due to past reliance on the
Corridor City placed along the new transit corridor or near the Euclidean zoning.
MARC station. Adding commercial uses that incorporates
Planning and development over the last 40 years Accommodate the anticipated large increase in residential under mixed-use zoning will greatly
have changed Germantown from a farming the number of residents and workers 55 years of increase the vitality of this corridor city, while
community to a developing corridor city with age and older, who wish to age in place. offering convenient living opportunities for a
housing, employment, and a town center. Future Preserve existing subsidized rentals and MPDUs variety of household types.
development will create a more vibrant, high- (sale and rental).
density, mixed-use urban center, fully integrating Encourage employers to participate in State and Figure 2 illustrates the vast amounts of parking
residential uses into the retail, office, and County purchase assistance programs, such as and large-block commercial development within
commercial uses in the town center using a variety the House Keys for Employees program, which the study area, as well as the distribution of most
of housing types. provides State matching funds for employer residential uses to areas outside the commercial
contributions for down-payment and closing-cost and office areas. There is opportunity for
Germantown is a working community, with housing assistance. additional mixed-use development within the study
affordable to the workforce. In addition to area.
integrating residential uses into the town center, The Study Area
The Germantown population is younger than that
future development must provide affordable
The study area for this update to the 1989 of the overall County, with an average age of 32
housing for new workers as well as residents aging
Germantown Master Plan comprises 2,450 acres years in Germantown compared to 36.9 years for
in place.
of the 11,000-acre Germantown planning area. the County as revealed by the 2005 Census
Shown in light red on Figure 1, it contains the Update Survey for the entire planning area. Over
Housing Recommendations
Town Center, two employment areas, and all or 72 percent of Germantown residents are younger
Add residential uses on top or among office and part of the areas known as Milestone, Neelsville, than 45 years of age, compared to just over 61
commercial uses in the Town Center. Montgomery College, and Middlebrook. percent of the County population. Less than five
Build transit-oriented workforce housing—reduce percent of Germantown residents are older than
the costs associated with getting to work. While
Figure 3: Age Distribution Figure 4: Germantown Labor Force Profile
Figure 5: Structure types Figure 6: Planned, approved and existing housing types
Mix of Housing Types in Germantown SFD SFA MF Total

1974 Master Plan + Existing + Approved Dwelling Units 5,775 17,183 9,053 32,011
Percent of Total Units 18.0% 53.7% 28.3%
Existing + Approved Dwelling Units (January 1, 1987) 3,545 9,843 5,811 19,199
1989 Master Plan + Existing + Approved Dwelling Units 10,735 11,258 14,790 36,783
Existing + Approved Dwelling Units (April 2006) 8,026 13,618 10,214 31,858
Change from 1987 Existing + Approved Dwelling Units 4,481 3,775 4,403 12,659
65 years of age, compared to more than 10 the Germantown Master Planning
Sector Plan
percent of the residents, countywide (Figure 3). Area (see Appendix 2). Area
Mobile
Homes
Forecasts and surveys indicate that the population Households in single-family 193
in Germantown will age, but the elongation of the detached homes are larger with
workforce curve shown in Figure 4 indicates that 3.48 persons per household,
many more residents will be staying in the compared to 2.82 for
workforce during their 50s, 60s and 70s as households in townhouses, and
compared to past generations. As discussed later 1.95 for households in garden
in the ―Workforce Housing‖ section of this report, apartments/condominiums.
the expectation of a prolonged work life is One-person households occupy
consistent with the findings in the 55+ Housing nearly 40 percent of garden
Preference Survey, which indicated that many apartments/condos, but only
workers do not plan to retire early, if at all.4 21 percent of townhouses, and Figure 7: Planned housing types – comparing Germantown to the
only 6 percent of single-family Sector Plan area
Townhouses account for most of the housing in detached homes. Married
Germantown, followed by garden apartments and couples occupy over 87 percent of single-family-
single-family detached homes. About 80 percent o The median age of nearly 47 years of age for
detached homes, compared to about 63 percent
are homeowners, compared to 77 percent for the heads of households living in single-family
of townhouses, and 34 percent of garden
County. By structure type, nearly 99 percent of homes is about four years older than the
apartments/condos.
households in single-family detached homes own median age heads of households in
Two-person households occupy over 38 percent
the homes, as do 92 percent of households in townhouses (43.4) or gardens (43.3).
of garden apartments/condos, but only 28
townhouses, and 43 percent of households in o Overall, however, the median age for persons
percent of townhouses and 19 percent of single-
garden apartments/condominiums. in Germantown living in single-family detached
family detached homes.
homes is 31.9 years of age and 31.5 for those
All age groups can be found in each of the
There are some distinct differences between living in townhouses. The median age for
housing structure types:
households living in different structure types, those living in garden apartments/condos is
according to the 2005 Census Update Survey for only slightly higher, at 33.5 years of age.
o The portion of those persons 18-29 years of
age is highest in garden apartments/condos
4RTC, M-NCPPC. 55+ HOUSING PREFERENCE SURVEY (2006). and lowest in single-family detached homes.
http://www.mc-m-ncppc.org/housing/studies/
housing%20_55.pdf
Figure 8: Planned, approved and existing housing types
Single-Family Single-Family Multi-Family (Garden

Policy Area Village Name TAZ Mobile Home Totals by TAZ
Detached Attached Apts/Condos)
282 1 193 362 0 556
283 2 22 484 0 508
Town Center Town Center 284 0 0 0 0 0
248 0 0 0 0 0
Employment Corridor (West) 249 0 0 0 0 0
250 0 410 28 0 438
252 596 1,630 6 0 2,232
Germantown Kingsview Village
253 1,703 478 106 0 2,287
West
Churchill Village 251 826 2,177 2,389 0 5,392
Clopper Village 255 374 2,193 222 0 2,789
256 846 1,016 1,749 0 3,611
Gunners Lake Village
254 358 2,296 2,269 0 4,923
286 2 84 524 0 610
Employment Corridor (East) 287 71 0 0 0 71
288 0 386 568 0 954
Germantown 285 342 464 204 0 1,010
Middlebrook Village
East 292 725 1,851 403 193 3,172
289 639 0 0 0 639
Neelsville Village 290 65 121 397 0 583
291 1,215 59 0 0 1,274
Totals by structure type: 7,765 13,380 9,711 193 31,049
Figure 9: Residential units in the pipeline for Germantown
Approved Units Remaining Units in Pipeline by Type

Detached Attached Multi-family (Garden Total Detached Attached Multi-family
Policy Area Single Family Single Family Apts. & Condos) Single Family Single Family (Garden Total
Germantown East 5 192 0 197 1 147 Apts. & 0
Germantown West 1162 217 491 1870 221 168 Condos)
179 568
Germantown Town Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Germantown Area Total 1167 409 91 2067 222 315 179 716
The median income of households is starkly Germantown increased to nearly 31,000 housing Germantown Master Planning Area. Most of the
different. The 2004 median household income units. units in the Plan area are multifamily units,
is $116,560 for single-family detached homes, followed by townhouses, and then detached units.
$75,495 for townhouses, and for garden On average, about 836 units have been built each
apartments/condos, $48,765. This difference in year since 1970. This pace of residential The only housing type not represented in
income is partially explained by the difference in development has created some problems: Germantown is high-rise multifamily. This type
the number of workers in each household. A tendency to identify more with one‘s would be very appropriate in the Town Center. and
subdivision than with ―Germantown.‖ would round-out the unit mix in the study area.
Existing Housing Stock Difficulty in establishing an overall Germantown Furthermore, because high-rise multi-family
community identity. structures are elevatored, these units will provide
The 1989 plan called for an eventual build-out of All the houses, infrastructure, and public accessible living quarters for a broad mix of ages,
36,783 residential units—approximately 15 amenities in the same neighborhood are aging, capacities, and incomes---especially when
percent more units than the 1974 plan, and it and possibly deteriorating, at the same time. partnered with public transportation and a
proposed a different mix of unit types: walkable mix of retail, employment, and
It increased multifamily housing to over 40 As shown on Figure 8, more than two-thirds of the educational and recreational opportunities.
percent. housing stock in Germantown is single-family
It increased single-family detached units to 29.2 detached and attached housing, while one-third is Units that have been approved but are not yet built
percent, and multi-family housing. As of April 2006, the are included in the development pipeline; 716
It reduced single-family attached units to fewer percentage of single-family detached units units remain in the pipeline for future completion
than 31 percent. increased to over 25 percent, just short of the in the study area. The Germantown Town Center
1989 Master Plan goal of 29 percent. Although has no units in the construction pipeline. Most of
By 2006, Germantown‘s existing and approved townhouses remain the predominant type of the new units to be constructed will be multifamily
housing stock included nearly 32,000 units housing unit, the proportion of townhouses has units.
comprising: been reduced from nearly 54 percent to less than
32 percent multifamily 43 percent of the housing stock. This mix of Housing Prices
Nearly 43 percent single-family attached housing provides choices to a range of household
Over 25 percent single-family detached. types. The median prices for homes in the Germantown
planning area are typically lower than for
Until 1970, there were just a few hundred homes The Sector Plan area combines the Town Center comparable homes elsewhere in the County,
in the Germantown area and by the end of the first and the East and West Employment Corridors. This largely due to the age and size of the housing
half of 2007, the number of housing units in area contains approximately 10 percent (about stock. Germantown has experienced slight
3,140 units) of the housing stock in the entire decreases in median sales prices among all
structure types during the period between 2005 Germantown is a location of ―naturally occurring‖ single-family attached home (townhouses and
and the first half of 2007, except for the median workforce housing. That is to say, households plexes).
sales price of existing single-family attached earning workforce incomes5 can afford the median A median-priced (about $255,000) new
homes (townhouses and plexes), which increased priced single-family home or condominium in condominium during the same period would
from $323,000 in 2005 to $333,000 in the first Germantown. have been affordable to a household earning
half of 2007. The cost of a single-family detached In the Germantown planning area during the first about $64,200. At slightly more than $263,900,
home in Germantown had a median sales price of half of 2007, purchase of a new single-family the median sales price of existing
$769,125 in 2005 and $664,575 in the first half detached home at the median price ($664,575) condominiums requires a household income of
of 2007. The median sales prices for new single- required an annual household income of more about $66,500.
family attached homes in Germantown in 2005 than $167,000 and purchasing an existing In the Germantown planning area, the median
was very low, because it included sales of single-family detached home at the median sales price of existing condominiums has been
moderately-priced dwelling units. price ($545,000) required an annual household slightly higher than the median price of new
income of more than $137,300. condos since 2006. This indicates that the
An annual household income of less than existing condominiums are a desired housing
$84,000 could afford the median-priced existing option for workforce families.
Figure 10: Home sales by structure type
Median Sales Prices 2005 2006 1st Half of 2007
Germantown County Germantown County Germantown County
New single family detached $769,125 $775,218 $806,850 $881,600 $664,575 $1,159,695
Existing single family detached $580,000 $530,000 $610,000 $552,500 $545,000 $557,875
New single family attached $138,696 $499,375 $450,000 $526,680 $491,353
Existing single family attached $323,000 $340,000 $337,000 $356,750 $333,000 $365,000
New Condos $353,645 $254,900 $391,900 $254,900 $429,500

Existing Condos $265,000 $279,900 $267,550 $296,595 $263,902 $295,000
5 Montgomery County defines workforce incomes as those

between 80 percent and 120 percent of Washington DC Metro’s
Area Median Income (AMI). The Washington Metro AMI was
$94,500 for a 4-person household in Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 (HUD,
2007).
First Half Approx. HH
2005 Median 2006 Median of 2007 Median income req'd. in
Sales Price #Units Sales Price # Units Sales Price Units 2007
New & Used Single Family Detached Germantown $350,000 2,094 $355,000 1,507 $350,000 626 $88,200
& Attached Homes Countywide $460,003 16,731 $485,000 12,490 $489,900 5,228 $123,455
Germantown $265,000 816 $265,000 840 $263,900 387 $66,503
New & Used Condos - Combined
Countywide $280,900 6,029 $302,950 4,750 $307,500 2,404 $77,490
Germantown $769,125 75 $806,850 30 $664,575 2 $167,473
North Bethesda $1,175,000 5 $1,272,100 10 $1,295,500 4 $326,466
Wheaton $737,424 16 $1,020,000 17 $885,000 7 $223,020
New Single Family Detached Homes
Silver Spring $939,463 2
Takoma Park $538,500 2 $1,055,000 2 $650,000 1 $163,800
Countywide $775,218 751 $881,600 520 $1,159,695 157 $292,243
Germantown $580,000 512 $610,000 363 $545,000 155 $137,340
North Bethesda $620,000 332 $591,250 266 $619,500 126 $156,114
Existing Single Family Detached Wheaton $419,000 1,411 $450,000 1,072 $448,000 421 $112,896
Homes Silver Spring $535,000 275 $540,000 245 $575,000 99 $144,900
Takoma Park $415,500 340 $450,000 276 $465,000 103 $117,180
Countywide $530,000 9,757 $552,500 7,497 $557,875 3,234 $140,585
Germantown $138,696 19 $450,000 4
North Bethesda $648,041 9
Wheaton $539,920 35 $609,465 3
New Single Family Attached Homes
Silver Spring $854,805 10 $215,411
Takoma Park
Countywide $499,375 507 $526,680 92 $491,353 107 $123,821
Germantown $323,000 1,488 $337,000 1,110 $333,000 469 $83,916
North Bethesda $645,750 100 $630,000 59 $622,500 50 $156,870
Existing Single Family Attached Wheaton $339,950 216 $385,200 172 $427,000 79 $107,604
Homes Silver Spring $520,750 18 $550,000 21 $579,700 12 $146,084
Takoma Park $290,500 26 $320,000 34 $340,000 9 $85,680
Countywide $340,000 5,716 $356,750 4,134 $365,000 1,730 $91,980
Germantown $254,900 94 $254,900 17 $64,235
North Bethesda $440,000 153 $110,880
Wheaton
New Condos
Silver Spring $284,886 33 $350,450 136 $334,033 63 $84,176
Takoma Park $269,000 4 $241,750 2
Countywide $353,645 340 $377,378 500 $429,500 348 $108,234
Germantown $265,000 816 $267,550 746 $263,902 370 $66,503
North Bethesda $329,900 1,060 $334,950 558 $332,950 274 $83,903
Wheaton $260,000 180 $270,000 143 $287,500 50 $72,450
Existing Condos
Silver Spring $272,500 116 $320,985 287 $329,950 186 $83,147
Takoma Park $205,500 52 $239,500 24 $241,400 30 $60,833
Countywide $279,900 5,689 $296,595 4,250 $295,000 2,056 $74,340
Figure 11: Incomes required for median-priced homes
Figure 12, far left: Rental market
areas
Figure 13, left: Location of rental
properties and group homes
Figure 14, below: Rental properties
within Sector Plan area
1-Bedroom Units 2-Bedroom Units 3-Bedroom Units

Year Low High Low High Low High
Name Type built Number Rent Rent Number Rent Rent Number Rent Rent
The Hamptons Garden 1980 496 $915 $915 272 $1,140 $1,220 0 NA NA
Middlebrook Square Towns 1973 0 NA NA 75 BMR BMR 0 NA NA
Oak Mill II Garden 2001 48 $860 $1,140 75 $1,140 $1,395 0 NA NA
Pinnacle at Town Center Garden 2001 76 $1,170 $1,400 176 $1,380 $1,810 31 $1,700 $1,755
Fox Run Garden 1991 56 $1,129 $1,149 118 $1,299 $1,319 0 $0 $0
Elms at Germantown Garden 2005 42 $1,225 $1,445 207 $1,340 $1,780 11 $1,660 $1,940
Milestone Garden 1998 252 $1,115 $1,200 264 $1,300 $1,400 60 $1,575 $1,595
Rolling Hills Apartments Garden 1985 0 NA NA 440 $1,100 $1,200 0 NA NA
Oak Mill Apartments Garden 2001 68 $860 $1,140 140 $1,140 $1,395 0 NA NA
Totals 1,038 1,692 102
Rentals the below-market-rent units in Middlebrook can be amount translate into significant rent increases.
targeted for protection, the units in the Hamptons For example, the average turnover rate for
The Montgomery County Department of Housing are more vulnerable to pressure for higher rents, efficiency apartments in Germantown increased at
and Community Affairs (DHCA) licenses rental condo conversion, or other redevelopment an annual rate of approximately four percent,
apartments and conducts annual surveys to schemes. 7 which increased the monthly rent from $644 in
determine rental vacancy rates and turnover rents 2000 to $844 in 2007. The Department of
for the various market areas and produces the While the Housing Opportunities Commission Housing and Community Affairs (DHCA) sets rent
annual DHCA Rental Apartment Vacancy Report. (HOC) has the right of first refusal for any increase ―guidance,‖ only.
The study area is within the larger Germantown- multifamily property built before 1981, there is no
Gaithersburg Market area. guarantee that the HOC will be able to purchase Income Needed
units when they become available. For this
Rental Supply reason, a policy of no net loss of affordable units is In 2007, the average turnover rents in the
needed to ensure that the Germantown planning Germantown market area remained relatively
Nine rental complexes are within the Sector Plan area maintains a stock of affordable rental units affordable to moderate income households.8 For
area providing a total of 2,832 units: 1,038 one- for the years to come. example a three-bedroom apartment in this area
bedroom units, 1,692 two--bedroom units, and rented for an average of $1,429, monthly, which is
102 three-bedroom units. In the Rental Properties Turnover Rents affordable to households earning approximately
table, Figure 14, the rent ranges are given for the $56,200, annually. During the same period, a 4-
apartments in the study area. Only Middlebrook ―Turnover rents‖ are the rents charged to new bedroom apartment rented for an average of
Square‘s exact rents are unknown, because all 75 tenants after an apartment has been vacated and $1,566, which is affordable to a household
are subsidized and are referred to only as below- rerented (turned over). The average turnover rents earning approximately $62,640 annually. Many
market-rent units.6 in the Germantown market area are lower than the rents include utilities, but when the rents do not
countywide turnover rents for apartments with the include utilities, housing costs may be too
On average, Germantown rents are more same number of bedrooms. This has been true expensive for these income levels. Figure 16
affordable than Countywide, primarily due to the since 2000. shows the impact on affordability, with and without
age of the units. Approximately 45 percent of the utilities.
properties were built before 1981. Age is also an The industry standard is a 3.5 percent rent
indication that these same units may be ripe for increase annually. Even small increases over that
substantial rehabilitation or redevelopment. While
8 Generally, an apartment is considered affordable if the cost of
7 The ―year built‖ data in Figure 3 should be considered to be
monthly rent and utilities, annualized, do not exceed 30 percent of
approximate, because the date information sometimes reflects
6For the purpose of this report, the units in Middlebrook Square the date of substantial rehabilitation or modification, instead of the (gross) annual household income. (HUD,
are assumed to have two bedrooms. the date of the original building construction. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/)
Number of Approximate Income Approximate Income
Bedrooms (BR) in Rent Needed if Rent Needed if Utilities
Unit includes Utilities are Extra
Efficiency $844 $33,760 $36,461

1-BR $1,051 $42,040 $45,403
2-BR $1,224 $48,960 $52,877
3-BR $1,429 $57,160 $61,733
4 or More BRs $1,566 $62,640 $67,651
Figure 15: Germantown turnover market rents Figure 16: Minimum income required for rents to be affordable in Germantown
Household Size Maximum Income

1 $43,000
2 $49,000
3 $55,500
4 $61,500
5 $66,500
Figure 17: MPDU income limits for renters, 2007
Figure 18: Germantown-Gaithersburg Market area vacancy rates

2000 to 2007
The ―incomes needed‖ from Figure 16 are within efficiency apartments and one-bedroom senior housing9 rental units, while all units at
the income ranges of the MPDU program, shown in apartments, but was relatively loose for three- and Kings Crossing are for-sale age-restricted MPDU
Figure 17. Additionally, in 2007, to qualify for four-bedroom apartments. This indicates that one- condos. The senior housing projects consist of two
MPDU rental units, a household‘s income must be bedroom units and efficiencies are in demand, rental facilities that provide a total of 223
at least $30,000, annually, and the maximum and that one- and two-person households are independent living units and four group homes
incomes are based on numbers of persons in the attracted to rentals in Germantown. On the other that provide a total of 24 assisted-living beds.
household. hand, three and four-bedroom units in Currently, there are no senior living facilities for
Germantown had relatively high vacancy rates at sale or for rent within the study area proper. One
Vacancy and Turnover Rates 6.1 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively. project however is approved but not built.
Vacancy rates are the percentage of time out of a One of the factors affecting the vacancy rates for Senior-living ownership opportunities in
given year that an apartment did not bring in rent. the large apartments is the high amount of rent Germantown include 110 age-restricted MPDU
Generally, a 5-percent vacancy rate indicates a being charged for those units. Households that condominiums in the Kings Crossing facility, where
relatively tight rental market. Countywide, the need three or four bedrooms may not want to one-, two-, and three-bedroom garden
vacancy rate remained tight (4.7 percent) in 2007 spend as much or more on rent than they would condominiums range in price from $149,900 to
(DHCA 2007 5). The Germantown-Gaithersburg on a mortgage. Another factor affecting the $169,900. Assuming that homeowners put at least
market area had a higher vacancy rate than the vacancy rates for large units is the much larger ten percent down, the annual household income
County (6.0 percent and 4.7 percent, respectively). demand for smaller units in the Germantown area. needed to afford a senior condominium at King‘s
Over a third of apartments in Germantown ―turned In other words, the market for smaller units does Crossing is between $40,000 and $50,000.
over‖ in 2006 to 2007. not offer any ―spillover‖ demand for larger units. If Properties that offer independent living
a household is in the market for a one- or two- opportunities are subject to the MPDU ordinance,
DHCA reported that the Germantown– bedroom unit, it is unlikely that it would be willing and all three of the independent living facilities
Gaithersburg market area had the highest to pay for a three- or four-bedroom unit, just listed in Figure 23 meet or exceed the MPDU
turnover rate in the County, with 35.7 percent of because it was vacant. requirement.
the rental units changing tenants from April 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007. The County Senior Housing
turnover rate during the same period was 31.2
percent. Existing Situation
Churchill Village and Clopper Mill Village provide 9
Senior housing is a term that covers housing that is age-restricted and
serves those persons either 55 or 62 years of age and older. Age-
Of the various unit sizes (numbers of bedrooms), restricted independent living properties, often called "Active Adult
Communities," serve households with at least one adult over 55 years
the 2007 Germantown market area was tight for of age. Many other senior housing facilities serve only those over 62
years of age. See Appendix A for a glossary of senior housing terms.
Number of Units/Beds Figure 19, above: Germantown
Facility Name Type Rental Ownership population, 2005 and 2030
Independent Living 121
Churchill Senior Living Independent Living * 133
Assisted Living * 46 Figure 20, left: Senior housing in
New Covenant Village** Independent Living 88 Germantown
Willow Manor at Clopper‘s Mill Independent Living 102
Foreman‘s Place Assisted Living 4
Warm Heart Family Assisted Living Assisted Living 5
Golden Age Retirement Home Assisted Living 7
R & W Eldercare Services Assisted Living 8
King‘s Crossing Independent Living - MPDU 110
Totals 514 110
*Approved July 17, 2008; unbuilt
**2007/2008 construction, now being leased
Senior Housing Definitions
Active Adult Communities These age-restricted communities comprise a variety of housing types, including a sizable number of single-family units, for
healthy and mobile residents over the age of 55. They include recreational facilities, such as swimming pools, tennis courts,
a clubhouse or golf courses, though some may feature business centers.
Aging in place Older residents remain in the same non-age-restricted homes and communities of their younger-adult years and rely on
services delivered to the home, if required. Such services may include Meals on Wheels, help with housekeeping and
shopping, home health aides, visiting nurses, and similar supportive options.
Assisted living Designed for adults who need help with the basic activities of daily living, such as bathing, dressing, and mobility. Most
facilities offer three meals per day, assistance with personal care, and a variety of activities.
Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) CCRCs offer more than one level of care with the expectation that residents will move freely from one level
to another as their needs change. CCRCs facilitate moves between levels of care if space is available at another level. (See
―Life Care,‖ below.)
Group home A residence for up to 15 people designated as disabled or senior. Residents typically have rooms rather than full dwelling
units and receive care similar to assisted living.
Household A household may consist of a single person or two or more persons sharing living quarters.
Independent living facilities Designed for healthy older adults, independent living communities vary in the amount of service offered, with some providing
primarily maintenance, lawn care, security, some social or wellness programs, and transportation. Most buildings are
constructed to accommodate physical disabilities.
Life Care is a term used interchangeably with CCRC. In life care, residents are guaranteed the ability to move from one level of care to
another as necessary, often with little change in financial arrangements. (See ―CCRC‖, above.)
Naturally Occurring Retirement Community (NORC) In the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service‘s 2004 report, Supportive Services Programs
in Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities, NORCs are defined as communities or buildings not designed specifically for
older people, but which naturally ―evolved in such a way that a large proportion of residents are older.‖
Nursing home A facility that offers skilled nursing care. Residents have ―beds‖ rather than apartments. There are fewer private rooms than
in other forms of housing. Nursing homes are rarely age-restricted, although a large percentage of residents are 65 and
older.
The 2005 population of the Germantown area residents age 55 and over plan to remain in their enable residents to stay in their own homes as
included about 10,000 residents 55 years of age current residence for the rest of their lives.‖ they age.
or older—only about 11 percent of the population. Another important finding was that most of the Provide assisted-living facilities and nursing
By 2030, the forecast is for over 25,000 residents residents 55 years of age or older who are working homes. Currently there are only 24 assisted-
55 years of age and older, and that will be about do not plan to retire. The Senior Housing Update living beds in four different facilities in or near
27 percent of the population. The number of (2006)11 inventoried the existing supply of senior the study area (Figure 20).
persons 65 years of age and older will swell from housing and compared the supply by type. Since Ensure that new residential construction
3,329 in 2005 to 14,130 in 2030. The number of 2000, there has been a countywide increase in includes efficiencies and 1-- and 2-bedroom
persons 75 years of age and older will increase to independent-living units, while there has been a rental units with elevators, sited within
about 4.5 times its 2005 level, from 1,231 in net loss of affordable assisted-living units. walkable mixed-use community, with services
2005 to 5,477 in 2030. The vast majority want to to ensure that workers of varying ages and
stay in their own homes, according to recent To allow Germantown‘s aging residents to stay as abilities can live independently as long as
studies. independent as they wish for as long as possible, possible.
they will need assisted-living options, such as the
Naturally occurring retirement communities following: Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs)
(NORCs) evolve when clusters of seniors stay at
home and age in place. Staff analysis revealed Ensure that all new multifamily housing Since the MPDU program began in earnest in
that 495 properties have been in the same construction offers first-floor at-grade ingress 1976, over 12,400 MPDUs have been produced,
ownership for 20 years or longer. Three relatively and egress, together with other accessibility with over one-fourth of them built in Germantown.
large clusters of such properties appear outside features. MPDUs constructed before 1995 have expired,
the study area: Churchill, Gunners Lake Village, Decentralize supportive services. Visiting unless the County, HOC, or another not-for-profit
and Fox Chapel. One cluster appears within the nurses, grocery and pharmacy home housing provider purchased the units and kept
study area in Meadowbrook Estates. deliveries, etc., are another example of them affordable. 12 MPDUs tend to remain
community supportive services that can relatively affordable after the control period
Research Findings expires, largely because these units are typically
smaller than market-rate units. Since 1983,
The 55+ Housing Preference Survey (2005) 10 needs and wants of those 55 and older in Montgomery County.
revealed that a ―majority of Montgomery County Over 16,000 random telephone calls yielded over 1,200 12Many of the MPDUs built in Germantown have expired,
completed interviews. The over 200 variables in the survey because the control periods were very short (10 years or less)
have been compiled into a database by Research & Technology for the first 25 years of the program. In 2001, the 10 year
10 http://www.mcparkandplanning.org/housing/ Center staff to be used in planning and policy analysis. control period was modified to reset if an MPDU was sold within
11 http://www.mcparkandplanning.org/research/
studies/housing%20_55.pdf. The survey, conducted by REDA, the control period. It was not until April 1, 2005, that the 30-
International, was conducted in 2004, and published in 2005. documents/SeniorHousing-Final.pdf. year and 99-year control periods went into effect for ownership
The telephone survey was designed to determine the housing and rental MPDUs, respectively.
Figure 22, above left: MPDUs built since 1985 in Germantown
Figure 23, above: Expiration profile of MPDUs
Figure 24, below left: HOC MPDUs in Germantown by structure type
Figure 25, below: MPDU income limits, March 2008
Household Maximum Income

Size MPDU Rentals MPDUs For Sale
Structure Type 1 2 3 4 5 Totals 1 $45,000 $48,500
Single-Family Detached 5 37 1 43 2 $51,500 $55,500
Townhouse 6 53 195 24 278 3 $58,000 $62,500
Garden Apartment 3 53 11 67 4 $64,500 $69,500
High Rise 5 5 5 $69,500 $75,000
Totals 9 111 211 61 1 393
2.3% 28.2% 53.7% 15.5% 0.3%
approximately 1,100 MPDUs have expired in the In Germantown, affordable workforce housing employees. Employers in Germantown should be
Germantown area. At the end of 2007, there were should be in the Town Center for many reasons, urged to participate in such programs.
still 1,181 MPDUs in control periods: 788 MPDUs including the fruition of a vision for the community
in DHCA control periods and 393 permanently that spans four decades. However, any site in the
controlled by HOC. study area that offers easy access to public transit,
employment opportunities, and community
About 54 percent of HOC‘s MPDUs are 3-bedroom services should be considered for workforce
units, about 28 percent are 2-bedroom units, housing.
about 16 percent are 4-bedroom units or larger,
and the remainder are 1-bedroom units. This mix Because the workforce includes a wide spectrum
generally reflects the market-rate mix, as well as of ages, abilities, and household types, units
the MPDUs in DHCA control periods. should be accessible. In the past only buildings
The income limits for the MPDU program are now with more than four stories were required to have
reset annually by the County Executive. MPDU elevators, but for housing to meet the needs of
sales prices and rents are not to exceed 30 workers of all ages and abilities, elevators become
percent of the annual income of eligible critically important, regardless of the number of
households. floors.
Workforce Housing Home Purchase Assistance
Germantown may have the most affordable In addition to the MPDU and Workforce Housing
workforce housing within Montgomery County, and Programs, Montgomery County offers households
preserving and increasing affordable workforce the opportunity to participate in a variety of
housing will be key to Germantown‘s future. In financial programs to assist with housing
addition to its affordability, a primary assumption affordability. Special attention is given to the
behind the concept of workforce housing in ―House Keys for Employees‖ program, in which
Montgomery County is that it can help households The Maryland Department of Housing and
save money by reducing dependence on personal Community Development offers a dollar-for-dollar
automobiles through proximity to transit or one‘s match for an employer‘s contribution for down-
employer. payment or closing-cost assistance to eligible
RENTAL PROGRAMS HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVELS SERVED 2008 AMI FOR WASHINGTON
DC METRO
$99,000
HOME-Funded Rental Housing At a minimum: 20% HOME units – HHs up to 50% AMI $49,500
70% HOME units – HHs up to 60% AMI $59,400
Tenant Based Rental Assistance At a minimum: 90% HOME units – HHs up to 60% AMI $89,100
Public Housing HHs up to 50% AMI $49,500

Housing Choice Vouchers At a minimum: 75% vouchers – HHs up to 30% AMI $29,700
25% vouchers – HHs up to 50% AMI $49,500
Home Ownership Programs Household Income Levels Served
American Dream Down Payment Households up to 80% AMI $79,200
HOC Closing Cost Assistance 1 and 2 person HHs may earn up to 100% AMI $99,000
3+ person HHs may earn up to 115% AMI $113,850
HOC Mortgage Purchase Program 1 and 2 person HHs may earn up to 100% AMI $99,000
3+ person HHs may earn up to 115% AMI $113,850
Moderately-Priced Dwelling Units Households up to approximately 60% of AMI $59,400
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits At a minimum: 20% units – HHs up to 50% AMI, or $49,500
40% units – HHs up to 60% AMI $59,400
CDBG-Funded Homeowner Rehab Households up to 80% AMI $79,200
House Keys for Employees 13 $5,000 from state and $5,000 from participating employer.14 1 or 2 person HHs up to $94,500; $94,500 to $108,675
3+ HH up to $108,675. Other limits apply.
closing costs from participating employers. The match is in the

13 Maryland‘s House Keys for Employees program is form of a zero percent deferred loan, which is repayable upon
administered by More House for Less and the State sale or transfer of the home or at the time of payoff or
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). refinancing.
Through the program, the State DHCD will match contributions 14 Maryland Department of Housing and Community
dollar-for-dollar, up to $5,000, toward down payment and Development (DHCD). www.morehouse4less.com.
Churchill Town Sector
APPENDIX 5: CHURCHILL TOWN SECTOR
About 300 acres of the Germantown Employment towns shall contain… all the residential, Many provisions of the town sector zone are
Area Sector Plan falls within the 1,554-acre commercial, community and industrial facilities unique. For example, a minimum of 1,500 acres is
Churchill town sector area (see map, opposite), needed to make possible a town that is reasonably required for any application for the zone; all uses
Because of the comprehensive nature of the town self-sufficient for all purposes, except major are permitted; there are no FAR maximums; and
sector (TS) zone, recommendations for TS-zoned employment and central business district there are no minimum lot sizes, setbacks or height
properties within the Sector Plan area must shopping‖ (Sec. 59-C-7.21). The following are limits.
include consideration of the entire Churchill town considered ―mutually interdependent
sector community. Additionally, staff has reviewed requirements‖: Constraints include limits on the total area for
the 2,435-acre town sector in Montgomery Village certain specified uses and on population:
for potential impacts, as the Village is the only a. Self-sufficiency (to include all desirable and commercial uses are permitted to occupy up to ten
other place in the County where the town sector necessary commercial, employment, cultural percent of the area; industrial and major
zone has been applied. and recreational facilities) employment facilities are permitted up to six
b. Diversity (to provide a variety of residential percent; and not less than ten percent open space
This section includes an updated accounting of the structure types, layouts, and rental and is required. Population constraints are based on
current land uses and population in the Churchill purchase prices) calculations included in the zone, rather than by
and Montgomery Village town sector areas, c. Density (to be urban rather than rural in order the resident population. No application for
recommendations for the part of the Churchill to facilitate travel and efficient use of public rezoning is to be granted until 50 years after the
town sector that falls within the Sector Plan area, utilities, but with large amounts of open land grant of the town sector zone.
and a discussion of potential amendments to the for recreational and scenic purposes)
town sector zone that have been considered d. Transportation facilities (to be sufficient to The population calculations and limits are unlike
during the preparation of this Plan. serve the anticipated total population) those found in other zones. The overall population
e. Public utilities (to have existing or planned is limited to 15 persons per acre based upon the
The Town Sector Zone sewer and water) total area of the town sector zone, and is
calculated based upon dwelling types; actual
The town sector zone was initially approved on The application of the zone is only appropriate for (census) population is not considered. The factors
May 18, 1965 (C-1522), to facilitate the creation land in identified corridor cities. used for calculating the population for each
of the New Towns described in the General Plan. dwelling type as described in the zone are:
As described in the Zoning Ordinance, ―(s)uch
count 3.7 persons per one-family detached based upon the total area within the town sector
dwelling; zone; except, that such planned population may EXAMPLES
count 3.0 persons per townhouse; be increased by an amount equal to the POPULATION CALCULATION
count 3.0 persons per multi-family dwelling population to be housed in moderately priced DUs Factor Pop.
that is less than five stories tall; and dwelling units included in the development plan in One-family
count 2.0 persons per multi-family dwelling accordance with chapter 25A of this Code, as detached 1,000 3.7 3,700
that is five or more stories tall. amended, provided that the total increase in Townhouses 3,000 3.0 9,000
population does not exceed 22 percent of the MF less than 5
For example, given a Corridor City of 1,500 acres, population that would otherwise be permitted stories 2,000 3.0 6,000
the total allowable population is first calculated by (Sec. 59-C-7.25). MF 5 or more
multiplying the total acreage (1,500) by the stories 1,900 2.0 3,800
maximum allowed, 15 persons per acre, for a total This differs from Chapter 25A (Housing, Total 7,900 --- 22,500
allowable population of 22,500. This 22,500 could Moderately Priced) calculations where the CALCULATION OF MPDUs
then be arranged in an unlimited number of ways minimum required 12.5 percent MPDUs are Market MPDUs Total
with various mixes of housing types, and the included in the total (base) density. The sidebar, units (12.5%) units
number of possible units can range from 6,081 (if Calculations of MPDUs, shows the difference in 1,000 base 875 125 1,000
all units were single-family detached dwellings) to 1,000 base density units and 1,000 market units, density units
11,250 (if they were all multi-family dwellings, five each with 12.5 percent MPDUs. 1,000 market 1,000 143 1,143
or more stories tall). The Population Calculation units
sidebar shows the calculations for one way the Chapter 25A states that 12.5 percent of the total In a 1,500-acre Corridor City, a population of 22,500
allowable population could be arranged. units must be MPDUs. Therefore, if 1,000 market (1,500 X 15) is permitted. If all homes are townhouses
units are permitted, 143 MPDUs are required, for (3.0 persons per townhouse), 7,500 market units are
The town sector zone includes a provision allowing a total of 1,143 units. allowed. With the required 12.5% (1,072) MPDUs, a
up to 22 percent moderately priced dwelling units total of 8,572 units are built.
(MPDUs) in excess of the 15 persons per acre The town sector zone MPDU provision differs in CALCULATION OF BONUS MPDUs
maximum; as the provision is written, it is one other way. In most zones, a market rate bonus
Market MPDUs Total
calculated differently than the 22 percent bonus density is offered when more than the minimum
units units
density that is offered in other zones: 12.5 percent MPDUs are provided; the town sector
Town sector with 7,500 1,650 9,150
zone does not include this provision (see excerpt
22% MPDUs
The population of the town sector zone must be from Sec. 59-C-7.25, above, and Calculation of
Non-town sector 8,888 1,569 10,457
planned so as not to exceed 15 persons per acre
with MPDU bonus
Bonus MPDUs, sidebar). The charts below show a higher number of MPDUs Churchill:
the difference in this provision with more detail. a lower number of market and total units Initial town sector zoning, F-148,
a lower population per acre, and approved October 1968
In comparing the town sector MPDU provisions to a lower density. 1,554 acres (just slightly above the
most other zones, the town sector 22 percent 1,500-acre minimum required)
bonus results in: The town sector contains no apparent incentive for A mixed residential-public-commercial
providing bonus MPDUs, though projects with character
bonus MPDUs (in at least one case in excess of 22 In the Germantown corridor city and part
percent) have been approved in both Montgomery of the I-270 employment corridor
Village and Churchill. Developed by numerous entities
Represented by numerous landowners
Two Town Sector Communities: and home owner associations.
Montgomery Village and Churchill
The table below, Comparing Zoning Maximums,
The town sector zone applies to almost 4,000 shows the greater commercial area in Churchill,
acres within two areas of the County: Montgomery and the Research and Development use that is
Village and Churchill. The two areas are similar in approved on the development plan; this reflects
some respects, but they differ in others. Churchill‘s proximity to the Employment Corridor
Chart: Town Sector with 22 Percent MPDUs and Montgomery Village‘s slight removal from it.
Montgomery Village: Churchill‘s larger percentage of open area is
Initial town sector zoning, E-327, largely due to the surface area of Lake Churchill.
approved August 1965
2,435 acres The second table below, Comparing Populations,
A mixed residential character updates and compares the existing and approved
Partly within the Gaithersburg corridor housing types and populations of Montgomery
city; adjacent to commercial and Village and Churchill. The existing population
employment areas near MD 355 and I- density in both Montgomery Village and Churchill
270 has been debated and examined at length. In
Developed by one entity 2005 and 2006, Montgomery Village residents did
Represented by the Montgomery Village an extensive study of their population and
Chart: Non-Town Sector MPDUs with 22
Foundation provided it to the community, staff and interested
Percent Bonus
developers. Staff used these corrections in their Comparing the two communities, staff observes
findings for a proposed mixed-use project about five percent more single-family detached
(820060400), but the corrections will not appear units and almost 15 percent more townhouses in
on a Development Plan until the plan in amended Montgomery Village than in Churchill, and about
14 percent more low-rise apartments in Churchill.
In Churchill, staff conducted an inventory of all Because none of the recommended high-rise units
land uses as part of the Germantown Employment have been built in Churchill, a comparison is
Area Sector Plan update, and found errors in the unequal; 4.8 percent exist in Montgomery Village
total acreage, land uses and population; this staff and 10.5 percent have been recommended in
inventory is being used in this report, above and Churchill, but none exist today.
below, but as noted previously, they differ from
past Development Plans. Staff is including MPDUs
as a separate item in this calculation, which was
done for the first time by Montgomery Village
residents as part of their study, and has not been
done for Churchill until now.
Comparing Zoning Maximums, Montgomery Village and Churchill

Acres Commercial (10% max) Industrial/Major employment (6% max) Open space (10% min)
Montgomery Village – existing * 2,434.8 43.1 0 696.8
- Approved, unbuilt 0 0 0
- Percent 1.8% 0.0% 28.6%
- Max allowed (min req) 243.5 146.1 (243.5)
- Remaining (above min) 200.4 146.1 (453.3)
Churchill – existing ** 1,554.0 75.8 0 745.2
- Approved, unbuilt 0 75 0
- Percent 4.9% 4.8% 48.0%***
- Max allowed (min req) 155.4 93.2 (155.4)
- Remaining (above min) 79.6 18.2 (356.5)
*From Montgomery Village DPA 02-2, corrected April 7, 2006
** Staff calculations; several errors found in current and past Churchill DPAs
***Includes Lake Churchill ( 17.3% belongs to WSSC)
Comparing Populations:
Montgomery Village and Churchill
Total
Market units Population MPDUs Population Total units Population
Montgomery Village:
2,434.8 acres X 15 persons per acre = 36,522 total permitted population*
36,522 – 36,285 = 237 remaining population
- One-family detached (X 3.7) 2,102 7,778**** 0 0 2,102 7,778
- Townhouses (X 3.0) 5,736 17,208 745 2235 6,481 19,443
- Multiple family < 5 stories (X 3.0) 3,387 10,161 26 78 3,413 10,239
- Multiple family 5 or more stories (X 2.0) 569 1,138 32 64 601 1,202
Montgomery Village (total existing, recommended, approved) 11,794 36,285 803 2,377 12,597 38,662
Churchill:
1554.0 acres X 15 persons per acre = 23,310 total permitted population**
23,310 – 19,395 = 3,915 remaining population
- One-family detached (X 3.7) 827 3,060**** 0 0 827 3,060
- Townhouses (X 3.0) 2,314 6,942 299 897 2,613 7,839
- Multiple family 5 or more stories (X 2.0)*** 651 1,302 94 188 745 1,490
Churchill (total existing, recommended***, approved) 6,489 19,395 634***** 1,808 7,123 21,203
*Source: MVF and residents calculations; confirmation should made at time of next DPA
** Source: Staff inventory and HOC GIS data files; confirmation should be made at time of next DPA.
***1989 Germantown Master Plan and 1992 Town Center Design Study; unbuilt
****Rounding differences noted from previous calculations
*****HOC data indicate that about 308 of these units expired between 1985 and July 2008
Churchill Town Sector As approved in 1968 (F-148), Churchill would development, and the minimum requirement for
include a broad mix of housing types, schools and green area has been generously met. The current
Part of the Churchill town sector area falls within recreational areas, plus 109 acres of commercial land use mix is summarized in the table below,
the current Sector Plan area, and part falls outside uses, 75 acres of industrial uses, and a 100-acre Churchill Town Sector Land Use Mix, 2008.
of it (see map at the start of this section); the latter University Science Center. Under that original
area is largely developed with residential uses, approval, Churchill met the self-sufficiency goal of This table includes details of the acreage of each
and will continue to be guided by the 1989 the zone, but much of that proposal has never housing type as a percentage of the area, rather
Germantown Master Plan. Below, a brief history been realized—there is no University Science than by unit count; this information appears on
and summary of the entire Churchill area is Center, industrial park or dense Central Business each development plan. Since its inception, an
followed by detailed information about the town District with high-rise housing. (Some of the details important goal of the town sector zone has been to
sector properties that fall within the current Sector of the zoning cases, along with earlier master plan provide a mix of dwelling types; Churchill has
Plan area. Calculations that include the Draft Plan recommendations, from 1966, 1974 and 1989, struggled to attain this mix. The following table,
recommendations are shown in the latter section and development plan approvals will be included Comparing Germantown Housing, 1968 and 2008,
only. in discussions of individual properties, where they shows the housing types proposed in 1968 and
are pertinent to current recommendations.) the housing that now exists.
History and Summary
The 1,554.00413-acre Churchill town sector area Today, the Churchill town sector area has a mixed Since 1968, developers have built fewer dwelling
has been created through three zoning cases: residential, public and commercial character; it units than was approved in the original zoning
includes the Germantown Town Center, with case, and they have built housing types that have
F-148 shopping, restaurants and offices, plus BlackRock a lower density per acre. As a result, there is little
October 1968 Center for the Arts, the Germantown Library, the remaining land intended for residential use. In
1,504.0923 acres Upcounty Services Center, and the Churchill Village addition, none of the 2,600 proposed high-rise
residential area, as designated in the 1989 multi-family units have been built. Because the
F-923 Germantown Master Plan. About 76 of the 109 population formula assumes a lower population
September 1974 acres of original commercial uses have been count for high-rise multi-family dwellings, the
25.17183 acres realized, and a 75-acre industrial area now remaining population is lower than it would have
appears as a Research and Development Campus been under the original mix. These market forces
G-742 on Churchill‘s approved development plan, though have resulted in a lower-than anticipated number
October 1997 it has not been built. The maximum percentage of homes, a more sprawling character and a
24.74 acres limits for commercial, industrial and major narrower mix of unit types than envisioned. It is
employment uses are not constraining
Churchill Town Sector Land Use Mix, 2008
Private owners Quasi-public,
Land Use (acres) non-profit Public owners Acres Percentage Max % (min %)
Residential 411.204 411.204 26.5%
Subtotals: SFD 167.624 167.624 10.8%
SFA 97.195 97.195 6.3%
MF – low-rise 146.385 146.385 9.4%
MF – high-rise 0.0%
Commercial 75.782 75.782 4.9% 10%
Industrial/Major empl.* 75 75 4.8% 6%
Churches 10.998 10.998 0.7%
Public Uses 7.729 55.321 63.05 4.1%
Subtotals: Utilities 7.729 7.729 0.5%
Schools 40.013 40.013 2.6%
BlackRock Center for the Arts 1.13 1.13 0.1%
Upcounty Services Center 5.451 5.451 0.4%
Library and future park 8.727 8.727 0.6%
Open Space 233.25 269.409 242.54 745.199 48.0% (10% min)
Subtotals: Parks 242.54 242.54 15.6%
Lake Churchill (WSSC) 269.409 269.409 17.3%
HOA, private rec, open space 233.25 233.25 15.0%
Major Roads** 172.77113 172.77113 11.1%
Totals 795.236 288.136 470.63213 1,554.00413 100.0%
*Approved, unbuilt
** No SDAT information available. Based on total TS acres minus total SDAT and/or GIS acres.
Comparing Churchill Housing: 1968 and 2008
1968 proposal (DUs) 1968 percentage 2008 existing (DUs) 2008 percentage
One-family detached 800 9.8% 827 13.0%
Townhouses 2,500 30.5% 2,613 41.0%
Multiple family < 5 stories 2,300 28.0% 2,938 46.1%
Multiple family 5 or more stories 2,600 31.7% 0 0.0%
Total 8,200 100.0% 6,378 100.1%*
*Rounding results distort total
Churchill Housing Details: Existing, approved and master planned*
Market units Percentage MPDUs Percentage Total units Total Percentage

One-family detached 827 11.4% 0 0.0% 827 11.4%
Townhouses 2,314 32.0% 299 4.1% 2,613 36.1%
Multiple family < 5 stories 2,697 37.3% 241 3.3% 2,938 40.6%
Multiple family 5 or more stories** 745 10.3% 107 1.5% 852 11.8%
Total existing, recommended**, approved 6,583 91.1 647*** 8.9% 7,230 100.0%
* Source: Staff inventory and HOC GIS data files; confirmation should be made at time of next DPA.
**Recommended (1989 Germantown Master Plan and 1992 Town Center Design Study) but unbuilt
***HOC data indicate that about 308 of these units expired between 1985 and July 2008
Churchill Town Sector Properties within the Town Center and West End
also creating pressure to allow housing in areas Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan Properties in the Town Center and West End were
planned for major employment uses. added to the town sector zone in 1968, 1974, and
About 300 acres of the Churchill town sector is 1997. In 1968, most of this area was designated
The second housing table, Churchill Housing included in the current Sector Plan. The properties as the central business district (CBD) area of the
Details, provides a breakdown by type of dwelling will be described in the order in which they appear Churchill town sector, encompassing the main
units and by MPDUs that are approved, built or in in the Draft Plan: the Town Center and West End commercial uses together with some of the
the 1989 and 1992 Germantown plans, by followed by the North End. recommended high-rise residential units. The
percentage of unit type. Almost half of the MPDUs 1974 and 1997 zoning additions have been
shown are no longer controlled. consistent with this vision, but the construction
has been more modest than the vision.
Area 1 (see numbered map, below), is the site of for employment. As part of the transit area, these rise market rate housing units remain, with MPDUs
the future Town Center CCT stop. This area, which two blocks are now recommended for further added, as above.
currently contains a commuter parking lot and development of mixed commercial uses,
several pad sites, is planned for a mix of office, entertainment and housing up to 2.0 FAR with Area 4, included in the 1968 zoning approval,
retail and residential uses at 2.0 FAR, with structured parking. As above, the area will remain contains the Upcounty Services Center,
commuter parking moving into a structure on the as commercial acreage, with 100 units of high-rise Germantown Commons Shopping Center, several
site. In 1997, at the time of rezoning, a proposal market-rate housing plus MPDUs. pad sites and across Germantown Road, the
that is similar to the current recommendations Germantown Square Park and part of a car wash.
was included for review, but not approved. Under Area 3, part of the 1968 and 1974 zoning Redevelopment of the shopping center at 0.5 FAR
the town sector zone limits, this area is expected approvals, contains the Germantown Library, with up to 40 percent housing is recommended.
to remain counted as commercial acreage with several hundred townhouses and apartments, Staff recommends up to 135 low-rise multi-family
500 units of high-rise market-rate housing, and Safeway, Euromotors and other retail and office market-rate units, plus MPDUs, for this area.
12.5 to 22 percent MPDUs. uses. In the 1974 Germantown Master Plan, this
area was designated as a regional and office Area 5, also part of the 1968 rezoning, contains a
Area 2, also part of the 1997 zoning application, commercial area with a library and a common church, housing, offices and warehouse
currently contains a hotel and cinemas with green. A 1997 development plan amendment commercial uses. The area contains smaller
surface parking. Prior to the rezoning, the 1989 changed this area to mixed use; current properties and has a limited amount of vacant
Germantown Master Plan recommended this area recommendations continue to reflect mixed use. land. The 16.5 acres of commercial properties are
Fewer jobs and high-rise housing expected to remain as commercial uses; partial
units have been developed in this redevelopment up to 0.5 FAR is recommended.
area than have been planned. The church and housing is expected to remain. A
When the commercial portion of past approval for 124 market-rate housing units
2 this area redevelops, higher plus MPDUs on the church property has been
densities, to 1.0 FAR, are retained.
1
5 3 recommended. Under the town
sector limits, this area remains North End
4 counted partially as commercial The Far North Village property was included in the
and partially as residential. From town sector application in 1968, with 75 acres
past recommendations, 245 high- recommended for industrial uses. A 1973
Churchill Town Sector Properties in the Town Center and West End
development plan amendment, reflected Since 1968, the property has not been developed;
in the 1974 Master Plan, changed the it currently contains a driving range. Staff
uses in this area to residential (179 continues to recommend that up to 75 acres of
single-family detached units and 225 the property be developed, and as it is adjacent to
townhouses) with a school and a park. both a future transit stop and I-270, considers this
Subsequently, DPA 83-3 again changed an important site for employment in Germantown.
the 75 acres to a 2.7 million square foot This recommendation includes 1.5 million square
Research and Development Park, but feet of R&D and major employment, with the
traffic was limited to the prior residential potential for that to include a hotel and a limited
approval. With DPA 89-3, the proposal amount of retail. To allow a broader mix of uses at
was modified to permit only 1.3 million transit and for compatibility with the adjacent
square feet of R&D development on 75 residential community, an allowance for 570
acres; this appears on the current market-rate multi-family units has been added to
development plan. In 1994, about 63 the site; half should be high-rise and half should
acres of stream valley was dedicated, to be low-rise units.
become part of Black Hill Regional Park,
North End Properties: Far North Village leaving about 110 acres of property.
Churchill Housing Details: Adding proposed units to existing units

Existing Existing Total existing Prop Prop MPDUs Total Ex + prop Ex + prop Ex + prop
market units MPDUs units market units (12.5%)* Prop market units MPDUs total
One-family detached 827 0 827 827 0 827
Townhouses 2,314 299 2,613 2,314 299 2,613
Multiple family < 5 2,697 241 2,938 544 78 622 3,241 319 3,560
stories
Multiple family 5 or 1,130 162 1,292 1,130 162 1,292
more stories
Total 5,838 540** 6,387 1,674 240 1,914 7,512 780 8,292
Note that the 1989 and 1992 recommended units have been moved into the Proposed columns
* RTC MPDU calculator used
** HOC data indicate that about 308 of these units expired between 1985 and July 2008
The remaining approximately 35 acres of this Town Sector Land Use Mix, 2008, but they will redevelopment are possible. Extinguishing all
property contains forest identified for preservation. change the housing and population calculations. or nearly all further rights to develop should
As the zone states: ―it is the purpose of this zone The table, Churchill Housing Details, shows the only be considered when the area is part of a
to preserve and take the greatest possible addition of the proposed housing. The table, master plan amendment. Until such an
aesthetic advantage of trees‖ (Purpose, 59-C- Proposed Churchill Population, shows the amendment is undertaken and the entire
7.21). In the event the retention of this forest is in population details by housing type, and its impact Churchill Town Sector is engaged, no further
conflict with the additional housing on the overall population. density should be assigned to the Sector Plan
recommendation, high-rise units may be area.
substituted for the recommended low-rise units It is not recommended that the full 15 person per
and the population allowance of 1,425 converted acre density be allotted to this area; a permitted Second, if more than 12.5 percent MPDUs
to reflect the high-rise units. population of 1,325 is projected to remain. This were provided on a site, the bonus market
recommendation is based upon two density provisions of Chapter 25A would not
At the time that a Development Plan Amendment considerations: apply because the town sector zone does not
is submitted for these or any other Churchill town reflect this provision. However, a slight
sector properties, detailed tables showing the land First, more than 1,200 acres (about 81 amendment to either the town sector zone or
use mix, housing and population should be percent) of the Churchill town sector zone is Chapter 25A could change this, and such an
provided. outside of the Sector Plan area, and an amendment would increase the potential
allowance should remain for changes in that number of units up to 22 percent. Such a
These recommendations will not change the land much larger area. Although that area is largely change could have a significant impact on the
use mix shown in the previous table, Churchill developed, infill development and character of Churchill and Montgomery Village,
Proposed Churchill population

Market units Population MPDUs Population Total units Total Population
Churchill:
1554.0 acres X 15 persons per acre = 23,310 total permitted population
23,310 – 21,985 = 1,325 remaining population
- One-family detached (X 3.7) 827 3,060 0 0 827 3,060
- Townhouses (X 3.0) 2,314 6,942 299 897 2,613 7,839
- Multiple family 5 or more stories (X 2.0) 1,130 2.260 162 324 1,292 2,584
Churchill (total existing, recommended, approved) 7,512 21,985 780 2,178 8,292 24,163
and is not being recommended. and the actual commercial area was zone are required to provide 65 percent green
determined to be substantially lower than is area. To compare the town sector zone with
Consideration of Amendments to the Town Sector shown. Staff sees no need for a change to this other mixed use zones, the TOMX and TMX
Zone limit. zones have a 75 percent coverage maximum,
and the RMX zones require ten to 20 percent
Several property owners and interested parties Should the industrial and major employment green area within the commercial portion of
have discussed amending the town sector zone, area maximum of six percent be increased? the site and 20 to 50 percent green area in
and in reviewing the zone, staff has also (59-C-7.243). This maximum has already the residential portion.
considered revisions and clarifications. The increased; until 1999, the maximum was five
following changes have been considered; they percent. There has been no industrial or major Because there is a limited amount of
appear in the order in which the existing provisions employment built in the zone. Should this undeveloped land in the town sector zone, a
appear in the Zoning Ordinance. allowance be removed? Staff supports change to the total open space requirement
retaining the use as it supports self-sufficiency would have minimal impact. The bulk of the
Area requirements (59-C-7.24): in the area. open space was designated during the initial
Should the town sector zone area minimum of development plan approvals; much smaller
1,500 acres be changed? (59-C-7.241) Staff Should the open area minimum of ten percent amounts (by acreage and percentage) have
discussed the potential for removing a be changed? (59-C-7.244) Currently, about been provided during more recent approvals.
property from the Churchill town sector zone, 29 percent of the area in Montgomery Village
which would have reduced the total area and 48 percent of the area in Churchill is held Since both town sector communities exceed
below 1,500 acres. This would have reduced as open space. In analyzing the Churchill open the overall requirement for open space, there
the number of zones in transit areas, but space, staff notes that only about one-third is is a risk that future projects could be approved
would also have reduced the self-sufficiency of held in public parks (15.6 percent); the without any open space within the new
the zone. Staff does not recommend reducing balance is owned privately (mostly by HOAs) neighborhood. Staff has discussed a potential
the minimum acreage requirement. and by WSSC. requirement for open space for individual sites
to avoid areas without open space.
Should the commercial area maximum of ten To compare to other residential areas, homes Alternatively, staff considered minimum sizes
percent of the total area be increased? (59-C- are usually restricted by coverage maximums or dimensions of open spaces, to avoid small,
7.242) According to Churchill‘s last approved (e.g., 15-40 percent is common) or by green unusable open spaces. Staff recommends
development plan, the limit was being space requirements (e.g., 30-50 percent); the that the open space requirements be reviewed
approached. However, in reviewing the largest developments (above 750 acres) in more broadly, perhaps as part of the
development plan, several errors were found, the Planned Retirement Community (PRC)
comprehensive revision of the Zoning In considering the second recommendation, Procedures for application and approval (59-C-
Ordinance. staff concludes that adding a category for 7.28):
senior housing would be inconsistent with the Should the limits on reclassification be
Density of population (59-C-7.25): current formula which is based on dwelling changed? Once the town sector zone is
Should the population density provision be types, not on resident types. Staff notes that granted, properties cannot be reclassified for
changed? As described above, the population facilities which will support an aging 50 years. The town sector zone was granted in
density in the town sector zone cannot exceed population, such as nursing facilities, are Montgomery Village in 1965, and in Churchill
15 persons per acre. Two recommendations considered services and are not limited by any in 1968; those properties become eligible for
have been made to staff: that more percentage in the zone. reclassification in 2015 and 2018,
population should be permitted because respectively. The consequences of such
census information indicates that we do not Should the MPDU provision be changed? In reclassifications have not been examined. For
have an actual population of 15 persons per the town sector zone, the MPDU provision instance, if some properties are reclassified, it
acre; and because we have an aging differs markedly from those in Chapter 25A. In could reduce the allowed commercial and
population, and seniors have smaller the town sector zone, all MPDU population is major employment acreage, possibly taking
household sizes, a new category for in excess of the stated maximum population, other properties out of compliance with the
calculating senior housing should be added. whereas elsewhere, the required 12.5 percent zone.
is considered to be part of the maximum
Staff is unable to address the first argument density. In addition, the 22 percent maximum During the review of the open area and
because this agency does not have any MPDU calculation contains no market rate population standards noted above, staff
authority over the number of people living in a bonus. Last, the 22 percent cap is calculated recommends that the policies and procedures
dwelling unit. A trend toward smaller on the entire acreage of the area, rather than for reclassification be made explicit. Both
household sizes has been observed since site-by-site. These differences can reasonably should be part of the comprehensive zoning
1965, so further study may be appropriate. If be expected to cause ongoing confusion. revision.
the Planning Board wishes to examine the However, standardizing the zone to reflect
standards used to calculate the population in Chapter 25A could result in excess population Because the zone dates to the 1960s, the town
the zone, staff recommends doing it as described in the previous section. sector contains no provision for using transferable
comprehensively, rather than as part of the Clarification is recommended, but should be development rights (TDRs) or building lot
current Germantown Employment Area Sector mindful of this result. termination rights (BLTs).
Plan.
Staff is not making land use recommendations in
the Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan
that require amending the town sector zone, but
staff does find several sections of the zone where
clarification is desirable. An amendment should be
done as part of the comprehensive revision of the
Zoning Ordinance or a study of the complete town
sector area, rather than as part of this Sector Plan.
The two town sector communities, Montgomery
Village and Churchill, should be included in the
discussions of any amendments.
Summary
The town sector zone is a flexible, mixed use zone

that has been in place in Germantown for 40
years. It is a very workable tool for developing the
Employment Corridor as envisioned in the Sector
Plan, with concentrated, mixed-use transit nodes.
Staff recommends retaining the elements of major
employment and open space that have appeared
consistently over the years, and recommends
increasing the mix of uses, as has been proposed
in the Draft Plan. This can create the kind of self-
sufficient community described by the zone since
its inception in 1965.
APPENDIX 6: TOP 100 GERMANTOWN BUSINESSES (RANKED BY EMPLOYMENT)
Company Address Location Type Jobs Industry Description

United States Dept of Energy 19901 Germantown Rd Single Location 1,700 Federal Facility15
Hughes Network Systems LLC 11717 Exploration Ln Headquarters 900 Telecommunications Resellers
Acterna LLC 1 Milestone Center Ct Headquarters 700 Communications Manufacturing
Energy Enterprise Solutions 20440 Century Blvd # 150 Single Location 400 Computer Programming
Library Systems & Services LLC 12850 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 400 General Management Consulting
Wal-Mart 20910 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 400 Discount Department Store
WABTEC Railway Electronics 21200 Dorsey Mill Rd Headquarters 300 Instrument Testing and Manufacturing
Aerospace Products and Parts
GE Aviation Systems 20511 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Branch Office 250 Manufacturing
NCR Government Systems LLC 20370 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 250 Computer Systems Design
Science Applications International Computer Programming & Integrated
Corporation 20201 Century Blvd #200 Branch Office 223 Systems Design
A W S Convergence Technologies 12410 Milestone Center Dr Single Location 205 Internet Service Provider
Home Depot Inc 21010 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 200 Home Centers
Montgomery Community College 20200 Observation Dr Branch Campus 200 Universities & Colleges
Target 20908 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 200 Discount Department Store
Giant Food 19721 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 170 Supermarket
Qiagen Sciences Inc 19300 Germantown Rd Single Location 170 Testing Laboratory
Current Group LLC 20420 Century Blvd Single Location 167 Telecommunications
Universata 12800 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 150 Web Search Portal
Other Telecommunications Services
Telkonet 20374 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 141 (networking)
Giant Food 13060 Middlebrook Rd Branch Store Location 130 Supermarket
Kohl‘s 20918 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 120 Discount Department Store
Shoppers Food Warehouse 18066 Mateny Rd Branch Store Location 101 Supermarket
Best Buy 20914 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 100 Electronics stores
Current Technologies LLC 20420 Century Blvd Single Location 100 Electronic parts
American Marketing Services 12900 Cloverleaf Center Dr A Single Location 90 Newspaper Publishers
15 RTC estimate based on survey of federal facilities in Montgomery County
Axiom Systems Inc 20300 Century Blvd Ste 120 Single Location 87 Computer Programming
Telogy Networks Inc 20450 Century Blvd Single Location 85 Computer Programming
Outback Steakhouse 12609 Wisteria Dr Branch Store Location 80 Full Service Restaurant
Accuvia Consulting Inc 20250 Century Blvd Single Location 75 Computer Systems Design Services
Roberts Home Medical Inc 20465 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Headquarters 75 Medical Equipment & Supplies
Other Measuring & Controlling Device
Wilcoxon Research Inc 20511 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 75 Manufacturing
Rodgers Consulting Inc 19847 Century Blvd # 200 Single Location 70 Engineering Services
Safeway 19718 Germantown Rd Branch Store Location 70 Supermarket
Counter Technology Inc 20410 Observation Dr Single Location 67 Consulting Services
Egan Enterprises Inc 17001 Germantown Rd Single Location 65 Caterers
Red Robin America's Gourmet 20001 Century Blvd Single Location 65 Full-Service Restaurant
Systematic Management Services 20201 Century Blvd # 105 Headquarters 65 Remediation Services
EKA Systems Inc 20201 Century Blvd # 250 Single Location 62 Telecommunications
Montrose Motors Inc 19560 Frederick Rd Single Location 62 New Car Dealers
Defense Contract Audit Agency 20251 Century Blvd #320 Branch Office 60 National Security
National Institute of Vehicle Dynamics 17802 Black Stallion Way Single Location 60 Auto Driving School
Pc-Tel Inc 20410 Observation Dr Single Location 60 Communications Equipment
Samuel Asare 20400 Observation Dr Single Location 60 Business Services
Avalon Pharmaceuticals Inc 20358 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 56 Research & Development
Ruby Tuesday 19800 Century Blvd Branch Store Location 55 Full-Service Restaurant
Amarex LLC 20201 Century Blvd Single Location 53 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Optelecom-Nkf Inc 12920 Cloverleaf Center Dr Headquarters 53 Manufacturing
Trident Tek Inc 12900 Cloverleaf Center Dr B Single Location 52 Computer Storage Manufacturing
Carrabba‘s Italian Grill 19935 Century Blvd Branch Store Location 50 Full-Service Restaurant
Gcat LLC 19560 Amaranth Dr Single Location 50 Electronic Parts & Equipment
Germantown Electrical Contracting 19120 Mateny Hill Rd Single Location 50 Electrical Contractors
Imatek Inc 19568 Amaranth Dr Single Location 50 Software Publishers
Michael S Schindler MD 20528 Boland Farm Rd Single Location 50 Physicians Offices
RE Max Professional Inc 20270 Goldenrod Ln # 200 Single Location 50 Real Estate Agents
Asbury Group Integrated Technologies 20030 Century Blvd #300 Single Location 45 Information Technology
Borders Books & Music 20926 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 45 Book Stores
Planet Technologies Inc 20400 Observation Dr Single Location 45 Computer Systems
Project Enhancement Corp 20300 Century Blvd # 175 Single Location 45 Management Consulting
The Butler School 15951 Germantown Rd Single Location 45 Elementary & Secondary Schools
Vika Inc 20251 Century Blvd #400 Branch Office 45 Engineering Services
Atteloir Inc 12850 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 42 Computer Training
Advanced Technologies Labs 20010 Century Blvd #500 Single Location 40 Management Consulting
Circle School Seneca Academy 15601 Germantown Rd Single Location 40 Elementary & Secondary Schools
Pep Boys 20900 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 40 Automotive Services
Petsmart 20924 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 40 Pet supplies & pet care
Genesis Security Systems LLC 20459 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 39 Security Systems
Carlos Painting & Decorating 14413 Cervantes Ave Single Location 38 Contractors
Aztek Enterprise Inc 19104 Jamieson Dr Single Location 36 Janitorial Services
Datalab USA LLC 20261 Goldenrod Ln Single Location 36 Data Processing
Advantage Point Catering 11717 Exploration Ln Single Location 35 Caterers
Fitness First Health Club 19757 Frederick Rd Single Location 35 Fitness & Recreation
Mantaro Networks Inc 20410 Century Blvd # 120 Single Location 35 Engineering Services
O B A Bank 20300 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Headquarters 35 Banking
Paramed Medical Transportation 23230 Ridge Rd Single Location 35 Transit & Transportation
Geomet Technologies LLC 20251 Century Blvd Ste 300 Headquarters 33 Scientific & Technical Consulting
Executive Drywall Inc 23208 Ridge Rd Single Location 30 Contractors
Global Credit Network LLC 20010 Century Blvd # 420 Single Location 30 Collection Agencies
Love My Car Carwash LLC 19600 Walter Johnson Rd Single Location 30 Car Washes
Pelican Pete's 12941 Wisteria Dr Single Location 30 Restaurant
Germantown Veterinary Clinic 19911 Father Hurley Blvd Single Location 28 Veterinary Services
Green Hill 20251 Century Blvd # 140 Single Location 28 Software Publishers
Medispec Ltd 20410 Observation Dr Single Location 28 Medical Equipment
Visual Aids Electronics Corp 12910 Clover Leaf Center Dr Headquarters 28 Consumer Goods Rental
Multispectral Solutions Inc 20300 Century Blvd Single Location 27 Engineering Services
Domino‘s Pizza 13050 Middlebrook Rd Branch Store Location 25 Quick-Service Restaurant
Microlog Corp of Maryland 20270 Goldenrod Ln # 100 Single Location 25 Computer Programming
Proxy Aviation Systems Inc 12850 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 25 Aircraft Manufacturing
S G S Light Science Services 12850 Middlebrook Rd 406 Single Location 25 Social Sciences Research
Tetra Tech NUS 20251 Century Blvd #200 Branch Office 25 Engineering Services
Woodside Deli 12958 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 23 Restaurant
Sensors for Medicine & Science 12321 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 22 Measuring and Controlling Devices
Comtech Mobile Datacom 20430 Century Blvd Headquarters 20 Telecommunications Resellers
Dermatology & Clinical Skin 19735 Germantown Rd #210 Single Location 20 Physicians Offices
Greenhorne & O‘Mara 20410 Century Blvd #200 Branch Office 20 Engineering Services
Histoserv Inc 19526 Amaranth Dr Single Location 20 Medical Laboratories
O'Connor Plumbing & Heating 19301 Mateny Hill Rd Single Location 20 Contractors
Middlebrook Pharmaceuticals 20425 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 18 Pharmaceutical Preparation
Vanguard Management Associates 19538 Amaranth Single Location 17 Real Estate Agents
Minkoff Development 20457 Seneca Meadows Pkwy Single Location 16 Real Estate Broker, Land Subdivision
Pinnacle Communications 19821 Executive Park Circle Headquarters 15 Telecommunications Resellers
Source: Dunn & Bradstreet Selectory Online database. Download December 2, 2008
Note: This list represents the top 100 of 2,360 companies with headquarter, single location and branch offices located in Germantown.
APPENDIX 7: MAJOR RETAILERS IN GERMANTOWN (RANKED BY EMPLOYMENT)

Wal-Mart 20910 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 400 Discount Department Store
Home Depot Inc 21010 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 200 Home Centers
Target 20908 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 200 Discount Department Store
Giant Food 19721 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 170 Supermarket
Giant Food 13060 Middlebrook Rd Branch Store Location 130 Supermarket
Kohl‘s 20918 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 120 Discount Department Store
Shoppers Food Warehouse 18066 Mateny Rd Branch Store Location 101 Supermarket
Best Buy 20914 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 100 Electronics stores
Outback Steakhouse 12609 Wisteria Dr Branch Store Location 80 Full Service Restaurant
Safeway 19718 Germantown Rd Branch Store Location 70 Supermarket
Red Robin America's Gourmet 20001 Century Blvd Single Location 65 Full-Service Restaurant
Ruby Tuesday 19800 Century Blvd Branch Store Location 55 Full-Service Restaurant
Carrabba‘s Italian Grill 19935 Century Blvd Branch Store Location 50 Full-Service Restaurant
Borders Books & Music 20926 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 45 Book Stores
Pep Boys 20900 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 40 Automotive Services
Petsmart 20924 Frederick Rd Branch Store Location 40 Pet supplies & pet care
Love My Car Carwash LLC 19600 Walter Johnson Rd Single Location 30 Car Washes
Pelican Pete's 12941 Wisteria Dr Single Location 30 Restaurant
Domino‘s Pizza 13050 Middlebrook Rd Branch Store Location 25 Quick-Service Restaurant
Woodside Deli 12958 Middlebrook Rd Single Location 23 Restaurant
Source: Dunn & Bradstreet Selectory Online database. Download December 2, 2008.
Little Seneca Lake, March 30, 2008
APPENDIX 8: WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY
From the Germantown Master Plan, 1989
The Germantown planning area is intended to use

public water and sewer systems consistent with
the planning and policies established in the
Comprehensive Water Supply and Sewerage
Systems Plan. WSSC provides community water
and sewer service in the Master Plan area. A few
properties in the planning area still use individual
on-site wells and septic systems. This Master Plan
recommends that the entire study area be
included in the public water and sewer service
envelope.
A substantial portion of the planning area lies

within the Little Seneca Creek watershed and
drains directly to Little Seneca Lake. Protect the
lake as an emergency drinking water source.
Figure 1: Watersheds
APPENDIX 9: ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS
Environmental Planning Division, 2008
Vision Watersheds). This section includes a description costs associated with stormwater management,
and evaluation of the environmental features and increase property values.16
The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan included in these two watersheds and includes
consists of well designed and strategically located recommendations for their protection and In the Sector Plan area, forests cover about 340
open spaces connected by tree-shaded walks, restoration. For more detailed information on the acres, or approximately 14 percent of the total
streets and greenways. Green design is integrated existing conditions and environmental policy study area.
into the built environment, making Germantown a affecting the environmental features discussed,
desirable and sustainable community in which to readers are encouraged to review the Seneca Urban Tree Canopy
live, work, and shop. Stormwater impacts are Creek Environmental Resources Inventory (April Individual trees or landscaped areas consisting of
mitigated through vegetated riparian buffers, 2007). large trees can play a vital role in urban areas by
green roofs, bioretention areas, and urban tree reducing urban heat island effect, mitigating
canopy. Developed areas are framed and Forest Resources and Urban Tree Canopy stormwater runoff, and improving air quality. And
supported by an environmental infrastructure while a forested buffer 100 feet in width along a
comprising an interconnected system of public As with any urbanized community, the stream is of greater value than individual trees
and private lands that contain significant areas of environmental and economic value of natural interspersed along the same stream, the
forest, wetlands, water supply reservoirs, wildlife resources such as forests is often overlooked. importance that individual trees play should not be
habitat, prime agricultural lands, and other Forests improve air and water quality, provide ignored.
sensitive areas with minimal intrusions from land wildlife habitat, moderate summer temperatures
development, light and noise pollution. and buffer winter winds, afford recreational Approximately 172 acres of urban tree canopy
opportunities, and improve community aesthetics. exists within the study area that does not meet the
Background From an economic point of view, urban tree definition of forests. If the forest and tree areas
canopy can decrease heating and cooling costs, are combined, the total amount of forest and
The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan is decrease costs related to clearing, grading and urban tree canopy within the planning area is 512
located in upper central Montgomery County, maintaining lawns of large developments, reduce
Maryland, and falls within two watersheds: the 16Cappiella, K., Schueler, T., and T. Wright. 2005. Urban
Great Seneca Creek watershed and the Little Watershed Forestry Manual Part 1: Methods for Increasing
Forest Cover in a Watershed. USDA Forest Service, Newtown
Seneca Creek watershed (see Figure 1, Square, PA. Also available
online at: www.cwp.org/forestry/index.htm.
acres; about 20 percent of the Sector Plan area is Recommendations:
covered by trees. Wetland Resources
Protect existing forest resources on
In a 2003 study of Montgomery County, Goetz and developable properties to prevent Wetlands occur where the ground is regularly
others determined that watershed tree cover fragmentation of upland forests particularly on saturated by surface water or groundwater,
greater than 45 percent was correlated with good the Montgomery College Germantown Campus resulting in vegetation that is adapted for life in
and excellent stream health, as measured by and in the northern part of the study area. saturated soil conditions. Some common types of
biological indicators. American Forests, a national Increase overall forest and urban tree canopy wetlands include springs, seeps, marshes,
nonprofit that specializes in urban forestry, to between 30 and 40 percent over the next swamps, bogs, and wet meadows. Often, they are
suggests that a goal of 40 percent canopy cover in 30 years for the Sector Plan area. located in close proximity to streams. The location
urban areas is achievable. o Identify opportunities for forest restoration of wetlands, coupled with their unique physical,
along streams and wetlands and target chemical, and biological processes, allows them to
Staff analyzed the potential to achieve 30-40 mitigation efforts to these areas during provide important water quality and flood control
percent tree canopy coverage in the Sector Plan the development review process, with an functions, as well as valuable wildlife habitat.
area. Thirty percent tree canopy coverage equates emphasis on connectivity to other
to 790 acres of tree canopy. Assumptions used in forested buffers. As part of the Seneca Creek Environmental
this analysis are: (1) stream buffers will be o Enhance the natural environment in Resources Inventory conducted in 2007,
forested; (2) existing forest conservation Germantown by creating green open Commission staff performed a wetland inventory
easements will remain forested; (3) road sections spaces as part of landscaping and forest and functional assessment within the boundaries
(other than freeways such as Father Hurley requirements and encourage tree of the Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan.
Boulevard and Great Seneca Highway) can have plantings in such areas. Require tree Most of the wetlands in the study area are
street trees planted along currently unplanted protection plans, including soil concentrated in the headwaters (i.e., the
segments; and (4) substantial areas of existing enhancement and other techniques, to uppermost part of a stream or the area just above
forest and neighborhood trees will be preserved. maximize planting success. the beginning of a stream) and floodplains of
The analysis shows that canopy coverage of at o Target unforested road sections for street Middle Great Seneca and in many of the feeder
least 31.3 percent is achievable. Achieving this tree plantings. tributaries along the eastern portion of the Little
goal does depend on retaining substantial areas of Restore forested stream and wetland buffers Seneca watershed. In total, it was found that
remaining existing forest, including most of the on public properties and target public land wetlands account for approximately 88 acres, or
forest on the Lerner and Montgomery College acquisition programs to preserve, enhance or just below four percent of the total acreage of the
properties. restore riparian buffers and special habitat study area. Surveyed wetlands include the
areas.
Germantown Bog, which is a Wetland of Special good candidates for wetland restoration or conditions have been monitored as part of the
State Concern. mitigation projects, and have been documented in Montgomery County Countywide Stream
the Seneca Creek Environmental Resources Protections Strategy (CSPS). Baseline monitoring
Commission staff conducted a functional Inventory. done in the 1990s indicated largely good to fair
assessment of each wetland‘s ability to perform water quality in subwatersheds within the Sector
five different wetland functions: attenuation of Recommendations: Plan area. Subsequent CSPS monitoring
flood flows; reduction in sediment and nutrient conducted in 2006 indicates declining water
loads; groundwater discharge; provision of aquatic Protect wetlands and their associated quality, with good subwatersheds now ranking as
habitat; and provision of terrestrial habitat. Each buffers – including springs and seeps – fair, and many fair subwatersheds slipping to poor
wetland was then rated as ―high, medium, or low‖ through the application of conservation water quality.
in terms of their ability to perform the five wetland easements during the development
functions. The highest quality wetlands within the review process. A 2003 CSPS report produced by Montgomery
study area are within or adjacent to large tracts of Restore and/or enhance such wetlands by County‘s Department of Environmental Protection
protected mature forested parkland. Although fencing, creating natural buffers, or other identified increasing impervious surfaces,
impacts from growth and other factors are techniques whenever possible. inadequate stormwater management facilities,
contributing to biological and chemical changes, Direct wetland mitigation within the Sector and piped headwater streams as the greatest
the overall functional ranking was determined to Plan area using the criteria identified in impairments to stream conditions in urbanized
be high within these protected park corridors. the Seneca Creek Environmental areas such as the Sector Plan area. Roads,
Resources Inventory. parking areas, buildings, and surrounding lawns
Also located throughout the study area are many are all examples of impervious surfaces because
stormwater management ponds that were Water Quality and Stormwater Management they inhibit rainwater‘s ability to soak into the
constructed for the purposes of controlling ground. As a result, additional impervious surface
stormwater runoff, as well as ‗converted areas‘ The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan increases stormwater runoff and decreases
that were natural or historic wetlands that are now falls within the Great Seneca Creek and the Little groundwater replenishment.
tilled, grazed, or planted. These areas may be Seneca Creek watersheds. Water quality
Increased stormwater runoff not only makes such as nitrogen, phosphorous, sediments, heavy events also increase stream bank erosion and can
streams more susceptible to flooding during storm metals, and toxins into our stream systems. destabilize streams. Development and
events, but it also increases the flow of pollutants Higher and faster water volumes during storm redevelopment efforts within the study area
present opportunities to incorporate stormwater
management with today‘s more stringent
standards; it also provides opportunities for
stream restoration work in the Great Seneca Creek
and Little Seneca Creek watersheds. In addition,
development and redevelopment efforts provide
the opportunity for the incorporation of
environmentally sensitive design techniques that
reduce impervious surface and provide for on-site
treatment of stormwater runoff.
Recommendations:
Use environmental site design and low-

impact development techniques such as
green roofs, rain gardens, innovative
stormwater outfalls, green streets,
cisterns, rain barrels, grass swales, and
stream restoration to the fullest extent
possible during the development review
process.
Figure 2: Great Seneca and Muddy Branch Watershed Study
Landscape existing stormwater concrete, to allow some water from Implement recommendations from the
management facilities with native these areas to infiltrate. These county‘s Great Seneca Creek and Muddy
materials to enhance water quality, cool methods should take into account the Branch watershed study (see Figure 2,
water, and improve aesthetics. The soil conditions and the need for Great Seneca and Muddy Branch
Department of Environmental Protection maintenance to assure that they Watershed Study) to restore the
must review and approve landscaping of continue to function properly. headwater stream reaches of Gunners
facilities they maintain. Dam safety, Wherever possible, conserve existing Branch on the east side and south of the
functionality, and maintenance should all forest and urban tree canopy to lessen Montgomery College property, and to
be considered. the deterioration of watershed health retrofit the stormwater management pond
State and local stormwater management from the impacts of urbanization. near the Hughes property.
approaches and regulations are Target street tree plantings where the Upon completion, implement
constantly being upgraded. New addition of tree canopy may help slow recommendations of the Water Quality
regulations may supersede down peak runoff flows, and mitigate Functional Master Plan for Montgomery
recommendations made in this and other temperature effects of runoff traversing County. Due to the fact that the Water
master plans. hot impervious surfaces before entering Quality plan implements measures
Minimize the number of parking spaces natural stream environments. required by state legislation,
and provide for alternative parking Implement stormwater retrofit and stream recommendations of the Water Quality
methods that reduce the area of restoration projects to help manage or plan may supercede recommendations of
impervious surfaces. remediate impacts of uncontrolled this and other Master Plans.
Reduce the area of impervious surfaces impervious areas.
during redevelopment projects. Encourage the application of innovative Greening the Built Environment
o Where development proposals stormwater control measures in reducing
contain extensive areas of impervious new development and redevelopment In 2006, the Montgomery County Council
surfaces (e.g., parking lots, pavement, impacts on streams. Seek ways to further approved legislation requiring county-built or
buildings), reduce the amount of reduce losses of natural vegetation and funded nonresidential buildings to achieve a LEED
imperviousness by using higher topsoil and reduce impervious or (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)
buildings, clustering uses and putting compacted land surfaces that result from silver rating, and private nonresidential or
parking underground or in structures. current land development standards for multifamily buildings to achieve a LEED certified
Where paving is necessary, use subdivisions, roads and sidewalks, rating. In order to achieve a LEED rating, buildings
innovative methods or technologies, utilities, parking lots, and individual must incorporate certain criteria that positively
such as porous pavement and buildings. impact the energy and environmental
characteristics of a building, including Minimize the development of open space by in the presence of sunlight and heat. Exposure to
sustainability of a site, water efficiency, energy taking advantage of existing brownfields, excessive levels of ground-level ozone and fine
efficiency, materials and resources. This law developing previously disturbed lands, and particulate matter can pose health risks to
applies to any newly constructed or extensively retrofitting existing buildings. vulnerable populations such as children, the
modified nonresidential or multifamily residential Minimize habitat disturbances and improve elderly, people with chronic upper respiratory
building with at least 10,000 square feet of gross the habitat for indigenous species through ailments such as asthma and bronchitis, and
floor area. restoring stream systems and riparian stream those with existing heart and lung conditions. The
buffers, and controlling erosion through primary sources of these pollutants are (coal-fired)
In addition to green building design, building a improved landscape practices. power plants and other industries, motor vehicles,
greener urban community requires better Reduce the transportation energy intensity of small gasoline-powered engines, and small
understanding and integration of the natural and buildings through transit-oriented businesses using solvents, cleaning solutions,
built environments by ensuring that parks, trails, development that also improves walkability paints, and insecticides. Motor vehicles alone
forests, green spaces, and other important and bicycle accessibility, traffic calming, and account for 30 percent to 40 percent of the
environmental features are included in growth connectivity. pollutants that cause ground-level ozone in the
management strategies for the Germantown study When completed, implement metropolitan region.
area. recommendations of the Green Infrastructure
Functional Master Plan. Recommendations:
Recommendations: When completed, implement
recommendations of the Energy and Design development and redevelopment
Redevelop Germantown using green community Environment Functional Master Plan. projects to minimize the need for motor
principles. vehicle trips and to prevent conditions that
Encourage the addition of new and expansion Air Quality may create local air pollution nuisances.
of existing green spaces, including trees to Provide an improved, continuous network of
shade paved surfaces and stormwater The Washington Metropolitan region, including the sidewalks and bikeways throughout the
management practices such as green roofs, Germantown study area, has been identified as a Germantown study planning area, and in
rain gardens, bioswales and cisterns that non-attainment area for ground-level ozone and particular between the MARC Station and
encourage groundwater recharge. fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Ground-level ozone Town Center. This should be designed to avoid
Encourage green building practices, including has been a persistent problem in the region for disturbance of natural resources.
the use of recyclable materials, solar power many decades. It is an invisible gas formed on hot Provide transit incentives to minimize single-
and other forms of energy efficiency. summer days when volatile organic compounds occupant vehicle travel.
(VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) react chemically
Enhance bus services by including new routes, Board uses master plans and regulatory review to
increasing bus frequency, improving implement noise reduction strategies and protect
pedestrian access to transit stops, and more residential properties from mobile sources.
bus shelters. Strategies to reduce adverse noise impacts from
Provide park-and-ride lots along major roads new development and redevelopment include
for carpools, vanpools, and transit users. compatible land uses, buffers, and external and
internal mitigation techniques.
Noise
Recommendations:
Noise is generally defined as any form of
unwanted sound. Excessive noise is an Support noise-compatible site design for
environmental health problem that can interfere projects located adjacent to existing and
with sleep, disrupt speech, cause psychological proposed noise generators and roadways of
stress, and degrade the quality of life. The amount arterial classification or greater.
of noise transmitted can vary considerably due to Place new residential uses farther away from
elevation, the existence of barriers, and project areas of excessive noise.
design. Mobile sources of noise in the study area Incorporate compliance with the Adopted
include traffic-generated noise along major County Noise Control Ordinance (Chapter 31B
roadways such as I-270, MD 118, MD 117, of the County Code).
Frederick Road, and the CSX railway. The proposed Require compliance with the Planning Board‘s
Corridor Cities Transitway will also contribute noise Staff Guidelines for the Consideration of
to surrounding areas. Transportation Noise Impacts in Land Use
Planning and Development.
Local government agencies are responsible for Evaluate development and redevelopment
controlling noise in Montgomery County. The proposals using Phase I noise studies and
Montgomery County Department of Environmental noise models.
Protection (DEP) enforces the Noise Ordinance, Provide for the use of approved attenuation
which regulates stationary sources such as measures when noise issues are identified.
heating and air conditioning units, construction
activities, noise producing land uses, and
neighborhood annoyances, while the Planning
19/3 Foundation, William Waters, Jr. House
APPENDIX 10: CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES TABLE
Park Planning and Stewardship, Department of Parks, and Historic Preservation, Planning Department
This table shows the status and location of cultural Appendix 11 contains information on Appendix 12 contains information on
and historic resources in the Germantown Master cultural resources in county and state resources supervised by the Historic
Plan area. The resources are further described in parks; these resources are managed by Preservation Section of the Planning
Appendices 11 and 12: the Parks Cultural Resources Stewardship Department.
Section.
Resource Master Plan Further

Resource Name Number Address Associated Park Designation Status References
Atomic Energy Building Route 118 and I-270 Not on Locational Appendix 12
Atlas
Black Hill Gold Mine 20926 Lake Ridge Drive, Boyds Black Hill Regional Not on Locational Appendix 11
(park address) Park Atlas
Black Rock Mill 24/6 16500 Black Rock Road Seneca Creek State Master Plan for Appendix 11
Park Historic Preservation
Boyd-Maughlin House 18/8 15215 Darnestown Road, Boyds Black Hill Regional Master Plan for Appendix 11
Park Historic Preservation
Calico Crab House 18MO363 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Cider Barrel 19/33 20410 Frederick Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Historic Preservation
Clopper Mill Ruins 19/21 Near Clopper Road and Waring Station Seneca Creek State Master Plan for Appendices 11
Road, Seneca Creek State Park, Park Historic Preservation and 12
Gaithersburg
Davis Mill Ruins 14/54 18900 Frederick Road Great Seneca Stream Not on Locational Appendix 11
(park address) Valley Park Atlas
Germantown Historic District 19/13 Liberty Mill Road and B&O Railroad Master Plan for Appendix 12
vicinity Historic Preservation
Grusendorf Log House 19/19 Near Visitor Center, Seneca Creek State Seneca Creek State Master Plan for Appendices 11
Park, 11950 Clopper Road, Park Historic Preservation and 12
Gaithersburg
Hoyles Mill Ruins 14000 Schaeffer Road Hoyles Mill Not on Locational Appendix 11
Conservation Park Atlas
John H. Gassaway Farm 19/27 17200 Riffle Ford Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Kavanaugh II Historical 18MO181 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh III Prehistoric 18MO182 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh IV Prehistoric 18MO183 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh V Prehistoric 18MO184 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh VI Prehistoric 18MO185 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh VII Prehistoric 18MO186 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
Kavanaugh VIII Historical 18MO187 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Archaeological Site
King Farm Dairy Mooseum 18028 Central Park Circle South Germantown Not on Locational Appendix 11
Recreational Park Atlas
Little Seneca Creek Viaduct, B&O 18/44 Wisteria Drive vicinity (WSSC property) Black Hill Regional Master Plan for Appendices 11
Metropolitan Branch Railroad Bed Park Historic Preservation and 12
Madeline V. Waters House Site 19/13-1 12900 Wisteria Drive Master Plan for Appendix 12
Middlebrook 18MO362 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Neelsville Presbyterian Church 19/5 20701 Frederick Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Parcel EC-1 Stone House 18MO205 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Pleasant Field 18MO408 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Pleasant Fields/ Basil Waters House 19/1 21200 Waters Road Waters House Special Master Plan for Appendices 11
Park Historic Preservation and 12
Pumphrey-Mateny House 19/13-5 19401 Walter Johnson Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Rabbit 18MO175 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Site 6 18MO472 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Stone Culverts and Railroad Bed 19/40 Harvest Glen Way Vicinity Master Plan for Appendix 12
Upton Bowman House 19/13-6 19219 Liberty Mill Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Wallich-Heimer House 19/13-7 19120 Mateny Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Waring Viaduct 19/10 B&O tracks at Great Seneca Creek Master Plan for Appendix 12
Waring-Crawford Farm 19/11 19212 Forest Brook Road Master Plan for Appendix 12
Waters Mill and House 18MO461 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
Waters Mill Ruins, Chimney Ruins, 18MO461 Various locations in Black Hill Regional Black Hill Regional Not on Locational Appendix 11
and W&M Boundary Marker Park, 20926 Lake Ridge Drive, Boyds Park Atlas
Watkins Mill Ruins 19/7 18900 Frederick Road Great Seneca Stream Not on Locational Appendix 11
(park address) Valley Park Atlas
William Waters, Jr. House Site 19/3 Between 20511 and 20533 Shadyside Master Plan for Appendices 11
Way Historic Preservation and 12
Wisteria 18MO594 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
355-1 18MO361 Archaeological site* Appendix 11
*No addresses given for archaeological sites.
Map, graphic or photo???
Clopper Mill Ruins

APPENDIX 11: GERMANTOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES
Park Planning and Stewardship Division, Department of Parks, 2008
From Artifact to Attraction: A Strategic Plan for Planning, Housing, and Economic Development identified in the section titled ―Historic Resources.‖
Cultural Resources in Parks, provides a blueprint (PHED) Committee of the County Council. The Therefore, certain sites may be included in both
for stewarding cultural resources and making document is not a master plan, but rather a this chapter on Parks as well as in the Historic
them more visible to the public. The Cultural strategic plan. Resources material within this Plan.
Resources Stewardship Section of the Park
Planning and Stewardship Division uses the Plan Plan Objectives
as the foundation for its evolving work stewarding
upwards of 150 park-based cultural resources. The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan
includes two types of information pertaining to
This section reflects new park planning emphasis cultural resources in parks: 1) a series of themes
on historical and cultural interpretation and relating to Germantown; and 2) archaeological and
outreach. Historic interpretation is an important historical resources on local, public parkland. The
element of this plan and will be emphasized in the objective of this Sector Plan is to highlight
parkland and through the public amenity process. opportunities to develop historic interpretation on
The interpretation of cultural and historic local parkland, whether that is
resources will support the vision of a sense of through future capital improvements
place that reflects Germantown‘s unique by the Department of Parks or by
character. developer amenity. Cultural resources
on parkland are all those resources
Policy Guidance that help tell the story of the County‘s
history, whether they are designated
From Artifact to Attraction: A Strategic Plan for or not. Note that all sites that are
Cultural Resources in Parks arose from the County designated on the Master Plan for
Council‘s interest in understanding stewardship Historic Preservation or on the
objectives and recommendations concerning Park- Locational Atlas and Inventory of
owned historical and archaeological sites. The Historic Sites in the Germantown
plan was presented to the Historic Preservation vicinity, regardless of whether they are
Commission, the Planning Board, and the in public or private ownership, are
Cultural Resources Interpretive Themes The Germans Behind Germantown (1830s - o The creation of sculptures.
and Opportunities 1870s). Early German settlers built log o The use of ―ghosting‖ of historic images
structures and ran many mercantile on current building facades.
Five themes are identified for interpretation as operations. Their community became known o The fixed telescoping of historic views that
follows: as ―Log Town.‖ can be compared with current views, etc.
1. Native American Hunting and Gathering 5. A Settlement that Followed Transportation A historical marker trail along the Seneca
Grounds (10,000 B.C. – 1607 A.D.). The area (Pre-1600 – Present). Transportation changes Greenway Corridor that parallels Seneca
around Germantown served as a hunting and from water routes to foot trails, trails to dirt Creek.
gathering grounds for various prehistoric roads, roads to rail lines, and rail lines to An improved trailhead at the Waters House
peoples through the centuries. paved roads and highways resulted in the Special Park where it accesses the Upcounty
2. The Waters Family and Early Agrarian movement of Germantown‘s core area from Corridor, or North Greenbelt.
Founders (18th Century – Early 20th Century). one place to the next over the centuries. Possible installation of a signed or brochure-
Germantown contains several historic (Historical photo of Seneca Viaduct below.) guided cultural walk along the proposed
buildings and sites associated with this Crystal Rock Greenway, culminating at the
prominent family who helped shape the Germantown‘s history can be conveyed through Black Hill Regional Park Visitors‘ Center.
agricultural tradition of Germantown. The sites cultural resources in parks in the following ways:
are part of the farming legacy of the county. Public Art Interpretation in one or more of the The opportunity exists for the Department of
(Photo of the Waters House-Pleasant Fields urban parks proposed near transit stops. Parks, private developers, and the Arts and
previous page.) Historic and cultural interpretation can be Humanities Council of Montgomery County to
3. Water and Steam Powered Mills (mid-18th implemented within urban open space create exciting and meaningful works of art that
Century - 1920s). Milling operations utilizing nodules via collaboration with local artists in interpret Germantown‘s history. Within this
natural water resources eventually were the following ways: context, opportunities also should be explored to
converted to steam. creatively make use of some of the large local
4. boulders from a dismantled Germantown railroad
culvert, since these boulders still exist in storage
at Black Hill Regional Park.
Each of the themes in this Plan could be

interpreted with signage complete with text and
illustrations.
The history of the Waters Family and other early Content of the Interpretive Themes of the Late Archaic Period, can be definitely placed
agrarian founders should be told when a new in Germantown.
trailhead can be constructed at the rear of the Boldface in text highlights extant resources which
Waters House property. (Photo, opposite page, of include the following: These were the Late Archaic broad-blade users
the trailhead location at the Waters House Barn at 1. Historic sites designated on the Master Plan who made the Savannah River and Susquehanna
for Historic Preservation (identifiable by
near left.) resource number with /, e.g. 19/13). Broadspear points found in the Kavanaugh III
2. Cultural resources found in county parkland, (18MO182) and Site 6 (18MO472) sites. The new
The Montgomery County Historical Society and the not designated on the MPHP. side-notched shapes have been attributed to the
3. Archeological resource (identified with MO
Heritage Tourism Alliance of Montgomery County number, e.g. 18MO461). introduction of the new atlatl, or spear thrower,
have partnered with the Conference and Visitors‘ which allowed for more force and distance. The
Bureau of Montgomery County and the Arts and Theme 1: Native American Hunting and Late Archaic Period was the height of the seasonal
Humanities Council of Montgomery County to Gathering Grounds (10,000 B.C. to 1607 A.D.) hunting and foraging pattern that would have
study a proposed conversion of the bank barn at focused more particularly on the resources of local
the Waters House Special Park into a Heritage and For thousands of years the Germantown region creeks and streams. Broad-blade implements are
Visitor‘s Center. This barn, like all the buildings at hosted a variety of prehistoric peoples. Although thought to be specialized harpoons for fishing
Waters House Special Park, is owned by the no Paleo-Indian sites (10,000 B.C. to 9000 B.C.) such as would have occurred in Seneca Creek.
Commission. If successful, the proposed project are particular to the area, a few locations along However, their users would also have gathered the
will create an additional destination point within the Potomac River and one in the Sandy Spring starchy seeds and tubers of the wetlands and
Waters House Special Park that will offer region have been associated with these Ice Age hunted the deer and other fauna that came there
information on local heritage, the Agricultural hunters who are identified by their fluted Clovis- to feed.
Reserve, park and recreational activities, hotels like points and mega-fauna hunting practices. The
and dining, heritage tours and functions, wineries, Sector Plan area would surely have been traversed Small mobile bands of between 50 and 100
local historical societies, etc. and known to these nomads. people would most likely have visited the Sector
Plan area in the summer and fall when hunting
After 9000 B.C., a warming and drying trend and gathering would have been at its best. Such
brought on the beginning of more modern Indians would have located their sites to exploit
environmental changes associated with the nut harvests, turkeys, and various vegetable foods,
Holocene era. A different prehistoric hunting and in addition to deer. Archaeologists have never
gathering tradition, called the Archaic Period, discovered what type of structures these Archaic
arose in the temperate climate and more modern peoples made, but they were probably similar to
flora and fauna which now covered the region. the small round huts of later periods, usually
These Indians, too, were nomadic and, by the end covered with skins or woven reeds.
Late Archaic semi-permanent macro-band camps Woodland villages have been discovered only in stable agrarian culture began much earlier.
(100+ people) would have been located in areas the Potomac Valley region of Montgomery County Europeans first took out land patents in the late
of higher resource potential, mostly along the Fall and its associated islands. However, earlier 17th century. The earliest patents for the
Line, the geological break between the Coastal Indians would have also made use of the Germantown area were mostly in the mid-18th
Plain (Prince George‘s County) and Montgomery Germantown area solely to hunt and gather century. What had been the "old Sinequa"
County‘s Piedmont uplands. Their seasonal round seasonal flora. Because such villages were (Seneca) Indian path now led settlers west along
would have taken them from such winter camps to abandoned about 100 years before European what they called the "Great Road" (Route 355).
springtime harvests in southern Maryland and contact, archaeologists have no knowledge of any They used the old Indian trail to roll their
back up into the western foothills again for the of their tribal affiliations, linguistic stocks, or even hogsheads (large barrels) of tobacco from their
summer and fall. migration destinations. farms to the port of Georgetown.
The only evidence of Woodland or Agricultural When John Smith sailed up the Potomac in 1609, The British settlers established the farming
Indians (1000 B.C. to 1607 A.D.) in the greater the Germantown area, along with the rest of practices used in southern Maryland; a soil-
Germantown area comes from known Indian Montgomery County, had become a sort of depleting, slave-oriented tobacco culture. Most
paths. Modern Route 355, was part of the old prehistoric no-man‘s-land, buffering the Montgomery County tobacco farms averaged only
―Sinequa‖ Indian trail that eventually wound its Algonquians of southern Maryland against the about three or four enslaved people, but some
way to Point-of-Rocks. Seneca Creek was also northern Iroquois (Seneca) and Susquehannocks were larger. In the 1790s, upon their marriages,
named for the northern Seneca Indians who used and western Siouan and Shawnee tribes. The the three Waters brothers, Zachariah, William, Jr.,
that stream valley as a way south. Susquehannocks and the Seneca were especially and Basil, all were given land in what is now
territorial about their rights to hunt in the region. Germantown by their father, William, Sr. A stone
It was the Susquehannocks who created the path boundary marker with the initials W & M (for the
that shows up on a 1716 map as the ―Tehoggee William and Mary Waters tract, photo, left) is
Trail‖, a rugged thoroughfare we now know as located in the Black Hill Regional Park west of
River Road. By this time, the Indians of Germantown. The combined Waters property
Germantown and Montgomery County had long covered all of present northeast Germantown,
disappeared into prehistory. comprising about 1,500 acres, and included a
tobacco plantation worked by 22 slaves. The
Theme 2: The Waters Family and Early fourth Waters brother, Ignatius, inherited their
Agrarian Founders (18th-20th Centuries) father‘s estate in Brookeville. The stone
foundations of the William Waters, Jr. House
Although Montgomery County was formed out of (19/3) are all that remain of a substantial brick
Frederick County in 1776, the establishment of a residence built in the late 1700s.
Around 1810, Zachariah Waters also established a Theme 3: Water and Steam Powered Mills needs with grain and lumber processing, but also
mill along Little Seneca Creek with three milling (mid-18th century through 1920s) provided important social and political functions
operations producing flour, lumber, and flaxseed as community gathering and voting places. The
oil. The mill ceased operation in c. 1895. Today From 1820 to 1900, a booming economy emerged mills‘ names pay tribute to the early residents who
the Waters Mill ruins are still visible, and they are in the Germantown area. This new prosperity was lived near Germantown: Benson, Crowe, Clopper,
interpreted by an historic marker in Black Hill made possible by the development of agricultural Davis, Watkins, Waters, Magruder, and Hoyle.
Regional Park. diversification and new fertilizers, as well as the
advent of the railroad in the area by the 1870s. Mill ruins known as the Clopper Mill (19/21) are
While the Zachariah and William, Jr. Waters homes The change from a folk-oriented tobacco culture to located in Seneca Creek State Park. A mill was
no longer stand, the Basil Waters House, dating a more nationally-focused industrial economy built on this site in the 1770s by Nicholas Sibert.
from the late 18th century, does. Basil Waters brought Montgomery County into the larger About 1795, Zacchariah MacCubbin rebuilt the
developed his property into a large tobacco American pattern of development. mill in stone. Francis C. Clopper, a prosperous
plantation known as Pleasant Fields (19/1, owner of woolen factory and mills, expanded the
18MO408). In the mid-1800s Basil‘s nephew, Dr. Along the waterways of Great Seneca Creek and mill with brick. The mansion house for Clopper‘s
William A. Waters, lived in the house and had his Little Seneca Creek, grist and saw mills had estate, called Woodlands, was located near the
doctor‘s office there. The house gained its present appeared by the mid-18th century. The park‘s visitor center.
Italianate appearance under ownership of Charles establishment of Waters Mill (18MO461) in Black
Waters, son of William. Charles built or expanded Hill Regional Park, and other
the frame section and compatibly redesigned the milling operations along
existing house. The new large central hall was Seneca Creek in the
outfitted with an elegant curved staircase. Charles Germantown area, reflect the
Waters bred racehorses on the property, one of growth of water-powered
which set the East Coast trotting record in 1898. manufacturing technology in
The property, which remained in the Waters family the Piedmont region, where
until 1932, includes a bank barn and double streams run swiftly. Early
corncrib. A small Waters family burial plot is maps of the area identify mills
nearby on Hawk‘s Nest Lane. The restored house as ―G&S mills‖ for the water-
and barn are owned by the M-NCPPC, open for powered grist and sawing
community events, and operated in part by the activities located along these
Montgomery County Historical Society. streams. These local
businesses not only served
the community‘s commercial
It is difficult to determine exact construction dates building a small dam or ―mill pond‖ upstream from A list of some of the water-powered mills located
of many of the early mills. Some burned or the mill. Water was diverted from the pond through on public parkland near the Germantown
deteriorated, and their foundation stones were a ditch called a ―mill race‖ or ―head race.‖ The mill Employment Area Sector Plan is located at the end
reused to build new mills on the same site. Early race contained a grate to filter debris before of this document. Of the mill ruins cited, one of
documents record ownership transfers that often reaching the water wheel. Upon turning the large the most intact ruins, and an example of a mill
meant a change in the name of the mill and the wheel, the water then flowed through the ―tail constructed using the local black rock, is Black
road where it was located. race‖ and was diverted back to the main stream. Rock Mill (24/6), now part of Seneca Creek State
The Waters Mill ruin in Black Hill Regional Park Park (photo previous page).
Early water mills were located along a steady contains remnants of these races.
stream of water and were constructed using local Water power fueled the mills until the advent of
stone and timber. Mill structures ranged in size The large water wheel turned a shaft that powered steam power in the 1850s. Later milling
from two- to three-story masonry or clapboard a series of cogged wheels inside the mill structure, operations ventured away from the streams and
structures, and some even utilized two water transferring power by moving from large to small towards steam power, locating near the railroad
wheels. Early water-powered mills were located gears and ultimately turning the mill stone for line for transportation purposes. In 1888, the
along steady, fast-moving streams and were grinding. Two stones were used for grinding. The Bowman Brothers' Liberty Mill was built next to the
constructed using local stone and timber. top stone, called the runner, rotated over the present-day Germantown depot, along the
stationary bottom runner, or bed stone. Both Metropolitan Branch Railway line of the Baltimore
Mills from the 18th and early 19th century were stones were cut with furrows to grind and channel & Ohio (B&O) Railroad. The wooden flour mill
usually powered by undershot wheels, where the the grain to the stone‘s edge. Grain was poured burned in 1914 but was rebuilt and modernized in
force of the water against the lower blades turned into the center of the top stone and moved out 1916 with six huge silos. In 1918 Augustus Selby
the wheel. As the population and agricultural through the furrows where the ground flour or and his four partners bought the mill and operated
production increased, the need for reliable water meal was collected at the edges. it until 1963. A grain elevator and grain dryer were
power for milling and milling operations grew. part of the operation in the 1920s and 30s, but
Experiments using different types of wheel designs Early grist mills used locally-quarried stones for burned in 1972 after the mill had closed. Still
were used, with the overshot wheel being the most grinding rye, buckwheat, and cornmeal producing standing, and located in the Germantown Historic
popular. In this design, the water struck the upper a coarsely ground flour or ―country custom‖ flour. District (19/13), is a grain scale housed in a small
blades on top of the wheel and moved it down by Stones were also imported from France and metal shed on Mateny Hill Road, southwest of
the force of gravity. Germany and produced more finely ground flour. Blunt Avenue. The Liberty Mill was at one time the
―Cullin‖ stones were a blue-black lava stone and second largest mill in the state.
At least an eight foot drop in elevation was ―French burrs‖ were freshwater quartz stones
necessary for locating a mill along a waterway. In quarried in Northern France.
addition, an ample supply of water was created by
Theme 4: The Germans Behind Germantown house has been relocated to Seneca Creek State During the late 19th century, with the
(1830s – 1870s) Park, southeast of Germantown. establishment of the railroad, farmers were able to
ship their produce, grain, and milk to Washington,
The first German settlers in the area came from Theme 5: A Settlement that Followed and also receive fertilizers to enrich the soil for
old Frederick County, and they established small Transportation (pre-1600s – Present) larger yields. The railroad continued to provide a
farms growing grains and cereals. In the 1830s strong economic link for Germantown, especially
and 1840s, Pennsylvania Germans, as well as The settlements at Germantown have undergone to the expanding metropolitan regions of Baltimore
immigrants from Germany and Slavic countries, five significant changes, from 1) Native American and Washington.
settled at the crossroads of Germantown (now temporary settlements along the waterways in the
called Liberty Mill Road) and Clopper (Route 117) pre-1600 period to 2) a small Germanic In 1878, the first Germantown railroad depot was
Roads. Some of the first settlers were the families crossroads settlement at Germantown and constructed. In 1891, it was replaced with a larger
of Domenicus Stang, a blacksmith; Franz Clopper Roads in the 1830s, to 3) a vital railroad frame building. This depot burned in 1978 and
Grusendorf, a stonemason; and Asher Rosenmeier stop in the 1880s and 90s, to 4) a ―Corridor City‖ was reconstructed following the same Victorian-
and Charles Adler, who ran the community‘s store. aligned with Frederick Road (Route 355) by the era architectural details. Another railroad
20th century, to 5) part of the technology corridor transportation component is the massive
Other early families included the Metzes and the in the 1970s, defined primarily by Interstate-270. stonework of the Waring Viaduct (19/10) and its
Richters. Many immigrants were millers and larger twin over the Little Monocacy River (near
farmers who tilled small plots of corn and tobacco. The initial movement of people and
During this period, when farmers from the industry was away from the waters
surrounding area came into town and heard more and towards the roads. After the
German than English, the area became known as Germans settled along east-west-
―Germantown.‖ The name Germantown first running Clopper Road, the
occurred in print in the mid-19th century, on a land settlement kept shifting
deed. The settlement was also sometimes called northwards: first with the coming
―log town‖ because the Germans brought log of the B & O Railroad, next to
construction to the area. Today only one of the better surface transportation with
known German-built dwellings associated with the the paving of Frederick Road and
original cluster of homes and shops from this then, with the construction of
particular time of settlement survives. The sole Interstate 270. Present-day Liberty
remaining structure is the Grusendorf Log House Mill and Walter Johnson Roads
(19/19, photo right), which originally stood on the were the original Germantown
east side of Clopper Road, near Route 118. The Road.
Dickerson, MD). The 350 foot-long, three-arch List of Park-Based Cultural Resources Both the Kavanaugh III and Site 6 sites uncovered
viaduct of roughly dressed granite supports the projectile points which dated to the Late Archaic
tracks that are about 70 feet above the Great Known Prehistoric Archaeological Sites Period, circa 3000 to 1000 B.C. The Kavanaugh III
Seneca Creek. A granite abutment and piers also There are seven prehistoric archaeological sites site contained the base fragment of a
remain from the Little Seneca Creek Viaduct within and adjacent to the Germantown Sector Susquehanna Broadspear-like point. Named for
(18/44), a single-track railroad bridge. Plan area. All of them consist of lithic scatter; i.e., the Susquehanna site where it was first identified,
they contain flakes and chips that were knocked it is triangular shaped, broad–based and side-
As the automobile became the preferred method off to manufacture tools and projectile points. notched, dating from 1750 B. C. to 700 B. C. The
of transportation in the area, accommodations Except for the Kavanaugh III (18MO182) and Site Site 6 point was a quartz Savannah River-like
arose for motorists along Frederick Road. The 6 (18MO472) sites, no diagnostic artifacts were projectile. Again, named after its original
Cider Barrel (19/33) was constructed in 1926 by discovered which would relate the other Indian Savannah River location, this point was triangular-
Andrew Baker to sell cider and apples from his sites to definite time periods. based and side-notched with a broad triangular
orchard. Located east of Germantown, this once- stem. Such spear points date from 3000 B.C. to
popular road-side stand still stands today. 1000 B.C.
The mid-20th century saw the growth of the area
continue with the location of the main
headquarters for the Atomic Energy Commission
(now U.S. Department of Energy) in Germantown.
TABLE 1: Known Prehistoric Archeological Sites
The completion of the I-270 ―Technology Corridor‖
Site Number Site Name Site type Period
during the 1970s provided for further commercial,
18MO182 Kavanaugh III Archaic Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
business, and educational development. During
18MO183 Kavanaugh IV Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
this time period, a satellite campus for
18MO184 Kavanaugh V Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
Montgomery Community College started in
Germantown. Today, the area continues to 18MO185 Kavanaugh VI Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
develop along this transportation corridor with 18MO186 Kavanaugh VII Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
three major intersections providing access to the 18MO472 Site 6 Archaic Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
surrounding community. 18MO594 Wisteria Lithic Scatter Prehistoric
Known Historical Archaeological Sites Table 2: Known Historical Archaeological Sites
There are nine historical archaeological sites near
Site Number Site Name Site type Period
the Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan.
18MO175 Rabbit Farm 19th century
Seven of these are farmsteads; one is a masonry
18MO181 Kavanaugh II Frame Structure Historic
structure, and the other is a mill complex. They
18MO187 Kavanaugh VIII Masonry Structure 19th century
span a time from the late 18th to the early/middle
18MO205 Parcel EC-1 Stone House Farmstead 19th/20th century
20th century.
18MO361 355-1 Farm ----------------
18MO362 Middlebrook Farm 18th-20th century
Additional Cultural Resources in Parks
18MO363 Calico Crab House Farm 19th century
18MO408 Pleasant Field Farmstead 18th century
19/1 Pleasant Fields/Basil Waters House
(c 1790s-early 1800s; 1890s) 18MO461 Waters Mill & House Mill 18th-20th century
21200 Waters Road, Waters House Special Park Today, the restored house is open to the public In c. 1810, Zachariah Waters also established a
Master Plan for Historic Preservation and contains offices for non-profit groups and mill along Little Seneca Creek with three milling
provides public meeting space. Now called the operations—flour grinding, flax-seed oil pressing,
The Waters family inhabited Pleasant Fields for Waters House Special Park, the property includes and lumber cutting. The mills ceased operation c.
more than a century. Basil Waters established the a large bank barn, a corncrib, and carriage house 1895. An 1865 Martenet and Bond map, labels
large tobacco plantation about 1790. The brick and is adjacent to the North
sections of the house (center and left) are the Germantown Greenway Stream
earliest, dating from the late 1700s or early Valley Park. The family burial
1800s. During the mid-19th century, Basil‘s ground of all three brothers‘
nephew, Dr. William Waters, owned the property families is preserved near the
and located his doctor‘s office in a back room on Pleasant Fields property on
the first floor. Dr. Waters served as the general Hawks Nest Lane.
practitioner for the community and also continued
wheat and corn on the farm. In 1907, Dr. Waters‘ Waters Mill Ruins, Chimney
son, Charles, inherited the house and farm. Ruins, and Boundary
Charles redesigned and expanded the house to its Marker
current Italianate-style appearance. The property Black Hill Regional Park
was used for breeding racehorses and remained in Not Designated
the family until 1932.
the mill site as ―Mrs. Waters Mill,‖ for Eleanor 19/7 Watkins Mill Ruins connected to the barn. In 2001-2002, the
(Ellen) Waters, who was Zachariah‘s daughter-in- Great Seneca Stream Valley Park Department of Parks restored the exterior of the
law. Ellen operated the mills after her husband, Not Designated barn and added missing roofs to the silos. The
Tilghman Waters, died in 1864. The Waters‘ grist barn is open to the public as the King Farm Dairy
and saw-mill ruins are visible from the Black Hill The Watkins Mill site is located along the Great Mooseum (photo below).
trail and interpreted by a historic marker in Black Seneca Creek at Watkins Mill Road. Originally built
Hill Regional Park. Foundations from the late by Aden Grey, a grist mill has been at this site Hoyles Mill Ruins
18th-century miller‘s house are in the vicinity. The since 1783. From 1791 to 1846, the Dorsey Hoyles Mill Conservation Park
site provides a good example of the head race and family owned the property and ran a grist and saw Master Plan for Historic Preservation
tail race used to direct water to and from the milling operation. From 1859 to 1877, it was
milling operation. Also located along the trail is a owned and operated by Susan Ann and Remus The Hoyles Mill site is located along Hoyles Mill
remaining ―W&M‖ stone boundary marker Snyder. At that time, the mill road was also called Road in the Hoyles Mill Conservation Park. This
indicating the William and Mary Waters land tract. ―Snyder‘s Mill Road.‖ Levi Watkins purchased the 19th century mill was operated by the Hoyle family
Near the park‘s picnic area and playground are mill at auction and operated the grist mill. By the on part of their farm land along Little Seneca
two stone chimneys and a foundation from a 1880s, the mill produced 600 barrels of wheat Creek. The 1850 Census of Manufacturers lists it
former tenant house owned by the Waters family. flour, 10,000 pounds of buckwheat flour, and as a grist and a saw mill. It operated until 1914
185,000 pounds of cornmeal a year. The mill when the Hoyles moved their milling operation to
14/54 Davis Mill Ruins burned in 1908. Part of the mill foundation Boyds to be closer to the railroad. The mill ruins
Great Seneca Stream Valley Park remains along the creek bank, and portions of the still contain remains of the water-powered turbine
Not Designated mill race are visible. A radio tower is located near that replaced the mill wheel in the second half of
the former mill pond. The miller‘s house burned in the 19th century.
The Davis Mill, located along Davis Mill Road near 1920. An interpretive historical marker is located
Great Seneca Creek, was purchased by John at the mill site.
Samuel Davis in the 1880s. A mill was at this site
as early as 1783. During the time Davis operated King Farm Dairy Mooseum
the grist mill, it was a three-story, clapboard, frame South Germantown Regional Park
building with a stone foundation. Davis‘ Not Designated
homestead was nearby and overlooked the mill.
The mill burned in the 1940s. An interpretive The c. 1930s James and Macie King Dairy barn is
historical marker is located at the mill site. part of the 650 acre South Germantown Regional
Park. The large concrete block barn features a
gambrel roof. Two original concrete silos are
18/44 Little Seneca Creek Viaduct, B&O arranged into four towers and one stand-alone closed to the public.
Metropolitan Branch Railroad Bed bent.
Black Hill Regional Park and WSSC Property 18/8 Boyd-Maughlin House
Master Plan for Historic Preservation In 1980, a dam was constructed to create the 15215 Darnestown Road
Little Seneca Lake reservoir. Construction (Black Hill Regional Park)
This resource consists of the remains of the 1896 occurred in the center of the viaduct site; the Master Plan for Historic Preservation
viaduct that traversed Little Seneca Creek and an western section of the viaduct and its stone piers
abandoned c. 1865 railroad bed located were either removed or buried. One of the earliest structures in the Boyds Historic
approximately midway between Boyds and District, is the David Maughlin House also known
Germantown. These structures were once part of The rest of the viaduct remains are located along as the Boyd-Maughlin house that dates from
the c. 1860s Metropolitan Branch of the B&O the former eastern slope of Little Seneca Creek. It 1866. The two-story, frame, clapboard house is a
Railroad, a 43-mile link between Washington, D.C. consists of one large granite-end abutment and good example of the rural Gothic Revival
and the Main Line of the B&O at Point of Rocks, four stone piers. The abutment is approximately influenced vernacular architecture. Features
MD. Upon its completion in 1873, an economic 31 feet wide and 12 feet long. The structure include a cross-gabled roof, bracketed porch
boom began for the communities located near its stands some 12 feet above grade at its exposed posts, and a central front gable with a small
route; consequently, the former crossroads end. Two dates are chiseled in the structure, arched window. The property is now part of the
community of Germantown moved its commercial ―6.17.96‖ and ―10.13.96‖ (photo below), and, Black Hill Regional Park and rented as a
development to the northeast, creating ―New probably represent the periods of construction. At residence.
Germantown‖ along this railroad. the base of the stone abutment stand four stone
piers. The 1896 viaduct replaced an early
The remaining masonry structures once supported 1870s wooden trestle. Visible remains from this
a single-tracked metal railroad bridge in operation earlier bridge are the stone retaining walls that
until 1928. The bridge was abandoned when the the B&O Railroad used as rip-rap for the base of
railroad was double-tracked, straightened, and the fill on the east bank of the creek. The viaduct
rerouted farther south. The bridge was built on a structures are located on WSSC property.
four-degree curve with a total span of about 480
feet and approximately 105 feet above water at its The remaining B&O Metropolitan Branch Railroad
midpoint. The bridge was designed by John E. Bed is a significant landscape feature that is cut
Greiner (1859-1942), an engineer with the B&O into the hillside and leads from Wisteria Drive to
Railroad, using a relatively standard bridge design the Little Seneca dam. It is now part of Black Hill
with the track supported by deck-type girder spans Regional Park and is currently being used as an
which were, in turn, supported by nine bents, access road to service the dam. The road is
Black Hill Gold Mine
Black Hill Regional Park
Not Designated
Remnants of mining pits from the Black Hill Gold

Mine are located in the Black Hill Regional Park.
Starting around 1850, miners used picks and
shovels in open-pit extraction in attempts to find
gold. However, results were disappointing since
ore containing gold was rarely found. In 1947,
George A. Chadwick purchased the property and
later converted the mine to a bomb shelter. An
interpretive historical marker is located at this site.
Photos: Black Rock Mill
Map 1: Historic Resources
APPENDIX 12: HISTORIC PRESERVATION ELEMENTS
Historic Preservation, Planning Department, 2008
Objective As a result of these master plan processes, a total Designation of historic sites and districts serves to
of 15 individual sites and one historic district have highlight the values that are important in
The intent of the County‘s preservation program is been designated on the Master Plan for Historic maintaining the individual character of the County
to provide a rational system for evaluating, Preservation. and its communities. It is the intent of the
protecting, and enhancing the County‘s historic County's preservation program to provide a
and architectural heritage for the benefit of Table 1 (below) provides a summary of rational system for evaluating, protecting, and
present and future generations. It serves to Germantown‘s historic resources and Map 1 enhancing the County's historic and architectural
highlight the values that are important in (opposite) gives the general location of these heritage for the benefit of present and future
maintaining the individual character of the County properties. This section contains a description and generations. The accompanying challenge is to
and its communities. a photograph or map of each master plan site, weave protection of this heritage into the County's
organized chronologically by date of construction. planning program to maximize community support
Summary The section also includes an explanation of the for preservation and minimize infringement on
historic preservation designation process and the private property rights.
Historic resources within the boundaries of this
effects of historic site designation.
Germantown Plan were designated in 1989 in the
The following criteria, as stated in Section 24A-3 of
Approved and Adopted Germantown Master Plan.
Montgomery County Historic Preservation the Historic Preservation Ordinance, shall apply
Other historic resources in the Germantown
Program when historic resources are evaluated for
Planning Area were designated in the following
designation in the Master Plan for Historic
documents: The Master Plan for Historic Preservation and the
Preservation.
the December 2008 Amendment to the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 24A of
Historic Preservation Master Plan; the Montgomery County Code, are designed to
(1) Historical and cultural significance:
Individual Historic Resources in the protect and preserve Montgomery County‘s
The historic resource:
1989 Germantown Master Plan; and historic and architectural heritage. Placement on
Has character, interest, or value as part of
the 1979 Master Plan for Historic the Master Plan for Historic Preservation officially
the development, heritage or cultural
Preservation. designates a property as a historic site or historic
characteristics of the County, State, or
district and subjects it to further procedural
Nation;
requirements of the ordinance.
Is the site of a significant historic event;
Is identified with a person or a group of otherwise specified in the amendment, the of historic resources should be sensitive to and
persons who influenced society; or environmental setting for each site, as defined in maintain the character of the area. Specific
Exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, Section 24A-2 of the Ordinance, is the entire design considerations should be reflected as part
political or historic heritage of the County parcel on which the resource is located as of the of the Mandatory Referral review processes.
and its communities; or date it is designated on the master plan.
(2) Architectural and design significance: In the majority of cases, decisions regarding
The historic resource: Designating the entire parcel provides the County preservation alternatives are made at the time of
Embodies the distinctive characteristics of adequate review authority to preserve historic public facility implementation within the process
a type, period, or method of construction; sites in the event of development. It also ensures established in Section 24A of the Ordinance. This
Represents the work of a master; that, from the beginning of the development method provides for adequate review by the public
Possesses high artistic values; process, important features of these sites are and governing agencies. To provide guidance in
Represents a significant and recognized and incorporated in the future the event of future public facility implementation,
distinguishable entity whose components development of designated properties. In the case the amendment addresses potential conflicts
may lack individual distinction; or of large acreage parcels, the amendment will existing at each site and suggests alternatives and
Represents an established and familiar provide general guidance for the refinement of the recommendations to assist in balancing
visual feature of the neighborhood, setting by indicating when the setting is subject to preservation with community needs.
Community, or County due to its singular reduction in the event of development; by In addition to protecting designated resources
physical characteristic or landscape. describing an appropriate area to preserve the from unsympathetic alteration and insensitive
integrity of the resource; and by identifying redevelopment, the County's Preservation
Implementing the Master Plan for Historic buildings and features associated with the site Ordinance also empowers the County's
Preservation that should be protected as part of the setting. It Department of Permitting Services and the HPC to
is anticipated that for a majority of the sites desig- prevent the demolition of historic buildings
Once designated on the Master Plan for Historic
nated, the appropriate point at which to refine the through neglect.
Preservation, historic resources are subject to the
environmental setting will be when the property is
protection of the County‘s Historic Preservation
subdivided. The Montgomery County Council passed legislation
Ordinance, Chapter 24A. Any substantial changes
in September 1984 to provide for a tax credit
to the exterior of a resource or its environmental
Public improvements can profoundly affect the against County real property taxes in order to
setting must be reviewed by the Historic
integrity of a historic area. Section 24A-6 of the encourage the restoration and preservation of
Preservation Commission (HPC) and a historic area
Ordinance states that a Historic Area Work Permit privately owned structures located in the County.
work permit issued under the provisions of the
for public or private property must be issued prior The credit applies to all properties designated on
Ordinance, Section 24A-6. In accordance with the
to altering a historic resource or its environmental the Master Plan for Historic Preservation (Chapter
Master Plan for Historic Preservation and unless
setting. The design of public facilities in the vicinity 52, Art. VI). Furthermore, the HPC maintains up-to-
date information on the status of preservation
incentives including tax credits, tax benefits
possible through the granting of easements on his-
toric properties, outright grants, and low interest
loan programs.
Table 1: Germantown Historic Resources Historic Sites Designated on the Master Plan for Historic Preservation
Resource # Resource Name Address Date
18/44 Little Seneca Viaduct Wisteria Drive Vicinity, Germantown c1865; 1873; 1896
19/1 Pleasant Fields/Basil Waters House 21200 Waters Road/Milestone Manor Lane c1790;1890
19/3 William Waters Jr. House Site Between 20511 & 20553 Shadyside Way c1785
19/5 Neelsville Presbyterian Church 20701 Frederick Road 1877
19/10 Waring Viaduct B&O tracks at Great Seneca Creek 1906
19/11 Waring-Crawford Farm 19212 Forest Brook Road c1850; c1885
19/13 Germantown Historic District Liberty Mill Road & B&O Railroad Vicinity c1878+
19/13-1 Madeline V. Waters House 12900 Wisteria Drive 1899-1902
19/13-5 Pumphrey-Mateney House 19401 Walter Johnson Road c1883
19/13-6 Upton Bowman House 19219 Liberty Mill Road c1901
19/13-7 Wallich-Heimer House 19120 Mateny Road 1913
19/19 Grusendorf Log House Seneca State Park near Visitor Center c1841
19/21 Clopper Mill Ruins Seneca State Park near Clopper Road-Waring Station Road c1795;1834
19/27 John H. Gassaway 17200 Riffle Ford Road c1815; c1840; 1904
19/33 Cider Barrel 20410 Frederick Road 1926
19/40 Stone Culverts & Railroad Bed Harvest Glen Way Vicinity c1873
GERMANTOWN HISTORIC SITES
19/13 Germantown Historic District required two telegraph operators to control the grain scale housed in a small metal shed on
(c1878+) switches to double tracks south of town. Mateny Hill Road, southwest of Blunt Avenue.
Vicinity of Liberty Mill Road, B&O Railroad, and
Mateny Hill Road The Germantown community became the center of Germantown‘s commercial district grew along
commercial activity when the Bowman Brothers Mateny Hill Road between the train station and
German farmers settled the Germantown area in built a new steam-driven flour and corn mill next to Liberty Mill Road. In the late 1800s and early
the early 1800s. The initial Germantown the new railroad depot, making obsolete the 1900s, Germantown had two general stores, a
settlement clustered around the intersection of earlier water-driven mills in the area. Bowman post office, three churches, a bank, doctor's office,
Clopper and Liberty Mill Roads. After the Brothers' Liberty Mill was built in l888 at the south barber shop, and school. The Germantown Bank
introduction of the Metropolitan Branch of the side of Liberty Mill Road along the railroad tracks. (1922)(below, left), 19330 Mateny Hill Road, was
B&O Railroad, the community known as The wooden flour mill burned in l914, but was funded through sale of shares to residents who
Germantown Station grew about one mile north of rebuilt and modernized in l916 with six huge silos. wanted to cash their mill paychecks without being
the original crossroads community. Present-day In 1918 Augustus Selby and his four partners charged 15 cents that the General Store
Liberty Mill and Walter Johnson Roads were the bought the mill, and operated it until l963. A grain demanded for the service. This one-and-a half
original Germantown Road. The railroad enabled elevator and grain dryer were part of the operation story brick building has a simple classical facade,
farmers to ship their produce, grain, and milk to in the l920s and 30s, but burned in l972 after the and iron bars on its triple windows. At the
Washington, as well as receive fertilizers to enrich mill had closed. Still standing is a
the soil for larger yields.
Germantown Station, built
in 1891, replaced an earlier
small railroad station
located there in l878. The
frame structure was rebuilt,
following a 1978 fire, and
serves modern-day
commuters traveling to jobs
downcounty and in
Washington, D.C. (photo, far
right). The original single
track at Germantown once
southern corner of Blunt Avenue and Mateny Hill parcels of land. Bank President A. H. Baker lived
Road, a small, board and batten shop with a gable in a large estate on Liberty Mill Road where Liberty
roof, was used at various times as a harness shop, Heights is now located.
barber shop and post office before it was
converted into a house. Numerous other service Bowman Brother's or Liberty Mill was at one time
businesses in this vicinity included a feed store, the second largest mill in the state. In the 1950s,
several warehouses, and a stockyard. dairy products replaced grain as the state‘s
primary agricultural output, leading to a decline in
The houses built within this period have strong the milling business. Popularity of the automobile
uniformity and similar architectural details in the enabled residents to shop in more distant
simple rural tradition of 19th century Maryland. shopping centers, people became less dependent
The homes were built for mill and railroad on the railroad, and growth of the county's
employees as well as shopkeepers and ministers. population turned cornfields into cul-de-sacs.
Many houses in the historic district still have Commercial businesses are now concentrated
dependencies such as stables, wash houses, and closer to I-270. The Germantown Historic District,
smokehouses; some with louvered cupolas, designated in l989, preserves the heritage of
contrasting trim, or other architectural details. The Germantown as a flourishing farming and mill
generous front and side yards allowed for family community, while continuing to focus on the B&O
gatherings, gardens, and perhaps a few animals, Station as a center for today‘s MARC train
while shade trees and porches helped residents commuters.
escape the heat of summer. One of the oldest
houses in the district is the c1870 Harris-Allnutt
House, 19390 Mateny Mill Road, which was
originally the home of R. E. and Alice Harris who
ran a store here. The Anderson-Johnson House
(1898), 19310 Mateny Mill Road, was first the
home of a railroad agent and later Germantown's
postmaster. Rev. Rayfield House (c1890s), 9215
Blunt Avenue, was the residence of the Baptist
Church minister. The homes of influential
community leaders (e.g. mill owners, banker, store
owners) lined Old Germantown Road on large
Individual Sites (listed chronologically) son of William. Charles built or expanded the 19/3 William Waters Jr. House Site
frame section (right) and compatibly redesigned (Late 1700s-Early 1800s)
19/1 Pleasant Fields/Basil Waters House the existing house. The new large central hall was Demolished Resource—Site Between 20511 &
(c1790s-early 1800s;1890s) outfitted with an elegant curved staircase. Charles 20553 Shadyside Way
21200 Waters Road/Milestone Manor Lane Waters was a successful breeder of racehorses, (drawing below, right)
(photo below, left) one of whom set the east coast trotting record
(1898). The property, which remained in the A designated historic site since 1979, the William
The Waters family inhabited Pleasant Fields for Waters family until 1932, includes a bank barn Waters House no longer stands. The five-bay
more than a century. About 1790, Basil Waters and double corncrib. A small Waters family burial dwelling was one of the earliest substantial brick
established a large tobacco plantation, supported plot is on Hawk‘s Nest Lane. The restored house residences in the Germantown area. The one-
by as many as 22 slaves. The brick sections and barn, owned by M-NCPPC, are scheduled to be room deep, center-passage house featured
(center and left) are the earliest, dating from the open for community events, run in part by the recessed 9/6 sash windows with jack arches, a
late 1700s or early 1800s. In the late 1800s, Montgomery County Historical Society. round-arched doorframe with keystone and
Basil‘s nephew, Dr. William A. Waters, a general cornerblocks, and fanlight transom. According to
practitioner, had a doctor‘s office in the house. tradition, William Waters, Jr. (1751-1817) built the
The house gained its present Italianate house after acquiring the property from his father
appearance under ownership of Charles Waters, in 1785. William was the brother of Basil Waters
who built Pleasant Fields. In the late 1800s, the
house was updated with a Gothic-inspired center
cross gable, a pointed-arch window and shingle
siding. The property, also
known as the Horace Waters
House, remained in the
family until 1962. The
foundations of the house
have been preserved in the
Waters Landing Park.
19/21 Clopper Mill Ruins (c1795; 1834) These ruins are significant as one of the few powered Bowman Brothers Mill opened in 1888, in
Clopper Road at Waring Station Road remaining distinguishable mills in the county, Germantown. Clopper‘s Mill was heavily damaged
(photo, below left) representing an industry once essential to by fire in 1947. The ruins consist of stone and
economic development. Nicholas Sibert built the brick walls with no roof. Local fieldstone on the
Located within Seneca Creek State Park, the original mill on this site in the 1770s. About 1795, basement and first floor levels has corner quoins
Clopper Mill Ruins are remnants of the extensive Zachariah MacCubbin rebuilt the mill, constructing and heavy stone lintels.
property of Francis C. Clopper, influential a two-level stone structure. Clopper renovated
businessman in Montgomery County in the mid- and expanded the mill in 1834, adding a third 19/11 Waring-Crawford Farm
1800s. A prosperous owner of a woolen factory story of bricks made at a manufactory on his (Log section: Mid 1800s; Enlarged Late 19th
and mills, Clopper was a principle backer of the estate. A stone in the mill‘s gable read ―F C C Century - Early 20th Century)
Metropolitan Branch in the 1850s, and was 1834.‖ An undershot water wheel used water 19212 Forest Brook Road
instrumental in persuading the B&O to take over from the Great Seneca Creek to turn the millstone. (photo, below right)
construction of the railroad branch after the Business at the mill declined after the steam-
original company failed. Clopper donated land
both for a nearby railroad station, named in his
honor, and for St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church.
Clopper‘s mansion, known as Woodlands, was
located near the Visitors Center at Seneca Creek
State Park.
This distinctive log and frame residence 1880s, and was railroad agent at Germantown pairs. Typical of higher style Montgomery County
represents an evolution of construction materials. Station where he operated a fertilizer and grain houses of this era (late 1800s-early 1900s), the
The original log house is a two-story side gable store in Germantown Station. This H-shaped first level windows allow access to the front porch,
structure, which had two rooms on each level. The house was built in three main sections. The in this case with jib-door panels.
Waring family (or Warring) probably built the log original part is the south section (left), oriented
dwelling. From the heirs of John P. Waring, George toward Seneca Creek. John Gassaway‘s father is The older section was made compatible with the
Leslie Crawford, in 1881, bought the 214-acre believed to have built in the early 1800s the 1904 section, updated with looped bargeboard
farm with a two-story house and log outbuildings. steeply pitched roof house. Wallpaper bears the and 2/2 sash windows. Front parlor mantels of
A wheat and dairy farmer, Crawford expanded the date of 1815. The center section was built about dark green marble were stolen by vandals.
house with a hipped-roof polygonal front ell, with a 1840. About 1904, John Gassaway reoriented the Electricity was first installed in 1948, replacing gas
fanciful turret over the front entry. After George‘s house when he built the north section, with front lighting. The farmstead includes a log
death in 1925, his descendants continued to run porch facing north toward Riffle Ford Road. smokehouse with vertical plank siding, corncrib,
the farm. Besides the house, only a smokehouse and a wind pump. The Maryland Historical Trust
remains of the farmstead that once included a The elaborately detailed north section of the house holds interior and exterior easements on the
bank barn, double corncrib, slave quarters, and a incorporates both Gothic Revival and Italianate property.
detached kitchen. The main house was built to elements. The north
face the original Waring Station Road, which ran center cross gable and
from Clopper Road to Frederick Road but was looped bargeboard in all
redirected with construction of I-270. main gables are Gothic
Revival in nature, while
19/27 John H. Gassaway Farm bracketed door hood,
(Early 19th Century; c1904) scrolled porch bracket
17200 Riffle Ford Road pairs, and window
(photo right) treatments are Italianate.
First and second level
This novel frame residence, home of a prosperous windows have prominent
farmer and merchant, shows the late acceptance cornices and footed sills,
of Romantic Revival architecture found 20-30 and attic windows are
years earlier in less remote parts of the Eastern round-arched lunettes.
Seaboard. John Hanson Gassaway (1829-1911) Rare in the county are
was president of the Montgomery County cast-iron panels
Agricultural Society in the late 1870s and early connecting wooden post
19/19 Grusendorf Log House (Mid-1800s) 19/40 Stone Culverts and Railroad Bed
Seneca Creek State Park (c1865-73)
(below, left) Harvest Glen Way Vicinity
(photo, above right; environmental setting, below
The Grusendorf Log House was originally located right)
on Clopper Road near Great Seneca Highway. The
house represents a wave of German immigrants This resource reflects the history and
who settled in Montgomery County in the mid technology of the B&O Railroad.
1800s. Frantz and Hanna Grusendorf, natives of
Germany, were among the first to settle in The abandoned railroad bed was the
Germantown, buying the property in 1841. Frantz original alignment of the railroad and
Grusendorf was a stonemason who helped build was in use from 1873 until 1927, when
many Germantown area houses, and Hanna was it was double tracked and straightened.
a midwife. The house, which remained in the The resource includes two stone
Grusendorf family for nearly a century, was moved culverts of granite and Black Rock stone
two miles to Seneca Creek State Park in 1989 to that carried water tributaries under the
protect it from development. tracks. The northwest culvert was
relocated and reconstructed for the
construction of a stormwater
management pond. Salvaged stones
not used in the reconstruction are in
storage will be used at the new
Darnestown Heritage Park, and more
are available for the Germantown Town
Center.
18/44 Little Seneca Viaduct (c1865-73) design of the viaduct, with deck-type girder spans the original single-track width railroad bed, cut into
Wisteria Drive Vicinity supported by nine bents, arranged in four towers the hillside. Now used as an access road to service
(photo, right; environmental setting, below) and one stand-alone bent, is highly representative the dam, the road is closed to the public.
of its time. Unusual was the sharp four-degree
This resource consists of three elements: a c1865 curve of the structure. The 480-foot span stood
abandoned railroad bed, c1872 stone rip-rap wall 105 feet above water at its mid-point. The
from the foot of the original wood trestle bridge remaining stone abutment is incised with the
that traversed Little Seneca Creek, and the dates 6-17-96 and 10-13-96. The bridge was
remains of the 1896 viaduct that replaced the designed by John E. Greiner (1859-1942), an
wooden one. The Little Seneca Viaduct was a accomplished engineer for the B&O Railroad—his
single-tracked iron bridge that served from 1896 later projects included the Havre de Grace bridge
until 1928. During this period of service, the over the Susquehanna River.
viaduct supported a railroad that gave a powerful
surge to Montgomery County‘s economy. The A wooden trestle bridge predated the metal
bridge was abandoned with the advent of double- viaduct. A stone riprap wall located on the east
tracking, and the railroad was rerouted further Recommended: Little Seneca Viaduct
bank of Little Seneca Creek was constructed for
south when the rail line was straightened. The this first bridge. The resource includes a section of
WSSC VIADUCT
DAM
RIPRAP
WALL
RAILROAD
BED
19/5 Neelsville Presbyterian Church (1877)
20701 Frederick Road
(photo, right)
The congregation of the Neelsville Church played

an important role in the development of
Presbyterianism in Montgomery County.
Conservative Presbyterians organized in 1845,
and soon built a log church, south of the present
church. The present Gothic Revival church dates
from 1877. Typical of the style are pointed-arch
windows, which have stained glass panes, a king
post truss embellishing the front gable, and
wooden buttresses, on each facade. The frame
church, which faces west, has a patterned slate
shingle roof and brick foundation. An entry
vestibule and a neon cross in the gable peak were
added in the 1930s. A north wing, completed in
1933 to provide a meeting room, is compatible in
massing and also has wooden buttresses. A large
cemetery lies behind the church, to the east. The
congregation, which now holds services in a 1975
brick church to the north, has restored the historic
church, which is used for Sunday School classes
and community meetings.
19/13-5 Pumphrey-Mateney House (c1883) time dwelling of Madeline Waters, daughter of
19401 Walter Johnson Road Horace. The residence was the most elaborate
(photo, above right) house in Germantown, featuring a three-story
projecting pavilion with palladian windows, a broad
After purchasing this property in 1883, Robert H. hipped roof with dormers, cornice with dentil
Pumphrey lived here where he ran a store until a molding, and pedimented
separate building was built next door (no longer wrap-around porch with
standing) in the early l900s. Judging by the classical columns.
asymmetrical five-bay side elevation and by the
older nature of the stone foundation, Pumphrey
may have substantially rebuilt and/or added onto
an earlier structure to create the building seen
today. Typical details of the 1880s era include
decorative Gothic Revival-influenced trusswork in
the gables, window cornices and footed sills, and
round-arched third-level windows. Robert‘s
daughter and husband, Henry ―Mac‖ Mateney (ma
TEE nee), resided here in the early and mid 1900s.
19/13-1 Madeline V. Waters House

(1899-1902)
Demolished Resource—Site at 12900 Wisteria
Drive
(drawing, below right)
A linear park along Wisteria Drive, at Rt. 118,

commemorates the Madeline Waters House that
was destroyed by arson in 1986. Built in
1899-1902, this roomy frame Colonial Revival
house belonged to the owner of Germantown's
general store, Horace D. Waters. His stepson
Lloyd Dorsey built the house, which was the long-
19/13-6 Upton Bowman House 19/10 Waring Viaduct (1906)
(c1901) 19219 Liberty Mill Road B&O tracks at Great Seneca Creek
(photo, upper left) (photo, lower left)
Located near the Germantown Historic Located about 1,000 feet east of Waring Station
District, this frame residence was the Road, this stone viaduct was built to carry the
home of Upton Bowman, who helped Metropolitan Branch of the B&O Railroad over the
establish the Bowman Brothers' Mill, Great Seneca Creek. It was the product of a
later known as Liberty Mill. In 1888, massive modernization campaign of Pennsylvania
Upton and his brothers Charles and Railroad‘s Leonor Loree when he took charge of
Eldridge opened the steam-powered the B&O in 1901. For its first 30 years of
gristmill, which flourished with its location operation, the railroad crossed the waterway on a
adjacent to the railroad station. The wooden trestle bridge that was dangerous and
success of the milling operation led to an expensive to maintain. The stone viaduct was
economic boom in the erected in 1906 when the railroad line between
Germantown Gaithersburg and Germantown was straightened
community and the and a second track installed. The massive
obsolescence of local stonework of the Waring Viaduct, and its larger
water-powered mills. twin over the Little Monocacy, are uncommon on
The Upton Bowman B&O lines yet more typically found on the
House was probably Pennsylvania Railroad, evidence of Loree‘s
built about 1901 when influence. The 350 foot-long, three-arch viaduct of
the family purchased roughly dressed granite supports the tracks that
the property. The are about 70 feet above the Great Seneca Creek.
frame house, now Early trains stopped at Waring Station to pick up
covered with stucco, passengers and freight, and to take on water
has decorative pumped up from Seneca Creek via a hydraulic
bargeboards with ram.
cross bracing, a two-
story polygonal bay on
the east side, and a
wraparound porch.
19/13-7 Wallich-Heimer House (1913) Germantown Elementary School (north side).
19120 Mateny Road Residents recalled autumns when dozens of
(photo, upper right) farmers with 4-horse team wagons loaded with
apples were waiting in line at the cider press
John Wallich, a local carpenter, built this frame located behind Baker‘s house. The
house for his own residence, in 1913. A well- Cider Barrel provided the retail outlet
preserved Colonial Revival house typical of the late for both the cider and for Baker‘s
1800s and early 1900s, the dwelling has a second own fresh apples.
story corner turret with polygonal hipped roof. The
full-width porch has a pedimented entrance and The barrel is actually a partial
Doric columns. The house has clapboard siding on cylinder applied to the front of a one-
the first level and shingle siding on the second and story front-gable building. A
attic levels. The residence is named in part for bracketed hood shelters an inset
Glenn and Midge Heimer who lived here from counter opening in the barrel facade.
1959-1981. Horizontal stripes capping the head
and base of the barrel lend a
19/33 Cider Barrel (1926) Streamline Moderne effect
20410 Frederick Road accentuated by an adjacent curved
(photo, lower right) c1931 apple stand hidden behind a
sliding door.
The Cider Barrel is a well-loved local landmark and
a distinctive example of roadside architecture. The Atomic Energy Commission
Andrew Baker built the structure in 1926 as a Building (1958)
retail outlet for his cider and fresh apples. The 19901 Germantown Road
Cider Barrel first became a favorite place for
refreshment in the early days of automobile This resource has not been
tourism. Baker was a prominent Germantown designated on the Master Plan for
entrepreneur who spearheaded the move to build Historic Preservation. The Maryland
the Germantown Bank (1922) and served as one Historical Trust has determined this
of its first trustees. Baker owned a large house resource is eligible for listing on the
and farm on Liberty Mill Road (near Liberty Heights National Register of Historic Places.
Court) with an apple orchard next to the
APPENDIX 13: DENSITY DISTRIBUTION
Figure 1
APPENDIX 14: CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
Transportation Planning, 2008
Germantown has various options of transportation land use and

Figure 2
for citizens in the community. There are major transportation
highways, buses, MARC, bicycle facilities, and changes outside of
sidewalks to facilitate travel to and from locations the Germantown
across the study area. These forms of Employment Area
transportation provide mobility and access in a Sector Plan. A
safe manner and shape the community‘s second level, the
character in conjunction with land use pattern and Local Area Model
urban design. This Appendix will be subject to (LAM), refine the
revision pending publication of the Planning Board forecasts at the
Draft Plan depending upon the recommendations local level, using
in the Plan. quick-response
methodologies
Analysis from NCHRP
Report 255 to
The roadway system is analyzed with the current convert system-
conditions and its ability to serve the study area‘s level forecasts to
travel desires based on existing and future travel project-level forecasts. Both the TRAVEL/3 and programs that reflect a non-auto driver mode split
patterns. The system was analyzed using two LAM use the four step process of trip generation, goal specific to Germantown, and higher than that
different levels of analysis. The Department‘s trip distribution, mode split, and traffic which would be reflected at a larger scale analysis.
travel demand model (TRAVEL/3) was applied to assignment. The LAM analyzed the existing conditions in
test local land use proposals in conjunction with Germantown and analyzes four future year (2030)
the Metropolitan Washington Council of The LAM was used to create a finer-grain analysis land use scenarios created by planners and the
Governments (COG) adopted land use forecasts based on the planned Germantown community. The land use scenarios were assigned
for the region. The TRAVEL/3 model results neighborhoods, a more refined road network, and into traffic analysis zones as seen in Figure 1. An
develop baseline conditions reflecting planned localized Travel Demand Management (TDM) assumption was made in the LAM to allow transit
access and travel demand management
improvements based on the type of land use Table 1 Commercial Dwelling Units Outbound PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips
proposed. With the CCT and a continuing focus on Scenario SF DU
sustainable transportation initiatives an average Existing 8,062,334 6,591 24,954
areawide achievement of a 25 percent non-auto
Alternative 2B 21,025,408 13,442 44,472
driver mode share for employees (compared to 16
percent today) was used in the LAM. The land use Alternative 2C 23,004,920 15,101 49,512
scenarios generate a number of trips and attract
Figure 3
trips from outside of Germantown, which is trip
generation and distribution. Those trips were
spread out over the network based on destinations
using the Local Area Transportation Review (LATR)
guidelines, which is trip assignment. The trips
assigned to the roads allow planners to determine
how much congestion occurs at intersections.
The scenarios generally result in more traffic

volume from the existing conditions than the 1989
Master Plan. There is a significant increase in
traffic volumes into the area and out of the area as
seen in Figure 2. Several land scenarios were
modeled and can be seen in Table 1 showing the
differences in the amount of development for each
proposal.
Capacity Considerations
From a Policy Area Mobility Review (PAMR)

perspective, the end-state analysis of Land Use
Alternative shows that the proposed land use and
transportation system can be found to be in
balance, due in large part to implementation of
regional facilities already in the sector plan
including I-270 widening, the CCT, M-83, and MD
355 widening. Figure 3 shows the results of the
PAMR analysis, comparing conditions for 2005,
2011, and Alternative 3. The staff recommended
land use is commensurate with that tested as
Alternative 3.
As shown in Figure 4, there are several locations

where we forecast localized congestion problems
that are generally either related to I-270 access
points or locations where major highways
intersect.
Figure 4
Legend
Several new master planned streets break up the Table 2
superblocks, with additional connectivity
Intersection Volume/Capacity (V/C) Ratios
supporting both the distribution of vehicular traffic
Map Intersection Existing 2030 Sector Plan
and accessibility by non-auto modes. The Plan
Symbol
recommends an expansion of the I-270/Father
Crystal Rock Dr & Cloverleaf Center 0.44 1.04
Hurley Boulevard interchange to facilitate
intermodal transfer where the CCT crosses I-270 Crystal Rock Dr & Father Hurley Blvd 0.69 1.12
via Dorsey Mill Road; this access could also Crystal Rock Dr & Germantown Rd (MD 118)* 0.92 1.05
alleviate the localized congestion problem at
Crystal Rock Dr & Kinster Dr 0.39 0.74
Father Hurley Boulevard and Crystal Rock Drive.
Father Hurley Blvd & Middlebrook Rd* 0.45 0.60
The localized congestion problems shown in Figure Frederick Rd (MD 355) & Germantown Rd (MD 118) 1.10 1.32
4 reflect the current growth policy intersection Frederick Rd (MD 355) & Henderson Corner Rd 0.76 0.99
congestion standards. For those intersections
Frederick Rd (MD 355) & Middlebrook Rd 0.96 1.39
where future interchanges are not recommended,
full pedestrian accommodation needs to be Frederick Rd (MD 355) & Ridge Rd (MD 27) 1.05 1.11
incorporated within any proposed reconstruction. Frederick Rd (MD 355) & Shakespeare Dr 0.89 1.09
Travel demand management measures should be
Germantown Rd (MD 118) & Aircraft Blvd* 0.68 0.97
considered as the first priority for addressing
congestion. In the Plan‘s urban areas and transit Great Seneca Hwy (MD 119) & Middlebrook Rd 0.69 1.11
station areas, intersection widening should be Great Seneca Hwy (MD 119) & Wisteria Dr 0.62 0.95
considered a last resort to best preserve a transit-
Middlebrook Rd & Crystal Rock Dr* 0.51 1.00
oriented development planned along the CCT.
Middlebrook Rd & Germantown Rd (MD 118)* 0.81 1.03
Middlebrook Rd & Waring Station Dr 0.73 0.91
Observation Dr & Germantown Rd (MD 118) 0.61 0.91
Observation Dr & Ridge Rd (MD 27) 1.00 1.08
Wisteria Dr & Germantown Rd (MD 118)* 0.85 0.68
*Capacities based on a 1600 CLV congestion standard.
Once the scenarios are added to the local network, an at-grade solution is expected to be the most I-270 Intermodal Access at Dorsey Mill
local intersections are evaluated based on the practical.
policy standard of congestion for the area where Incorporation of direct access to the Dorsey Mill
the intersection is located. Critical lane volumes Changes to the 1989 Master Plan of transit station to and from the north along I-270 is
(CLV) is an analysis used for existing signalized Highways desirable. This access can be provided by either
intersections in the area to determine the highest direct access ramps at the Dorsey Mill Road
amount of volume a through lane can hold. CLV is The following paragraphs summarize the changes interchange or a revision to the Father Hurley
a calculation for intersections that uses through between the 1989 Germantown Master Plan and Boulevard interchange. The new access would
traffic and traffic turning left against oncoming the recommendations expected to be included in facilitate intermodal connections between future
traffic. For the Germantown area, there are two the Planning Board Draft of the 2009 Germantown managed lanes and bus services on I-270 and the
different policy standards of congestion. The Employment Area Sector Plan at time of Appendix transit service along the Corridor Cities Transitway.
Germantown Town Center area has a congestion production. This access would also reduce congestion at the
standard of 1600, while the rest of Germantown junction of Father Hurley Boulevard with Crystal
has a congestion standard of 1425. Existing I-270 Improvements Rock Drive, reduce commercial traffic use of
conditions are represented by traffic volumes Kinster Drive, and provide better access to
observed between 2002 and 2006. The CLVs are This Plan supports the widening of I-270 to a businesses along Century Boulevard. The access
converted into a volume over capacity ratio that twelve-lane facility with some managed lane would need to be coordinated with State Highway
can be seen in Table 2 and in Figure 4 with a star component to provide preferential treatment to Administration and Federal Highway
noting capacities based on a 1600 CLV congestion transit vehicles and high-occupancy vehicles. The Administration. Staff has determined that a fully
standard. The existing conditions columns have Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) is separated interchange at Dorsey Mill Road would
three intersections currently failing. The 2030 studying options that include express toll lanes; likely not meet Interstate Access Point Approval
Sector Plan column represents CLVs with this Sector Plan does not set policy regarding requirements as it would not be needed to
recommended improvements includes new roads, whether or not tolling should be provided on I-270 facilitate freeway flow. However, a future
extra lanes, and turn lanes at the intersections but notes that value pricing is a useful demand reconstruction of the Father Hurley Boulevard
shows seven failing intersections. At three of management tool. The SHA is also examining interchange to connect to the CCT crossing in the
these locations (along MD 355), the Plan limited interchange reconstruction in Germantown vicinity of Dorsey Mill Road could provide both the
recommends grade-separated interchanges to including the provision of some direct access intermodal connection and facilitate local access.
address traffic congestion at Plan buildout. At ramps to and from express toll lanes. Development of a split urban diamond
three other intersections, the forecast V/C ratio is configuration, similar to the I-270 Spur
less than 10 percent over capacity, a level where interchange with Old Georgetown Road (MD 187)
and Rockledge Drive, would be one means to MD 355 Corridor Considerations fully evaluate alternatives to M-83. Staff
achieve this objective. Along the MD 355 corridor, forecast traffic recommends a 250‘ wide right-of-way for MD 355
congestion is severe at locations where MD 355 in the draft Plan with a staging element that would
Target Speeds intersects east-west major highways such as Ridge link the ultimate right-of-way width to a County
Road (MD 27). The 1989 Master Plan Council decision regarding the M-83 study in
The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan recommends a grade-separated interchange at 2010. The wider right-of-way would also provide
identifies target speeds for non-residential this location. This Plan also recommends grade the ability to study bus rapid transit concepts
roadways classified in the Sector Plan, following separated interchanges at the MD 355 further during the same staging period.
the guidance in the County Code and Executive intersections with Middlebrook Road and MD 118.
Regulation 31-08. Staff has also explored the development of what
The DPWT study of Midcounty Highway Extended Peter Calthorpe terms an ―urban network‖; the
Controlled Major Highway (M-83) is expected to be completed in early 2010, provision of at-grade, one-way couplets where
after the Germantown Plan adoption. The master major highways meet. This concept could be
A controlled major highway is defined in the 2007 plan alignment for M-83 is outside of the applied at each of the MD 355 intersections with
road code as ―a road meant exclusively for the Germantown Plan study area. The master-planned MD 27, MD 118, and Middlebrook Road.
through movement of vehicles at lower speeds alignment is in both the Master Plan of Highways Preliminary analyses indicate that this approach
than a freeway. Access must be limited to grade- and the regional Constrained Long Range Plan and (the replacement of a single wide intersection with
separated interchanges or at-grade intersections has been assumed as part of the network of four intersections of one-way streets around a
with public roads.‖ Three roads in the Plan area; regional transportation improvements for the town square type of feature) could provide mobility
Father Hurley Boulevard/Ridge Road (MD 27), purposes of Sector Plan analysis. levels commensurate with that achieved by the
Frederick Road (MD 355), and Great Seneca proposed grade-separated interchanges. The
Highway (MD 119) either meet the definition for a DPWT has studied an alternative to building M-83 urban network would also have a lower capital
controlled major highway or should be classified by improving MD 355. Their preliminary findings cost, but requires a substantial and coordinated
as such for mobility and access management are that a MD 355 alternative that generally redevelopment to implement. The Plan
purposes. Classification implementation for these respected the current 150‘ wide right-of-way and recommends that the urban network concept be
roads does not mean that existing driveway cuts existing development in the corridor would not studied further, either as a supplemental study to
should be closed. These roads in the 1989 meet the study purpose and need. Staff concurs the Plan (should budgetary constraints permit) or
Germantown Master Plan were classified as major with that finding, but has worked with DPWT to as an alternative within any project planning study
highways. expand their study to include an alternative that of interchange construction.
does meet the purpose and need, in order to more
Father Hurley Boulevard Observation Drive – MD 118 to
The number of travel lanes on the portion of Middlebrook Road Crystal Rock Drive – MD 118 to
Father Hurley Boulevard west of Wisteria A parallel route to I-270 and MD 355 from a Middlebrook Road
Drive should be reduced from six lanes to regional standpoint is needed, which is The portion of Crystal Rock Drive that
four lanes, based on confirmation of travel achieved by a southerly extension of connects Middlebrook Road to Germantown
demand volumes examined during the Observation Drive across the Montgomery Road is being reclassified as a minor
Facility Planning study in 2003. College campus to Middlebrook Road, with arterial roadway with a local bicycle facility.
a roadway connection eastward to MD 355
Great Seneca Highway at Cider Press Lane and a potential second Kinster Drive
Great Seneca Highway today meets the easterly connection to MD 355 north of the Kinster Drive was classified as a four-lane,
definition for a controlled major highway, Boys and Girls Club property. This divided arterial in the 1989 Germantown
with one exception. This road in the 1989 connection will facilitate access within and Master Plan. Based on public comment and
Germantown Master Plan was classified as across the campus, reducing local trip staff discussions, Kinster Drive will be
a major highway. lengths. This Plan adds a new extension of changed in the Sector Plan to remain as a
Observation Drive to the east of the campus two lane divided, minor arterial road with
Arterials along the stream valley buffers as a four on-street parking. Staff forecasts that with
Crystal Rock Drive – Father Hurley lane, undivided road to serve both local and the I-270 Dorsey Mill Road access and the
Boulevard to MD 118 regional transportation needs. Public Hearing Draft Plan land use, Kinster
Crystal Rock Drive has several Drive will carry approximately 7,000
classifications throughout its entire length. Minor Arterials vehicles per day, within the capacity of a
From Kinster Drive to Aircraft Drive, Crystal Cider Press Place two-lane roadway.
Rock Drive is classified as a four lane, This is an extension of an existing two lane
divided arterial. This particular section of residential road one block in length on the Business Streets
Crystal Rock Drive has a recreational west side of MD 355. This roadway Any street in this Plan boundary that was classified
greenway proposed adjacent to the eastern extension will connect to the new extension as an industrial street in the 1989 Germantown
edge of the right-of-way. of Observation Drive on the Montgomery Master Plan was reclassified as a business street.
College campus to MD 355. This particular
alignment is preferred based on the
relatively limited stream buffer crossing at
the eastern edge of the campus.
Blunt Road Crystal Rock Drive Middlebrook Road – MD 118 to Father
Blunt Road is classified as a two lane Crystal Rock Drive has several Hurley Boulevard
business street. The cul-de-sac will be classifications. This road is classified as a Middlebrook Road was classified as a major
removed and the road will connect to MD four lane business street from the proposed highway in the 1989 Germantown Master
355. At Middlebrook Road, further study is Dorsey Mill Road extension to Kinster Drive Plan. Based on its proposed function
needed to determine if this newly created and from Middlebrook Road to Wisteria serving a re-orientation of proposed Town
intersection will be a right-in or right-out Drive. A portion of this road from Black Hill Center development, Middlebrook Road
design or whether a full movement Park to Kinster Drive will have a from Germantown Road to Father Hurley
intersection or left-turn in treatment can be recreational greenway proposed on the Boulevard is reclassified as a four lane,
designed to meet both traffic control and eastern portion of the road. However, the divided business street. This road from
sight distance requirements. entire length of Crystal Rock Drive has a Germantown Road to Frederick Road (MD
proposed local bicycle facility. 355) will maintain the classification set in
Century Boulevard the 1989 Germantown Master Plan of a six
Century Boulevard is designated as a four Goldenrod Lane lane, divided major highway. Middlebrook
lane divided business street with a shared- Goldenrod Lane is reclassified as a four Road will continue to have a shared-use
use bicycle path from the proposed Dorsey lane business street. This extension will path alongside the entire length of the road.
Mill Road extension to Crystal Rock Drive. connect to Observation Drive, skirting along
From Crystal Rock Drive to Wisteria Drive, the edge of the forest. This road should be Waterford Hills Boulevard
Century Boulevard is classified as a two provided in conjunction with the Waterford Hills Boulevard is a new addition
lane business street. Century Boulevard is development plans for the Technology Park. to the Germantown Employment Area
proposed to be extended from Wisteria The connection will allow students to Sector Plan. The existing road that
Drive to the proposed Waters Road access the Technology Park and will give intersects Father Hurley Boulevard will be
extension. This extension will facilitate other employees access to the Technology extended to the proposed Century
connections between the Town Center and Park through Observation Drive and the Boulevard extension. Waterford Hills
the West End (including to the MARC new connection via Cider Press Place Boulevard will be a four lane, divided
station) without traveling on Germantown Extended to MD 355. business street with a local bicycle facility.
Road.
Waters Road
Waters Road is a new two lane business
street that connects Wisteria Drive to
Germantown Road.
New, Unnamed Business Streets

There are three proposed new unnamed
business streets in the Germantown
Employment Area Sector Plan. There are
two new two lane roads that connect
Century Boulevard to Crystal Rock Drive (B-
17 and B-19). The third new business street
is a two lane road from Seneca Meadows
Parkway to Milestone Center Drive called B-
25 that will pass over Ridge Road adjacent
to the eastern leg of the CCT.
Figure 5
The following are roads that were not
classified in the 1989 Germantown Master
Plan, but are classified as business streets
in this Plan that did not have changes to
them.
o Bowman Mill Road
o Cloverleaf Center Drive
o Seneca Meadows Road (formerly
Goldenrod Lane)
o Walter Johnson Drive
Public Transportation
Germantown has several forms of public

transportation for the community. MARC and Ride
On buses give residents options for traveling
throughout the County.
The Brunswick line of the MARC commuter rail

service has a train station located in Germantown
between Middlebrook Road and Dawson Farm
Road as seen in Figure 6. There are nine MARC
trains that stop at Germantown. Currently, there is
a free paved parking lot to either side of the
railroad tracks allowing riders to park their cars all
day. From April 2005 to April 2006 there were 729
people on an average daily basis board MARC at
the Germantown station.
Figure 6.
MARC and Transit stations.
Table 3
Public Transportation Facilities & Segments
Trains per Average Daily
Facility From To Type day Riders
MARC Brunswick Line Martinsburg, WV Washington D.C. Commuter Rail 9 7,122
MARC Brunswick Line Germantown stop Commuter Rail 9 729
Ride On Route 55 Rockville Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 6,890
Ride On Route 61 Shady Grove Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 2,639
Ride On Route 70 Express Milestone Park and Ride Bethesda Bus N/A 593
Ride On Route 74 Shady Grove Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 751
Ride On Route 75 Clarksburg Correctional Facility/Urbana Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 233
Ride On Route 79 Shady Grove Germantown Bus N/A 133
Ride On Route 82 Clarksburg Town Center Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 77
Ride On Route 83 Germantown Transit Center Milestone Park and Ride Bus N/A 696
Ride On Route 90 Shady Grove Damacus Bus N/A 843
Ride On Route 90 Damascus Milestone Park and Ride Bus N/A 843
Ride On Route 97 Germantown Transit Center Gunners Lake Bus N/A 703
Ride On Route 98 Germantown Transit Center Seabreeze Court Bus N/A 360
Ride On Route 100 Express Shady Grove Germantown Transit Center Bus N/A 1,632
Corridor Cities Transitway Shady Grove Clarksburg Proposed N/A
This is one of several stops along the Brunswick station to accommodate some of these Grove, Germantown, and Clarksburg. The western
line providing weekday commuters the ability to commuters. alignment of the CCT within Germantown is under
travel from Germantown to Silver Spring or to current study by the Maryland Transit
Washington D.C. to work. Some commuters use The Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT) as seen in Administration (MTA), as shown in Figure 6. At the
the MARC train to transfer to the Rockville Metro Figure 7 is a master-planned public transportation time of this Plan draft, the MTA draft
Station or the Silver Spring Metro Station and system that will either be light rail transit or bus Environmental Assessment was not yet released
continue their commute by Metro. By 2015, MARC rapid transit between the Shady Grove Metro nor had a decision been made regarding the mode
plans to add 3,800 new seats to the Brunswick Station and Frederick County by way of of the CCT. As part of this sector plan, the
Line and build a parking garage near the MARC Washingtonian, Quince Orchard, Metropolitan Middlebrook Road CCT transit station is being
removed. This proposed station serves a limited
commercial area, which is not suitable for transit-
oriented development due in part to its size,
shape, and topographic constraints. Removing a
low-priority and low-volume station from the CCT
Master Plan Alignment would improve overall
Germantown Stations
transit line speeds, and therefore boost ridership.
Multi-modal accessibility is paramount in ensuring

that the CCT is a viable facility with ridership levels
competitive for federal funding. This Plan makes
the following recommendations regarding CCT
station facilities:
Development at the Germantown Town Center

station should accommodate 9 bus bays to
facilitate the pulse-type of transfer currently
associated with Ride-On Route 100 service.
The Cloverleaf and Observation Drive/Seneca
Meadow stations should be planned to have
adjacent on-street bus stops.
Development at the Dorsey Mill and Manekin
stations, adjacent to the proposed new I-270
access ramps should each be planned to
accommodate 500 parking spaces, 10 kiss-
and-ride spaces, and 4 bus bays.
Figure 7:
Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT)
Source: MTA and SHA, I-270/US15 Multimodal
Transitway Study Area, September 2006
Germantown Town Center has a transit station
located along Crystal Rock Road with a free paved
parking lot behind the transit center. The County‘s
Ride On bus services allow commuters to travel
from Germantown to Bethesda, Shady Grove,
Gaithersburg, and Rockville. Currently, there are
eleven Ride On bus routes that travel throughout
the area with six routes having a final stop at the
Transit Center. Additional parking is currently
needed near the transit center and will be needed
in the future with the future CCT. Table 3 contains
more details about ridership on each route that
travels in the study area.
As stated in the report, explore the feasibility,

funding, and proposed route for a circulator bus
with DOT and initiate this service between the
Town Center, MARC station, and transit
neighborhoods.
The future Germantown Town Center Station
APPENDIX 15: STATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CORRIDOR CITIES TRANSITWAY (CCT) STATIONS
This section presents assumptions and Middlebrook Station EA/AA: Same as Baker Study
recommendations related to the Germantown (Noted in EA/AA as Future Station – Beyond 2025) Sector Plan: Retain Baker recommendations.
Corridor Cities Transitway station areas on land Baker Study: A 1.3-acre station with two bus
area, bus and kiss & ride access, and parking. bays, eight kiss & ride spaces Manekin Station
and 50 parking spaces (Noted in EA/AA as Future Station – Beyond 2025)
The information is taken from two prior sources – EA/AA: Same as Baker Study Baker Study: A 1.9-acre station with an on-
the Shady Grove – Clarksburg Transitway Study Sector Plan: Station not recommended street bus stop, ten kiss & ride
Final Report (or ―Baker Study‖) of November 1997 spaces and 500 parking spaces.
and the I-270 / US 15 Multi-Modal Corridor Study Germantown Town Center Station EA/AA: Essentially same as Baker Study
Draft Environmental Impact Study of May 2002. Baker Study: At 5.6 acres, this is the largest Sector Plan: Retain Baker recommendations
The latter study is currently being updated by the station recommended in this
Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT). study. Nine bus bays, 20 kiss & Seneca Meadows Station
The update is referred to as an Environmental ride spaces and 600 parking (Not in MDOT Study)
Assessment / Alternatives Analysis (EA/AA) and it is spaces recommended. Baker Study: A 1.9-acre station with an on-
scheduled to be completed later this spring. A EA/AA: Same as Baker Study street bus stop, ten kiss & ride
―Locally Preferred Alternative‖ for the CCT is Sector Plan: Promote pedestrian access and spaces and 500 parking spaces.
expected to be selected by the Governor after the shared parking. Reduce EA/AA: Not Applicable
update is completed and the comment period has auto/pedestrian conflicts. If built Sector Plan: Retain Baker recommendations.
ended. concurrently, permit some of the
600 spaces to shift to adjacent Dorsey Mill Station
The MDOT studies included the CCT alignment blocks. Baker Study: A 3.3-acre station with four bus
west of I-270 and do not include the alignment bays, ten kiss & ride spaces and
east of I-270 south of the Dorsey Mill Station. As a Cloverleaf Station 500 parking spaces.
result there is no assumption in the EA/AA for the Baker Study: A 0.6-acre station with an on- EA/AA: Walk up station
Seneca Meadows station. street bus stop, ten on-street kiss Sector Plan: Retain Baker recommendations.
& ride spaces, and 50 parking
spaces.
APPENDIX 16: BIKEWAYS
The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan have the natural surface trail extended. A hard is an important part of connectivity in the area to
includes a network of existing and planned bicycle surface trail should be provided connecting from transit stations, residential, and commercial areas.
facilities, including shared use paths, shared use the trailhead parking lot on MD 355 to the One connection that is of particular interest is a
roads, and park trails. A hard surface trail system proposed Upcounty Corridor. The access roadway missing connection from Pinnacle Drive to
along Great Seneca Creek is proposed to allow from Century Boulevard to Black Hill Regional Park Celebration Way. As part of the Road Construction
recreational cyclists and walkers to travel from should be removed due to environmental Code, design elements should foster pedestrian-
Seneca Greenway to Damascus using the concerns, although an unpaved trail connection oriented design, particularly in the urban areas of
Magruder Trail via the North Germantown should be retained. the Plan. In certain neighborhoods, specific
Greenbelt and through Clarksburg per Countywide pedestrian pathways are recommended to
Park Trails Plan, July 1998. This Plan also Although this Sector Plan does not explicitly facilitate access to the town center and transit
proposes that the existing Seneca Greenway Trail recommend sidewalks and pedestrian facilities, it station areas.
APPENDIX 17: TRAIL CONNECTIONS
Park Planning and Stewardship, Department of Parks, 2008
Trails are integral to the Germantown pedestrian connectivity between urban centers, parks, Policy Guidance
network. Connect trails, bikeways and sidewalks community facilities, and local and regional
through all districts promoting an alternative to bikeways. The proposed pedestrian and bike The 1998 Countywide Park Trails Plan proposed a
vehicle use and improving access to destinations system will support the plan‘s vision of a 250-mile interconnected system of hard surface
such as transit stations, schools, commercial pedestrian-oriented environment, with linkages and natural surface trails in eight greenway
services, parks and natural areas. The trail into open spaces, regional trail systems, and other corridors throughout Montgomery County. The
recommendations in this document will update the destinations. (See also Appendices 17, 19 and 20, Germantown Planning Area is located in two of the
2005 Park, Recreation, & Open Space (PROS) Bikeways, Recreation Needs and Parks and Open eight corridors:
Plan. Spaces.)
Corridor 2: Seneca Greenway Corridor, a
Key Park Trail Planning Issues . natural surface trail corridor that stretches
Assure connectivity by creating a park trail from the Potomac to the Patuxent and utilizes
New visions for the Germantown study area system that in combination with the bike paths a portion of the Germantown Greenbelt.
include a more compact and walkable provides an integrated, interconnected
environment within each of several distinct mixed- pedestrian network throughout the Corridor 8: Upcounty Corridor, a hard surface
use neighborhoods that are clustered around the community, and links neighborhoods to the trail corridor that features a proposed hiker-
transit stations of the Corridor Cities Transitway. larger community by trails, sidewalks, and bike biker trail to link the communities of
The key issue for trail connections will be to assure paths Germantown, Clarksburg and Damascus.
Table 1 Summary of Proposed Trail Recommendations, Germantown Corridor Area
Facility Status Issues Recommendations
M-83 Segment of Germantown Countywide Park Trails Road might not be built due Identify alternate alignment(s)
Bicycle Beltway Plan to environmental issues
Crystal Rock Greenway In existing ROW Create linear recreation corridor between Town Center
and Black Hill Park, with hiker/biker path, seating,
landscaping.
As recommended by the Countywide Park Trail Recommendations
Trails Plan we have developed an extensive
natural surface trail system that will surround The Trail Concept both links the study area to
the Planning Area and will have a hard surface nature, parks, and community destinations and to
bicycle beltway with connections to the north regional trail systems. Specifically the Plan
and south. The Countywide Park Trails Plan proposes to:
identifies the need for a more comprehensive
look at how park trails and bike paths can be Link the Town Center to the greenbelt parks to:
integrated in the upcounty area and stresses
the need for a ―well-thought out trail concept Create a ―greenway‖ that integrates the Town
to guide both private and public Center entertainment district, public parks,
development‖. Both the Germantown and private open space and features easy
Employment Area Sector Plan and the larger access from transit This is a linear green
MD 355 corridor study will help assure space that connects Black Hill to the Town
enhanced connectivity along the entire length Center (via Crystal Rock Drive road narrowing).
of the I-270 Corridor. If possible and through work with private
developers, this plan proposes a cultural walk
Trail Connection Needs that could build upon one or more of the
historical themes identified in this Plan.
Connectivity to park trails, existing and proposed
parks, and community facilities is essential. Provide a Bicycle Beltway that connects the
Closing the gap in the North Greenbelt proposed Study Area to the north, south and east to
trail is important between Seneca Crossing Local parks and trails. If M-83, Midcounty Highway,
Park and Great Seneca Stream Valley Park. The M- and its related bikeway are not built, an
83 segment of the Germantown Bicycle Beltway alternate bikeway alignment must be
will provide this function, however if M-83 is not identified.
built, an alternate alignment must be provided.
Trail head parking is needed at the Waters house.
New trails planned for Black Hill Regional Park will
add to recreational opportunities.
APPENDIX 18: RECREATION NEEDS
Department of Recreation, Montgomery County, December 2007
Currently, the Germantown area is served by Facilities would generally take the form of a
several public recreation facilities. The multipurpose building blending community service
Germantown Community Recreation Center and with active and passive recreation/leisure
Germantown Outdoor Pool were built on a single activities. Service populations include all ages –
site in combination with the Kings View Middle Preschool thru Senior from a surrounding 30,000
School. The site includes outdoor recreation minimum resident area. By taking advantage of
facilities and is located southwest and outside of the future development it may be possible to
the study area. The Germantown Indoor Pool, integrate facilities into the initial conceptual
located at South Germantown Regional Park is a design of some mixed use parcels. It may even be
large full service aquatic facility drawing from a possible to conceive of a full service facility
regional audience. The last facility is the Plum Gar including outdoor features at the eastern edge of
Neighborhood Recreation Center situated at the the Germantown community and a ―downtown
farthest southeast corner of the study area. An annex‖ in the Milestone/I-270 area that would
additional small facility is also operated near the provide residents of the higher density central
intersection of MD 355 & Middlebrook Road by the sections with smaller facility focused on basic key
Boys and Girls Club. recreational elements.
Based on the population of Germantown as well as RECOMMENDATION: M-NCPPC should work

the increased development of the mixed use ―town closely with the Department of Recreation to
center‖ areas, there is a significant need to locate incorporate community recreational facilities into a
additional community serving recreation facilities detailed land use plan for the further development
in this vicinity. Geographically, sites in the central of Germantown.
and northeastern sections of Germantown would
be most complimentary to the existing facilities
and serve both the ―in-town‖ urban center
residents in the vicinity of the Transit Corridor and
those in growth areas north and east of the core
study area.
Figure 1
Urban Open Spaces and Trails Concept
Legend
Existing Public Parks

Proposed Urban Open Space
Proposed Green Commons

Proposed Public Park
Proposed Transit Sidewalk Network
Proposed Bicycle Beltway
Proposed Black Hill Greenway
Proposed Observation Drive Pathway
Germantown Planning Area
Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan
Proposed Corridor Cities Transitway and Stations
Commuter Train
PLANNING BOARD DRAFT – JANUARY 2009
APPENDIX 19: PARKS AND OPEN SPACES
Park Planning and Stewardship, Department of Parks, 2008
Public parkland, open space and pathways play an Plan‘s suburban land use proposals for will provide a great deal of recreation and
important role in the well-being of a community. In Germantown. New visions for the study area open space in Germantown.
urban areas, parkland enhances citizens‘ quality include a more compact and walkable
of life by providing visual relief from the built environment within each of several distinct mixed- 3. Assuring active and nature oriented recreation
environment, a sense of place and identity, an use neighborhoods that are clustered around the opportunities are available to existing and
opportunity to connect with nature, and space to transit stations of the Corridor Cities Transitway. future residents of the Germantown area. The
gather, play and celebrate community life. In The existing patterns and proposals for parks need ability of parks, both within the Sector Plan
addition, open space contributes to the natural to be reevaluated to support this new vision. area and also in the greater Germantown
environment by providing wildlife habitat, area, to meet the needs in the area have been
improving air quality, and preserving water quality. The key park planning issues that are addressed in assessed in light of potential increasing
this plan are highlighted below: density.
Master plans in future urbanizing areas, like the
Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan, refine 1. Providing adequate urban parks and open 4. Assuring connectivity between urban centers,
and customize parks and private open spaces to space in the areas of highest density and near parks, community facilities, and local and
reflect the particular needs of a community. They transit stations. Recreation proposals in this regional bikeways. Appendices 16 and 17,
also help implement land use planning goals and plan reflect increased density in the proposed Bikeways and Park Trail Connections, show
objectives established in the Countywide Park, mixed-use ―urban villages‖ around transit these connections in detail.
Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS) for stations, and the changing land use patterns
Montgomery County which gives guidance on the and population forecasts. 5. Reflecting new park planning emphasis on
countywide pattern of parkland and recreation historical and cultural interpretation and
needs. The park and trail related 2. Creating a cohesive, usable, pattern of open outreach. This information is in Appendix 11,
recommendations in this document will update the space by utilizing public amenity space as well Cultural Resources.
2005 PROS Plan. as parkland. The new plan considers a series
of public open spaces near transit and mixed
Key Park Planning Issues use centers. Not all open space can or should
be publicly owned and managed parkland.
The existing pattern of parks in Germantown and Public amenity spaces in new developments
the surrounding area reflects the 1989 Master
Plan Recommendations to Address Key recognizes that urban open spaces are a An Entertainment District Meeting Place: A
Planning Issues critical feature in higher density plaza with landscaping and seating across the
neighborhoods; and street from the cinemas, next to the police
The following planning recommendations will promotes the vitality of the centers by station.
address key issues and implement the Urban providing spaces for the meeting of residents
Open Spaces and Trails Concept (Figure 1). and employees. For Each Mixed Use, Transit-Served Neighborhood:
In order to assure that new mixed use areas are A Meeting Place: a space to wait for transit or
1. Provide urban parks and open spaces in high livable areas with open spaces and recreation, the meet people, near each transit stop.
density areas and near transit Stations. Plan recommends specifically: A Family Oriented Active Play Park: a flexible
open space with places to run, climb, play,
The Germantown Employment Area Sector Plan For the Town Center: and relax.
supports smart growth by proposing high density, Create a series of public open spaces, linked by a
mixed uses near transit areas. Public urban promenade, a linear pedestrian system along Urban open spaces tend to be more expensive to
amenity open spaces serve high-activity areas. Century Boulevard, the Town Center‘s ―Main build, manage, and maintain than suburban parks.
Suitable locations include transit station areas, Street.‖ The locations of these spaces would help To develop, manage, and maintain these urban
large employment centers, commercial areas, and to enliven and complement the retail and open space areas in an attractive, usable manner
high density residential areas. They can provide entertainment district of the Town Center, and without impact on other public facilities, it will be
landscaped sitting areas, walkways, and flexible include: important to explore funding mechanisms such as
active recreational opportunities. Urban amenity The Town Commons: A civic space at the a maintenance district.
open spaces adjacent to large employment heart of Germantown with flexible seating in
centers provide a place for workers to eat lunch, front of BlackRock Center for the Arts. This 2. Provide a cohesive, usable, pattern of open
read, socialize, and relax. In addition, they provide space is currently owned by the County and space, by utilizing public amenity space as
the perfect opportunity for cultural resource maintained by DOT. well as parkland.
interpretation of a more progressive nature, such Town Center Urban Park: A strolling and
as public art. reflective park, located behind the library. This Recreation and open space needs in Germantown
park has already been approved as a facility will be met by a combination of public parks and
The Urban Open Spaces and Trails concept in this plan. private open spaces. The role of public parks in
Plan provides adequate open spaces and urban A Family-Oriented Active Play Park: An active this recommendation will be explored as part of
parks in the areas of highest density in that it: park with places to run, climb, play, and relax, the implementation process. Depending on their
reflects the need for more parks and open near the Upcountry Regional Services Center scale and function, ―neighborhood green‖ areas
space in the core area; on the M & T Bank site. may best be provided and managed by the private
sector. Park trails will be integrated into the
overall pedestrian circulation concept to enhance shape the public realm and serve employees and renovated or new light industry emerges, open
connectivity. residents. spaces should be added to supplement public
parks. Landscaping, seating areas, and public
Policy Guidance for Urban Open Space Consideration should be given to the following art can improve the area‘s appearance and
guidelines in location and development of urban improve the working environment.
Open Space in Urban Environments: Parks for park and amenity open spaces: i. Environmental function should be designed
Tomorrow (1998) indicates that urban residential a. They should be within five to ten minutes of into park facilities, such as fountains with
areas such as Germantown need several types of walking time for users. storm water functions, or that mask noise.
recreation facilities including hiker/biker paths b. They should include sitting areas, walkways, j. In residential developments, a key to providing
and community connectors, neighborhood and landscaping. adequate, close-to-home recreation is
recreation for new residential areas, and urban c. Playground equipment and other small-scale ensuring that opportunities are incorporated
recreation and open space for existing and active recreation facilities, such as multi- into plans for new development, which should
proposed businesses and mixed use development. purpose courts, should be considered in areas provide private recreation areas for all age
serving a significant number of children. groups, as appropriate. Private development
Planning and Design d. Special consideration should be given to the should include:
needs of the elderly and the handicapped. level grass areas for leisure and informal
This plan‘s recommendations recognize that urban e. Urban amenity open spaces located on the play to serve people of all ages
areas present distinct challenges and periphery of high-intensity non-residential adult recreation areas
opportunities to provide park and recreation areas should include facilities to serve nearby walking and bicycling paths.
resources and strive to incorporate and create residents. playgrounds for young children
those resources with redevelopment. The location, f. Design should provide crime prevention multi-use courts for children, teens, and
size, and type of open spaces appropriate to an through environmental design by maximizing young adults
urban setting are unique. As shown on the Urban visibility and natural surveillance.
Open Space and Trails Concept (Figure 1), this g. Amenity open spaces should be of a sufficient In high-rise housing and transit station areas
plan recommends a series of open spaces at a size to support appropriate use by residents, indoor recreation areas will be essential. Project
smaller scale than is typical of less densely workers and the public. development should explore innovative
populated areas, provided through a combination h. Consideration should be given to the approaches to providing these facilities, including
of public and private efforts. appropriate amount of funding necessary to rooftops and indoor facilities such as playgrounds
support both the initial cost of the and gyms.
Both residential and employment redevelopment development and the long-term maintenance
projects should provide a mixture of recreational of the amenity space. In commercial and
facilities, open spaces, and trail connections that mixed use developments, as businesses are
3. Assure recreation needs, both active and picnicking. These parks will continue to serve a Parks and Recreation Opportunities
nature oriented, are met for future residents large population area because of their unique
of the Germantown area. facilities. Undeveloped Parkland: There are several
undeveloped local parks in the Germantown
It is critical for master plans to address the active In the last 10 years the Parks Department has Area that should be used to meet the needs of
and passive recreational needs of the area and developed six new local parks that have provided future residents of both the Transit Study area
determine whether there are any available and nine new fields, seven tennis courts, seven new and the Germantown Planning Area. These
appropriate sites for parkland acquisition to meet playgrounds, and five basketball courts. The include: Kingsview and Seneca Crossing.
long range future needs. Although new urban Recreation Department has opened a Additionally, the Hondros property which is
parks and open spaces are recommended near Germantown Recreation Center adjacent to part of South Germantown Recreational Park
transit stations, most opportunities for larger scale Kingsview Middle School and a world class aquatic may be used to provide future recreation
active and nature-oriented recreation will be met facility at South Germantown Recreational Park. facilities. Specific recommendations for these
in the greater Germantown area, beyond the study parks are found in Table 2.
area. Parks and Recreation Needs
Additional Facilities in Existing Parks:
Existing Parks One purpose of a master plan update is to assess Opportunities to provide recreation facilities
whether the existing recreational facilities are include a proposal for a large public/private
The Germantown Planning Area has nearly 2,000 adequate and whether new resources should be indoor tennis- racquet ball facility in South
acres of parkland, which includes approximately provided for existing and future users. The PROS Germantown Recreational Park.
300 acres of local parkland and around 1,700 in Plan projects recreational needs by planning and
Conservation, Stream Valley, Regional and community based team area, and specific needs Private Recreation Facilities: As residential or
Recreational Parks. (See Table 1) This parkland for sub-areas such as the study area are not mixed use neighborhoods are built, their
forms a greenbelt around Germantown, providing available. According to the 2005 PROS Plan the required private recreation facilities will be
residents with easy access to parkland. Black Hill Planning Area will need an additional six developed to help meet recreation needs in
Regional Park provides water oriented recreation playgrounds, but needs for tennis and basketball new residential communities.
and picnic/playground facilities, Ridge Road courts can be met by existing facilities at parks
and schools. In terms of new fields, the entire I-
Recreational Park has athletic fields, in-line hockey 270 Corridor will need 33 additional fields, many
and picnicking, and South Germantown of which will be provided by parks and schools in
Recreational Park has many active recreation the rapidly growing Clarksburg Area.
facilities including a soccer complex, an adventure
playground, splash park, heart smart trail, and
TABLE 1: EXISTING PARKLAND IN THE GERMANTOWN AREA
Inventory of all Facilities & Parkland Owned, Leased and/or Maintained by M-NCPPC
Lighted Football Football
Park Park Play- Soft Ball Baseball Basketball/ Tennis Picnic Open Rest-
Park Name Acreage Basketball Soccer Soccer
Code Status ground Field Field Multi-Use Court Shelters Shelter room
Court Overlay Field
URBAN PARKS
A25 D GERMANTOWN SQUARE URBAN 0.7684
PARK
A28 U GERMANTOWN TOWN COMMONS 0.4602
URBAN PARK
Subtotal 1.2286
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
B17 D FOX CHAPEL NEIGHBORHOOD 15.696 1 1 2 1 1 6
PARK
C33 U GUNNER'S VILLAGE 46.8461
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
AREA
C15 U MIDDLEBROOK HILL 11.5435
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
AREA
Subtotal 74.0856 1 1 2 1 1 6
LOCAL PARKS
E64 D CEDAR CREEK LOCAL PARK 10.1 1 1 1 1
D27 D CLEARSPRING LOCAL PARK 28.9823 1 1 2 1 1
E71 D FOUNTAIN HILLS LOCAL PARK 7.3774 1 1 1 2 1
D45 U GERMANTOWN EAST LOCAL PARK 8.0954
D52 D GUNNER'S BRANCH LOCAL PARK 65.4044 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
D53 D GUNNER'S LAKE LOCAL PARK 8.9398 1 2 1 1
E68 P HOYLES MILL LOCAL PARK 16.09
E69 P KINGS CROSSING LOCAL PARK 10.0072
D83 U KINGSVIEW LOCAL PARK 8.0001
D46 D LEAMAN LOCAL PARK 8 1 2 2 1
D91 D PLUMGAR LOCAL PARK 8.48 1 1 3 1 1
E02 D SOUTH GUNNER'S BRANCH 14.9927 1 1 2 2 1
LOCAL PARK
D73 D WARING STATION LOCAL PARK 16.457 1 1 1 1
E61 D WATERS LANDING LOCAL PARK 11.6874 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
Subtotal 222.6137 10 6 7 3 10 2 11 2 3 7
STREAM VALLEYS
P78 U GREAT SENECA STREAM VALLEY 436.6804
UNIT #1
P79 U GREAT SENECA STREAM VALLEY 392.2122
UNIT #2
Subtotal 828.893
TABLE 1 (continued): EXISTING PARKLAND IN THE GERMANTOWN AREA
Inventory of all Facilities & Parkland Owned, Leased and/or Maintained by M-NCPPC
Community Recreation Center and Aquatic Lighted Football Football
Park Park Play- Soft Ball Baseball Basketball/ Tennis Picnic Open Rest-
FacilityStatus
Code Needs Park Name Acreage
ground Field Field Multi-Use
Basketball
Court
Soccer Soccer
Shelters Shelter room
Court Overlay Field
RECREATIONAL PARKS
H07 U RIDGE ROAD RECREATIONAL 74.7189 1 2 1 1 1 3 2
PARK
G11 D SOUTH GERMANTOWN 700.4416 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 4 1
RECREATIONAL PARK
Subtotal 775.1605 3 4 3 1 3 2 3 7 3
SPECIAL PARKS
N30 D WATERS HOUSE SPECIAL PARK 3.9
H08 SOCCERPLEX OF SOUTH 24 24
GERMANTOWN
Subtotal 3.9 24 24
Total 1920.6571 14 11 3 8 3 15 5 38 9 4 40
Community Recreation Center and Aquatic intersection of Rt. 355 & Middlebrook Road by the activities. Service populations include all ages,
Facility Needs Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Washington. preschool through senior, from a surrounding
30,000 minimum-resident area. By taking
Currently, the Germantown area is served by Based on the population of Germantown as well as advantage of the future development it may be
several public community centers and aquatic the increased development of the mixed use ―town possible to integrate facilities into the initial
facilities. The Germantown Community Recreation center‖ areas, there is a significant need to locate conceptual design of some mixed use projects. It
Center and Germantown Outdoor Pool were built additional community serving recreation facilities may even be possible to conceive of a full service
on a single site in combination with the Kingsview in this vicinity. Geographically, sites in the central facility including outdoor features at the eastern
Middle School. The site includes outdoor and northeastern sections of Germantown would edge of the Germantown community and a
recreation facilities and is located southwest and be most complementary to the existing facilities ―downtown annex‖ in the Milestone/I-270 area
outside of the study area. The Germantown Indoor and serve both the ―in-town‖ urban center that would provide residents of the higher density
Pool, located at South Germantown Regional Park residents in the vicinity of the Transit Corridor and central sections with a smaller facility focused on
is a large full-service aquatic facility drawing from those in growth areas north and east of the core basic key recreational elements.
a regional audience. Plum Gar Neighborhood study area.
Recreation Center, situated at the farthest
southeast corner of the study area, will be Facilities would generally take the form of a
renovated by the Recreation Department. Last, an multipurpose building blending community service
additional small facility is operated near the with active and passive recreation/leisure
Table 2: Summary of Park and Trail Recommendations Corridor Area
Proposed Parks and Open Space Germantown Study Area
Park Status Issues Opportunities or Recommendations
Town Center Commons, BlackRock Owned by Montgomery County Poorly maintained Encourage DOT to develop a plan for better
Center for the Arts front lawn public use with seating, landscaping, etc.
Family-oriented play park near M&T Bank site Exchange for Germantown Family oriented seating and playground.
Upcounty Regional Services Center Square Urban Park. Need to
anchor south end of Century
Boulevard Promenade.
Transit Neighborhood Parks : Developer owned, could be public Urban open spaces needed near Flexible, level grassy area for variety of active
Cloverleaf Park or private future transit stops. pickup sports, seating, play structures,
Far North Park skateboarding spot. Possible location of cultural
Seneca Meadow Park public art/artistic interpretive elements. Seneca
Milestone Green Meadows Park could be combined with an urban
recreation center on east side of I-270.
Town Center Urban Park Proposed for construction in the Lack of play facilities for children Explore installing climbable art either in the park
Capital Improvements Program or next to the library.
Germantown Square Local Park Existing Underused, inaccessible. Swap for M&T Bank site near Town Center
(Century Boulevard at Middlebrook Road).
Germantown Boys & Girls Clubs site Existing building provides Poor views into site from the Design, install, maintain streetscape, possibly
(Germantown East Local Park) recreation programming space. street partnering with Boys & Girls Clubs. Work with DOT
to install safe pedestrian crossings.
Parks Beyond Study Area (To be used by residents of the study area)
Kingsview Local Park Facility Planning Priority Project Needs program Facilities for youth and teens, such as skate park
or plaza, open play area, playground
Seneca Crossing Local Park 20-acre Facility Planning Priority Needs program Provide needed fields, possibly cricket and other
Project in the FY07-12 CIP active recreation facilities
Expansion of Black Hill Regional Park Under study Valuable forest needs protection Protect through easements or dedication
It is recommended that the M-NCPPC work closely Natural Resource Recommendations:
with the Department of Recreation to incorporate
community recreational facilities into a detailed Develop all parks and open spaces in an
land use plan for the further development of environmentally sensitive manner.
Germantown.
Examine feasibility of park acquisition of any
Stewardship of Natural Resources and properties that include outstanding natural
Nature Oriented Recreation Facilities resources if they become available,
particularly those adjacent to Black Hill
The M-NCPPC made an early commitment to Regional Park or Great Seneca Stream Valley
environmental stewardship and conservation Park.
when it was first formed in 1927 and began
acquiring land surrounding the stream valley
parks. This commitment has become an important
principle that guides a wide range of planning and
regulatory programs and projects.
As indicated on the Existing Parks Table, the

Germantown area has over 800 acres of nature
oriented stream valley parkland. The Great Seneca
Stream Valley Park offers opportunities for natural
oriented recreation such as enjoying nature,
hiking, nature photography, bird watching, etc. The
Black Hill Regional Park provides opportunities for
water oriented recreation, picnicking, and hiking.
APPENDIX 20: GERMANTOWN AMENITY FUND PROJECTS
Purpose
Germantown‘s transformation into a more urbane incorporate artwork such as special seating, identified historic themes relating to
place must have a significant level of amenity to paving and lighting, where appropriate. Germantown‘s past. Consider incorporating
help enhance and establish identity and character 2. Create special artwork integrated into all interactive play equipment such as
in new public and private development. Amenities transit shelters similar to the artwork provided trampolines set at grade level, musical chimes
will provide residents and workers greater at the bus transfer station along Aircraft Drive. or other interactive facilities.
enjoyment of new development, open spaces and 3. Create a brochure for walking tour of historic 3. Renovate the Town Commons in front of
special areas such as the Town Commons in front sites. BlackRock Center for the Arts to create a more
of the BlackRock Center for the Arts. A greater 4. Create and install public art at urban parks useable and attractive gathering place.
number of amenities will help establish the Town and transit stops. Partner with the Include sculpture making use of existing
Center as the upcounty Cultural Arts district, and Montgomery Council on the Arts and ―black rock‖ that is in storage and provide
complement the entertainment uses and Humanities to find local artists. more interactive artwork.
restaurants that are coming to this area. 5. Paint ―ghost images‖ of historic Germantown 4. Provide streetscaping that includes artwork in
buildings that have been lost on newer the paving and along the sidewalks to help
A placemaking approach to providing amenities is facades and identify images as to what they establish the special character of Century
recommended integrating historic-, cultural- and were. Boulevard as the main promenade in the
nature-oriented themes. Design character should Town Center.
range from sophisticated to fun and playful. District Amenities 5. Add a statue of baseball great Walter Johnson
Participatory elements are encouraged such as along Century Boulevard, exact location to be
movable artwork, splash fountains and musical Town Center determined.
chimes. Most importantly, amenities should be 6. Design the Crystal Rock Greenway cultural
integral to the design of the space and not 1. Dedicate, design and build the new Urban walk with signed or brochure-guided
conceived as an afterthought. Park after land exchange based on the interpretive experience highlighting themes of
Department of Parks‘ Concept and Facility Germantown‘s history.
Area Wide Amenities Planning protocol.
2. Create a vibrant interactive art/play feature West End
1. Provide improvements to public streets with for Town Center to be located in new Urban
streetscaping in accordance with the Park. Consider using patterns or symbols in 1. Design transit station park improvements
Germantown Streetscape Plan and paving or structures that reflect any of the such as seating, special paving and lighting,
landscaping and transit themed artwork. Such 2. Improve the trailhead at the Waters House
art work could feature historic photographs of Special Park with a kiosk, an interpretive
the B&O Railroad or the train crossing the exhibit on the Waters Family, and potentially
viaduct. restrooms in the retrofitted carriage house.
2. Employ then and now photographs around the
MARC train station to show the historic Seneca Meadows/Milestone
character of that area. Use 3-D stereoptics
side by side (where you look through 1. Provide artwork in the provision of the
telescopes) to see an image of what the area Recreation Center to achieve a place specific
used to look like versus today. center that reflects Germantown‘s history and
3. Restore the scale at Liberty Mill. culture.
4. Designate the farmers‘ market near the
historic district. Montgomery College District
Gateway 1. Consider the adaptive reuse of the Cider

Barrel. New uses could include a local wine
1. Start the interpretation of Germantown‘s retailers‘ consortium, farmers‘ market
themes in the neighborhood, then lead to concession, or local crafts and foods stand.
Seneca Creek trail signage, again highlighting
the cultural and natural history of the area. Fox Chapel
Cloverleaf 1. Provide seating, special paving, landscaping

and pedestrian scaled lighting incorporated
1. Provide artwork into the green common into the design of the shopping center.
provided as an integral part of the community.
North End
1. Work with the American Indian Heritage

Education Association to interpret the Native
American role in the establishment of the
master plan area through a public art project.
APPENDIX 21: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) funded two years when regional advisory committees and The land use and staging recommendations
by the County Council and implemented by County the M-NCPPC hold forums to discuss proposed contained in the Planning Board Draft of the
agencies, establishes how and when construction items for the six-year CIP. Sector Plan for the Germantown Employment will
projects are completed. The CIP cycle starts every require the following capital improvement projects:
Phase* Project Name Project Limit Category Road Lead Agency Coordinating
Number Agency/Group
Controlled Major Highway
1 Father Hurley Blvd CSX Wisteria Transp CM-27 MSHA MCDOT
Major Highways
2 Great Seneca Highway CSX Middlebrook Rd Transp M-90 MSHA MCDOT
2 MD 118 Millennium Dr MD 355 Transp M-61 MSHA MCDOT
Arterials
2 Observation Dr Little Seneca Creek Dorsey Mill Rd Transp A-19 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Observation Dr Germantown Rd 1000‘ S of Transp A-19 Private Sector MCDOT
Germantown Rd
2 Observation Dr 1000‘ S of Middlebrook Rd Transp A-19 Private Sector MCDOT
Germantown Rd
2 Waring Station Rd Clopper Rd Wisteria Dr Transp A-289 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Wisteria Dr Crystal Rock Dr Great Seneca Highway Transp A-74 MCDOT Private Sector
Minor Arterials
2 Cider Press Pl Observation Dr End of Existing Road Transp MA-4 Private Sector
Extension
2 Cider Press Pl End of Existing Road MD 355 Transp MA-4 Private Sector
Business Streets
2 Blunt Road cul-de-sac Middlebrook Rd Transp B-8 Private Sector MCDOT
1 Bowman Mill Rd Germantown Rd Waters Rd Transp B-16 Private Sector
1 Century Blvd Dorsey Mill Rd Kinster Dr Transp B-10 MCDOT MSHA
Number Agency/Group
Extension
1 Century Blvd Kinster Dr Cloverleaf Center Dr Transp B-10 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Century Blvd Cloverleaf Center Dr Aircraft Dr Transp B-10 Private Sector
2 Century Blvd Aircraft Dr Crystal Rock Dr Transp B-10 Private Sector
2 Century Blvd Middlebrook Rd Wisteria Dr Transp B-10 Private Sector
2 Century Blvd Wisteria Dr Waters Rd Transp B-10 Private Sector
2 Crystal Rock Dr Dorsey Mill Rd Black Hill Park Access Transp B-11 Private Sector M-NCPPC/ MCDOT
Extension
2 Crystal Rock Dr Black Hill Park Access Kinster Dr Transp B-11 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Crystal Rock Dr Middlebrook Rd Wisteria Dr Transp B-11 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Dorsey Mill Rd Crystal Rock Dr Observation Dr Transp B-14 MCDOT Private Sector
Extension Extension
2 Goldenrod Ln Germantown Rd 1000‘ S of Transp B-4 Private Sector
Germantown Rd
2 Goldenrod Ln 1000‘ S of Observation Dr Transp B-4 Private Sector
Germantown Rd Extension
2 Scenery Dr Germantown Rd Middlebrook Rd Transp B-13 Private Sector
2 Walter Johnson Dr Bowman Mill Rd Wisteria Dr Transp B-3 MCDOT
2 Waters Rd Germantown Rd Wisteria Dr Transp B-5 Private Sector
2 Waterford Hills Blvd cul-de-sac Germantown Rd Transp B-22 Private Sector
2 Wisteria Dr Father Hurley Blvd Germantown Rd Transp B-2 MCDOT Private Sector
2 Wisteria Dr Germantown Rd Crystal Rock Dr Transp B-2 MCDOT Private Sector
2 New Road Crystal Rock Dr Century Blvd Transp B-18 Private Sector
2 New Road Century Blvd New Road (B-19) Transp B-18 Private Sector
2 New Road Century Blvd Crystal Rock Dr Transp B-19 Private Sector
2 New Road Ridge Rd Milestone Center Dr Transp B-25 Private Sector
Primary Residential Streets
2 Oxbridge Rd Cider Barrel Rd Frederick Rd Transp P-3 Private Sector
Other Roadway/Transit-related Improvements
Number Agency/Group
1 MARC Station Parking Transit MTA MSHA
2 I-270 Access to Dorsey Mill Transp MSHA MTA/MCDOT
CCT Station
2 MD 355 Interchanges @ Ridge Transp MSHA MCDOT
Road, MD 118, and
Middlebrook Road
2 MD 27/Observation Dr Transp MSHA MCDOT
Interchange
Public Facilities including Parks and Open Space
2 Crystal Rock Drive Greenway Aircraft Drive Black Hill Regional Park Park N/A M-NCPPC MCDOT
1 Town Commons Front of BlackRock -- Park N/A M-NCPPC MCGSA
1 Family Park Town Center location -- Park N/A M-NCPPC Private sector
TBD
1 Workforce Housing Police and Fire -- Housing N/A DHCA MC Public Safety
Station property
2 Urban Recreation Center Seneca Meadows -- Community N/A MC Recreation
transit station area facility
Germantown Town Center
APPENDIX 22: URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT LEGISLATION
Chapter 68 of the Montgomery County, Maryland § 68A-2. Findings; general intent. For purposes of this Chapter, the following
Code relates to the administrative and financial terms have the meanings indicated:
framework for the creation of Urban Districts as § 68A-3. Creation of urban districts; purposes.
special taxing districts to enhance intensely (a) Board of directors means the board of
developed communities containing diversified § 68A-4. Funding. directors of an urban district corporation.
commercial, institutional, and residential
development. § 68A-5. Advisory committee. (b) Corporation means an urban district
corporation.
Portions of this Code must be amended to address § 68A-6. Maintenance agreements.
an urban district proposed for Germantown which (c) Department means a County department,
is not, by definition, a Central Business District. § 68A-7. Budget preparation. principal office, or other office that the County
Sections which must be modified include: Executive designates to perform functions under
§ 68A-8. Urban district boundaries. this Chapter. Department does not include an
68A-3 Creation of urban districts; purposes urban district corporation.
§ 68A-9. Urban District Corporations.
68A-5 Advisory committee (d) Maintaining streetscape amenities means
§ 68A-10. Board of Directors of Corporation; cleaning, repairing rehabilitating, or replacing
68A-8 Urban district boundaries Employees; Other Organizational Matters. streetscape amenities.
A working group has been formed consisting of § 68A-11. Urban District Corporation-Powers. (e) Maintaining the streetscape includes
representatives from the MC Department of cleaning sidewalks, driveways, streets, and other
§ 68A-12. Urban District Corporations-Budget,
Finance, County Council, Upcounty Regional public areas; collecting trash; and caring for trees
Finances, and Administration.
Services Center, the M-NCPPC, Gaithersburg- and other plantings. Maintaining the streetscape
Germantown Chamber of Commerce, and other includes streetscaping of the medians and street
§ 68A-13. Termination of Urban District
interested parties. sweeping, but does not include maintaining the
Corporation; Dissolution.
road or the curbs.
Chapter 68A: Montgomery County Urban Districts
Sec. 68A-1. Definitions.
§ 68A-1. Definitions.
(f) Off-site amenity means a streetscape (j) Urban district corporation means a Sec. 68A-3. Creation of urban districts; purposes.
amenity installed by an optional method developer corporation created under Section 68A-9. (1987
on a public right-of-way. L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1.) (a) Urban districts are created in the
business districts of Wheaton, Bethesda and Silver
(g) On-site amenity means a streetscape Sec. 68A-2. Findings; general intent. Spring as described in Section 68A-8.
amenity installed by an optional method developer
on property owned by the optional method (a) Certain areas of Montgomery County have (b) Except as provided in subsection (c), the
developer or on private property not owned by an become, or may in the future become, intensely department may provide the public services and
optional method developer. developed communities containing diversified facilities necessary to implement the following
commercial, institutional, and residential purposes of an urban district:
(h) Optional method development means development. In order to maintain and enhance
property for which the owner has agreed with the these areas as prosperous, livable urban centers, (1) maintaining the streetscape and
Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning and to avoid blight, the County should: streetscape amenities on:
Commission to be responsible for installing and
maintaining both on-site and off-site (1) increase the maintenance of the (A) public rights-of-way; and
improvements. streetscape and its amenities;
(B) any property that is used by the
(i) Streetscape amenity includes such items (2) provide additional public amenities general public;
as bulletin boards and electronic displays; such as plantings, seating, shelters, and works of
communication systems; containers for growing art; (2) promoting and programming public
things; fountains and pools; drinking fountains; interest activities that benefit both residential and
functional and decorative lighting; outdoor seating; (3) promote the commercial and commercial interests of an urban district (and
restrooms; seating and other street furniture; residential interests of these areas; and which may incidentally benefit neighboring
shelters for pedestrians and persons using public communities);
transportation; non-standard paving; sidewalks; (4) program cultural and community
trees and other plantings; trash containers; activities. (3) providing additional streetscape
vending booths and kiosks; works of art; any amenities and facade improvements;
outdoor item that an optional method developer (b) Urban districts are created as special
taxing districts to provide an administrative and (4) monitoring activities to enhance the
agreed to install and maintain as a condition of
financial framework through which to accomplish safety and security of persons and property in
site plan approval; and other items of a similar
these goals. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., public areas; and
character or purpose.
ch. 16, § 1.)
(5) providing any capital project that 1997 L.M.C., ch. 7, §§ 1 and 2; 1998 L.M.C., ch. (A) The County Council may transfer
promotes the economic stability and growth of the 14, §1; 1999 L.M.C., ch. 22, § 1.) revenue from parking fees to the fund of the urban
district. district in which the fees are collected.
Sec. 68A-4. Funding.
(c) In an urban district with an urban district (B) The amount of revenue from
corporation, the department is not responsible for (a) General. Each urban district is funded parking fees transferred to an urban district must
streetscaping of the medians and streetsweeping through: not exceed the amount calculated by multiplying:
inside the curbs. The department is responsible
for other maintenance inside, and including, the (1) Urban District Tax. (i) The number of parking spaces in
curbs. Outside of the curbs, the department is the urban district by
only responsible for repair of standard concrete (A) Each tax year the County Council
sidewalks. The urban district corporation is may levy against all the assessable real and (ii) The number of enforcement
responsible for brick or other non-standard personal property in an urban district a sum not hours per year by
sidewalk maintenance. This allocation of greater than 30 cents on each $100 of assessable
functions may be altered by written agreement property. (iii) 20 cents.
between the department and the corporation.
(B) The urban district tax is levied and (C) The amount of revenue from
(d) Urban districts are created to provide collected as other county taxes are levied and parking fees may differ from one urban district to
public services and facilities that are: collected by law. another.
(1) primarily of benefit to the property and (C) The urban district tax has the same (3) Maintenance charge on optional
persons within the urban district rather than to the priority, bears the same interest and penalties, method developments.
County as a whole; and and in every respect must be treated the same as
other county taxes. (A) The County Executive may charge
(2) in addition to services and facilities each optional method development for the cost of
that the County provides generally. (D) The urban district tax rate may maintaining off-site amenities for that
differ from one urban district to another. development, including the County's cost of
(e) The Department may provide a service or liability insurance.
facility outside the boundaries of an urban district (2) Parking Lot District fees.
if the service or facility will primarily benefit (B) The County Executive may collect a
businesses or residents in the urban district. maintenance charge under this section in the
(1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; same way that the County collects taxes.
(C) A maintenance charge under this funding the budget of that urban district in later there is only one optional method development;
section has the same priority and bears the same years. and 11 members if there are no optional method
interest and penalties as county taxes. developments. The Executive must strive to
(c) Additional funding restrictions. appoint the members so that:
(4) Transfer from the General Fund. The
Council may transfer revenues from the County The proceeds from either the urban district tax or (A) two members represent the
general fund to an urban district. The transfer may parking fees transferred into an urban district fund Wheaton-Kensington Chamber of Commerce;
be subject to repayment as specified in the must not exceed 90 percent of their combined
Council resolution approving the district's annual total. (B) two members represent businesses
operating budget. that employ fewer than 10 individuals;
(d) Use of funds. The County government
(5) Miscellaneous Revenue. All other must use funds obtained under this section only: (C) four members represent residential
revenues collected by an urban district, including communities in the urban district or within 2 miles
charges for services and private contributions, (1) for the urban district in which they are of the urban district;
must remain in the respective urban district fund, obtained; and
and, subject to appropriation, may be used to fund (D) one member represents a
the urban district budget. (2) for the purposes of an urban district residential community in or outside of the urban
specified in Section 68A-3. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § district and is a member of the Mid County Citizens
(b) Urban district fund; surplus balances. 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; 1997 L.M.C., ch. 7, §§ Advisory Board;
1 and 2; 1998 L.M.C., ch. 14, §1.)
(1) The Director of Finance must establish (E) two members represent businesses
a separate fund for each urban district. Sec. 68A-5. Advisory committees. that employ 10 or more individuals; and
(2) Monies in an urban district fund and (a) Composition. Each urban district must (F) the remaining members represent
not appropriated for use by an urban district have an advisory committee, or an urban district optional method developers.
corporation under Section 68A-11 may be corporation board of directors, whose members
appropriated by the County Council for use by are appointed by the County Executive and (2) The Bethesda Urban District Advisory
County departments, subject to the limitations of confirmed by the County Council. Committee has 8 members. The County Executive
subsection (d). If in any fiscal year a balance must strive to appoint the members so that:
remains in an urban district fund, the Director of (1) The Wheaton Urban District Advisory
Finance must maintain this balance for use in Committee has 13 members if there are 2 or more
optional method developments; 12 members if
(A) two members are persons (D) two members represent a (c) Duties.
nominated by the Bethesda Chamber of residential community in the urban district; and
Commerce; (1) An urban district advisory committee
(E) one member represents a may advise the County government on all aspects
(B) three members represent optional residential community in or outside of the urban of the program, management, and finances of the
method developers; district and is a member of the Silver Spring urban district.
Citizens Advisory Board.
(C) one member represents a business (2) An urban district advisory committee
that employs fewer than 10 employees; (4) The County Executive may reject a should:
person nominated to serve on an advisory
(D) one member represents a committee and request additional nominations a. by July 15 each year, advise the
residential community in the urban district; and from the same source. department on the program and budget of the
urban district;
(E) one member represents a (b) Term.
residential community in or outside of the urban b. by September 15 each year, review
district and is a member of the Western (1) Committee members serve for a period the urban district budget and submit comments to
Montgomery County Citizens Advisory Board. of 3 years beginning July 1. However, when an the department; and
advisory committee is first formed, the following
(3) The Silver Spring Urban District members serve for only 2 years: c. by October 1 each year, meet with
Advisory Committee has 11 members. The County the head of the department to resolve areas of
Executive must strive to appoint the members so a. one member nominated by the disagreement regarding the budget.
that: Chamber of Commerce;
(d) Compensation.
(A) two members are persons b. one member who represents the
nominated by the Greater Silver Spring Chamber optional method developers; and (1) The County does not compensate
of Commerce; members of urban district advisory committees for
c. one member who represents a their services.
(B) three members represent optional business that employs fewer than 10 persons.
method developers; (2) Committee members are exempt from
(2) The County Executive may reappoint the requirements of the County Financial
(C) three members represent a committee members. Disclosure Law, Sections 19A-17 through 19A-20.
business that employs fewer than 25 employees;
(e) Procedures and attendance. An urban appropriate urban district advisory committee by (2) Then in an easterly direction along the
district advisory committee may establish its own August 15 of each year. north line of Lot 47 and 48 to the northeast corner
rules of procedure. A committee may adopt a rule of Lot 48 as shown in Plat Book 16, Plat 1038,
that provides for removal of a member because of (b) Except for the first budget, the head of the recorded January 9, 1939, among the land records
failure to attend meetings. department must submit the proposed budget for of Montgomery County, Maryland, which is also the
review to the urban district advisory committee north line of Block 1 of the Rosedale Park
(f) Termination. When an urban district and meet with the committee to attempt to resolve subdivision, as recorded August 5, 1908, in Plat
corporation is created in a district, the advisory any areas of disagreement. Book 1, Plat 92, among the land records of
committee for that district ceases to exist. (1987 Montgomery County, Maryland;
L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; 1999 (c) The department must include the budget
L.M.C., ch. 14, § 1; 2005 L.M.C., ch. 24, § 1; 2006 of each urban district in its departmental budget (3) Then in an easterly direction along the
L.M.C., ch. 33, § 1.) submission to the Office of Management and north line of Block 1 in the Rosedale Park
Budget. The County Executive must include the subdivision to the northeast corner of Lot 5, Block
Sec. 68A-6. Maintenance agreements. budget of each urban district as modified by the 1, Rosedale Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat
Executive in the budget recommended to the 92, recorded August 5, 1908, among the land
The County and an optional method developer County Council. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
may enter into an agreement for: L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1.)
(4) Then in a southerly direction along the
(1) the County to maintain streetscape Sec. 68A-8. Urban district boundaries. common lot line, which is the east line of Lot 5 and
amenities on private property; or the west line of Lot 6, Block 1, Rosedale Park, to
(a) Bethesda Urban District. The Bethesda its intersection with the north right-of-way line of
(2) an optional method developer to Urban District is all land in the seventh election Chestnut Street, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 92,
maintain streetscape amenities on public rights- district of the county within the area described as recorded August 5, 1908, among the land records
of-way. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. follows: of Montgomery County, Maryland;
16, § 1.)
(1) Beginning at a point on the east right- (5) Then crossing Chestnut Street to the
Sec. 68A-7. Budget preparation. of-way line of Wisconsin Avenue at the northwest northwest corner of Lot 7, Block 3, Rosedale Park,
corner of Lot 47, Block 1, in the Resubdivision of as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 92, recorded August
(a) For each urban district where an urban Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Rosedale Park, as recorded 5, 1908, among the land records of Montgomery
district corporation has not been created, the January 9, 1939, in Plat Book 16, Plat 1038, County, Maryland;
department must prepare a budget and, except for among the land records of Montgomery County,
the first budget, should submit the budget to the Maryland;
(6) Then in a southerly direction along the (12) Then in a southerly direction along (16) Then in a southerly direction along
west line of Lot 7, Block 3, Rosedale Park, to the the west right-of-way line of Tilbury Street, crossing the common lot line, which is the east line of Lot
northwest corner of Lot 16, Block 3, Rosedale Maple Avenue and Highland Avenue to the south 18 and the west line of Lot 19, Block 5, to its
Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 92, recorded line of Highland Avenue; intersection with the north right-of-way line of West
August 5, 1908, among the land records of Virginia Avenue, as shown in Plat Book 2, Plat 186,
Montgomery County, Maryland; (13) Then in a westerly direction along the recorded April 31, 1916, among the land records
south right-of-way line of Highland Avenue to its of Montgomery County, Maryland;
(7) Then along the west line of Lot 16, intersection with the northeast corner of Lot 8,
Block 3, Rosedale Park, to its intersection with the Block 5, West Chevy Chase Heights subdivision, as (17) Then in an easterly direction along
north right-of-way line of Rosedale Avenue; recorded April 31, 1916, in Plat Book 2, Plat 186, the north right-of-way line of West Virginia Avenue
among the land records of Montgomery County, to its intersection with a northern extension of the
(8) Then crossing Rosedale Avenue to the Maryland; west lot line of Lot 15, Block 9, West Chevy Chase
northwest corner of Lot 7, Block 7, Rosedale Park, heights subdivision, as shown in Plat 2, Plat 186,
as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 92, recorded August (14) Then in a southerly direction along recorded April 31, 1916, among the land records
5, 1908, among the land records of Montgomery the common lot line, which is the east line of Lot 8 of Montgomery County, Maryland;
County, Maryland; and the west line of Lot 9, Block 5, West Chevy
Chase Heights subdivision, as shown in Plat Book (18) Then in a southerly direction along
(9) Then in a southerly direction along the 2, Plat 186, recorded April 31, 1916, among the that extension, crossing West Virginia Avenue to
west line of Lot 7, Block 7, Rosedale Park, to the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland, the northwest corner of Lot 15, Block 9, West
northwest corner of Lot 15, Block 7, Rosedale crossing a public alley to the northwest corner of Chevy Chase Heights, as shown in Plat Book 2,
Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 92, recorded Lot 18, Block 5, West Chevy Chase Heights Plat 186, recorded April 31, 1916, among the land
August 5, 1908, among the land records of subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 2, Plat 186, records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
Montgomery County, Maryland; recorded April 31, 1916, among the land records
of Montgomery County, Maryland; (19) Then in a southerly direction along
(10) Then in a southerly direction along the common lot line, which is the west line of Lot
the west line of Lot 15, Block 7, Rosedale Park, to (15) Then in an easterly direction along 15 and the east line of Lot 14, to the southwest
its intersection with the north right-of-way line of the north line of Lot 18, Block 5, to the northeast corner of Lot 15, Block 9, West Chevy Chase
Maple Avenue; corner of Lot 18, Block 5, West Chevy Chase Heights subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 2, Plat
Heights subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 2, Plat 186, recorded April 31, 1916, among the land
(11) Then along the north right-of-way line 186, recorded April 31, 1916, among the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
of Maple Avenue to its intersection with the west records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
right-of-way line of Tilbury Street;
(20) Then crossing a 10-foot-wide alley (24) Then in an easterly direction along common lot line, which is the east line of Lot 2 and
that is dedicated in Plat Book 2, Plat 186, the north right-of-way line of Cheltenham Drive to the west line of Lot 3, Mae S. Middleton's
recorded April 31, 1916, among the land records its intersection with the west right-of-way line of Subdivision, as recorded December 31, 1935, in
of Montgomery County, Maryland, to the northeast Tilbury Street; Plat Book 8, Plat 639, among the land records of
corner of Lot 22, Block 9, West Chevy Chase Montgomery County, Maryland;
Heights subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 2, Plat (25) Then in a southerly direction along
186, recorded April 31, 1916, among the land the west right-of-way line of Tilbury Street crossing (29) Then in a southerly direction along
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Cheltenham Drive and along an extension of that the common lot line between Lot 2 and Lot 3,
right-of-way line of Tilbury Street to its intersection Middleton's Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 8,
(21) Then in a southerly direction along with the north line of Rabner's Subdivision, as Plat 639, recorded December 31, 1935, among
the common lot line, which is the east line of Lot recorded May 11, 1936, in Plat Book 9, Plat 675, the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland,
22 and Lot 23, Block 9, West Chevy Chase Heights among the land records of Montgomery County, to its intersection with the north line of the George
subdivision, to its intersection with the north right- Maryland; G. Bradley Subdivision, as recorded December 31,
of-way line of Chase Avenue, as shown in Plat 1935, in Plat Book 8, Plat 635, among the land
Book 2, Plat 186, recorded April 31, 1916, among (26) Then in an easterly direction along records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland; the north line of Rabner's Subdivision to the
northeast corner of Lot 6, Rabner's Subdivision, as (30) Then in a westerly direction along the
(22) Then crossing Chase Avenue to the shown in Plat Book 9, Plat 675, recorded May 11, north line of the George G. Bradley Subdivision to
northwest corner of Outlot "A," Block 1, Westboro 1936, among the land records of Montgomery the northwest corner of Lot 5, George G. Bradley
subdivision, as recorded July 12, 1937, in Plat County, Maryland; Subdivision;
Book 12, Plat 839, among the land records of
Montgomery County, Maryland; (27) Then in a southerly direction along (31) Then in a southerly direction along
the common lot line, which is the east line of Lot 6 the west line of Lot 5, George G. Bradley
(23) Then in a southerly direction along and the west line of Lot 7, Rabner's Subdivision, to Subdivision, to its intersection with the north right-
the common line, which is the east line of a 20- its intersection with the north right-of-way line of of-way line of Avondale Street, as shown in Plat
foot public alley and the west line of Outlot "A," Middleton Lane, as shown in Plat Book 9, Plat Book 8, Plat 635, recorded December 31, 1935,
Block 1, Westboro subdivision, to its intersection 675, recorded May 11, 1936, among the land among the land records of Montgomery County,
with the north right-of-way line of Cheltenham records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Maryland;
Drive, as shown in Plat Book 12, Plat 839,
recorded July 12, 1937, among the land records of (28) Then in a westerly direction along the (32) Then crossing Avondale Street to the
Montgomery County, Maryland; north right-of-way line of Middleton Lane to its northwest corner of Lot 22, George G. Bradley
intersection with a northern extension of the Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 8, Plat 635,
recorded December 31, 1935, among the land intersection with the east right-of-way line of Pearl (41) Then in an easterly direction along
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Street; the north line of Lot 1 of the East-West Apartment
site to its northeast corner, as shown in Plat Book
(33) Then in a southerly direction along (37) Then in a northerly direction along 60, Plat 4987, recorded August 10, 1957, among
the west line of Lot 22 to its intersection with the the east right-of-way line of Pearl Street to its the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
southern line of the George G. Bradley Subdivision, intersection with the northwest corner of Lot 1,
as shown in Plat Book 8, Plat 635, recorded Block A, subdivision of part of Charles W. Pafflow's (42) Then in a southerly direction along
December 31, 1935, among the land records of property, as recorded April 24, 1926, in Plat Book the east line of Lot 1 of the East-West Apartment
Montgomery County, Maryland; 4, Plat 329, among the land records of site to its intersection with the north right-of-way
Montgomery County, Maryland; line of East-West Highway, crossing East-West
(34) Then in an easterly direction along Highway along a southerly extension of that lot line
the south line of the George G. Bradley Subdivision (38) Then in an easterly direction along to its intersection with the south right-of-way line of
to the southeast corner of Lot 14, George G. the north lot line of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 to its East-West Highway;
Bradley Subdivision, which is also the intersection intersection with the east line of Block A, as shown
of the east and south lines of the George G. in Plat Book 4, Plat 329, recorded April 24, 1926, (43) Then in an easterly direction along
Bradley Subdivision as shown in Plat Book 8, Plat among the land records of Montgomery County, the south right-of-way line of East-West Highway
635, recorded December 31, 1935, among the Maryland; crossing Montgomery Avenue to its intersection
land records of Montgomery County, Maryland, with the north right-of-way line of the B & O
and also the northeast corner of Parcel A, Waverly (39) Then in a northerly direction along Railroad;
House, as recorded November 12, 1976, in Plat the east line of Block A to the northeast corner of
Book 101, Plat 11383, among the land records of Block A, as shown in Plat Book 4, Plat 329, (44) Then in a southwesterly direction with
Montgomery County, Maryland; recorded April 24, 1926, among the land records the north right-of-way line of the B & O Railroad to
of Montgomery County, Maryland; its intersection with the east line of Pearl Street;
(35) Then in a southerly direction along
the east line of Parcel A, Waverly House, as shown (40) Then in an easterly direction along (45) Then in a southerly direction crossing
in Plat Book 101, Plat 11383, recorded November the north line of the lot recorded by deed dated the B & O Railroad right-of-way along an extension
12, 1976, among the land records of Montgomery July 1, 1919, which is part of the boundary of the of the east right-of-way line of Pearl Street to its
County, Maryland, to its intersection with the north Bethesda Chevy Chase High School property, to intersection with the south right-of-way line of the
right-of-way line of East-West Highway; the northwest corner of Lot 1, East-West B & O Railroad;
Apartment site, as recorded August 10, 1957, in
(36) Then in an easterly direction along Plat Book 60, Plat 4987, among the land records (46) Then in a westerly direction along the
the north line of East-West Highway to its of Montgomery County, Maryland; south right-of-way line of the B & O Railroad right-
of-way to its intersection with the northwest corner (51) Then in a southerly direction along (57) Then in a northerly direction along
of Lot 2, Block L, Section 8-B, Chevy Chase the west right-of-way line of 46th Street, crossing the east right-of-way line of Strathmore Street,
Subdivision, as recorded July 29, 1926, in Plat Leland Street and Walsh Street to its intersection crossing Leland Street to the north right-of-way line
Book 4, Plat 336, among the land records of with the south right-of-way line of Walsh Street; of Leland Street at the southwest corner of Lot 2,
Montgomery County, Maryland; Block 1, Plat of Section One, George P. Sack's
(52) Then in an easterly direction along Subdivision Bethesda, as recorded November 24,
(47) Then in a southerly direction along the south right-of-way line of Walsh Street to its 1931, in Plat Book 5, Plat 435, among the land
the common lot line, which is the west line of Lot 2 intersection with the west right-of-way line of West records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
and the east line of Lot 1, Block L, Section 8-B, Avenue;
Chevy Chase Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 4, (58) Then in a northerly direction along
Plat 336, recorded July 29, 1926, among the land (53) Then in a southerly direction along the common lot line, which is the west line of Lot 2
records of Montgomery County, Maryland, to its the west right-of-way line of West Avenue, crossing and the east line of Lot 3, Block 1, George P.
intersection with the north right-of-way line of Elm Standford Street, to its intersection with the north Sack's Subdivision, to its intersection with the
Street; right-of-way line of Bradley Lane; north line of George P. Sack's Subdivision as
shown in Plat Book 5, Plat 435, recorded
(48) Then in a westerly direction along the (54) Then in a westerly direction along the November 24, 1931, among the land records of
north right-of-way line of Elm Street to its north right-of-way line of Bradley Lane to its Montgomery County, Maryland;
intersection with a northerly extension of the west intersection with the east right-of-way line of
right-of-way line of 47th Street; Wisconsin Avenue; (59) Then in a westerly direction along the
north line of George P. Sack's Subdivision to the
(49) Then in a southerly direction along (55) Then crossing Wisconsin Avenue to northwest corner of Lot 11, Block 1, George P.
that extension crossing Elm Street and continuing the southeast corner of Lot 3, Block 2, Section 1, Sack's Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 5, Plat
in a southerly direction along the west right-of-way Bradley Hills - Bethesda Subdivision, as recorded 435, recorded November 24, 1931, among the
line of 47th Street, crossing Willow Lane to the August 10, 1957, in Plat Book 60, Plat 4990, land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
south right-of-way line of Willow Lane; among the land records of Montgomery County,
Maryland; (60) Then in a westerly direction along the
(50) Then in an easterly direction along north line of George P. Sack's Subdivision to its
the south right-of-way line of Willow Lane to its (56) Then in a northwesterly direction intersection with the south right-of-way line of the
intersection with the west right-of-way line of 46th along the north right-of-way line of Bradley Metropolitan and Southern Branch of the
Street; Boulevard to its intersection with a southern Baltimore & Ohio Railroad;
extension of the east right-of-way line of
Strathmore Street;
(61) Then in a westerly direction along the (65) Then in a northerly direction along (69) Then in a northerly direction along
extension of that subdivision line to its intersection the west line of Parcel B, Bradley Hills Subdivision, that east line of Lot Pt 6, Block D, Miller's Addition
with the north right-of-way line of the Metropolitan as shown in Plat Book 25, Plat 1582, recorded to Bethesda Subdivision, as recorded by deed
and Southern Branch of the Baltimore & Ohio December 30, 1948, among the land records of dated September 2, 1948, and described as
Railroad; Montgomery County, Maryland, to its intersection Parcel No. 2 in Liber 1185, Folio 513, among the
with the southern boundary of Miller's Addition to land records of Montgomery County, Maryland, to
(62) Then in a southerly direction along Bethesda Subdivision, as recorded October 23, its intersection with the south line of another Lot
the north line of the Metropolitan and Southern 1946, in Plat Book 29, Plat 1823, among the land Pt 6, Block D, Miller's Addition to Bethesda
Branch of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad right-of- records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Subdivision, as recorded by deed dated July 14,
way, crossing Bradley Boulevard, to its intersection 1949, in Liber 1274, Folio 367, among the land
with a southern extension of the west line of Parcel (66) Then in a westerly direction along the records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
"EYE," Bradley Hills, Section 2, as recorded southern boundary of Miller's Addition to Bethesda
December 16, 1954, in Plat Book 50, Plat 3893, Subdivision to its intersection with the east line of (70) Then in an easterly direction along
among the land records of Montgomery County, Lot Pt 6, Block E, Miller's Addition to Bethesda the south line of the same Lot Pt 6, Block D,
Maryland; Subdivision, as recorded by deed dated Miller's Addition to Bethesda Subdivision, as
September 2, 1948, and described as Parcel No. 1 recorded by deed dated July 14, 1949, in Liber
(63) Then in a northerly direction along in Liber 1185, Folio 513, among the land records 1274, Folio 367, among the land records of
the west line of Parcel "EYE," Bradley Hills Section of Montgomery County, Maryland; Montgomery County, Maryland to the southwest
2 Subdivision, to its intersection with the south corner of Lot Pt 8, Block D, as recorded by deed
right-of-way line of Bradley Boulevard, as shown in (67) Then in a northerly direction along dated July 14, 1949, in Liber 1274, Folio 367,
Plat Book 50, Plat 3893, recorded December 16, the east line of Lot Pt 6, Block E, to its intersection among the land records of Montgomery County,
1954, among the land records of Montgomery with the south right-of-way line of Bethesda Maryland;
County, Maryland; Avenue;
(71) Then in an easterly direction along
(64) Then in a northerly direction, crossing (68) Then crossing Bethesda Avenue to the south line of the same Lot Pt 8, Block D, to the
Bradley Boulevard, to the southwest corner of the intersection of the north right-of-way line of southeast corner of the same Lot Pt 8, Block D;
Parcel B, Bradley Hills Subdivision, as recorded Bethesda Avenue and the east line of Lot Pt 6,
December 30, 1948, in Plat Book 25, Plat 1582, Block D, Miller's Addition to Bethesda Subdivision, (72) Then in a northerly direction along
among the land records of Montgomery County, as recorded by deed dated September 2, 1948, the east line of the same Lot Pt 8, Block D, to its
Maryland; and described as Parcel No. 2 in Liber 1185, Folio intersection with the south right-of-way line of Elm
513, among the land records of Montgomery Street;
County, Maryland;
(73) Then in an easterly direction along (78) Then in a northerly direction along (84) Then in a northerly direction along
the south right-of-way line of Elm Street, crossing the west right-of-way line of Woodmont Avenue, the west right-of-way line of Cordell Avenue to its
Arlington Road, to its intersection with the east crossing North Lane and Edgemoor Lane to the intersection with the common lot line, which is the
right-of-way line of Arlington Road; south right-of-way line of Middlesex Lane; north line of Lot 5 and the south line of Lot 4,
Block L, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, as
(74) Then in a northerly direction along (79) Then in a westerly and northwesterly recorded July 24, 1925, in Plat Book 4, Plat 304,
the east right-of-way line of Arlington Road, direction along the south right-of-way line of among the land records of Montgomery County,
crossing Elm Street and Hampden Lane, to its Middlesex Lane to its intersection with the south Maryland;
intersection with the north right-of-way line of right-of-way line of Moorland Lane;
Hampden Lane; (85) Then in a westerly direction along the
(80) Then in a westerly direction along the common lot line of Lots 4 and 5 as shown in Plat
(75) Then in an easterly direction along south right-of-way line of Moorland Lane to its Book 4, Plat 304, recorded July 24, 1925, among
the north right-of-way line of Hampden Lane to the intersection with the east right-of-way line of the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland,
southeast corner of Lot 9, Block 24D, Edgemoor Arlington Road; to its intersection with the east line of Lot 6, Block
Subdivision, as recorded June 4, 1935, in Plat L, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, as shown in
Book 7, Plat 573, among the land records of (81) Then in a northerly direction along Plat Book 4, Plat 304, recorded July 24, 1925,
Montgomery County, Maryland, which is also on the east right-of-way line of Arlington Road to its among the land records of Montgomery County,
the west line of a public alley running between intersection with the southwest right-of-way line of Maryland;
Hampden Lane and Montgomery Lane, and also Old Georgetown Road;
the proposed western right-of-way line for (86) Then in a northerly direction along
Woodmont Avenue; (82) Then in a northwesterly direction the east line of Lot 6 to the southernmost corner
along the southwest right-of-way line of Old of Lot 21, Block L, Section 2, Battery Park
(76) Then in a northerly direction along Georgetown Road, crossing Arlington Road, to its Subdivision, as recorded November 30, 1951, in
the west line of that alley to its intersection with intersection with the north right-of-way line of Plat Book 41, Plat 2973, among the land records
the south right-of-way line of Montgomery Lane; Wilson Lane; of Montgomery County, Maryland;
(77) Then crossing Montgomery Lane to (83) Then in a westerly direction along the (87) Then in a northwesterly direction
the intersection of the north right-of-way line of north right-of-way line of Wilson Lane, crossing along the southwest lines of Lots 21, 20 and 1,
Montgomery Lane and the west right-of-way line of Cordell Avenue, to its intersection with the west Block L, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, as
Woodmont Avenue; right-of-way line of Cordell Avenue; shown in Plat Book 41, Plat 2973, recorded
November 30, 1951, among the land records of
Montgomery County, Maryland, to its intersection shown in Plat Book 3, Plat 261, recorded August Samuel T. Robertsons Addition to Bethesda
with the south right-of-way line of Del Ray Avenue; 24, 1923, among the land records of Montgomery Subdivision, to its intersection with the southeast
County, Maryland; boundary line for Samuel T. Robertsons Addition to
(88) Then in a westerly direction along the Bethesda Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 5,
south right-of-way line of Del Ray Avenue to its (92) Then in a northwesterly direction Plat 407, recorded January 9, 1930, among the
intersection with the common lot line dividing Lot along the southern line of Lot 35, Block K, Section land records of Montgomery County, Maryland,
16 and Lot 17, Block L, Section 2, Battery Park 2, Battery Park Subdivision, to its intersection with which is also being the common subdivision
Subdivision, as recorded August 24, 1923, in Plat the southern right-of-way line of Glenbrook Road, boundary with Woodmont Subdivision as recorded
Book 3, Plat 261, among the land records of as recorded June 6, 1980, in Plat Book 111, Plat November 13, 1894, in Plat Book 1, Plat 4, among
Montgomery County, Maryland; 12996, among the land records of Montgomery the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
County, Maryland;
(89) Then crossing Del Ray Avenue to the (97) Then in a northeasterly direction
southwest corner of Lot 8, Block K, Section 2, (93) Then in a northeasterly direction along the common subdivision boundary line
Battery Park Subdivision, as recorded February 26, along the southern right-of-way line of Glenbrook between Samuel T. Robertsons Addition to
1962, in Plat Book 70, Plat 6614, among the land Road to the southwest right-of-way line of Old Bethesda and Woodmont Subdivisions to its
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Georgetown Road; intersection with the southwest right-of-way line of
Norfolk Avenue;
(90) Then in a northerly direction along (94) Then crossing Old Georgetown Road
the west line of Lot 8, Block K, Section 2, Battery to the intersection of the northeast right-of- way (98) Then in a northerly direction along
Park Subdivision to the southwest corner of Lot line of Old Georgetown Road and the southeast the common subdivision boundary line between
29, Block K, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, right-of-way line of Glenbrook Road; Samuel T. Robertsons Addition to Bethesda and
as shown in Plat Book 70, Plat 6614, recorded Woodmont Subdivisions, crossing Rugby Avenue to
February 26, 1962, among the land records of (95) Then in a northeasterly direction its intersection with the southern boundary line of
Montgomery County, Maryland; along the southeast right-of-way line of Glenbrook Northwest Park Subdivision, as recorded October
Road to the northeast corner of Lot 1, Block A, 10, 1910, in Plat Book 2, Plat 134, among the
(91) Then in a northwesterly direction Samuel T. Robertsons Addition to Bethesda land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
along the southern lot lines of Lots 7, 6, and 5, Subdivision, as recorded January 9, 1930, in Plat
Block K, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, as Book 5, Plat 407, among the land records of (99) Then in an easterly direction along
recorded August 24, 1923, in Plat Book 3, Plat Montgomery County, Maryland; the common subdivision boundary line between
261, among the land records of Montgomery Northwest Park and Woodmont Subdivisions to its
County, Maryland, to the southwest corner of Lot (96) Then in a southeasterly direction intersection with the westernmost line of Lot 633,
5, Block K, Section 2, Battery Park Subdivision, as along the northeast line of Lots 1 and 2, Block A, Woodmont Subdivision, as recorded October 8,
1982, in Plat Book 119, Plat 14027, among the Plat Book 1, Plat 4, among the land records of Block 2, Northwest Park Subdivision, to its
land records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Montgomery County, Maryland, to its intersection intersection with the northern boundary line for the
with the west line of the Montgomery County Northwest Park Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book
(100) Then in a northerly direction along Public Parking Facility No. 35 site as recorded in 2, Plat 134, recorded October 10, 1910, among
the westernmost line of Lot 633, Woodmont Liber 2388, Folio 521; the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
Subdivision, to its intersection with the
northernmost line of Lot 633, Woodmont (104) Then in a northerly direction along (109) Then in an easterly direction along
Subdivision, as shown in Plat Book 119, Plat the west line of Public Parking Facility No. 35 to its the northern boundary line of the Northwest Park
14027, recorded October 8, 1982, among the intersection with the north line of Public Parking Subdivision to its intersection with the west right-
land records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Facility No. 35; of-way line of Wisconsin Avenue;
(101) Then in an easterly direction along (105) Then in an easterly direction along (110) Then in an easterly direction,
the northernmost line of Lot 633, Woodmont the north line of Public Parking Facility No. 35 to crossing Wisconsin Avenue, to the point of
Subdivision, to its intersection with the east line of its intersection with the western right-of-way line of beginning; and
Lot 633, Woodmont Subdivision, which is also the Woodmont Avenue;
west line of Lot 45, Block 1, Northwest Park (111) Any lot that is partially within and
Subdivision, as recorded October 10, 1910, in Plat (106) Then in a northerly direction along partially outside of the areas under paragraphs (1)
Book 2, Plat 134, among the land records of the western right-of-way line of Woodmont Avenue through (110).
Montgomery County, Maryland; to its intersection with the southern right-of-way
line of Battery Lane; (b) Silver Spring Urban District. The Silver
(102) Then in a southerly direction along Spring Urban District is all land in the thirteenth
the common lot line of Lot 633, Woodmont (107) Then in a northerly direction, election district of the county within the area
Subdivision and Lot 45, Block 1, Northwest Park crossing Battery Lane, to the northern right-of-way described as follows:
Subdivision, to its intersection with the northern line of Battery Lane at the southeast corner of Lot
boundary line of the Woodmont Subdivision as 47, Block 2, Northwest Park Subdivision, as (1) Beginning at a point on the Maryland-
shown in Plat Book 2, Plat 134, recorded October recorded October 10, 1910, in Plat Book 2, Plat District of Columbia boundary line at the
10, 1910, among the land records of Montgomery 134, among the land records of Montgomery intersection of the west right-of-way of Georgia
County, Maryland; County, Maryland; Avenue with the Maryland-District of Columbia
boundary line, and running in a northwesterly
(103) Then in an easterly direction along (108) Then in a northerly direction along direction along the Maryland-District of Columbia
the northern boundary of the Woodmont the east line of Lot 47, Block 2, Northwest Park boundary line, and crossing Sixteenth Street along
Subdivision as recorded November 13, 1894, in Subdivision, which is also the west line of Lot 20, an extension of that boundary line to its
intersection with the west right-of-way line of Lots 1 and 2, Block B, Section 4, Woodside Park, County, Maryland, crossing Pershing Drive along
Sixteenth Street; to its intersection with the southwest right-of-way an extension of that line to its intersection with the
line of Noyes Drive; southeast right-of-way line of Pershing Drive;
(2) Then in a northerly direction along the
west right-of-way line of Sixteenth Street, crossing (7) Then in a southeasterly direction along (12) Then in a southwesterly direction
East-West Highway to its intersection with a the southwest right-of-way line of Noyes Drive to its along the southeast right-of-way line of Cedar
southwesterly extension of the northerly right-of- intersection with the northwest right-of-way line of Street;
way line of Spring Street; Colesville Road;
(13) Then in a southeasterly direction
(3) Then in a northeasterly direction along (8) Then crossing Colesville Road in a along the northeast right-of-way line of Cedar
that extension crossing Sixteenth Street to its southeasterly direction to the intersection of the Street, crossing Wayne Avenue, to its intersection
intersection with the east right-of-way line of southeast right-of-way line of Colesville Road and with the southeast right-of-way line of Wayne
Sixteenth Street; the southwest line of the Silver Spring Public Avenue;
Library site, Parcel No. P959;
(4) Then in a northeasterly direction along (14) Then in a southwesterly direction
the northern right-of-way line of Spring Street, (9) Then along that line to the southeast along the southeast right-of-way line of Wayne
crossing Second Avenue, First Avenue, Georgia right-of-way line of Ellsworth Drive; Avenue for approximately 750 feet, to its
Avenue, and Alton Parkway, then southeasterly to intersection with the east lot line of Lot 24, Block
its intersection with the northwest right-of-way line (10) Then in a southwesterly direction 4, in Jordan's and Smith's Addition to Silver Spring
of Fairview Road; along the southeast right-of-way line of Ellsworth Park, as recorded June 2, 1925, in Plat Book 4,
Drive to its intersection with the common line of Plat 301, among the land records of Montgomery
(5) Then in a northeasterly direction the Academy of the Holy Names site and the County, Maryland;
approximately 390 feet along the northwest right- northeast line of Evanswood Sec. 1 Subdivision,
of-way line of Fairview Road to its intersection with also shown as the common lot line of Lot 9 and (15) Then in a southeasterly direction
the westward extension of the southwest line of Lot 10, Evanswood Section One, as recorded along the east line of Lot 24 to the southeast
Lots 1 and 2, Block B, Section 4, Woodside Park, March 2, 1932, in Plat Book 5, Plat 439 among corner of Lot 24;
as recorded January 30, 1923, in Plat Book 3, Plat the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
244, among the land records of Montgomery (16) Then in a southwesterly direction
County, Maryland; (11) Then in a southeasterly direction approximately 15 feet to the northeast corner of
along the northeast lot lines of Lots 1 through 9 as Lot 14, Block 4, Jordan's and Smith's Addition to
(6) Then crossing Fairview Road in a shown in Plat Book 5, Plat 439, recorded March 2, Silver Spring Park, as shown in Plat Book 4, Plat
southeasterly direction along the southwest line of 1932, among the land records of Montgomery
301, recorded June 2, 1925, among the land common lot line, which is the west line of Lot 7 Lot 5, Block H, as shown on the "Map of Building
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; and the east lot line of Lot 28, Block P, Silver Sites for Sale at Silver Spring;"
Spring Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 99,
(17) Then in a southeasterly direction recorded April 4, 1909, among the land records of (24) Then in a southerly direction along
along the east line of Lot 14, as shown in Plat Montgomery County, Maryland; the common lot line of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block H, to
Book 4, Plat 301, recorded June 2, 1925, among its intersection with the northern right-of-way line
the land records of Montgomery County, Maryland, (21) Then in a southerly direction along of Silver Spring Avenue;
to the northwest right-of-way line of Bonifant the common line of Lot 7 and Lot 28, Block P and
Street; the common line of Lot 18 and Lot 19, Block P, (25) Then crossing Silver Spring Avenue to
Silver Spring Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat the intersection of the southern right-of- way line of
(18) Then in a southerly direction crossing 99, recorded April 4, 1909, among the land Silver Spring Avenue and the common lot line,
Bonifant Street to the intersection of the records of Montgomery County, Maryland, crossing which is the east line of Lot 4 and the west line of
southeastern right-of-way line of Bonifant Street Thayer Avenue to the intersection of the south Lot 5, Block I, as shown on the "Map of Building
and the northeast corner of Lot 5, Block U, Silver right-of-way line of Thayer Avenue and the Sites for Sale at Silver Spring;"
Spring Park, as shown in Plat Book 1, Plat 99, common lot line which is the east lot line of Lot 5
recorded April 4, 1909, among the land records of and the west lot line of Lot 6, Block G, as shown (26) Then in a southerly direction along
Montgomery County, Maryland, which is also the on a "Map of Building Sites for Sale at Silver the common lot line of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block I,
same as the northeast corner of Montgomery Spring," as recorded May 23, 1904, in Plat Book 1, crossing a 20-foot alley dividing Block I and Block
County Public Parking Facility 29; Plat 54, among the land records of Montgomery J, as shown on the "Map of Building Sites for Sale
County, Maryland; at Silver Spring," to its intersection with the south
(19) Then in a southerly direction along right-of-way line of that alley and the common lot
the common lot line, which is the east line of Lot 5 (22) Then in a southerly direction along line, which is the east line of Lot 4 and the west
and the west line of Lot 6 as shown in Plat Book 1, the common lot line of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block G, line of Lot 5, Block J, as shown on the "Map of
Plat 99, recorded April 4, 1909, among the land and with an extension of that line to the south Building Sites for Sale at Silver Spring;"
records of Montgomery County, Maryland, crossing right-of-way line of a 20-foot alley dividing Block G
Easley Street along the southern extension of that and Block H, as shown on the "Map of Building (27) Then in a southerly direction along
line to its intersection with the south right-of-way Sites for Sale at Silver Spring;" the common lot line of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block J, to
line of Easley Street; its intersection with the northern right-of-way line
(23) Then in a westerly direction of Sligo Avenue;
(20) Then in a westerly direction along the approximately 50 feet along the south line of that
south right-of-way line of Easley Street alley to its intersection with the common lot line, (28) Then along a southern extension of
approximately 50 feet to its intersection with the which is the east line of Lot 4 and the west line of that common lot line of Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block J, to
its intersection with the southern right-of-way line (34) Then in a westerly direction along the northeast line of Eastern Avenue, which is also the
of Sligo Avenue; southern right-of-way line of Gist Avenue to its Maryland-District of Columbia boundary line;
intersection with the eastern right-of-way line of
(29) Then in a northwesterly direction Fenton Street; (40) Then in a northwesterly direction
along the southern right-of-way line of Sligo along the Maryland-District of Columbia boundary
Avenue to its intersection with the northeast (35) Then in a southerly direction along line to the point of beginning; and
corner of Lot 19, Block A, shown on a plat of Blair the eastern right-of-way line of Fenton Street
Section 1, recorded June 7, 1922, in Plat Book 3, crossing Philadelphia Avenue, Isington Street, and (41) Any lot that is partially within and
Plat 229 among the land records of Montgomery New York Avenue to its intersection with the partially outside of the areas under paragraphs (1)
County, Maryland; corporated limit line of the City of Takoma Park; through (40).
(30) Then in a southerly direction along (36) Then in a southwesterly direction with (c) Wheaton Urban District. The Wheaton
the east line of Lot 19, Block A, to its intersection the corporate limit line of the City of Takoma Park Urban District is all land in the thirteenth election
with the remainder of Lot 25, Block A, as shown on crossing the northeast right-of-way line of the B & district of the county within the area described as
the plat of Blair Section 1, recorded June 7, 1922, O Railroad to its intersection with the southwest follows:
in Plat Book 3, Plat 229, among the land records right-of-way line of the B & O Railroad;
of Montgomery County, Maryland; (1) Beginning on the west right-of-way line
(37) Then in a southeasterly direction with of Amherst Avenue at the southeast corner of
(31) Then in an easterly direction the southwest right-of-way line of the B & O Parcel A, Wheaton Place, as recorded February 26,
approximately 15 feet to its intersection with the Railroad to its intersection with the northeast right- 1965, in Plat Book 77, Plat 7696, among the land
northwest corner of Lot 51, Block A, as shown on a of-way line of Blair Road; records of Montgomery County, Maryland;
plat of Blair Section 1, recorded November 16,
1935, in Plat Book 8, Plat 626, among the land (38) Then in a northwesterly direction (2) Then in a westerly direction along the
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; along the northeast right-of-way line of Blair Road south line of the same Parcel A to its intersection
to its intersection with an extension of the with the east right-of-way line of Georgia Avenue,
(32) Then in a southerly direction along southeast line of Parcel One, Yost's Addition to as shown in Plat Book 77, Plat 7696, recorded
the west line of that Lot 51 to its intersection with Silver Spring, as shown in Plat Book 85, Plat 8874, February 26, 1965, among the land records of
the northern right-of-way line of Gist Avenue; recorded March 13, 1968, among the land records Montgomery County, Maryland;
of Montgomery County, Maryland;
(33) Then along a southerly extension of (3) Then crossing Georgia Avenue along a
the west line of that Lot 51 to the southern right- (39) Then in a southwesterly direction westerly extension of the south line of the same
of-way line of Gist Avenue; along that line to its intersection with the
Parcel A to its intersection with the west right-of- Kensington View, to its intersection with the west Blueridge Avenue, which is also the P.T. of Fillet
way line of Georgia Avenue; line of East Avenue, as shown in Plat Book 4, Plat curve No. 4 and generally the northwest corner of
303, recorded July 10, 1925, among the land Lot 1, Block 44, as shown on Plat No. 9, Wheaton
(4) Then in a northerly direction along the records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Hills, recorded in Plat Book 32, on Plat 2058,
west right-of-way line of Georgia Avenue to its among the land records of Montgomery County,
intersection with the southern line of Parcel 4, (9) Then in a northerly direction along the Maryland;
Wheaton Plaza, as recorded August 11, 1960, in west line of East Avenue, crossing Upton Drive and
Plat Book 66, Plat 6037, among the land records Kensington Boulevard to the north line of (14) Then with the southerly side of
of Montgomery County, Maryland; Kensington Boulevard; Blueridge Avenue, with the arc of a curve to the
left in a general easterly direction, to the east side
(5) Then in a westerly and then northerly (10) Then in an easterly direction along of Grandview Avenue;
direction along the southern and western lines of the north line of Kensington Boulevard, including
Parcel 4, Wheaton Plaza, to its intersection with its planned extension, to its intersection with the (15) Then with the east side of Grandview
the south right-of-way line of University Boulevard west line of Viers Mill Road; Avenue north to the common front corner of Lots
West, as shown in Plat Book 66, Plat 6037, 19 and 20, Block 27, as shown on Plat No. 9,
recorded August 11, 1960, among the land (11) Then crossing Viers Mill Road to the Wheaton Hills, recorded in Plat Book 32, on Plat
records of Montgomery County, Maryland; west corner of Lot 1, Block B, Triangle Park as 2058, among the land records of Montgomery
shown in Plat Book No. 4, on Plat No. 338, County, Maryland;
(6) Then crossing University Boulevard recorded among the land records of Montgomery
West to the southwest corner of Lot Pt 8, Block G, County, Maryland; (16) Then leaving the east side of
Kensington View subdivision, as recorded July 10, Grandview Avenue and running with the dividing
1925, in Plat Book 4, Plat 303, among the land (12) Then with the southerly side of line of the same Lots 19 and 20, and Lots 9 and
records of Montgomery County, Maryland, which is Kensington Boulevard in an easterly direction and 10, Block 27, as shown on Plat No. 9, Wheaton
also the northeast intersection of University crossing Wheaton Hill Road to a point on the Hills, recorded in Plat Book 32, on Plat 2058,
Boulevard West and Midvale Road; easterly side of the same Wheaton Hill Road, among the land records of Montgomery County,
which is also the north corner of Lot 16, Block A, Maryland, east to the west side of Georgia Avenue;
(7) Then in a northerly direction along the as shown on the plat of Triangle Park in PlatBook
west line of the same Lot Pt 8 to its intersection 4, on Plat No. 338, recorded among the land (17) Then with the west side of Georgia
with the north line of the same Lot Pt 8; records of Montgomery County, Maryland; Avenue and running south, approximately 200
feet;
(8) Then in an easterly direction along the (13) Then running with the easterly side of
north lines of Lots 1 through 8, Block G, Wheaton Hill Road northeast to the south side of
(18) Then leaving the west side of Georgia (23) Then in a southerly direction along extent not inconsistent with this Section or Article
Avenue, crossing Georgia Avenue, and running that easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1 to the 25A, Section 5(FF) of the Maryland Code, an urban
east with the northerly subdivision limits of Villa intersection of the extension of that line with the district corporation may exercise all powers and is
Verde Subdivision as shown in Plat Book No. 4, on southerly line of University Boulevard West subject to all requirements applicable to non-stock
Plat No. 388, recorded among the land records of (formerly Old Bladensburg Road); corporations under the Corporations and
Montgomery County, Maryland, to the northeast Associations Article of the Maryland Code. An
corner of Lot 8, Villa Verde; (24) Then in a northeasterly direction urban district corporation performs tasks of
along that southerly line of University Boulevard benefit to the government.
(19) Then in a southerly direction along West to its intersection with the west line of
the east line of the same Lot 8, Villa Verde, and Amherst Avenue (formerly Vernosia Place); (b) Services. An urban district corporation
crossing Blueridge Avenue to the intersection of may provide the following services to benefit
the extension of the east line of Lot 8, Villa Verde (25) Then in a southerly direction along residents and businesses in the district (and which
and the south line of Blueridge Avenue; that west line of Amherst Avenue, crossing Reedie may incidentally benefit neighboring communities):
Drive and Prichard Road to the point of beginning;
(20) Then along the south line of and (1) promotion, organization, and support
Blueridge Avenue to approximately 125 feet east of cultural, recreational, and business activities;
of the east line of Amherst Avenue, which is a (26) Any lot that is partially within and
point on the dividing line between Lot 1, Block 1, partially outside of the areas under paragraphs (1) (2) specialized transportation services,
Wheaton Manor, and the property occupied by through (25). (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2.) including jitney service;
Columbia Broadcasting Company as shown in Plat
Book 45, on Plat No. 3390, recorded among the Sec. 68A-9. Urban District Corporations. (3) subject to Section 68A-3,
land records of Montgomery County, Maryland; enhancement and maintenance of streetscape
(a) General. An urban district corporation may and provision of additional streetscape amenities;
(21) Then in a southerly direction along be created under this Section for the benefit of and
that line to its intersection with the northerly line of each urban district. An urban district corporation
Lot 3, Block 1, Wheaton Manor; created under this Section is a public (4) other initiatives to advance the
instrumentality of the County and is a commercial business and residential environment and sense
(22) Then in an easterly direction along district management authority for that urban of community through such measures as
that northerly line of Lot 3, Block 1, Wheaton district. An urban district corporation is not within enhanced security, coordination of retail marketing
Manor, to its intersection with the easterly line of the Executive or Legislative branches of County and signage, facade improvements, business
the same Lot 3, Block 1; government, is separate and distinct from the retention services, community initiatives, and
County, and is an independent entity. To the similar activities.
A Corporation may provide a service outside e. powers of the corporation, subject to ch. 16, § 1; 1999 L.M.C., ch. 22, § 1; 2000 L.M.C.,
the boundaries of an urban district if the service the restrictions or limitations on the powers of the ch. 26, § 1.)
will primarily benefit businesses or residents in the corporation in this Section and in Article 25A,
urban district. A Corporation may also provide any Section 5(FF) of the Maryland Code. Sec. 68A-10. Board of Directors of Corporation;
authorized service to another Corporation or urban Employees; Other Organizational Matters.
district. (2) The resolution adopted under
paragraph (1) must also approve proposed by-laws (a) Appointment and Confirmation of Board
(c) Creation. for the corporation that include provisions required of Directors. Except as otherwise provided in the
under Section 68A-10(h). resolution creating an urban district corporation,
(1) An urban district corporation may be the board of directors of the corporation has 11
created by the adoption of a resolution by the (3) The County Executive, or any other members. Members are appointed by the County
County Council that is approved by the County person designated in the resolution adopted under Executive and confirmed by the County Council.
Executive or, if disapproved by the Executive, is paragraph (1), must execute and file the articles of The County Executive must appoint the members
readopted by a vote of 6 Councilmembers. The incorporation for recording with the State of the board of directors so that:
public must be given at least 30 days to comment Department of Assessments and Taxation. When
on the proposed articles of incorporation and by- the articles of incorporation are accepted for (1) an ex-officio, nonvoting member is the
laws before the Council adopts the resolution. The recording by the Department of Assessments and County Executive or the Executive's designee;
resolution must approve articles of incorporation Taxation, the corporation becomes a body
that state the: corporate, lawfully and properly created and (2) 2 members are persons nominated by
authorized to exercise its powers. the chamber of commerce of that urban district;
a. name of the corporation;
(4) The County Council may amend the (3) 3 members are, or represent, owners
b. names, addresses, and terms of articles of incorporation by adopting a resolution of an optional method development;
office of the first directors of the corporation; approved by the County Executive or, if the
resolution is disapproved by the Executive, (4) one member is an owner, partner,
c. location of the principal office of the readopting it by a vote of 6 Councilmembers. Any proprietor, or corporate officer of a small business;
corporation; amendment must be filed and recorded with the
State Department of Assessments and Taxation. A (5) one member lives in the urban district;
d. purposes for which the corporation is copy of the articles of incorporation and any
formed; and (6) one member lives in a residential
amendment must be filed with the County
community outside of, but in close proximity to, the
Executive. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C.,
urban district, who must be appointed by the
County Executive from among three candidates (2) The County Executive may reappoint a recommendation of the board, because of failure
nominated by the County Council; member to the board of directors for one to attend meetings or other reasons.
additional term, but a member must not serve
(7) one member lives in a residential more than 2 consecutive terms on the board. (2) A member of the board of directors is
community within the planning area in which the not subject to Chapter 19A (Ethics) but must
urban district is located and is nominated by the (3) The County Executive may remove a comply with all bylaws pertaining to ethical
citizens advisory board serving that area after the member of the board of directors for malfeasance, conduct by the board of directors approved by the
board has solicited interest from the public and misfeasance, or nonfeasance or other reason County Council and County Executive under
interviewed potential nominees; and specified in the bylaws for the corporation. subsection (g).
(8) one member is a resident member of (d) Duties. The board of directors directs all (g) Bylaws.
the citizen advisory board who is nominated by the aspects of the program, management, and
board, or if no member of the board is able to finances of the corporation. (1) At the organization meeting of the
serve, a resident of the planning area in which the board of directors required under Section 2- 109
urban district is located who is nominated by the (e) Compensation; Relation to County of the Corporations and Associations Article of the
citizens advisory board. retirement system. Maryland Code, the board must adopt the bylaws
approved by the County Council and Executive
(b) Rejection of nominations to board of (1) A member of the board of directors under Section 68A-9. Any later amendment to the
directors. The County Executive may reject any serves without compensation. bylaws must be submitted to the County Council
person nominated to serve on the board of and County Executive for approval at least 60 days
directors and request additional nominations from (2) A member of the board of directors is before the board of directors takes final action on
the body that nominated the person. not eligible to receive benefits under the County the amendment. All bylaws must be filed with the
retirement system for service rendered as a board County Executive within 5 working days of
(c) Term; Removal. member. adoption.
(1) Each member of the board of directors (f) Procedures, attendance, and ethics. (2) The bylaws may contain any provision
serves for a period of 3 years. However, when the not inconsistent with law or the articles of
board of directors is first formed, any member of (1) The board of directors may establish incorporation of the corporation to regulate and
the district's Urban District Advisory Committee its own rules of procedure. These rules may be manage the affairs of the corporation. The bylaws
who consents to do so serves as a member of the included in the bylaws of the corporation. The must contain provisions that:
board for the remainder of that person's term. board may adopt a rule that allows for removal of
a member by the County Executive, upon
a. protect against any conflict of e. specify how the corporation will (k) Publicity. An urban district corporation
interest or similar impropriety by members of the comply with the state public records law. may publicize its activities through newsletters or
board of directors or the Executive Director or any other media. It may sell advertising in its
other employees, including self-dealing and (h) Committees. The board of directors publications. (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993
collusive practices. This requirement includes a should be supported by committees, each chaired L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1.)
provision for the disclosure of a financial or similar by a board member, which oversee the
interest of any person in any matter before the management and other functions of the Sec. 68A-11. Urban District Corporation-Powers.
corporation and the establishment of conditions corporation. Membership on committees must be
under which that person is disqualified from open to persons other than board members. (a) Powers. To further its statutory purposes,
participating in decisions or other actions in which but subject to the limitations in subsection (b), an
there is a conflict between the person's official (i) Executive director; agents and employees. urban district corporation may:
duties and private interests. Appropriate remedies The board of directors should engage an executive
against violation, including removal or termination director with substantial experience managing (1) acquire, hold, and use both real and
must be provided; downtown districts or in a related field. The board personal property and other property rights
may employ, or contract with, other persons to necessary to achieve its purposes, including
b. provide for competitive procurement assist in carrying out the corporation's functions. acquisition by purchase or lease;
for goods and services with reasonable public An employee of the corporation is not a County
notice; employee under Chapter 33 (Personnel) nor a (2) make contracts, including employment
public employee for purposes of Chapter 19A contracts and contracts for goods and services;
c. provide for surety bonds or similar (Ethics). An employee must not participate in or
instruments to protect against misappropriation of receive benefits from the County retirement (3) sue and be sued;
funds by employees of the corporation responsible system for service as an employee with the
for the handling of corporation funds; corporation. (4) accept grants, gifts, or other
contributions;
d. specify how the corporation will (j) Insurance. An urban district corporation
comply with the state open meetings law and, in must secure reasonable and appropriate (5) establish commercial bank accounts,
addition, provide that all meetings of the board of insurance for its activities. The corporation and its with any earnings on funds inuring to the
directors must be open to the public except when employees are eligible to participate in the corporation; and
closed on a recorded vote of the board for a County's comprehensive insurance and self
reason expressly listed in the bylaws; and (6) take other necessary or convenient
insurance programs in accordance with Section
actions.
20-37.
(b) Limitations. An urban district corporation (2) an optional method developer to (e) County not liable; Suits by corporation
must not: maintain streetscape amenities on public rights- against County prohibited; styling of suits by or
of-way. against the corporation; County Attorney.
(1) pledge the full faith and credit of the
County; (d) Applicability of County Procurement (1) The County is not liable, in contract or
Policies. tort, for any obligation, act, or omission of an
(2) issue bonds or notes; urban district corporation or its agents or
(1) The requirements of Chapter 11B employees. Any contract executed by an urban
(3) exercise any police or general power of (Procurement) do not apply to procurement by an district corporation must state that the County is
the County, except those expressly authorized by urban district corporation. However, the not liable for any obligation of the corporation
law; corporation must make a good faith effort to meet under the contract.
the minority, female, and disabled business
(4) exercise the power of eminent domain; procurement goals that apply to County (2) An urban district corporation must not
government under Chapter 11B. Similarly, the sue the County as plaintiff.
(5) lease any property as tenant for a term corporation must make a good faith effort to
of years beyond the date of termination of the achieve procurement goals for the purchase of (3) As a commercial district management
corporation; recycled goods that apply to County government authority, each corporation is a "local government"
under Chapter 11B. The corporation must submit as that phrase is used in the Local Government
(6) purchase, sell, construct, or, as a a report to the Chief Administrative Officer by Tort Claims Act. A lawsuit brought by or against an
landlord, lease office or retail space; or September 1 of each year describing achievement urban district corporation must name the urban
of those goals in the prior fiscal year. district and the corporation as follows:
(7) except as otherwise authorized under "(geographic area) Urban District Corporation for
this Chapter, compete with the private sector. (2) An urban district corporation should the benefit of the (geographic area) urban district,
participate in the County cooperative purchasing a special taxing district of Montgomery County,
(c) Maintenance agreements. An urban
program to the fullest extent possible. To the Maryland." The special taxing district should be
district corporation and an optional method
extent practicable and cost effective, the considered the real party in interest under
developer may enter into an agreement for:
corporation must utilize the County's centralized Maryland Rules of Procedure and for purposes of
purchasing system by purchasing goods under the Local Government Tort Claims Act.
(1) the corporation to maintain
County requirement contracts with vendors or
streetscape amenities on private or public
using existing County inventories. (4) The County Attorney is the legal advisor
property; or
to each urban district corporation and must be
notified of any legal action brought by or against
the corporation. This paragraph does not prohibit must be applied to the next annual corporation c. in accordance with its articles of
a corporation from hiring additional legal counsel budget approved by the Council. incorporation and bylaws and the agreement
approved by the County Attorney. (1987 L.M.C., ch. between the corporation and the County.
2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; 1993 L.M.C., ch. (b) Distribution; use of urban district funds.
24, § 1.) (3) The agreement between the County
(1) After the County Council has approved and the urban district corporation may provide for
Sec. 68A-12. Urban District Corporations-Budget, the urban district's budget, the Director of Finance the County to provide goods or services to the
Finances, and Administration. must transfer those monies appropriated for use corporation.
by an urban district corporation to the corporation
(a) Budget preparation, review, and action. in accordance with Section 11B-42(d)*. The (c) Start-up funding. Any start-up funding that
transfer of funds to, and expenditure of funds by, cannot be accommodated in the normal County
(1) Each urban district corporation must the corporation is subject each year to the budget cycle may be funded by a supplemental or
annually prepare and submit a budget to the Office execution of an agreement between the County emergency appropriation in accordance with law.
of Management and Budget for review in and the urban district corporation. This Chapter
accordance with the procedures and schedule and any agreement executed under this (d) Annual report and audit. An urban district
established by the Office of Management and subsection do not create or imply any continuing corporation must maintain its books, accounts,
Budget. right of a corporation to public funding. The and records and file with the Director of Finance
County in its discretion may terminate or refuse to an annual report. The books, accounts, and
(2) The Office of Management and Budget renew any such agreement at the end of any fiscal records must be open to inspection by the County
should meet with the board of directors to attempt year. during reasonable working hours. The corporation
to resolve any area of disagreement. must also provide the County an annual
* Editor‘s note—Chapter 11B was amended. independent audit by a certified public accountant,
(3) The County Council considers and acts See Sec. 11B-14(a)(4). including a copy of any accompanying
on the County Executive's recommended budget management letter. The time for submission of
for the urban district corporation in accordance (2) An urban district corporation must use the annual report and audit must be stated in the
with the budget adoption procedures of the County funds transferred under this Section only: agreement between the urban district corporation
Charter. The Council may consider any non-County and the County.
funding available to the corporation in deciding the a. for the urban district from which they
amount of County funding to approve. are obtained; (e) Evaluation. At least one year before an
Unencumbered County funds estimated to remain urban district corporation is scheduled to
in the corporation at the end of the fiscal year b. for the purposes of the urban district terminate under Section 68A-12, the Office of
as set forth in this Chapter; and Legislative Oversight must evaluate the
performance of the corporation. This evaluation maintain any property it would otherwise maintain
should include a survey of property owners, but for the existence of the corporation.
businesses, and residents located in and around
the urban district served by the corporation. (1987 (d) Dissolution of an urban district
L.M.C., ch. 2, § 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; 1993 corporation is governed by Section 5-208 of the
L.M.C., ch. 24, § 1.) Corporations and Associations Article of the
Maryland Code. Any assets remaining after all
Sec. 68A-13. Termination of Urban District liabilities and obligations of the corporation are
Corporation; Dissolution. satisfied must be distributed to the County.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), an (e) Notwithstanding subsection (a) or (b), an
urban district corporation exists for 5 years after urban district corporation may be terminated at
its articles of incorporation are accepted for any time after adoption of a resolution by the
recording by the State Department of Assessments County Council that is approved by the County
and Taxation. Executive or, if disapproved by the Executive, is
readopted by a vote of 6 Councilmembers if the
(b) The existence of an urban district urban district corporation has been operated in an
corporation may be extended for an unlimited ultra vires manner, or in the event of misfeasance,
number of additional 5-year terms by a resolution malfeasance, or nonfeasance by the board of
adopted by the County Council and approved by directors. Termination and dissolution is governed
the County Executive or, if disapproved by the by subsections (c) and (d). (1987 L.M.C., ch. 2, §
Executive, by a vote of 6 Councilmembers. 2; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 16, § 1; 1993 L.M.C., ch. 24, §
Amended articles of incorporation must be filed 1.)
and recorded with the State Department of
Assessments and Taxation. A copy of the
amended articles of incorporation must be filed
with the County Executive.
(c) When an urban district corporation

terminates, all contracts and services must
terminate unless expressly assumed and
maintained by the County. The County must then
Transit in Germantown as envisioned in 1966
APPENDIX 23: TRANSIT MIXED-USE ZONE
Ordinance No: 16-29 By amending the following section of the

Zoning Text Amendment No: 08-14 Montgomery County Zoning EXPLANATION:
Concerning: Transit Mixed-Use (TMX) Zone - Ordinance, Chapter 59 of the Montgomery County Boldface indicates a heading or a defined term
Establishment Code: Underlining indicates text that is added to existing
Draft No. & Date: 4 -11/18/08 laws by the original text amendment.
Introduced: June 24, 2008 DIVISION 59-A-2 ―DEFINITIONS‖ [Single boldface brackets] indicate text that is
Public Hearing: July 29, 2008 Section 59-A-2.1 ―Definitions‖ deleted from existing law by the original text
Adopted: November 25, 2008 DIVISION 59-D-2 ―PROJECT PLAN FOR OPTIONAL amendment.
Effective: December 15, 2008 METHOD OF DEVELOPMENT IN CBD, TOMX, AND Double underlining indicates text that is added to
RMX ZONES. the text amendment by amendment.
COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Section 59-D-2.0 ―Zones enumerated‖ [[Double boldface brackets]] indicate text that is
MARYLAND deleted from the text amendment by amendment.
SITTING AS THE DISTRICT COUNCIL FOR THAT And by adding the following Division to the * * * indicates existing law unaffected by the text
PORTION OF Montgomery County Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 59 amendment.
THE MARYLAND-WASHINGTON REGIONAL of the Montgomery County Code:
DISTRICT WITHIN
OPINION
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND DIVISION 59-C-14 ―TRANSIT MIXED-USE ZONES
(TMX)‖
Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 08-14, sponsored
By: District Council at Request of the Planning Sections 59-C-14.1 through 59-C-14.[[32]]27
by the District Council at the request of the
Board
Planning Board, was introduced on June 24, 2008.
AN AMENDMENT to the Montgomery County The Planning Board recommends using a new
Zoning Ordinance to: Transit Mixed-Use (TMX) zone proposed in ZTA 08-
14 instead of amending the Transit-Oriented
- establish a Transit Mixed-Use (TMX) Zone; and Mixed-Use zone in Transit Station Development
- establish allowable land uses, development Areas. ZTA 08-14 would establish the TMX zone.
standards, use of buildable transferable
development rights, and approval procedures
for development under the Transit Mixed-Use
Zone.
In its report to the Council, the Montgomery County workforce housing, and considering bonus density Development Area. Representatives of auto
Planning Board recommended that the zoning text for the purchase of BLTs, instead of requiring their dealerships requested an expansion of the land
amendment be approved with amendments. In purchase for all density above the standard uses that would be allowed in the TMX zone. The
light of the findings of the Research and method of development. text amendment was referred to the Planning,
Technology Division, and because of the testimony Housing, and Economic Development Committee
provided by the public, the Planning Board The Council held a public hearing on ZTA 08-14 on for review and recommendation.
recommended certain adjustments to the TMX July 29, 2008. Testimony was received in favor of The Planning, Housing, and Economic
zone as introduced: (1) exempt residential and in opposition to the BLT program. Several Development Committee held worksessions to
development from the Building Lot Termination speakers who represented landowners favored the review the amendment on September 8,
(BLT) requirement where the workforce housing general direction of the amendments proposed by September 22, and October 6, 2008. After careful
requirement applies; (2) increase the maximum the Planning Board‘s testimony: 1) reducing the review of the materials of record, and for the
optional method density from 3.0 to 4.0; (3) allow financial burden of purchasing BLTs; 2) increasing reasons described in the memorandum presented
development under a development plan approved the allowable density; and 3) grandfathering to Council on October 28 concerning ZTA 08-14,
for the TS-R and TS-M zones to remain valid and approved projects. The Planning Board‘s the Committee recommended approving ZTA 08-
construction to continue subject to applicable testimony responded to some of the major 14 with the following amendments:
approvals (FAR above the approved development concerns found in the Council‘s public hearing
plan limit would be subject to the TMX standards); testimony, other than dropping the requirement for 1) Standard method of development in TMX zone
and (4) allow development under a preliminary the purchase of BLTs. Opponents to the TMX zone should have:
plan to remain valid and construction to continue characterized the BLT requirement as a tax on a) a maximum floor area ratio (FAR)
subject to applicable approvals (a preliminary plan desirable development. The agricultural of .5 with increases for MPDUs
approved before the applicable SMA adoption date community supported a privately financed BLT and workforce housing;
may be amended after the SMA adoption date program, as did the League of Woman Voters and b) a maximum building height of 42
under the standards of the previous zone or under the Sierra Club. feet; and
the TMX zone standards). The Planning Board also c) streetscaping should be required
recommended amending the TMX zone so that the The Housing Opportunities Commission expressed immediately in front of the
County Executive would determine the cost of a concern about the economic impact of requiring development.
single BLT. BLTs, and recommended finding ways to reduce 2) Optional method of development in
development costs. The Sierra Club also spoke in the TMX zone should have:
The County Executive recommended not allowing a favor of reducing the parking requirements to a) a maximum FAR of 4 with
master plan or sector plan to limit density from the offset the costs of BLTs. In addition, the Sierra increases for MPDUs and
maximum in the TMX zone. He also recommended Club requested the exclusion of proposed transit workforce housing;
amendments to allow more residential density for stations from the definition of a Transit Station
b) criteria for height and density but should leave the sending property standard the name of the zone created was changed to
no maximum height in the zone; method density unless the sending site is TMX-2 with the expectation that additional
c) design principles to implement recommended for open space in the master or zones may be created under the TMX
the sector plan recommendations sector plan. requirements;
for optional method development 7) The grandfather provision should include all the minimum number of parking spaces was
adopted by the Planning Board; approved development plans and all approved reduced for certain retail uses, reflecting the
d) a requirement for acquiring BLTs preliminary plans, including amendments to recommendations of the Urban Land Institute;
excluding residential projects that those plans. the criteria for determining height and density
are required to provide workforce were amended to reflect comments from the
housing; The rationale for imposing a BLT obligation is Planning Board;
e) an option to bypass a project plan directly related to the impacts created by the the setback standard was changed under
application if the project also proposed development. All development in the certain circumstances; and
requires subdivision approval; County increases the development pressure in the the requirement for development ―to follow‖
and Rural Density Transfer (RDT) area. Residential Planning Board adopted design guidelines was
f) payments instead of providing on- development increases the demand for changed to ―consistent with‖.
site amenities used in the same commercial development. Increased employment
Transit Station Development increases the demand for residential For these reasons and because to approve this
Area. development. More than 60 percent of people amendment will assist in the coordinated,
3) The land uses in the previously proposed who work in the County also live in the County. comprehensive, adjusted and systematic
TOMX zone and all the uses allowed in the The BLT removes development pressure in the development of the Maryland-Washington
Central Business District (CBD) zone should be RDT area. Regional District located in Montgomery County,
added to the list of permitted uses, including Zoning Text Amendment No. 08-14 will be
automobile repair. The District Council reviewed Zoning Text approved as amended.
4) The minimum parking requirements should be Amendment No.08-14 at worksessions held on
reduced from the current requirement in October 28 and November 18, 2008, and agreed ORDINANCE
Division 59-E. with the recommendations of the Planning,
5) Require TMX development to be ―consistent‖ Housing, and Economic Development Committee The County Council for Montgomery County,
with the applicable master or sector plan. except as follows; Maryland, sitting as the District Council for that
6) The transfer of density provision should the maximum optional method of portion of the Maryland-Washington Regional
require 18,000 square feet of land at a development FAR was changed to 2 plus District in Montgomery County, Maryland,
minimum, unless otherwise recommended by density required for MPDUs and workforce approves the following ordinance:
a master or sector plan, and the transfer housing;
Sec. 1. Division 59-A- is amended as follows: (d) could be transferred by a BLT Easement The TMX zone is for use in a transit station
Division 59-A-2. Definitions and Interpretation. under this Chapter. development area.
59-A-2.1. Definitions When a BLT easement is recorded in the land S EC . 59-C-14.2. T RANSIT M IXED -U SE (TMX)
* * * records, the easement extinguishes the right to Z ONE .
[[Building Lot Termination Easement Program: A build a dwelling unit in the RDT zone; this attribute 59-C-14.21. Description, purpose, and general
program by which a BLT is purchased or donated distinguishes a BLT from other TDRs. requirements
in exchange for terminating some or all of the 59-C-14. 21.1. Description.
residential building lots. A transferable Buildable Lot Termination Easement. A form of an The TMX Zone permits moderate through intensive
development right that is eligible for transfer into a agricultural easement that runs with the land in mixed-use development in a Transit Station
designated TDR receiving area that is not a perpetuity and extinguishes the right to construct a Development Area. The TMX zone must be shown
residential building lot on a parcel in the RDT Zone residential dwelling unit on land located in the on a master or sector plan and applied by
is not eligible for use under the Building Lot Agricultural Reserve and zoned Rural Density Sectional Map Amendment. The zone establishes
Termination Easement Program. Transfer. density, uses, and standards, for standard and
* * * optional methods of development which may be
Buildable lot Termination (BLT) Transferable [[Transferable Development Right (TDR): The right limited by the recommendations of the applicable
Development Right: A transferable development to transfer the residential buildable capacity in the master or sector plan.
right in the Rural Density Transfer (RDT) Zone that Rural Density Transfer (RDT) Zone to other 59-C-14.2.2. Purpose.
can be used for building one dwelling for each 25 designated zones at the rate of one transferable The TMX zone fosters transit-oriented
acres in that zone; distinguished from a development right (TDR) for each full five acres development by permitting increased density and
transferable development right that is in excess of owned in the RDT Zone.]] height consistent with the recommendations of an
the density allowed in the RDT zone.]] approved and adopted master plan or sector plan.
Transfer of development rights: The conveyance of The purpose of the TMX zone is to:
Building Lot Termination (BLT): A transferable development rights by deed, easement, or other (a) Implement the land use and density
development right (TDR) created from land that: legal instrument authorized by local law to another recommendations of approved and adopted
(a) consists of at least 25 acres; parcel of land and the recordation of that master or sector plans for Transit Station
(b) is capable of being served by an individual conveyance among the land records of Development Areas by:
sewage treatment unit which meets the Montgomery County, Maryland. (1) facilitating mixed-use development with
requirements of Chapter 27A and applicable a compatible network of interconnecting
regulations issued under that Chapter; Sec. 2. Division 59-C- is amended as follows: streets, open squares, plazas, defined
(c) is located in the Rural Density Transfer * * * streetscapes, and civic and community
(RDT) zone; and [[DIVISION 59-C-14. TRANSIT MIXED-USE (TMX) ZONE oriented uses ; and
59-C-14.1. Zone permitted.
(2) providing incentives and flexible review is required under section 59-D-3. If under the Optional Method of Development. If
development standards that foster residential uses are included in a residential uses are included in a
innovative design and technology. development, Moderately Priced Dwelling development, Moderately Priced Dwelling
(b) Encourage land assembly in a compact and Units must be provided as required under Units must be provided as required under
efficient form. Chapter 25A and workforce housing units Chapter 25A and workforce housing units
(c) Provide a variety of housing opportunities, must be provided as required under Section must be provided as required under Section
including affordable housing, near transit 59-A-6.18 and Chapter 25B. The maximum 59-A-6.18 and Chapter 25B. The maximum
stations. dwelling unit density or residential FAR may be dwelling unit density or residential FAR may be
(d) Encourage sustainable and efficient design. increased in proportion to any MPDU density increased in proportion to any MPDU density
(e) Improve multi-modal access to transit from bonus provided on-site. bonus provided on site. The procedure for the
the communities surrounding transit station approval of the Optional Method of
(b) Optional Method of Development:
development areas. Development is under Section 59-D-2. Site
(f) Provide receiving capacity for buildable lot The Optional Method of Development allows plans review is required under Section 59-D-3.
terminations (BLT). greater densities and encourages innovative
design and building technologies to create
59-C-14.24. Land uses.
59-C-14.22. Location. pedestrian-oriented and mixed-use
No use is allowed except as indicated in the
Land classified in the TMX Zone must be located in development patterns and an environment
following table:
a Transit Station Development Area. capable of supporting the greater densities.
- Permitted Uses. Uses designated by the letter "P"
59-C-14.23. Methods of development. Two Approval of the Optional Method of
are permitted on any lot in the zones indicated,
methods of development are available. Development is dependent upon providing
subject to all applicable regulations.
(a) Standard Method of Development: The required public use space, public amenities
- Special Exception Uses. Uses designated by the
standard method requires compliance with a and facilities, and participation in the BLT
letters "SE" may be authorized as special
specific set of development standards and program. Public use space and public
exceptions under Article 59-G.
permits a range of uses and a density facilities and amenities are required to
compatible with these standards. Site plan support the additional densities permitted
TMX
Standard Optional
(a) Residential:
Dwellings. P P
Group home, small. P P
Group home, large. P P
Hotel or motel. P P
TMX
Standard Optional
Housing and related facilities for senior adults or persons with disabilities. P P
Life care facility. P P
Personal living quarters. P P
(b) Transportation, communication and utilities:
Parking garages, automobile. P P
Public utility buildings, structures, and underground facilities. P P
Radio and television broadcasting studio. P P
Rooftop mounted antennas and related unmanned equipment building, equipment cabinet or equipment P P
room.
Taxicab stand, not including storage while not in use. P P
(c) Commercial:
Antique shops, handicrafts or art sales and supplies. P P
Automobile sales, retail showroom. P P
Book store. P P
Convenience food and beverage store, without fuel sales. P P
Department stores. P
Drug store. P P
Eating and drinking establishment, excluding drive-in. P P
Florist shop. P P
Furniture store, carpet, or related furnishing sales or service. P P
Gift shop. P P
Grocery store. P P
Hardware store. P P
Office supply store. P P
Office, general. P P
Office, professional including banks and financial institutions (excluding check cashing stores). P P
Standard Optional
Offices for companies principally engaged in health services, research and development. P P
Newsstand. P P
TMX
Standard Optional
Photographic and art supply store. P P
Pet sales and supply store. P P
Specialty shop. P P
(d) Services:
Adult foster care homes. P P
Ambulance or rescue squad, public supported. P P
Animal boarding place. SE SE
Art, music and photographic studios. P P
Automobile filling station. SE SE
Automobile rental services, excluding automobile storage and supplies. P P
Barber and beauty shop. P P
Charitable and philanthropic institutions. P P
Clinic. P P
Child daycare facility
- Family day care. P P
- Group day care. P P
- Child day care center. P P
Daycare facility for not more than 4 senior adults and persons with disabilities. P P
Domiciliary care for no more than 16 senior adults. P P
Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up station. P P
Duplicating services. P P
Educational, private institution. P P
Home occupation, no impact. P P
Home occupation, registered. P P
Home occupation, major. SE SE
Hospice care facility. P P
Hospitals, veterinary. SE SE
International public organization. P P
TMX
Standard Optional
Place of religious worship. P P
Publicly owned or publicly operated uses. P P
Shoe repair shop. P P
Tailoring or dressmaking shop. P P
Universities and colleges teaching and research facilities. P P
(e) Research and Development and Biotechnology P P
Laboratories. P P
Advanced Technology and Biotechnology. P P
Manufacturing, compounding, processing or packaging of cosmetics, drugs, perfumes, pharmaceuticals, P P
toiletries, and products resulting from biotechnical and biogenetic research and development.
Manufacturing and assembly of medical, scientific or technical instruments, devices and equipment. P P
Research, development, and related activities. P P
(f) Cultural, entertainment and recreational:
Auditoriums or convention halls. P P
Billiard parlor. P P
Bowling alley. P P
Health clubs and gyms. P P
Libraries and museums. P P
Park and playgrounds. P P
Private clubs and service organizations. P P
Recreational or entertainment establishments, commercial. P P
Theater, legitimate. P P
Theater, indoor. P P
59-C-14.25. Development standards.
The development standards applicable to the Standard
Method and Optional Method of Development are
established in this section. In addition to the requirements
specified in this table, all Optional Method of Development
projects must be consistent with the recommendations of
the applicable master plan or sector plan.
TMX
Standard Optional
59-C-14.25.1. Minimum net lot area required for any development (in square feet):17 18,000
59-C-14.25.2. Maximum Building Coverage (percent of net lot area): 75
59-C-14.25.3. Minimum Public Use Space (percent of net lot area): 1018 2019
59-C-14.25.44. Maximum Building Height (in feet): 28
- If adjoining or directly across the street from land recommended for or developed in a residential zone with a
maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre or less (in feet) 35
59-C-14.25.5. Minimum Setbacks (in feet):
- From an adjacent TMX Zone20 15
- From an adjacent commercial or industrial zone 20
- From an adjacent single family residential zone 25
- From a public right-of-way 10
17 A smaller lot may be approved if the lot is located adjacent to or confronting another lot either classified in or under application for the same zone, or the combined lots are subject
to a single project plan. The minimum area requirement does not prohibit a lot of less than 18,000 square feet for purposes of subdivision or record plat approval.
18 The required standard method public use space may be reduced to 5% if the Planning Board finds that the reduction is necessary to accommodate the construction of MPDU‘s,
including any bonus units, on-site.
19 The required optional method public use space may be reduced or eliminated on-site, if an equivalent amount of public use space is provided off-site in the same transit station
development area within a reasonable time. A payment instead of all or some of the required public use space may be made if approved under Division 59-D-2.
20 If the proposed building or the adjacent building has windows or apertures facing the lot line that provides light, access, or ventilation to a habitable space, the setback shall be 15
feet. If the adjacent building does not have windows or apertures, no setback is required.
TMX
Standard Optional
59-C-14.25.6. Minimum and Maximum Density of Development 21 (floor area ratio) .25 - .522 3.06
12.5% of any density above the maximum of the standard method, as set in the applicable master or sector plan, must
be through the purchase of BLTs or through a contribution to the BLT Land trust, as described in Section 59-C-14.30.
21 The maximum dwelling unit density or residential FAR may be increased in proportion to any MPDU density bonus provided on-site.
22 Master or sector plan recommendations may limit the maximum density within these ranges.
59-C-14.26. Special standards for development retail, residential entrances, office (14) enhance crosswalk areas with
under the TMX zone. lobbies, and restaurants; accessible curb ramps.
(a) Public facilities and amenities. Public
(6) promote pedestrian safety with safety- 59-C-14. 27.Off-street parking. As required under
facilities and amenities are required for
oriented environmental design and Article 59-E.
approval of a standard or optional method
clearly designated crosswalks and 59-C-14.28. Special Standards for Optional
development project.
sidewalks; Method of Development projects.
(b) Design Principles. Site plans submitted for (a) Density and mix of uses. In approving the
(7) include street trees and landscaping on
projects in the TMX zone must follow general mix of uses and the proposed densities, the
all streets;
design principles recommended by the Planning Board must consider the size of the
applicable master or sector plan and design (8) provide continuous, direct and parcel, and the relationship of the existing
guidelines adopted by the Planning Board to convenient connections to transit and proposed building or buildings to its
implement the applicable master or sector stations for pedestrians and bicyclists; surrounding uses. The mix of uses and the
plan. Unless those general principles or (9) locate and screen service and loading proposed densities must substantially
design guidelines recommend otherwise, or areas to reduce visibility from any conform to the recommendations of an
the Planning Board finds that it is infeasible street; approved and adopted master plan or sector
to follow the design principles due to site plan.
(10) for any building other than a one-family
constraints or other reasons, any project
residential building, locate mechanical (b) Building height and setbacks. The maximum
developed in the TMX zone should:
equipment within buildings or within a height permitted for any building and the
(1) use sustainable design principles; mechanical equipment penthouse; minimum building setback requirements
however if mechanical equipment is must be determined during project plan
(2) orient all buildings to streets;
located on a roof or is freestanding, it review. In approving height limits or setback
(3) locate off-street parking to the side, requirements, the Planning Board must
must be effectively screened;
rear, or below grade; consider the size of the lot or parcel, the
(11) design street lighting to avoid an
(4) create a continuous building line to relationship of existing and proposed
adverse impact on surrounding uses,
accentuate open space and building buildings to surrounding uses, the need to
while also providing a sufficient level of
entrances; blank building facades must preserve light and air for the residents of the
illumination for access and security;
be avoided or minimized; development and residents of surrounding
(12) provide tree canopy along each street;
properties, and any other factors relevant to
(5) provide pedestrian-oriented activity at (13) provide street furniture such as
the height or setback of the building. The
street level with uses such as storefront benches, trash receptacles and
proposed building height and the proposed
planters;
setbacks must substantially conform to the
recommendations of an approved and more than 10 percent of the gross floor area or purchase an easement, or if the amount of
adopted master plan or sector plan. 7,500 square feet or construction of a new density to be attributed to BLT easement is
building must comply with the standards of the a fraction of the applicable floor area
(c) Transfer of public use space, density, and
TMX Zone. equivalent, the Planning Board must
mix of uses. The Planning Board may
59-C-14.30. Special regulations for use of a require the applicant to pay the Agricultural
approve the transfer of density, the mix of
Buildable Lot Termination (BLT) Development Land Preservation Fund an amount equal
uses, and the public use space, between
Right. to the average annual market rent for class
parcels classified in the TMX zone in the
(a) 12.5 percent of any floor area above the A office space or multi-family residential
same transit station development area. The
maximum allowed under the standard space in the applicable master or sector
transfer of density must not result in an
method of development, as recommended plan area for the amount of floor area
increase of density or height on parcels that
in the applicable master or sector plan, required to be supported by buildable rights
abut or confront properties recommended
must be supported through the purchase by termination.
for one-family residential development by
the applicant of a BLT or through a 59-C-14.31. Development approval procedures
an approved and adopted master plan or
contribution to the Agricultural Land under the standard and optional method of
sector plan. Any transfer of public use
Preservation Fund under Chapter 2B for development.
space, density, or mix of uses must not
purchase of an easement on real property to (a) In the standard method, APF validity will be
result in a change in the total combined
preserve agricultural land in the County. determined at subdivision or at site plan if
amount of public use space, density, or mix
(b) One BLT must be required for 9,000 square subdivision is not required.
of uses otherwise attributable to the
feet of residential space, and 7,500 square (b) In the optional method, APF validity will be
relevant parcels , and such transfers must
feet of non-residential space for the amount determined at the time of project plan if
be approved as part of a combined project
of floor area supported through the subdivision is not required.
plan for all relevant parcels under Section
purchase of BLTs .
59-D-2 and Section 59-D-3. (c) Under both standard and optional method, if
(c) A BLT must be created, transferred and
subdivision is not required, the applicant
59-C-14.29. Existing buildings and uses. extinguished only by means of a recordable
must record a plat under Sec. 50-35A.
Any lawful structure, building or established use easement in perpetuity approved by the
that existed before the applicable Section Map Planning Board, including appropriate (d) The Planning Board must find that the
Amendment adoption date, is a conforming releases. The BLT easement must proposed development:
structure or use and may be continued, extinguish the right to construct a dwelling (1) satisfies the provisions of this chapter;
structurally altered, repaired, renovated, or unit on each 25 acres in the RDT zone (2) substantially conforms to any numeric
enlarged up to 10 percent of the gross building subject to the easement. limits recommended in the applicable
floor area or 7,500 square feet, whichever is less. (d) If the applicant for optional method of master or sector plan concerning floor
However, any enlargement of the building that is development under the TMX zone cannot area ratio, dwelling units per acre,
building heights, and setbacks; and is in (2) providing flexible development
substantial conformance with the DIVISION 59-C-14. TRANSIT MIXED-USE (TMX) ZONE standards; and
recommendations of the applicable 59-C-14.1. Zone permitted. (3) encouraging designs that produce a
master or sector plan; and The TMX zone is permitted only in a Transit Station desirable relationship among individual
(3) achieves a desirable development Development Area. The Transit Station Mixed-Use buildings, the circulation system, public
compatible with site conditions, zone and its identifying symbol is as follows: spaces, and adjacent areas, and that
surrounding existing development, and TMX-2---Transit Mixed-Use, 2 foster use of non-auto forms of
anticipated future development. S EC . 59-C-14.2. T RANSIT M IXED -U SE (TMX) transportation, including pedestrian,
Z ONE . bicycle, and public transit.
59-C-14.32. Development standards applicable to
59-C-14.21. Description, purpose, and general (b) Encourage land assembly.
the standard and optional method of
requirements (c) Provide a variety of housing opportunities.
development.
59-C-14.211. Description. (d) Promote the effective use of transit facilities.
In making the determination as to the final
All of the references to the TMX zone in Chapter (e) Provide for building lot terminations (BLTs).
density, the Planning Board must consider
59 apply to the TMX-2 zone. The TMX zone must 59-C-14.213. General requirements
whether the proposal:
be recommended in a master or sector plan. The (a) Master plan or sector plan conformance.
(a) substantially conforms to any numeric limits zone permits moderate through intensive mixed- Development under the TMX zone must be
recommended in the applicable master or use development in a Transit Station Development consistent with the recommendations of the
sector plan concerning floor area ratio, Area. The zone establishes densities, land uses, applicable master or sector plan.
dwelling units per acre, building heights, and standards for the standard and optional (b) MPDUs and workforce housing. If residential
and setbacks; and substantially conforms methods of development. uses are included in a development,
with the recommendations in the applicable 59-C-14.212. Purpose. Moderately Priced Dwelling Units must be
approved master or sector plan; The purposes of the TMX zone are to: provided under Chapter 25A, and workforce
(b) preserves environmentally sensitive and (a) Implement the recommendations of housing units must be provided under
priority forest areas, and mitigates approved and adopted master or sector Section 59-A-6.18 and Chapter 25B. The
unavoidable impacts on the natural plans for Transit Station Development Areas maximum residential FAR may be increased
environment; by: in proportion to any MPDU density bonus and
(c) facilitates good transit serviceability and (1) facilitating mixed-use development with workforce housing units provided on-site.
creates a desirable and safe pedestrian a compatible network of Site plan review under section 59-D-3 is
environment; and interconnecting streets, open squares, required.
(d) is compatible with surrounding land uses plazas, and civic and community 59-C-14.214. Off-street parking. Off-street
and promotes harmonious development of oriented uses; parking must satisfy Article 59-E except:
the planning area.]]
(a) the minimum number of parking spaces for (a) Standard Method of Development: The Planning Board, to implement the
every residential unit, without regard to the standard method requires compliance with a applicable master or sector plan.
number of bedrooms in each unit, is 1 space specific set of development standards and
(2) Projects that are subject to subdivision
for every market rate unit and .5 space for permits a range of uses and a density
under Chapter 50 have the option of
every MPDU and workforce housing unit; compatible with these standards. Site Plan
submitting a Division 59-D-2 Project
(b) the minimum number of parking spaces is required under Section 59-D-3. If
Plan. If the applicant chooses not to
required for office development in the streetscaping on the right-of-way
submit a Project Plan, the Planning
Southern Area must be used to determine immediately fronting the development is
Board must find that the proposed
the minimum number of spaces required for needed, then development may only be
subdivision will satisfy the standards of
office development in the South Central Area; approved on the condition that the
59-D-2.42 and 59-D-2.43 in order to
however, for office space under a lease to development will provide that streetscaping.
approve the preliminary plan of
any government agency or entity for a
(b) Optional Method of Development: subdivision.
duration of 20 years or more, the minimum
59-C-14.23. Land uses.
number of spaces required is 1.5 spaces for (1) Under the optional method, greater
No use is allowed except as indicated below:
every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area; densities may be permitted and there
-Permitted Uses. Uses designated by the letter "P"
and are fewer specific standards, but
are permitted, subject to all applicable regulations.
(c) the minimum number of parking spaces additional public facilities and
-Special Exception Uses. Uses designated by the
required for general retail and restaurant use amenities must be provided by the
letters "SE" may be authorized as special
is 4 spaces for every 1,000 square feet of developer. The procedure for the
exceptions under Article 59-G.
gross leasable area, if less than 20 percent approval of an optional method of
of the leasable area is devoted to restaurant development project is under Section
use. 59-D-2. Site plan review is required
59-C-14.215. Location. under Section 59-D-3. Site plans
Land classified in the TMX zone must be located in submitted for optional method projects
a Transit Station Development Area. must be consistent with general design
59-C-14.22. Methods of development. Two principles recommended by the
methods of development are available under the applicable master or sector plan, and
TMX zone. design guidelines adopted by the
TMX L AND U SES
(a) Residential:
Dwellings. P
TMX L AND U SES
Group home, small. P

Group home, large. P
Hotel or motel. P
Housing and related facilities for senior adults or persons with disabilities. P
Life care facility. P
Personal living quarters. P
(b) Transportation, communication, and utilities:
Bus terminal, non-public. P
Parking garages, automobile. P
Public utility buildings, structures, and underground facilities. P
Radio and television broadcasting studio. P
Rooftop mounted antennas and related unmanned equipment building, equipment cabinet, or equipment room. P
Taxicab stand, not including storage while not in use. P
(c) Commercial:
Antique shops, handicrafts or art sales and supplies. P
Appliance store. P
Automobile sales, indoors and outdoors. P
Automobile sales, retail showroom. P
Book store. P
Convenience food and beverage store, without fuel sales. P
Department stores. P
Drug store. P
Eating and drinking establishment, excluding drive-in. P
Florist shop. P
Furniture store, carpet, or related furnishing sales or service. P
Gift shop. P
Grocery store. P
Hardware store. P
Office supply store. P
TMX L AND U SES
Office, general. P
Office, professional including banks and financial institutions (excluding check cashing stores). P
Offices for companies principally engaged in health services, research and development. P
Newsstand. P
Photographic and art supply store. P
Pet sales and supply store. P
Specialty shop. P
(d) Services:
Adult foster care homes. P
Ambulance or rescue squad, public supported. P
Animal boarding place. SE
Art, music, and photographic studios. P
Automobile filling station. P
Automobile rental services, excluding automobile storage and supplies. P
Automobile repair and service. P
Barber and beauty shop. P
Charitable and philanthropic institutions. P
Clinic. P
Child daycare facility.
- Family day care. P
- Group day care. P
- Child day care center. P
Daycare facility for not more than 4 senior adults and persons with disabilities. P
Domiciliary care for no more than 16 senior adults. P
Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up station. P
Duplicating services. P
Educational, private institution. P
Home occupation, no impact. P
Home occupation, registered. P
TMX L AND U SES
Home occupation, major. SE

Hospice care facility. P
Hospitals, veterinary. SE
International public organization. P
Place of worship. P
Publicly owned or publicly operated uses. P
Shoe repair shop. P
Tailoring or dressmaking shop. P
Universities and colleges teaching and research facilities. P
(e) Research and Development and Biotechnology
Laboratories. P
Advanced Technology and Biotechnology. P
Manufacturing, compounding, processing, or packaging of cosmetics, drugs, perfumes, pharmaceuticals, toiletries, and products P
resulting from biotechnical and biogenetic research and development.
Manufacturing and assembly of medical, scientific, or technical instruments, devices, and equipment. P
Research, development, and related activities. P
(f) Cultural, entertainment and recreational:
Auditoriums or convention halls. P
Billiard parlor. P
Bowling alley. P
Health clubs and gyms. P
Libraries and museums. P
Park and playgrounds. P
Private clubs and service organizations. P
Recreational or entertainment establishments, commercial. P
Theater, indoor. P
Theater, legitimate. P
(g) Miscellaneous uses
Accessory buildings and uses. P
59-C-14.24. Development standards.
Standard method and optional method of development projects must satisfy the following development standards.
TMX-2
Standard Optional Special Provisions
59-C-14.241. Minimum net lot area required 18,000 A lot smaller than 18,000 s.f. may be approved if it abuts or confronts another
for any development (in square feet): lot classified in or recommended for TMX zone, and the combined lots are
subject to a single project plan.
59-C-14.242. Maximum Building Coverage 75 Determined at
(percent of net lot area): project plan
59-C-14.243. Minimum Public Use Space 10 20 The required public use space for a standard method project may be reduced
(percent of net lot area): to 5% if the Planning Board finds that the reduction is necessary to
accommodate the construction of MPDU‘s, including any bonus units, on-site.
59-C-14.244. Maximum Building Height (in 42 Determined at See Section 59-C-14.26
feet): project plan
- If adjoining or confronting lot is Determined at
recommended for or in a residential zone 35 project plan
with a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre
or less
59-C-14.245. Minimum Setbacks (in feet): Determined at
project plan
- From an adjacent building on a separate lot 15 Determined at [[No]] A setback is not required for any building if the proposed building [[or
project plan the]] and any building on an abutting lot has no windows or apertures facing
the lot line. The setback must be 15 feet in the optional method if the
proposed building or [[the]] any building on an abutting lot has windows or
apertures facing the lot line that provide light, access, or ventilation to a
habitable space.
- From an adjacent commercial or industrial 20
zone
- From an adjacent single family residential 25 25
zone
- From a public right-of-way 10
TMX-2
Standard Optional Special Provisions
59-C-14.246. Maximum Density of 0.5 2 The maximum residential FAR may be increased in proportion to any MPDU
Development (floor area ratio): density bonus and workforce housing units provided on-site.
59-C-14.246 BLT Requirement: 12.5% of any See Section 59-C-14.28

density above
0.5 FAR
59-C-14.25. Additional provisions for optional (3) Buildings should be sited to (a) authorize a payment instead of all or some of
method of development projects. minimize the impact of shadows the required public facilities and amenities,
(a) In approving an optional method project, the on single family neighborhoods or any required public use space; or
Planning Board must find that the project outside the TMX zone; (b) permit any required public use space to be
meets the requirements of Section 59-D-2. (4) Building heights may be provided off-site in the same Transit Station
The Planning Board must also find, in the adjusted to avoid or minimize Development Area.
context of development in the Transit Station environmental impacts; and 59-C-14.252. Transfer of Density. The Planning
Development Area or on the site of the (5) The project meets all standards Board may approve an optional method of
application, that the project satisfies the and requirements of the TMX development project for two or more TMX-zoned
following criteria: zone. parcels in the same Transit Station Development
Area that are not adjacent to each other, but when
(1) Density and building height
59-C-14.251. Public facilities and amenities or combined, total gross tract area is a minimum of
should generally decrease as
public use space. The presence of certain public 18,000 square feet. A transfer of density may also
the distance from a transit
facilities and amenities is intended to create an be approved when the combined gross tract area
facility increases;
environment capable of supporting the greater is less than 18,000 square feet if it is
(2) Density and building height
densities and intensities of development. The recommended in an approved and adopted
should generally be lower as the
Planning Board may, under Division 59-D-2.31: master plan or sector plan. The project must
distance to single family homes
comply with Section 59-C-6.2355; however, if an
decreases;
approved and adopted master plan or sector plan
recommends open space or recommends that less (c) Development under a preliminary plan space, or for each 7,500 square feet of non-
than the standard method of development density approved before adoption of the applicable residential space. The BLT requirement does
be retained on the site transferring density, then Sectional Map Amendment remains valid, not apply to residential development in areas
the maximum gross square feet of future and construction may proceed subject to subject to the workforce housing program
development on the site transferring density may applicable approvals. A preliminary plan under Section 59-A-6.18 and Chapter 25B.
be reduced below the standard method of approved before adoption of the applicable (b) If the applicant for optional method of
development density consistent with the Sectional Map Amendment may be amended development under the TMX zone cannot
recommendations of the master plan or sector after the adoption of the applicable Sectional purchase an easement, or if the amount of
plan. Any transfer of density must satisfy the Map Amendment under the standards of the density to be attributed to BLT easement is a
approval requirements of Section 59-D-2.42(g). previous zone or under the TMX zone fraction of the applicable floor area
59-C-14.26. Existing buildings and uses. standards. equivalent, the Planning Board must require
(a) Any lawful structure, building, or established the applicant to pay the Agricultural Land
use that existed before the applicable 59-C-14.27. Special regulations for use of a Preservation Fund an amount set annually by
Sectional Map Amendment adoption date is Building Lot Termination (BLT) Development Right. Executive Regulation.
a conforming structure or use, and may be Except for residential development subject to the * * *
continued, structurally altered, repaired, requirement of workforce housing under Section Sec. 3. Article 59-D is amended as follows:
renovated, or enlarged up to 10 percent of 59-A-6.18, the approval of an application for any
ARTICLE 59-D. ZONING DISTRICTS—APPROVAL
the gross building floor area or 7,500 square gross floor area in an optional method of
PROCEDURES.
feet, whichever is less. However, any development project must be subject to the
INTRODUCTION
enlargement of the building that is more than following requirements:
* * *
10 percent of the gross floor area or 7,500 (a) 12.5 percent of any floor area above the
The following table is provided for the convenience
square feet of construction of a new building maximum allowed under the standard
of the public, citing the appropriate sections of
must comply with the standards of the TMX method of development, as recommended in
article 59-C and indicating the types of plans
Zone. the applicable master or sector plan, must be
required in each zone. In the event of any conflict
(b) In the TS-R and TS-M zones, development supported through the purchase by the
between this table and the provisions of article 59-
under a development plan approved before applicant of a BLT easement or through a
C, the latter must govern.
adoption of the applicable Sectional Map contribution to the Agricultural Land
Amendment remains valid, and construction Preservation Fund under Chapter 2B, for
may proceed subject to applicable approvals. purchase of a BLT easement on real property
Any increase in density above the approved to preserve agricultural land in the County.
development plan limit must be subject to One Buildable RDT lot must be extinguished
the standards of the TMX zone. for each 9,000 square feet of residential
Plan Approvals Required
Zone Section Number Development Plan Project Plan Optional Site Plan (Division 59- Diagrammatic Plan
(Division 59-D-1) Method (Division 59-D- D-3) (Division 59-D-4)
2)
* * *
Standard Method
* * *
TMX-2 X
* * *
Optional Method
* * *
TMX-2 X
X*
*Projects that require subdivision plan approval are required to satisfy §59-C-14.23(b)(2).
* * *
Sec. 3. Division 59-D-2 is amended as follows: The Planning Board is authorized to approve TMX-Transit Mixed-Use
* * * development under the optional method of [TOMX-1-Transit Oriented Mixed-Use, 1.0]
Division 59-D-2. Project plan for optional method development procedures described in Section 59- * * *
of development in CBD, TOMX, TMX, AND RMX C-6.2 of the CBD zones, Section 59-C-10 of the [TOMX-1/TDR-Transit Oriented Mixed-
ZONES. RMX [[Zones]] zones, Section 59-C-13 of the Use/Transferable Development Rights, 1.0]
TOMX [[Zones]] zones, Section 59-C-14 of the
Sec. 59-D-2.0. Zones enumerated. TMX zone, and the approval procedure set forth in * * *
this Division, for the following zones:
* * *
Sec. 4. Effective date. This ordinance becomes This is a correct copy of Council action.
effective 20 days after the date of Council ________________________________
adoption. Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council
THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION
8787 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

www.MontgomeryPlanning.org

Germantown Forward Planning Board Draft - February 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Germantown Forward Planning Board Draft - February 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ger

montgomery county planning department

Prepared by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

APPENDIX 1: PLANNING FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3

From the Germantown Master Plan, 1989

As a result, several subdivisions in

Another factor affecting Germantown‘s

These larger political, environmental, economic,

The Comprehensive Growth Policy Study considers

Research & Technology Center (RTC)

2005 Census Update Survey

1 Those of Hispanic orgin may be of any race.

2 Ages 16 and older and employed full-or part-time.

*Insufficient data for reliable estimates.

Montgomery County Public Schools, December 12, 2008

Research & Technology Center (RTC), 2008

Mix of Housing Types in Germantown SFD SFA MF Total

Single-Family Single-Family Multi-Family (Garden

Figure 9: Residential units in the pipeline for Germantown

Approved Units Remaining Units in Pipeline by Type

Figure 10: Home sales by structure type

Median Sales Prices 2005 2006 1st Half of 2007

Germantown County Germantown County Germantown County

New single family attached $138,696 $499,375 $450,000 $526,680 $491,353

New Condos $353,645 $254,900 $391,900 $254,900 $429,500

5 Montgomery County defines workforce incomes as those

1-Bedroom Units 2-Bedroom Units 3-Bedroom Units

Efficiency $844 $33,760 $36,461

Household Size Maximum Income

Figure 17: MPDU income limits for renters, 2007

Figure 18: Germantown-Gaithersburg Market area vacancy rates

Household Maximum Income

Workforce Housing Home Purchase Assistance

70% HOME units – HHs up to 60% AMI $59,400

10% HOME units – HHs up to 80% AMI $79,200

10% HOME units – HHs up to 80% AMI $79,200

Public Housing HHs up to 50% AMI $49,500

25% vouchers – HHs up to 50% AMI $49,500

Home Ownership Programs Household Income Levels Served

American Dream Down Payment Households up to 80% AMI $79,200

3+ person HHs may earn up to 115% AMI $113,850

3+ person HHs may earn up to 115% AMI $113,850

Moderately-Priced Dwelling Units Households up to approximately 60% of AMI $59,400

40% units – HHs up to 60% AMI $59,400

CDBG-Funded Homeowner Rehab Households up to 80% AMI $79,200

closing costs from participating employers. The match is in the

dollar-for-dollar, up to $5,000, toward down payment and Development (DHCD). www.morehouse4less.com.

Comparing Zoning Maximums, Montgomery Village and Churchill

Churchill Housing Details: Existing, approved and master planned*

Market units Percentage MPDUs Percentage Total units Total Percentage

Churchill Housing Details: Adding proposed units to existing units

Proposed Churchill population

The town sector zone is a flexible, mixed use zone

Research & Technology Center (RTC), 2008

Company Address Location Type Jobs Industry Description

15 RTC estimate based on survey of federal facilities in Montgomery County

Research & Technology Center (RTC), 2008

Company Address Location Type Jobs Industry Description

From the Germantown Master Plan, 1989

The Germantown planning area is intended to use

A substantial portion of the planning area lies

Environmental Planning Division, 2008

Use environmental site design and low-