According to Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) Master Planner Chad Williams, Greenbelt’s Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone (NCOZ) is “almost near the end of a long, not so strange road.” At a Greenbelt City Council worksession on September 20, Williams and Director of Planning and Community Development Terri Hruby, gave a summary of the status of the NCOZ, primarily the revised standards and the final draft of the Greenbelt Neighborhood Study that were released by M-NCPPC on September 1. This session was in anticipation of the Prince George’s County Council’s review of these measures “for consideration as legislation,” according to Hruby in a staff memo.
Williams, in his initial presentation, said that a NCOZ can provide additional or different design standards that could apply to new development or redevelopment, in areas like density, block sizes, yard depths and building setbacks, among others. Hruby, in a separate interview, described the Greenbelt NCOZ as “needed to protect historic Greenbelt and to provide development standards that would allow additions/expansions within Historic Greenbelt to progress through the county’s permitting process.” According to Williams, the NCOZ is focused on aspects like preserving green and open space and making sure new structures are “appropriate in size, height and scale with existing buildings.”
Said Williams, what a NCOZ cannot do is: delegate approval authority or establish local design review committees; prohibit development; mandate specific development types or business entities; and regulate demolition.
The Greenbelt NCOZ was created to replace the original Residential Planned Community (RPC) Zone which was part of the county’s previous, and long-standing, zoning ordinance. The NCOZ surpasses the RPCZ (which limits only residential density) in that it “allows for close collaboration with communities to calibrate design standards for the needs of a community,” and offers a “more streamlined process and clearly resolves longstanding issues that have worked against the intent of the city and community to preserve the New Deal community,” according to Williams, in a separate interview.
Said Williams, revisions to the NCOZ Neighborhood Study include: added information on prior historic district designation efforts and new dates, corrected names and other clarifications; a definition of Roosevelt Center for the purposes of the study; and updated maps and photographs.
Some of the major NCOZ Draft Development Standards Revisions that were discussed were: a change from minimum land area to minimum percentage of developed land; increased allowable additions/expansions to single-family detached, townhouses, two-family and three-family dwellings from 40 to 60 percent; and reduced height of new multi-family development from 50 to 40 feet; other dwellings reduced from 40 to 30 feet. Commercial or mixed-use buildings reduced from 40 to 30 feet.
The city requested a zero-density cap at Roosevelt Center, both the North and South Forest Preserve and the GHI Woodlands. In response, M-NCPPC has put forth a maximum of eight dwelling units (du) per acre at Roosevelt Center, 2 du/acre at the North Preserve, and 0.2 du/acre at the South Preserve and the GHI Woodlands. Council expressed concern with these provisions in a desire to curb development in those areas.
Regarding the woodland areas, Williams said setting a zero density is close to implementing a “taking,” or a governmental ban on residential development and requiring a constitutional pretext, making it problematic.
Regarding Roosevelt Center, arguments on both sides addressed the idea of the adding of residential units. Councilmember Rodney Roberts said that such an expansion would ruin the uniqueness and enjoyability of the site, citing the numerous residential developments that already exist around the site. Williams said that mixed-use development is the prevailing trend nationwide, with studies showing that commercial-only sites often experience struggles to survive.
Hruby said that city ownership of the surrounding parking provides a measure of protection to the area from further development there as the city “would have to be supportive of a project that requires additional parking and the city has control over Departures.” Roberts was skeptical of relying simply on that provision, with Hruby acknowledging that it was not a perfect protection.
Williams noted that the NCOZ can be amended or changed in the future, either through a text amendment, if there is a wording issue, or through a council bill, regarding a zoning boundary or standards issue.
This plan was presented by M-NCPPC staff and stakeholders to county council on September 28. The council’s Committee of the Whole will be convened at a future date to review it fully. The bill is available to the public at Prince George’s County Council-Reference No. CB-104-2021 (princegeorgescountymd.legistar.com).