Skip to Navigation | Skip to Content
|
info This page is no longer updated
» Back to: » Planning home » Research & Technology » Growth Policy » 2009-2011 Growth Policy » 2009-2011 Adequate public facilities guidelines

2009-2011 Adequate Public Facilities Guidelines

The Montgomery County Council adopts a Growth Policy every two years after considering recommendations by the Planning Board. The Growth Policy resolution sets the rules the Planning Board will use to consider subdivisions over the subsequent two-year period. These rules, commonly known as the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, ensure enough school and road capacity to accommodate new development.

Below are the results of FY2010 school and transportation tests, indicating policy area requirements with respect to school and road capacity.

Test Results for School Clusters and PAMR Mitigation

Mid-Cycle Assessment of the FY2010 School Test Effective January 1, 2010-June 30, 2010
Elementary Middle High School
Clusters requiring a school facility payment for residential approval1
Bethesda-Chevy Chase

Bethesda-Chevy Chase

 
Walter Johnson Richard Montgomery  
Richard Montogmery    
Northwest    
Northwood    
Paint Branch    
Quince Orchard    
Rockville    
Seneca Valley    
Wheaton    
Whitman    
Clusters under moratorium for residential approval2
  Clarksburg  

1 School adequacy is determined for each school level, elementary, middle and high. At any level, if projected school enrollment exceeds 105% of projected school capacity then residential development within the affected school cluster will be required to make a School Facility Payment (SFP). The SFP is based on the number of students generated by the proposed development and the cost of additional infrastructure needed to support it, which varies by school type. The above table shows which school clusters require a School Facility Payment and the level at which the payment must be made.

2 If projected enrollment exceeds 120% of projected capacity then the entire school cluster is in moratorium for residential development approvals.

Percentage of trips requiring mitigation by policy area
Aspen Hill 20%
Bethesda/Chevy Chase 30%
Clarksburg 10%
Derwood 20%
Fairland/White Oak 50%
Gaithersburg City 50%
Germantown East 50%
Kensington/Wheaton 10%
Montgomery Village/Airpark 5%
North Bethesda 35%
North Potomac 50%
Olney 10%
Potomac 40%
Rockville City 25%
R&D Village 40%
Silver Spring/Takoma Park 10%
Local area transportation review intersection congestion standards
Critical lane volume Policy area
1350 Rural East, Rural West
1400 Damascus
1425 Clarksburg, Gaithersburg City, Germantown East, Germantown West, Montgomery Village/Airpark
1450 Cloverly, North Potomac, Olney, Potomac, R&D Village
1475 Aspen Hill, Derwood, Fairland/White Oak
1500 Rockville City
1550 North Bethesda
1600 Bethesda/Chevy Chase, Germantown Town Center, Kensington/Wheaton, Silver Spring/Takoma Park
1800 Bethesda CBD, Friendship Heights CBD, Glenmont, Grosvenor, Rockville Town Center, Shady Grove, Silver Spring CBD, Twinbrook, Wheaton CBD, White Flint

Special mitigation standards

Applies in all Metro Station Policy Areas, Germantown Town Center, Kensington, White Oak, Rock Spring Park, and the North Bethesda Road Code Urban Area.

Applications for development within these designated areas may qualify for Special Mitigation Standards if the following conditions are satisfied:

  • at minimum of 50 percent of the floor area must be used for residential development
  • development must use at least 75 percent of the achievable on-site density allowed under chapter 59, sublect to any lower limits imposed in a Master or Sector Plan and applied under Chapter 50
  • development must achieve a minimum enrgy cost savings percentage, using applicable LEED standards of 17.5% for new construction and 10.5% for renovation or offset at least 2.5% of its annual building energy costs on site, using applicable LEED standards.

Development under the Special Mitigation Standards will be required to pay 75% of their trip mitigation payment otherwise required under TP#3 of Resolution 16-1187 to the County Department of Transportation, which must use at least 2/3 of the funds received under this scenario for any transit system which serves the policy area in which the development is located. The remaining 1/3 of the funds must be used for transportation purposes, including but not limited to transit services.

Date of last update: Feburary 22, 2010