REGULAR MEETING OF THE GREENBELT CITY COUNCIL held May 8, 2006.

Mayor Davis called the meeting to order at 8:03 p.m.

ROLL CALL was answered by Councilmembers Konrad E. Herling, Leta M. Mach, Rodney M. Roberts, and Mayor Judith F. Davis. Councilmember Edward V. J. Putens, who had advised that he would be late, arrived at 9:30 p.m.

ALSO PRESENT were Michael P. McLaughlin, City Manager; John F. Shay, Jr., City Solicitor; David E. Moran, Assistant City Manager; and Kathleen Gallagher, City Clerk.

Mayor Davis asked that everyone observe a moment of silence in honor of residents Ann and Edward Karlander and former residents Ruby and Nelson Guidry. She then led the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

Mayor Davis introduced the elected officials who were present to participate in the ACE Student Awards ceremony and the 2006 Legislative Update: State Delegates Anne Healey, Tawanna Gaines, and Justin Ross. Richard Santos represented County Councilmember Douglas J. J. Peters. School Board Member José Morales was also present, and State Senator Paul Pinsky arrived shortly thereafter.

CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Davis asked to remove the minutes of the regular meeting of April 24, 2006, from the consent agenda. It was moved by Mr. Herling and seconded by Ms. Mach that the agenda be approved as amended. The motion passed 4-0.

Council thereby took the following actions:

MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

- Work Session, April 17, 2006
- Work Session, April 19, 2006
- Work Session, April 26, 2006
- Interview, May 1, 2006

Approved as presented.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Arts Advisory Board, Report #06-002 (Contribution/Recognition Group Applications): Council received this report on the consent agenda and agreed to consider it at the Contribution Groups budget work session later in the week.

FUNDING FOR RESURFACING FIRE STATION FRONT RAMP – APPROVAL: Council approved the $5,000 contribution requested from the Greenbelt Volunteer Fire Department & Rescue Squad toward the cost of having NZI resurface the front ramp of the fire station.

PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT – AWARD OF PURCHASE: Council approved contracting with Taylor Sports & Recreation in the amount of $17,725 to do playground upgrade work in Windsor Green in accord with their proposal of March 22, 2006.

APPOINTMENT TO ADVISORY GROUP: Council appointed Ethel M. Dutky to the Advisory Committee on Trees.

REAPPOINTMENTS TO ADVISORY GROUPS: Council appointed Robert Trumbule to a new term on the Advisory Committee on Trees and Marc Siegel to a new term on the Park & Recreation Advisory Board.

RESIGNATIONS FROM ADVISORY GROUP: Council accepted with regret the resignations of Clement Lau and Derrick Lee from the Park & Recreation Advisory Board.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Mr. Herling and seconded by Ms. Mach that the agenda be approved as presented. The motion passed 4-0.

PRESENTATIONS

Advisory Committee on Education (ACE) Awards: Mayor Davis introduced Raymond Peterson, chair of ACE. Dr. Peterson then introduced ACE members Kilolo Ajanaku and Tim Wedig, and he recognized Leta Mach as Council liaison to ACE and Wendy Wexler as staff liaison.

First, the City Council and the Delegation recognized Wayne Davis, Guidance Counselor at Greenbelt Middle School. Mr. Davis was unable to attend the ACE Educator Awards presentation in March.

Dr. Peterson then proceeded with the presentation of ACE’s 12 th Annual Student Awards Program. After describing a number of the programs ACE runs throughout the year and the various gifts the ACE-award students would receive, Dr. Peterson called the award winners forward:

Greenbelt Elementary School: Joshua Ntoko and Erin Weeks
Springhill Lake Elementary School: Owen Browne and Melissa Benjamin
Magnolia Elementary School: Eric Dorsey, Jr., and Chantel Jones
St. Hugh’s School: Ryan Nguyen and Colleen McAndrew
Greenbelt Middle School: Hung Tran and Sierra Simpkins
Eleanor Roosevelt High School: Raheem Shobowale and Shalay D. Ward

Delegate Healey then presented a Maryland State Delegate Award to Eleanor Roosevelt High School student Oliver Ventura.

Legislative Wrap-Up – 22 nd District Delegation: Senator Pinsky gave an overview of this year’s session, saying this session had not been as productive as some years, but that some significant bills had been passed, including a compromise bill on the growth of municipalities and annexation, the reprogramming of the funding for the Springhill Lake Recreation Center to the refurbishing of the Community Center windows, early state voting, enhancement of the state teachers’ retirement system, funding for stem cell research, and the Healthy Air Act. Mayor Davis thanked the delegation for overriding vetoes by the governor on the minimum wage and the “Wal-Mart” health insurance bills. She also thanked them for achieving the successful reprogramming of the money to be used for the windows.

Delegate Healey noted that there were many other overrides of vetoes, including 17 at the beginning of the session and another three at the end. She said the governor’s refusal to sign the early voting bill had created a tense situation. Delegate Gaines cited the restoration of the Highway User fees, as well as funding for both Doctors and Prince George’s hospitals. Delegate Ross also mentioned funding for scholarships for veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraqi conflicts and funding for Youth Services Bureaus. The Mayor again thanked the delegation, and she also thanked Mr. Moran for his work with the delegation on legislation.

Sheldon Goldberg, chair of the Greenbelt East Advisory Committee, encouraged the delegation to work for legislation to permit electricity aggregation by municipalities, especially in the face of the large increases coming up this summer. Delegate Healey agreed, adding that all of the delegation had co-sponsored bills on this topic over the last few years.

PETITIONS AND REQUESTS: None presented. A resident who had planned to speak to Council regarding practices at Glen Oaks Apartments in the process of condominium conversion had e-mailed the Mayor with her concerns instead. Mr. Putens asked if the City was monitoring the situation. Mr. McLaughlin said, yes, but only where the City had a role to play: for example, with the complaints about water being turned off. The Mayor asked that there continue to be follow-up by City inspectors in any appropriate areas.

MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

Regular Meeting of April 24, 2006: The Mayor corrected a vote to show that it was “4-1” rather than “4-0,” with Mr. Roberts voting against. With that correction, it was moved by Mr. Putens and seconded by Mr. Herling that this set of minutes be approved. The motion carried 5-0.

Executive Session of April 26, 2006: Mr. Roberts moved that the minutes of the executive session of the City Council held Wednesday, April 26, 2006, be approved as presented. He further requested that the minutes of this meeting reflect that the Council met in executive session at 10:45 p.m. in the Multipurpose Room of the Community Center. Council held this closed meeting in accordance with Section 10-508 (a) (9) of the State Government Article of the Annotated Code of Public General Laws of Maryland to consider matters related to collective bargaining negotiations. Ms. Mach seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL:
Mr. Herling - yes
Ms. Mach - yes
Mr. Putens - yes
Mr. Roberts - yes
Mayor Davis - yes

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

The following items and events were commented on:

Mr. McLaughlin: successful attendance at last Saturday’s Pet Expo, Celebration of Spring, and Cinco de Mayo; the annual Public Works plant sale at Roosevelt Center this coming Saturday at 9 a.m.

Ms. Mach: the ACE Literary Showcase, which she hosted; Cinco de Mayo and Artful Afternoon.

Mr. Herling: development of a Greenbelt multicultural festival, for which volunteers are sought.

Mayor Davis: photos taken by Derek Thompson of the grading issue at the new post office; the possibility of meeting with county social services representatives on homeless services, in light of their recently receiving substantial funding for chronic homeless programs; a ribbon-cutting ceremony for Educational Systems Federal Credit Union, which recently moved to the Greenbelt’s Maryland Trade Center; the ACE Literary Showcase, Pet Expo, and Cinco de Mayo.

LEGISLATION: None.

SPRINGHILL LAKE PRELIMINARY PLAN OF SUBDIVISION – BRIEFING: Mayor Davis read the agenda comments and noted that she had recently spoken with Bea Tignor, chair of the School Board, who confirmed that the board had still taken no action or position. Terri Hruby, Assistant Director, Planning, explained that the Preliminary Plan of Subdivision (PPS) would be placed on the City Council’s May 22 agenda, since it would be on the County Planning Board’s May 25 agenda. She noted that the City had already approved the Conceptual Site Plan (CSP). Referring to the staff memo included in Council’s packet, she said that while progress had been made on many issues, some major gaps still existed.

Ms. Hruby said the question of public dedication of roads had not been resolved. She said staff had determined that all but three of the roads were suitable for public dedication. The concern had been that the high level of landscaping intended for the roadways would carry too high a price tag for the City to maintain, in addition to maintaining the roads. The owner, AIMCO, had subsequently agreed to take over all the costs of maintaining the landscaping. Mayor Davis said she was very pleased at their willingness to do that but was concerned about the likelihood of long-term compliance and enforcement. She asked how the commitment would be guaranteed, especially if AIMCO sold its property and the City had to deal with a new owner and possibly a number of homeowner or condo associations. Mr. Shay said this would require some thought but that probably the best approach would be a covenant that would run with the land and thus be enforceable on whoever came to own the properties. Mr. Putens said he shared the Mayor’s concern, since oftentimes, when a few years have passed, homeowner associations are unaware of the requirements and press the City to take over maintenance responsibilities they say they cannot afford. He said they would question why, when they are paying taxes, they should also have to pay out-of-pocket to maintain landscaping on public streets. Mr. Shay allowed that there can always be problems when the current players move on. Mr. Roberts asked how much it was going to cost the City to maintain the streets themselves. Ms. Hruby said she did not have this information with her but could supply it later. Discussion continued on the potential difficulties of having to deal with landscaping covenants with a multiplicity of ownership groups. Ms. Hruby noted that an advantage to having more public streets in Springhill Lake would be the greater ease of providing for public transportation.

Regarding environmental impacts, Ms. Hruby said the owner has submitted 21 variation requests, about half of which relate to restoration areas. She added that because there are already many existing environmental impacts on this property, the goal staff is working toward with AIMCO is to end up with no more impacts than currently exist and, if possible, fewer. Mayor Davis asked Ms. Hruby to provide color reductions of the illustrations she was displaying of the roads and the environmental impacts if possible. Mayor Davis asked about forest mitigation. Ms. Hruby said the tree conservation plan was approved conceptually as part of the CSP. She said that because of the in-fill nature of the project, there is not adequate qualified land available for mitigation on site. Initially, AIMCO had proposed to meet the requirement through a combination of off-site mitigation and fee-in-lieu, but both the City and the county rejected fee-in-lieu. The result is that what is now anticipated is 22 acres of off-site mitigation and about four acres of preservation and reforestation, with 3.1 acres to be cleared of the existing eight acres of forested area that remain on the site. Ms. Hruby added that the current plan has about 80 acres of green space, which is an increase of a little more than five acres from the CSP.

One area of environmental impact still under discussion is the number of stream-crossings by roads for access to the tower buildings.

Mr. Herling expressed concern about how many significant gaps and questions still remained on the PPS, given the need for Council to act on it in two weeks. He asked what would happen if Council did not have a clear recommendation by then. Ms. Hruby said that since the County Planning Board was required to act, there was no leeway but that staff fully expected to have a formal recommendation for the Advisory Planning Board next week and a recommendation and any requirements for conditions to Council in time for the next meeting.

The Mayor asked about the county’s police and fire staffing criterion and asked if this plan could go forward if that were still an issue. Ms. Hruby said it would go forward but it would not be approved. She said she believed fire department staffing had been resolved.

Regarding recreational facilities, Ms. Hruby said there were no ball fields, but there was a substantial recreation package proposed, valued at about $3.8 million, including a new 20,000 square-foot City recreation center on the current site, which would include a competition-sized gym. There is also the two-acre public open field area that can be used for pick-up games. The City has requested dedication of that space, but AIMCO wants only to lease it to the City. Also included is a $1.8 million contribution toward the City’s capital project needs elsewhere, e.g., Northway Fields and Buddy Attick Park. Ms. Hruby provided further information on swimming pools, ball courts, pocket parks, and the trail system to be provided. Mayor Davis asked for clarification on what facilities would be “public” in terms of residents of other parts of the City: for example, could the Swim Team use the Olympic-sized pool? Ms. Hruby said, no, under the present plan, it would be limited to residents of Springhill Lake.

Mr. Roberts asked if he was not correct in remembering that provision of three full-sized ball fields was a condition of the City’s approval of the CSP and, if so, why the City would want to negotiate that condition away. He said he believed one of the reasons the existing Springhill Lake apartments have failed is that historically there has been a serious lack of adequate recreational facilities in Greenbelt West. He said he was “disgusted” that the staff would negotiate away a condition that has always been attached to the approval. He said it was ridiculous to think that the people who would live in Greenbelt West would have to come to other parts of town for ball fields and that the City now had “one chance to get this right” and see that adequate facilities were built in to the community. He said Council’s agreement to allow somewhat higher density was for the purpose of providing open space for fields. Now, however, the density was doubled, and not a single field was being provided. He said it was not only the residents of Greenbelt West who would suffer as a result of this lack but the whole City. He said he now understood why staff was so interested in lighting ball fields at Schrom Hills Park and using the Sunrise Property for ball fields. Mayor Davis, Mr. Putens, and Ms. Mach began to object, but Mr. Roberts held the floor. He said he was sorry if anyone thought he was being too hard on AIMCO but that this was a serious issue and that the project would impact the entire community and all the City’s resources. He said it was Council’s responsibility to get what the City needs for its residents and that the time was past for being nice about it.

Mayor Davis said she understood that Mr. Roberts was frustrated about aspects of the plan, as was she, but that she strongly objected to his implying that the staff was somehow conspiring with the developer to do something that would damage the City. She stressed that it is the Council, not the staff, that makes the decisions. She asked that he express his frustration with the plan without taking it out on the staff. Mr. Roberts replied that Council had in fact already made the decision to qualify its prior approval with the condition that ball fields be provided and that it was incumbent on staff to work within the parameters of that decision. He said, “I don’t want to have to fight about it every time it comes back to Council.” He said once the Council had made a decision, the staff should stand by that decision.

Mr. McLaughlin said he appreciated the Mayor’s comments but had to take exception to what he understood Mr. Roberts to have said. He said staff cannot and does not attempt to negotiate “done deals.” He said Mr. Roberts has previously suggested on this project that the staff had negotiated a done deal. He said it is not within the staff’s power to make the developer accept Council’s position; rather, what the staff does is to go as far as possible in following Council’s direction as a goal but that ultimately the project must return to Council for decision.

Mr. Putens said he was responsible for encouraging redevelopment rather than renovation of Springhill Lake. He said he had supported increased density and increased building height as a way to get more open space but that the plan included too much density and building height and too little open space. He said he agreed with the Mayor and Mr. McLaughlin that the staff was acting appropriately but that he had to agree with Mr. Robert’s critique of the plan. He said he could not support it and that he agreed with Mr. Roberts that its shortcomings were attributable to greed on AIMCO’s part.

Mayor Davis asked what building height was currently being discussed. Ms. Hruby said 15-18 stories and that they would be requesting a further increase under the Detailed Site Plan. She said staff had specified that any request to go higher should be justified by a clear quantification of increased open space so that the benefits could be determined. Mayor Davis said she would not support that, and she pointed out that the original plan included two high-rise buildings of a maximum of 12 stories. Ms. Hruby said now there are three buildings of 18 stories and another two or three of 15 stories. The Mayor said she thought these buildings would be far too high and that they would impinge on the view of existing residents without increasing the open space.

Mr. Herling said he had not opposed the lack of ball fields in the Greenbelt Station plans because it was his understanding that these facilities would be provided as part of Springhill Lake and that transportation between the two developments would make them accessible. He said he agreed that the recreational facilities were inadequate.

Mr. Putens asked to see a comparison of existing open space and numbers of housing units at Springhill Lake and those proposed. Ms. Hruby said she did not have that but could ask AIMCO to provide it.

Mayor Davis commented that on the positive side, she did like the greater mixture of the housing types.

Regarding the schools issue, Mr. Roberts asked if the plan was still “short an elementary school.” Ms. Hruby said it was. She said staff’s understanding was that the only commitment being offered by AIMCO was to pay the $20 million surcharge fee up front for the 2,900 new housing units. She said they had been told that staff believed this amount undervalued the existing land and loss of the school seats. There was discussion that the total compensation for the loss of the existing school and provision for the new housing units was more on the order of $60 million. Mayor Davis said that was what the School Board was working with and that the City could express its opinion but that ultimately the decision was the School Board’s. Ms. Mach favored expressing a strong stand. She said at least another elementary school was needed and that the Advisory Committee on Education (ACE) was also very concerned. Mr. Putens asked whether Greenbelt Station did not also have some responsibility. Ms. Mach said, yes, but that Greenbelt Station had already paid its surcharge fee up front. Raymond Peterson expressed ACE’s concern with inadequate capacity, and he added that the surcharge goes to the county school system but not necessarily for use within Greenbelt.

André Gingles, the attorney representing AIMCO, said they had heard Council’s comments and would highlight a couple of items but would otherwise wait to see the staff recommendation and conditions. He said the plan as presented is essentially the same as in the CSP. He said they did increase building height in response to comments made on the CSP to create additional green space. He said what they have done is consistent with what they were asked to do.

Regarding the schools, he said the requirement is that by the time they draw their first building permit they are required either to pay the $20 million up front, in which case the money will be spent on schools in Greenbelt, or to pay it to the county over time, in which case it will not be earmarked for Greenbelt but will go into the schools’ general fund.

Regarding recreation, he said there are no ball fields on the approved CSP. Rather, they have developed a package they believe will best serve the likely population of Greenbelt West. He said they are not trying to move away from the CSP; they are still working with that.

Mr. Roberts asked for clarification on whether the CSP as approved by the county kept the City’s requirement for the ball fields. Ms. Hruby said she would read out the exact language from the County Planning Board’s adopted CSP approval so there would be no misunderstanding:

The preliminary plan shall address mandatory parkland dedication requirements. At a minimum, mandatory dedication shall include a 20,000 square-foot recreation center with a competition-sized gym, three competition-sized and -equipped ball fields and on-site private recreation facilities sufficient in number and variety and location to service the needs of the future population of Springhill Lake. Alternatively, the Planning Board may require the applicant to provide monetary contributions, land, or a combination thereof to satisfy such requirements if requested by the City of Greenbelt.

Mr. Roberts asked how that was compatible with Mr. Gingles’ statement that the approved CSP does not require ball fields. Mr. Gingles clarified that what he meant was that there are no ball fields included on the drawing that comprises the CSP. He said they do not dispute the condition that was included. He said they have consistently maintained all along, however, that it would be very difficult to put ball fields on the site. He added that the City staff had just as consistently continued to remind them that at least some of the Councilmembers were concerned about it. He said it is an urban design. They did not think that multiple competition-sized fields were consistent with the type of development they were attempting to create. The open two-acre space that had been added, which could be used for various informal purposes, was more appropriate. He said they had looked at various options for fields but none that seemed acceptable. Mr. Roberts said it was a requirement. Mr. Gingles said development is a process that evolves, and they have done the best they could. He said they think their recreation package is a rich one and that although it does not include the ball fields, it includes many other things they expect residents to want. Mr. Roberts said he thought it was a failure of urban design not to include adequate open and recreational space. He said Greenbelt recognized this when it was established and has always had a higher standard on including the things that have been missing in urban life. He said, “We only have one chance to get this right.”

Mayor Davis said it would be enlightening to hear what alternatives AIMCO had considered for the ball fields and why they had concluded there was no place to put a ball field. Mr. Gingles said they had looked at alternatives internally, and he thought that when they had concluded they could not meet the “competition-sized” criterion they did not pursue it. The Mayor asked him to share some of that information with staff. Ms. Mach pursued the possibility of a smaller field for younger players. Mr. Gingles said they thought doing that in conjunction with the schools made more sense.

Mayor Davis thanked everyone and said the matter would return on Council’s next agenda for action.

2005 ELECTION QUESTIONNAIRE – BRIEFING: The Mayor read the agenda comments. Mr. Moran gave a slide presentation on the results of the questionnaire distributed at the last election. He said the response rate was down to only 35% of those voting but that it would take at least one more election to determine if this was a trend or not, since there was variation from year to year. Mayor Davis suggested that if the questionnaire could be filled out and returned on line, some residents might be more likely to do it. Mr. Herling asked what else might be contributing to the lower response. Mr. Moran said the fact that the questionnaire had gotten longer and longer over the years might be a contributing factor. After discussion of other items, Mayor Davis said she was sure staff would be looking at the data and the open-ended responses in detail. Council thanked Mr. Moran for the briefing.

MEETINGS: Council reviewed the meeting schedule. Ms. Mach said she could attend the meeting in Annapolis on May 16 at which the community center windows bill is expected to be signed.

ADJOURNMENT: A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Ms. Mach and seconded by Mr. Putens. The motion carried 5-0. The Mayor adjourned the regular meeting of May 8, 2006, at 12:10 a.m. on Tuesday, May 9, 2006.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathleen Gallagher
City Clerk

"I hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct report of the regular meeting of the City Council of Greenbelt, Maryland, held May 8, 2006. @

Judith F. Davis
Mayor

City of Greenbelt, Maryland
City Offices, 25 Crescent Road, Greenbelt, MD 20770
Phone: 301-474-8000 FAX: 301-441-8248