A. Application and fee.
1. The subdivider must file the preliminary plan with the Board, together with the completed application form, supporting information, and payment of the required fee.
2. The subdivider must own the property or be authorized by the owner to file the application.
3. If property is owned or controlled by the State, Montgomery County, or another political subdivision, government entity or agency, or WMATA, the subdivider must obtain authorization from the government entity, agency or WMATA to include the property as part of the subdivision.
B. The drawing. The subdivider must submit a preliminary plan drawing in a form required by regulations of the Board. Details and information must include:
1. scaled drawing of a maximum of 100 feet to the inch, or as specified by the Director;
2. title block information;
3. certificate of an engineer or land surveyor to affirm the accuracy of boundary lines, topographic data, and other engineering or survey data, and to certify that the subdivision plans and supporting documents were prepared in a manner that satisfies all submission requirements and applicable agency standards, policies, and procedures;
4. locations and names of abutting and confronting subdivisions with lot, block, and record plat number of subdivided land, and deed references for unplatted land;
5. existing scenic easements, scenic vistas designated by the Rustic Roads Plan, or designated historic resources;
6. vicinity location map; and
7. graphic representation of the proposed subdivision, including:
a. bearings referenced to the Maryland Coordinate System, except that an application filed to correct an approved preliminary plan may be referenced to the plat meridian used on the original approved preliminary plan or the record plat;
b. lot and block layout;
c. all roads labeled as public or private with construction details. The subdivider must show the applicable Road Design and Construction Code design standards or typical sections for the proposed roads and must list any proposed modifications;
d. location of existing and proposed utilities;
e. existing topography with contour intervals of 5 feet or less;
f. location and width of existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks, shared-use paths and on-road bicycle lanes and connections to existing off-site facilities;
g. sites for public uses and open spaces;
h. location, type, and width of all existing and proposed rights-of-way and easements, including roads, slopes, paths, utilities, on- and off-site storm drainage, and other improvements;
i. the proposed use of all lots on the preliminary plan and the scaled dimensions and approximate area of each use;
j. lines showing the limits of each zone, if the property is located in more than one zone;
k. all existing topography, structures, and paving on adjoining properties within 100 feet; and
l. location of any burial sites of which the applicant has actual notice or constructive notice or that is included in the Montgomery County Cemetery Inventory.
C. Supporting information.
1. An approved Natural Resources Inventory/Forest Stand Delineation.
2. A preliminary forest conservation plan or forest conservation exemption.
3. Verification from the County and other applicable agencies showing payment of any required fees in connection with the County’s review process.
4. Concept road grade and profile. For a public road, an engineer or a land surveyor must prepare conceptual road grade and profile plans under the design criteria approved by the Department of Transportation and indicate the percentage of tangent grades, lengths of crest and sag, vertical curves and elevations, and elevations of all intersecting roads. The plan must indicate the direction of water flow. Where the topography makes the determination of the adequacy of the road grades difficult, the Director may require additional supporting information.
5. Storm drainage capacity and impact analysis. The concept road grade plan must be supported by a preliminary storm drain study prepared under the drainage design criteria of the transportation or permitting agency with jurisdiction over the road.
6. Sight distance evaluation for all driveways that will serve new development and road intersections prepared under the criteria of the applicable State or County transportation agency.
7. Hydraulic Planning Analysis. For lots located in areas where the subdivider proposes connection to public water and sewer facilities, the subdivider must submit verification from WSSC that the subdivider has applied for a Hydraulic Planning Analysis.
8. Wells and septic systems. For lots located in areas where the subdivider proposes the installation of individual wells and septic systems, the preliminary plan must also show:
a. the proposed locations of water wells for each lot and existing wells on the property and within 100 feet of the property;
b. a circular area with a radius of 100 feet around each well to denote clear space in which no final sewage system is to be located;
c. the “usable area” for sewage disposal that satisfies the Executive Regulations for on-site sewage disposal;
d. any existing sewage disposal systems located on the property and within 100 feet of the property;
e. wetlands, rock outcrops, and floodplains; and
f. a 10-foot zone surrounding the water service line to buildings, free and clear of any sewer lines, systems, or part thereof.
9. Phasing schedule.
a. The preliminary plan approval establishes the plan validity and adequate public facilities validity periods for the entire project.
b. Where the subdivider proposes a phased project that will cumulatively exceed the minimum validity periods under Sections 4.2.G.2.a and 4.3.J.5.a, the applicant must submit a recording and construction phasing schedule as part of the preliminary plan for approval by the Board. The schedule must indicate the portions of the preliminary plan for which record plats and building permits will be obtained during each of the proposed phases, up to the expiration of the maximum adequate public facilities validity period under Section 4.3.J.5.a.
c. When applicable, the phasing schedule must identify the timing for the completion of construction and conveyance to unit owners of such things as common open areas and recreational facilities. In addition, the phasing schedule must indicate the timing for the provision of moderately priced dwelling units, and infrastructure improvements associated with each phase. The subdivider must design such a phasing schedule to minimize dependence on features (other than community-wide facilities) that will be provided in subsequent phases and have minimal impact during construction on phases already built and occupied.
d. If a phasing plan for a preliminary plan included land or building space that the County accepted for an arts or entertainment use under Section 59-C-6.2356 of the zoning ordinance in effect on October 29, 2014, approval of a site plan under Section 59-7.3.4 for the phase containing that land or building space validates all remaining phases of the preliminary plan and the project plan for the purpose of Section 59-D-2.7(b) of the zoning ordinance in effect on October 29, 2014.
10. Transfer of development rights.
a. A preliminary plan for a property located in a receiving area that proposes to increase the density of the property by using transferred development rights must indicate:
i. the number of lots permitted for the tract by zoning without the use of density increases as allowed by Transferable Development Rights (TDR) or the Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit (MPDU) programs;
ii. the number of development rights to be conveyed to the receiving property;
iii. the number of Moderately Priced Dwelling Units to be provided as required by Chapter 25A;
iv. the total density, in dwelling units, of the proposed subdivision; and
v. the density recommended by the adopted master plan.
b. A preliminary plan that uses transferable development rights in the Rural Residential and Residential zones must include at least two-thirds of the number of development rights permitted to be transferred to the property under the appropriate master plan. However, the Board may reduce the two-thirds requirement if it finds the reduction is more appropriate for environmental or compatibility reasons.
11. Draft Traffic Mitigation Agreement. A preliminary plan application for property located in a Transportation Management District (TMD), designated under Chapter 42A, Article II, must contain a draft Traffic Mitigation Agreement (TMAg) or similar plan designated under Chapter 42A prepared by the applicant that meets the requirements of that Article.
12. Encumbrance. The applicant must identify the existence of and the location of any encumbrance that would impact the proposed development, including encumbrances on existing or proposed right of way.
D. Application processing.
1. The applicant must submit an initial application to the Director. The Director must review the application for completeness within 10 days after receipt. An application is incomplete if any required element is missing or is facially
defective, e.g., a drawing that is not to scale. An application filed without all required fees is also incomplete. The assessment of completeness must not address the merits of the application.
2. The applicant must submit any required revisions to the Director. The Director must review the revised application for completeness within 10 days after receipt.
3. After the Director verifies that the application is complete, or if the review is not completed within 10 days after receipt, the Director will accept the application and establish a hearing date under Section 4.1.E.
4. Public notice is required to satisfy a regulation approved under Section 10.1.
E. Hearing date. The Board must schedule a public hearing to begin within 120 days after the date the Director accepts an application. The Director may postpone the public hearing by up to 30 days once without Board approval. The Director or applicant may request one or more extensions beyond the original 30 days with Board approval. The Board must notice the public hearing and indicate the new hearing date on the Board’s agenda. An application that was filed before February 13, 2017 is not subject to this subsection.
(Mont. Co. Code 1965, §§104-23, 104-24; Ord. No. 6-39; Ord. No. 7-41, §§1, 2; 1973 L.M.C., ch. 25, §8; Ord. No. 8-46, §1; Ord. No. 8-73, §§1, 2; Ord. No. 8-92, §2; Ord. No. 9-23, §1; Ord. No. 9-68, §1; Ord. No. 9-69, §1; Ord. No. 10-12, §2; Ord. No. 10-60, §3; Ord. No. 10-71, §1; Ord. No. 11-18, §§1, 2; Ord. No. 11-23, §1; Ord. No. 11-28, §3; Ord. No. 11-63, §3; Ord. No. 12-16, §1; Ord. No. 12-19, §§4, 5; Ord. No. 12-31, §1; Ord. No. 12-60, §§1, 2, 3; Ord. No. 12-83, §2; 1995 L.M.C., ch. 13, §1; Ord. No. 13-26, §1; Ord. No. 13-36, §1; Ord. No. 13-51, §§1, 2; Ord. No. 13-91, §4; Ord. No. 13-113, §1; Ord. No. 14-8, §2; Ord. No. 14-37, §1; Ord. No. 14-50, §1; Ord. No. 15-39, §1; Ord. No. 15-50, §1; Ord. No. 15-66, §1; Ord. No. 15-67, §1; Ord. No. 15-89, §1; Ord. No. 16-05, §1; Ord. No. 16-16, §1; Ord. No. 16-26, §1; Ord. No. 16-27, §1; Ord. No. 16-33, §1; Ord. No. 16-35, §1; Ord. No. 17-04, §1; Ord. No. 17-20, §1, Ord. No. 17-31, §1; Ord. No. 18-04, §2; Ord. No. 18-19, §2; Ord. No. 18-31, §1; Ord. 19-22, §3.)
Editor’s note—Section 4.1 [formerly §50-34] is quoted in Cinque v. Montgomery County Planning Board, 173 Md. App. 349, 918 A.2d 1254 (2007). Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 8.1 [formerly §§50-34 to 50-35 and, prior to that, §§104-23 through 104-25] are quoted in Gruver-Cooley Jade Corporation v. Perlis, 252 Md. 684, 251 A.2d 589 (1969).
For preliminary plans and record plats approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance, which remain valid, the validity period and procedural requirements and limitations for plan extensions are as established under this ordinance.
Portions of Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 [formerly §50-35] are quoted in Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Town of Washington Grove, 408 Md. 37; 968 A.2d 552 (2009) and cited in Cinque v. Montgomery County Planning Board, 173 Md. App. 349, 918 A.2d 1254 (2007). In Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Silkor Development Corp., 246 Md. 516, 229 A.2d 135 (1967), the court held that the 1963 amendments to the Maryland-Washington Regional District Act eliminated the right to require approval of a development plan within sixty days of submission. The “default provisions” of the Act only apply if the County adopts them. Section 4.2.D.3 [formerly §50-35(k)] is cited in Waters Landing Ltd. Partnership v. Montgomery County, 337 Md. 15, 650 A.2d 712 (1994). Portions of Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 [formerly §50-35] are cited in Montgomery County v. Waters Landing Limited Partnership, 99 Md.App. 1, 635 A.2d 48, wherein the court held development impact tax valid. Portions of Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 [formerly §50-35] are cited in Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission v. TKU Associates, 281 Md. 1, 376 A.2d 505 (1971). Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 8.1 [formerly §§50-34 to 50-36 and, prior to that, §§104-23 through 104-25] are quoted in Gruver-Cooley Jade Corporation v. Perlis, 252 Md. 684, 251 A.2d 589 (1969).
The requirement in §4.2.D.3 [formerly §50-35(k)] concerning a determination of adequate public facilities prior to approval of a subdivision plan is mentioned in connection with a discussion of Montgomery County’s growth policy in P. J. Tierney, Maryland’s Growing Pains: The Need for State Regulation, 16 U. of Balt. L. Rev. 201 (1987), at p. 237.
See County Attorney Opinion dated 9/7/07 discussing methods of acquiring the construction of infrastructure for development districts. See County Attorney Opinion dated 7/26/07 discussing multiple issues deriving from the Clarksburg Master Plan and related issues regarding development districts. See County Attorney Opinion dated 11/5/99 describing the authorization for the Department of Public Work and Transportation to provide a recommendation to the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission regarding road access.
Ord. No. 19-12, § 3, states: Automatic Extensions.
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of portions of Section 4.3.J to the contrary, the validity period of any determination of adequate public facilities that was valid on March 31, 2009, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2009 is automatically extended for 8 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 8-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of portions of Section 4.3.J to the contrary, the validity period of any determination of adequate public facilities that was valid on March 31, 2011, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2011, is automatically extended for 6 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 6-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(c) Notwithstanding any provision of portions of Section 4.3.J to the contrary, the validity period of any determination of adequate public facilities that was valid on March 31, 2013, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2013, is automatically extended for 4 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 4-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(d) Notwithstanding any provision of portions of Section 4.3.J to the contrary, the validity period of any determination of adequate public facilities that was valid on March 31, 2015 or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2015, is automatically extended for 2 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 2-year extension must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(e) Notwithstanding any provision of portions of Section 4.3.J to the contrary, the validity period of any determination of adequate public facilities that was valid on July 28, 2020, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on July 28, 2020, is automatically extended for 2 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 2-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
Ord. No. 19-12, § 4, states: Automatic Extensions:
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 4.2.G to the contrary, the validity period of any preliminary subdivision plan that was valid on March 31, 2009, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2009, including any separate phase of a multi-phase plan, is automatically extended for 8 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 8-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 4.2.G to the contrary, the validity period of any preliminary subdivision plan that was valid on March 31, 2011, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2011, including any separate phase of a multi-phase plan, is automatically extended for 6 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 6-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(c) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 4.2.G to the contrary, the validity period of any preliminary subdivision plan that was valid on March 31, 2013, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2013, including any separate phase of a multi-phase plan, is automatically extended for 4 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 4-year extension includes any extension granted automatically by any previous subdivision amendment and must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(d) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 4.2.G to the contrary, the validity period of any preliminary subdivision plan that was valid on March 31, 2015, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on March 31, 2015, including any separate phase of a multi-phase plan, is automatically extended for 2 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 2-year extension must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
(e) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 4.2.G to the contrary, the validity period of any preliminary subdivision plan that was valid on July 28, 2020, or for which a timely application for an extension of the validity period was pending on July 28, 2020, including any separate phase of a multi-phase plan, is automatically extended for 2 years after the date when the validity period would otherwise have expired. This 2-year extension must be treated for all purposes as part of the validity period that was extended.
Ord. No. 17-20, §2, concerning Tier 4 density, and §4, concerning effective dates, state:
Sec. 2. Certification of Tier 4 density. Within 5 days after this ordinance becomes law [September 18, 2012], the Planning Director must submit the Tier Map to the Maryland Department of Planning, with all data required by Maryland’s Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012, to verify that the average density of the Tier IV area is no greater than one unit for every 20 acres.
Sec. 4. Effective date. This ordinance takes effect as follows:
(a) Except for Section 4.3.F.3.f [formerly §50-35(e)(7)], this ordinance takes effect on the date the ordinance becomes law [September 18, 2012].
(b) Section 4.3.F.3.f [formerly §50-35(e)(7)] takes effect on the date the Maryland Department of Planning certifies the Tier IV area as being less dense than one dwelling unit for every 20 acres. [Maryland Department of Planning letter of December 21, 2012 to the Montgomery County Planning Department, states: “MDP’s finding is that the County’s established zoning and subdivision rules already adequately limit residential subdivision sufficiently so there is no need for the additional restrictions that would be imposed by Tier IV restriction.”]
Subsection 4.3.E.5.c is derived, in part, from Subsection 50-35(q), which was added by Ord. No. 12-31, §1. Section 2 of that ordinance reads as follows:
“Sec. 2. Interim protection of roads.
“(a) This Ordinance applies to the roads identified on Exhibit A [following §49-80] as rustic roads and exceptional rustic roads as if the County Council had so classified the roads under Section 49-78.
“(b) The Rustic Roads Advisory Committee must advise the Planning Board regarding the significant features of these roads that must be preserved when the roads are improved. These significant features have the same status as those identified by the County Council under Section 49-78.
“(c) The County Council may add or delete all or part of a road from the list on Exhibit A by resolution after a public hearing if:
“(1) the Planning Board asks the Council to delete a road from the list so that the Board can require roadway improvements not permitted by this Act;
“(2) the Rustic Roads Advisory Committee asks the Council to add or delete a road from the list; or
“(3) an applicant for a preliminary plan of subdivision asks the Council to delete a road from the list so that the applicant can make roadway improvements not permitted by this Act.
“(d) This Section is not effective after December 31, 1996.”
Subsection 4.3.J.5 is derived, in part, from Subsection 50-35(h), which was amended by Section 2 of Ord. No. 12-60. Section 3 of that ordinance reads as follows:
Sec. 3. For preliminary plans and record plats approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance, which remain valid, the validity period and procedural requirements and limitations for plan extensions are as established under this ordinance.
Section 5 of 1995 L.M.C., ch. 13, reads as follows: “Sec. 5. A regulation that implements a function assigned to the Department of Health and Human Services by 1995 LMC ch. 13 continues in effect but is amended to the extent necessary to provide that the regulation is administered by the Director of the Department of Health and Human Services.”