Subject
title
Work Session #1: Discussion and Direction on Planning Commission Recommendations on Zoning Text Amendment TXT2026-00271, the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite and Map Amendment MAP2026-00126, the Comprehensive Zoning Map Amendment; Mayor and Council of Rockville, Applicants
end
Department
CPDS - Zoning Review & Other
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Council discuss and provide direction on the Planning Commission’s recommendations.
Change in Law or Policy
Upon adoption, the draft Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map will significantly modify the laws that govern land use in the city, in fulfillment of the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s zoning text and rezoning recommendations.
Discussion
Project History and Adoption Process
An overview of the project history and information on the adoption process are contained in the staff report for the public hearing on the associated Zoning Text Amendment.
This public hearing is the first of two public hearings on the Comprehensive Map Amendment that the Mayor and Council will hold during the adoption process. The second is scheduled for May 4, 2026. Public hearings on the associated Zoning Text Amendment are scheduled for the same evenings.
Discussion and Direction on Planning Commission Recommendations
Background
This work session is the first in a series of work sessions that the Mayor and Council will hold during the adoption process. During this work session, staff will seek Mayor and Council direction on Planning Commission recommendations.
The brief book includes Planning Commission recommendation memos for the Zoning Text Amendment and Comprehensive Map Amendment (Attachments 1 and 2, respectively). Written public comments are included as attachments to the relevant public hearing items. In addition to the materials provided with this brief book, the following materials can be accessed via the project webpage, engagerockville.com/zoningrewrite <https://engagerockville.com/zoningrewrite>:
• Highlights: Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance
• Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance Table of Contents
• Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance (full text)
• Staff Draft Zoning Map
Additional background and supporting analyses informing Planning Commission recommendations are contained in brief books for the January 14 and 28 and February 4 and 11 Planning Commission meetings, located in the city’s Agenda Center <https://www.rockvillemd.gov/agendacenter>.
Planning Commission Recommendations
The Planning Commission adoption process is explored in more depth in the “Boards and Commissions Review” portion of this staff report (page 9). Pursuant to the current Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission may submit written recommendations to the Mayor and Council on Zoning Text Amendment and Comprehensive Map Amendment applications. On February 25, the Commission voted to adopt formal recommendations on the pending ZTA and CMA applications, addressing a range of topics raised during its public hearings and discussions. Those recommendations are transmitted to the Mayor and Council for consideration as part of the current adoption process.
In nearly all instances, staff concurs with Planning Commission recommendations; however, six items merit additional discussion. These include three items of particular interest to the Mayor and Council, for which additional information was requested; two items that resulted in split 3-3 votes by the Commission; and one recommendation where staff’s position differs from that of the Planning Commission.
• Comprehensive Map Amendment
o Planning Area 10, Montrose and North Farm (Mayor and Council request)
o Planning Area 12, Tower Oaks (Mayor and Council request)
• Article 8: General Development Requirements
o Fencing/Deer Mesh (Mayor and Council request)
• Article 10: Signs
o Electronic message centers (Planning Commission split vote)
• Article 11: Historic Preservation
o Owner consent (Planning Commission split vote)
o Adaptive Reuse of Historic Buildings (staff and Planning Commission differ)
Comprehensive Map Amendment
Planning Area 10, Montrose and North Farm
As recommended by the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Staff Draft CMA proposes rezoning a portion of Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm), including the Rollins Park Apartments and Congressional Towers, to a “new, higher-density residential zone” (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Staff Draft CMA Proposal: Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm)
In response to resident testimony, the Mayor and Council requested additional consideration of the Planning Area 10 rezoning proposal. Staff presented the Planning Commission with an alternative proposal designed to align with Plan recommendations, support economically feasible redevelopment, and incorporate community feedback. The proposal refined the boundaries of the new Residential High Density (RHD) zone and increased the zone’s allowable height and density standard.
Noting the Montrose community’s support, the Planning Commission supported staff’s recommendations, as follows:
• The proposed rezoning as depicted in Figure 2; and
• Revising the RHD zone standards through the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite, as follows:
o Increase the maximum height to 150 feet.
o Increase the maximum density to 100 dwelling units per acre.
Additional information regarding the Planning Commission’s recommendation, along with property owner and community testimony, is included in the Planning Commission’s CMA recommendation memo (Attachment 3).
Figure 2. Planning Commission CMA Recommendation: Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm)
Planning Area 12, Tower Oaks
As recommended by the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Staff Draft CMA proposes rezoning of the 9.75-acre parcel adjacent to Don Mills Court in the New Mark Commons community from R-90 (Single Unit Detached Restricted Residential) to RMD-25 (Residential Medium Density), which allows for a variety of dwelling types at a density up to 25 units per acre and 75 feet in height. In response to resident testimony, the Mayor and Council requested consideration of an alternate proposal for the property.
Additional information regarding the Planning Commission review and testimony received is outlined in the Planning Commission’s CMA recommendation memo (Attachment 3). Following additional testimony, the Planning Commission ultimately recommended the following:
• The proposed rezoning as depicted in Figure 3; and
• Revising the RMD-25 zone density standard through the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite, by adding a footnote as follows:
o If any vehicular access to a property is provided from a secondary residential street that ends in a cul-de-sac on [effective date], then the maximum development density is limited to 10 dwelling units per acre.
Commissioners noted agreement with applying the RMD-25 zone to the property. Commissioner Fulton noted the recommendation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and addresses housing issues and increased density. He also noted that any project that would be proposed on the site would be subject to a full development review. Chair Sun expressed that the Commission’s recommendation is a balanced compromise between the original proposal and the concerns of the nearby community. She also expressed a desire to include an approval finding related to compatibility. (Note: the Planning Commission ultimately recommended adding such a finding to the draft ordinance; this is reflected in the Planning Commission’s recommendation memo on the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite (TXT2026-00271).
Figure 3. Planning Commission CMA Recommendation: Planning Area 12 (Tower Oaks)
Article 8: General Development Requirements
Fencing/Deer Mesh
In response to resident testimony, Mayor and Council directed staff to evaluate potential revisions to the Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance’s residential fencing requirements to address concerns about deer access to private property.
Staff reviewed regulatory approaches used in other jurisdictions. In 2003, Montgomery County adopted a Zoning Text Amendment establishing specific regulations for deer fences. Although the County’s general fence height limit was 6.5 feet, the amendment permitted deer fences up to eight feet in side and rear yards, but not in front yards.
Both the current Zoning Ordinance and the Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance also regulate residential fences by limiting height based on yard location. Fences are permitted up to eight feet in side and rear yards and four feet in front yards. For corner and through lots, yards abutting either street frontage are classified as front yards and are therefore subject to the four-foot height limitation. As a result, many residents have successfully installed deer fences in their rear and side yards. However, preventing deer access to all yards - particularly on corner and through lots, where multiple yards are classified as front yards - remains challenging. The front-yard height restriction has a disproportionate impact on those properties.
Staff identified the following options. Under all options, fences up to eight feet in height, including deer fences, would continue to be permitted in side and rear yards.
Option 1: Retain the prohibition on deer fences in the front yard, except as follows:
• On corner lots and through lots, allow deer fences in the front yard behind the rear façade of the building (the “practical rear yard” of the property).
Option 2 (Staff’s recommendation): Retain the prohibition on deer fences in the front yard, except as follows:
• On corner lots and through lots, allow deer fences in the front yard behind the front façade of the principal dwelling.
Option 3: Allow deer fencing in all yards, including front yards on corner and through lots.
Figure 4. Deer Fence Options (Staff's Recommendation Highlighted)
Staff recommended that Option 2 be considered for incorporation into the Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance for both corner and through lots. This would place those lots on equal footing with interior lots, while maintaining consistency for fence heights in front yards. Staff further recommended that a minimum setback from the public right-of-way and/or an otherwise compliant fence be installed along with the deer fence to reduce the visual impact of the deer fence.
The Planning Commission recommended the following:
• Define “deer fence” as “A fence that is up to 8 feet high and constructed of an open mesh ranging in size from 1.5 x 1.5 inches to 2 x 2.75 inches made of heavyweight plastic or similar material that allows a clear view through the fence and may be constructed with wood, metal, or fiberglass posts.”
• Continue to permit deer fences on all side and rear yards.
• Option 2: Retain the prohibition on deer fences in the front yard, except as follows:
• On corner lots and through lots, allow deer fences in the front yard behind the front façade of the principal dwelling.
Article 10: Signs
Electronic Message Centers
Electronic Message Centers (also known as “EMCs”) are defined in the Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance as “any sign that uses changing lights to form a sign message or messages wherein the sequence of messages and the rate of change is electronically programmed and can be modified by electronic processes.” The current Zoning Ordinance effectively prohibits EMCs. The Staff Draft maintains this prohibition while making it more explicit.
Testimony from the Greater Rockville Chamber of Commerce, the International Sign Association, and several local businesses indicated this prohibition could disadvantage Rockville’s small and mid-sized businesses relative to surrounding jurisdictions where EMCs are permitted. Staff notes that, to date, existing and prospective Rockville businesses have not raised similar concerns outside of the ZOR and CMA process.
The Planning Commission was split 3-3 on this provision. Commissioners Fulton, Pitman, and Salahuddin supported retaining the prohibition as presented in the Staff Draft. Chair Sun and Commissioners Espinosa and Zyontz supported recommending that the Mayor and Council explore regulations adopted in other jurisdictions to allow EMCs.
Staff continues to recommend the provision contained in the Staff Draft. However, should the Mayor and Council wish to pursue regulations that would allow EMCs, staff is prepared to provide regulatory options for consideration at a future meeting.
Article 11: Historic Preservation
Owner Consent
The Staff Draft Zoning Ordinance outlines two paths to recommend designation of a historic property, depending on whether the property owner consents to the designation. If the property owner consents to the designation or is silent on the matter, a simple majority of the approving body would be required. In cases where the owner opposes designation, a unanimous vote would be required.
The Planning Commission was split 3-3 on this provision. Chair Sun and Commissioners Espinosa and Zyontz supported the provision as presented in the Staff Draft; Commissioners Fulton, Pitman, and Salahuddin proposed that if an owner was silent on the designation of their property, a unanimous vote should be required.
The Staff Draft proposal was previously discussed by the Mayor and Council and the Historic District Commission on October 6 and 16, 2025, respectively, and direction from these bodies was incorporated into the Staff Draft. Staff continues to recommend the provision contained in the Staff Draft.
Adaptive Reuse of Historic Buildings
The Planning Commission recommended revising the Staff Draft to allow multi-family uses within the Historic District Overlay on properties with a residential base zone. The Commission’s rationale and specific recommendations are outlined in the Commission’s ZTA recommendation memo (Attachment 1).
Staff do not disagree with this policy in principle and acknowledge that it could introduce additional flexibility for historic properties and create opportunities for additional housing. However, as noted in the Planning Commission’s memorandum, Staff advise that this policy is not anticipated in the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Currently, the Historic District Overlay does not modify the use permissions established by a property’s underlying base zone. Allowing multi-family uses in residential base zones through the Overlay would represent a significant change to use permissions in those zones.
Should the Mayor and Council wish to pursue this policy, staff recommend considering it as part of the next Comprehensive Plan update. Incorporating the policy into a broader planning effort would allow for consideration of multiple strategies, as well as targeted outreach and engagement with historic property owners and affected neighborhoods.
Mayor and Council History
Information related to Mayor and Council history for the project is contained in the staff report for the public hearing on the associated Zoning Text Amendment.
Public Notification and Engagement
Information related to public notification and engagement for the project is contained in the staff report for the public hearing on the associated Zoning Text Amendment.
Boards and Commissions Review
Information related to board and commission review is contained in the staff report for the public hearing on the associated Zoning Text Amendment.
Next Steps
Next steps are contained in the staff report for the public hearing on the associated Zoning Text Amendment.