Comparison of Development Options in Montpelier Hills | |||||
February 26, 2005 | DRAFT WORKSHEET -- ALL ENTRIES ARE SUBJECT TO REVISION | ||||
Options -------> | Mid-Rise Construction | Town House Construction | Rezoning to Detached Single-Family. No near-term construction | No Build | |
Outcome if Option Pursued | Outcome if Option Pursued | Outcome if Option Pursued | Outcome if Option Pursued | ||
Most Favorable (Least Unfavorable) Outcome | County approves about 300 Mid-Rise condominium units (not
lease/rental) to be built by Bermans in cooperation with MH community. MH may get County to prevent further development on remaining land. |
County approval to build Townhouses vice Mid-Rises as currently
planned. 258 or fewer townhouse units would be built by Bermans in cooperation with MH community No more construction on remaining parcels. |
Participation in the Master Plan Review process results in the
County Council rezoning the parcels from Multi-Family to Single-Family
Detached. No Houses would be built soon because Bermans say they won't build Single Family Homes now nor sell the land to other builders of Single-Family Homes at this time. In future Bermans or another builder may or may not build Single Family Detached homes. Some entries below marked "(When built)" apply only if and when Single-Family homes actually may be built on those parcels at some later time. |
At this time there appears to be no basis in law to prevent any construction ever on these undeveloped land parcels. The Bermans have a legally defensible expectation to build something someday on the land they own in MH as long as it meets county law for development and construction, and absent any overriding public interest justifying seizure of the land by the state. | |
Other Possible Outcomes | Bermans might seek and get county approval to build more Mid-rise or High-rise units later on remaining land. | Attempt
to get County approval to build Townhouses might fail. Then Bermans are expected to try to build ~300 Mid-Rise units now and possibly more Mid-Rise or High-Rise units later on remaining land. |
Attempt to rezone land to Single-Family Detached fails. Parcels remain zoned for Mid-Rise or parcels get rezoned for Single Family, Townhouse, but with less MH HOA influence over plan details. |
Efforts to prevent any construction fail. Bermans build ~300 Mid-Rise units now and possibly more Mid-Rise or High-Rise units later. |
|
Units might end up being lease/rent vice ownership condo. | Units owned, with some sub-letting. | (When built) Ownership units. Some sub-letting | |||
County might approve a Berman plan that is unacceptable to MH | County might approve a Berman plan that is unacceptable to MH | Zoning may be changed back to higher density by future County Councils. | |||
County might not approve or might delay approval of a plan because it is unacceptable to MH | County might not approve or might delay approval of a plan because it is unacceptable to MH | ||||
County might not approve any plan or delay approval for some other reason | County might not approve any plan or delay approval for some other reason | ||||
Actions with Bermans | MH HOA negotiates with Bermans on details for the number, kind,
location and quality of Mid-Rise units, associated land use, amenities for
the Mid-Rise properties, amenities for existing MH properties, nearby public
improvements outside MH, etc. |
MH HOA Negotiates with Bermans on details for the number, kind, location and quality of Townhouses, associated land use, amenities for the new Townhouse properties, amenities existing MH properties, nearby public improvements outside MH, etc. | Bermans would oppose. | Bermans would oppose. | |
Actions with County | MH
HOA participates in County approval process to express concerns/concurrence
on plans for ~300 or fewer new Mid-Rise units now (no new Mid-Rises or
High-Rises later) § Sub-division § MH CDP modification § Detailed Site Plan (Specific Development Plan). |
MH
HOA participates in County approval process to express concerns/concurrence
on plans for ~258 or fewer Townhouse units. § Sub-division § MH CDP modification § Detailed Site Plan (Specific Development Plan). |
Participate in County Master Plan Review seeking rezoning of undeveloped parcels from Multi-Family to Single Family | Participate in County Master Plan Review, but without a viable rationale for preventing construction on the undeveloped parcels in MH. | |
MH HOA asks county to update MH CDP studies (environmental, traffic, etc) | MH HOA asks county to update MH CDP studies (environmental, traffic, etc) | (When built) Ask county to update MH CDP studies (environmental, traffic, etc) | |||
MH HOA monitors County and Bermans actions and MH express concerns/concurrence to county regarding approvals or waivers | MH HOA monitors County and Bermans actions and MH express concerns/concurrence to county regarding approvals or waivers | (When built) Monitor County and Bermans actions and MH express concerns/concurrence to county regarding approvals or waivers ( | |||
MH HOA concurs in County release of Bond money back to Bermans only after all construction is satisfactorily completed | MH HOA concur in County release of Bond money back to Bermans only after all construction is satisfactorily completed | (When built) MH HOA concurs in County release of Bond money back to Bermans only after all construction is satisfactorily completed. | |||
MH HOA participates in the County Sub-Region 1 Master Plan Review regarding zoning in MH compatible with Mid-Rises | MH HOA participates in the County Sub-Region 1 Master Plan Review regarding zoning in MH compatible with Townhouses | MH HOA participates in the County Sub-Region 1 Master Plan Review to get rezoning from Multi-Family to Single Family | |||
MH HOA will avail ourselves of all our residents' legal rights throughout all planning and construction activities. This includes ensuring that Adequate Public Facilities are provided by the developer for Schools, Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services, public infrastructure (sewer, roads, etc) before any construction is permitted, as required by county law, such as CB-089-2004. | MH HOA will avail ourselves of all our residents' legal rights throughout all planning and construction activities. This includes ensuring that Adequate Public Facilities are provided by the developer for Schools, Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services, public infrastructure (sewer, roads, etc) before any construction is permitted, as required by county law, such as CB-089-2004. | (When Built) MH HOA will avail ourselves of all our residents' legal rights throughout all planning and construction activities. This includes ensuring that Adequate Public Facilities are provided by the developer for Schools, Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services, public infrastructure (sewer, roads, etc) before any construction is permitted, as required by county law, such as CB-089-2004. | |||
Other Actions | MH HOA coordinates with other stakeholder communities and organizations | MH HOA coordinates with other stakeholder communities and organizations, to get County approval to build townhouses | MH HOA coordinates with other stakeholder communities and organizations, who may also support rezoning from Multi-Family to Single Family | MH HOA coordinates with other stakeholder communities and organizations | |
Homeowners Costs | Legal counsel costs and frequent community mailing expenses to seek County approval of Mid-Rises, even with MH HOA support, because this option may be opposed by other stakeholder communities and organizations | Legal counsel costs and frequent community mailing expenses to seek County approval of Townhouses, even with MH HOA support, because this option may be opposed by other stakeholder communities and organizations | Even more legal counsel costs and community mailing expenses than for Mid-Rise or Townhouses to seek County rezoning from Multi-Family to Single-Family, in face of expected Berman opposition. | Highest potential legal counsel, community mailing expenses, and possible court costs, in the face of expected Berman opposition, with no real prospect of success. | |
Homeowners Time | A few hours each month reading HOA mailings and giving feedback on development details and at approval stages. More time for homeowners to demonstrate community support en mass at County proceedings in Upper Marlboro | A few hours each month reading HOA mailings and giving feedback on development details and at approval stages. More time for homeowners to demonstrate community support en mass at County proceedings in Upper Marlboro | Even more hours each month reading HOA mailings and giving feedback on HOA efforts to rezone parcels to Single-Family . More time for homeowners to demonstrate community support en mass at County proceedings in Upper Marlboro | A few hours each month reading HOA mailings and giving feedback on HOA efforts. Much more time than any other option for homeowners to demonstrate community support en mass at County proceedings in Upper Marlboro. | |
Increased Population | Most new residents (~ 780 at 2.6/unit per county) for ~300 units | A few less residents (~697 at 2.7/unit per county) for ~258 units or less | Least new people (~313 at 3.13/unit per U.S. census) for 100 units or less | not applicable | |
Impact on Police, Fire, Emergency Medical Services | Being studied. Construction can not begin until Police, Fire and EMS achieve response times of 10-minutes for emergencies and 25 minutes for non-emergency service calls per CB-089-2004 | Being studied. Construction can not begin until Police, Fire and EMS achieve response times of 10-minutes for emergencies and 25 minutes for non-emergency service calls per CB-089-2004 | Being studied. (When built) Construction could not begin until Police, Fire and EMS achieve response times of 10-minutes for emergencies and 25 minutes for non-emergency service calls per CB-089-2004 | not applicable | |
Traffic | Most new residents (~780) Will have the most impact on traffic | Many new residents (~697) Will impact traffic | (When built) Fewest new residents (~313) Would impact traffic less than other options, but still significant | not applicable | |
More Montpelier E.S.. School Pupils | Most new pupils (~ 75) at .24/unit (per county) | Fewer new pupils (~ 62 or less) at .24/unit (per county) | Least new pupils (~ 24 or less) at .24/unit per (county) | not applicable | |
Impact on Montpelier Elementary School (MES) | ~63 new pupils over capacity (713). School may not have room to build extra classrooms and related facilities. Some families whose children would normally attend MES now or in the future may have to go to more distant elementary schools, depriving them of a neighborhood school. | ~50 or less new pupils over capacity (713). School may not have room to build extra classrooms and related facilities. Some families whose children would normally attend MES now or in the future may have to go to more distant elementary schools, depriving them of a neighborhood school. | (When built) ~13 pupils or less over capacity. School may not have room to build extra classrooms and related facilities. Some families whose children would normally attend MES now or in the future may have to go to more distant elementary schools, depriving them of a neighborhood school. | not applicable | |
Adequate School Facilities Surcharge to Builders ($12,000 + inflation index per unit) paid to School District not to MES | Exceeds 105% capacity; triggers payment of surcharge. The money may not go to MES. Does not include other population increase trends. | Exceeds 105% capacity; triggers payment of surcharge. The money may not go to MES. Does not include other population increase trends. | (When built) Would bring MES to 102% over capacity, Would not trigger surcharge payment because it is not over 105%. Does not include other population increase trends. | not applicable | |
Membership of Homeowners & Recreation Associations | We have a choice to put new units in the current HOA and Rec Associations or separate HOA/Rec associations. PROs & CONs being studied | We have a choice to put new units in the current HOA and Rec Association or separate HOA/Rec associations. PROs & CONs being studied | (When built) We have a choice to put new units in the current HOA and Rec Association or separate HOA/Rec associations. PROs & CONs being studied | ||
Unit Design & Materials | Unknown | Will be Brick | unknown | not applicable | |
Set Backs | More room for set backs | Less room for set backs | Much less room for set backs | not applicable | |
Open Space | More open space | Less open space | Much less open space | not applicable | |
Green Space | More green space | Less green space | Much less green space | not applicable |