Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout055-03 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION DECLARING DESIRE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BUILDERS FOR THE BAY PROGRAM WHEREAS, Frederick County wishes to insure that its development design standards and regulations take into account the effects of the resulting development on the natural environment; and WHEREAS, changes to the built environment can have a negative impact on both surface and ground water; and WHEREAS, the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay offers localities the opportunity to examine their design standards and regulations through a voluntary "Roundtable" process of consensus building; and WHEREAS, the Alliance also provides the manpower, organizational skills, and experience in facilitating the Roundtable process along with the majority of funding required to support the effort; and WHEREAS, the report and recommendations produced as a result of the cooperative Roundtable process are submitted to the locality for their consideration and locality is in no way obligated to implement undesired alterations to their regulations; NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOL VED that the County of Frederick does hereby state its desire and intent to enter into an agreement with the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay to participate in a Roundtable process, with the local share contribution not to exceed $20,000. ADOPTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on the23rd day of April, 2003, by the following recorded vote: W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Margaret B. Douglas Lynda J. Tyler Richard C. ShickJe Robert M. Sager Sidney A. Reyes Gina A. Forrester A COpy TESTE: John R. Riley, Jr., Clerk Board of Supervisors Resolution No.: 055-03 cc: Eric R. Lawrence Timothy L. Welsh Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr. Postponed Until Presentation Before the Board Can be Made. COUNTY of FREDERICK Kris C. Tierney Assistant County Administrator 540/665-5666 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: ktierney@co.frederick.va.us I MEMORANDUM I TO: Board of Supervisors Kris C. Tierney, Assistant County Administrato~ Builders for the Bay Program - Presentation by the Center for Watershed Protection and the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay FROM: RE: DATE: April 14, 2003 Frederick County was approached by the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay and the Center for Watershed Protection about participating in the Builders for the Bay program. The goal of the program is to review the design standards within a locality to determine where changes to the standards might result in both improving the quality of storm water runoff from development sites, as well as reducing the amount. The Builders for the Bay program establishes a "Roundtable" of citizens within the community to review and make recommendations on possible changes to local development ordinances. Any resulting changes to our ordinances would be at the discretion of the board of supervisors following normal ordinance amendment procedures Attached is a resolution stating the county's intent to participate in the program for a local cost not to exceed $20,000. Please let me know if! can answer any questions in advance of the meeting. Attachment: as stated C:\ WlNDOWS\TEMP\bosbldrsforbayl.wpd 107 North Kent Street. Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Bay Journal: January-t<ebruary lUUl - VOl. 11 -l"W. IV - DU1lu~r;-- .ca.=;1l;; .1 VJ. 'T r 0 { ( I h.... C It'',l.iJUI1il ]\<1\1 Nell "P,/pt'!' . , HOME ....1!'..CK ISSUES 0 00 SEARG;~ ~UB~(RIBl CONTACf Vol 11- Number 10 January-February 2002 Developing a better watershed: Program aims to build better relations between developers, environmentalists It is hoped that the up-front involvement of the National Association of Home Builders will make local home builder groups more eager to take part in the roundtable process. "These are not folks who normally spend a lot of time together," noted Bill Matuszeski, former director of the EPA's Bay Program Office. "But I think it is ultimately going to be great because they are going to see the cOllunonality of their interests." The program was launched by the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, the National Association of Home Builders, and the Center for Watershed Protection at the Dec. 3 Chesapeake Executive Council meeting. http://www. bayj ournal. cOlll/01-0 I /builders .htlll 4/15/1003 ]jay JOUrnal: January-.reoruary ~VV~ - VVl. 11 -l'lV. lV - UUUU.oli> - ---------_._------~~---- .........~.....-......... . It has its roots in the Chesapeake 2000 agreement, which called for preserving open space and reducing the rate of sprawl in the watershed. At first, some of the commitments sparked concern among developers. To alleviate those worries, Matuszeski and former Alliance Executive Director Fran Flanigan met with the home builders association to see how to include developers in the effort. At first, home builders envisioned an award program that would recognize environmentally sensitive development. But when they began looking at consensus-building processes in the Rappahannock Watershed and elsewhere aimed at bringing coalitions together to enact local-level changes, they began to see greater potential. [See "Rappahannock roundtables pave way for better design" on page 16]. "They realized they were not each others' enemies; they wanted to do certain things together," said Martin Poretsky, an official with the National Association of Home Builders who also chairs Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Trust, and recently joined the Alliance's board. "I thought, why call't we do this elsewhere?" The new program seeks to replicate that process throughout the watershed, targeting six communities in 2002, and six more the following year. Through initial successes, they hope the concept catches on and and begins spreading on its own through the watershed. The goal is to spark regulatory changes at the local level. As was the case in the Rappahannock watershed, the problem with promoting new ideas such as cluster development, smaller parking lots and innovative stormwater management often isn't in the development community, but with antiquated government regulations. "It is hard to do dramatic change when there are so many silly rules; you have to put in curb and gutter, your streets have to be 34- feet wide, your cul-de-sacs have to be big enough to land a http://www.bayjournal.colll/Ol-01/builders.htm 4/15/2003 Hay Joumal: January-J:'eDruary ,,"vv,," - v 01. J J - l'1U. 1 V - VUJlI.ICn;m J. a5~.J VI. "T spaceship on, and so forth," said Tom Schueler, director of the nonprofit Center for Watershed Protection. "Things are getting better, but we still have a ways to go." As in the Rappahannock, the Builders for the Bay will use the Center's 22 Better Site Design principles as the focus for roundtables that involve environmentalists, builders, local officials, transportation agencies and others. They will review the principles - possibly modify them to meet local needs - and recommend local changes to help implement them. For example, local regulations often require huge cul-de-sacs so fire engines and emergency vehicles have room to maneuver. But there are alternatives: Pavement can be reduced by a landscaped island in the middle of a cul-de-sac - or even turning the cul-de- sac into a loop road. Such tweaking of regulations can dramatically reduce the amount of impervious surfaces - and the amount of stonnwater fUnoffthat has to be treated. Where Builders for the Bay will differ from the Rappahannock process is that, because of the up-front involvement of the National Association of Home Builders, local home builder groups should be more eager to take part in the roundtable process. "If Builders for the Bay is working properly, we won't have to spend time convincing the development community that they need to participate," said Matuszeski, who is now an Alliance board member. "If the development community is on board at the outset, along with the environmental community - and those are two big 'ifs' - then we ought to be able to move the process of developing the local criteria further along." Coupled with the roundtables will be an awards program to recognize individuals, organizations and developers who promote change and for environmentally sound projects. "When the initial Builders for the Bay awards are given out, it will create a feeling1in the building community of other builders wanting to do the same thing and to get on the bandwagon," said Earl Armiger, a national http://www.bayjournal.com/02-01Ibuilders.htm 4/1512003 nay Journal: January-rt::OflliUY ~vv~ - VUI. 11 - HU. 'V - UU11U\;;.:> .L,",,~,", I v.&. . vice president of the National Home Builders Association, and president of Orchard Development Corp. "Obviously, we've got to have examples where it makes economic sense, as well as environmental sense." As successful models - both for developments and for revamped ordinances - begin appearing on the landscape, it's hoped that the number of communities participating in the process will accelerate. That needs to happen if there is any hope in keeping pace with impacts of population growth and development expected in the watershed, said David Bancroft, executive director of the Alliance. "A fundamental part of Builders for the Bay is a recognition that as we look into the next fIve, 10 or 20 years, there is going to continue to be residential and commercial development," he said. "This is a way we can help minimize the impacts of that." [ ] [ ] .\ . . , . "." i Ii. ....'lol : Last Modified: 01/10/02 http://www.bayjournal.com/02-01/builders.htm 4/15/1003 Day Juurnal. JallUi:uy-rt:Ulu4:UY ~vv..:. - "VI. .1..1. -..L"fV. .LV -J.u.ppu----- - .....0- - -- - HOME . BACK IS~Ut~ SEARCH SUBSCRIBE I' ..( ! J It' Cfll''>l'!)(',JI?L H<I,'1 :\idl '\tk'PlT CO NTAC r Vol 11- Number 10 January-February 2002 Developing a better watershed: Rappahannock roundtables pave way for better development By Karl Blankenship When Virginia completed a strategy to guide the cleanup of the Rappahannock River a few years ago, John Tippett saw a grim message in it. Unless something was done to control runoff from his fast-growing area of Virginia's Piedmont, the Rappahannock would have little hope of ever achieving its cleanup goals. Growth in and around Fredericksburg - located on the Interstate 95 corridor on the outer cusp of the Washington, D.C. area - was likely going to offset cleanup efforts undertaken by others. By in large, developers were willing to try the design techniques. The problem was that roadblocks often existed in the local governments. "We've got some of the fastest growing counties in the state - and rapidly increasing stonnwater impacts to the Rappahannock," said Tippett, executive director of the watershed group, Friends of the Rappahannock. Tippett had already been through years of frustration in trying to change development and reduce its impact. http://www.bayjournal.com/02-0 l/rappa.htlU 4/15/2003 DClY JUUJl1i:tl. J(111Uc.t1y-rC:UlllalY ~VV~ - V VI. J..l - J....V. IV - U"'ppu. .... ....:::;.- ............ "Flying experts" would come in from out-of-town, give a workshop - and nothing would change. Environmental think tanks would tout new development ideas - and land use patterns would stay the same. State and federal agencies would offer guidance for new stormwater management techniques - but the same old stormwater ponds continued to pockmark the landscape around new developments. Tippett fmally coined a new term: the "'guidance/implementation gap." It described the chasm between good ideas and on-the- ground results. At last, Tippett hit upon a new idea to bring change - one that helped to serve as a model for the new Builders for the Bay program which seeks to usher in a new way of doing development around the Chesapeake. With support from the Bay Program, Tippett teamed up with the Center for Watershed Protection to launch a consensus process that brought together local government officials, state agency officials, builders, site designers, bankers, fue chiefs, transportation agency officials and others. For 10 months, a group of 35 people met, at first together, then in smaller groups focused on particular issues. The focal point for the roundtables were 22 principles of Better Site Design developed by the Center for Watershed Protection. Those design techniques seek to reduce the impact of development by promoting such things as cluster development, narrower roads and improved stormwater management techniques. But such techniques are often hampered, not so much by developers, but by government ordinances and codes. They often prescribe the size of cul-de-sacs, the width of roads - even the amount of parking spaces. Builders were often reluctant to submit plans for innovative projects because they almost always meant a longer-than-normal review process, which often led to uncertain results. "We found, by in large, they were willing to do a lot of these things because they http://wwwbayjoumalcom/02-01/rappa.htm 4/15/2003 l::Say Journal: January-t'eoruary .;vv.; - v VI. 11 - I';V. 1 V - 1"1111" ~ "5'"' oJ V.L -' made sense," Tippett said. "The problem was, the roadblocks existed in the local governments." But, Tippett noted, changing codes can be risky for local governments. What happens if, instead of a stormwater pond, they allow rain gardens in a new subdivision, but they are installed incorrectly? "If they fail, the officials could be on the front page of the paper with 100 land owners who have ponds in their front yards," he said. "Thankfully, increasing numbers of demonstration projects in the area are helping local program managers become more comfortable with the new approaches and technologies." Local planners may know about emerging techniques, but rarely have time to review enough technical information to feel comfortable approving roadside swales and other stormwater bioretention techniques instead of tried-and-true stormwater ponds. uuring the process, experts from the Center for Watershed Protection were able to explain those techniques. They were also able to analyze existing regulations of each of three local jurisdictions - the city of Fredericksburg and the counties of Spotsylvania and Stafford. The examined their strengths and weaknesses, and where ordinances allowed - or were roadblocks to - innovative techniques. After nearly a year of meetings, the group last February reached consensus on adopting the 22 principles as a goal for the region, and made specific recommendations about how regulations could be changed so the principles could be put to work. And workshop participants believe change will happen. Instead of workshops that come and go, and concepts from afar, the consensus created local advocates who could take "ownership" of the issues within their communities and work for change. "It gives us a ready, set handbook to educate the planning commission, the board of supervisors and the public on these issues," said Ray Vtz, senior planner with the Spotsylvania County Office of Planning, who participated in the roundtable. "So it's not http://www.bayjournal.com/02-01/rappa.htm 4/15/2003 !:Say Journal: January-reoruary .;vv.; - v VI. 11 - 1';U. 1 V - I "I-'~- .LQS.....,.V.L ...' solely a staff recommendation or a citizen recommendation. It is the recommendation of a recognized group, which is important." Spotsylvania County is in the process of updating its comprehensive plan, and Vtz said the timing of the roundtable allowed some new ideas to be included in the plan. He expects more changes when, after the plan is adopted, the county updates its ordinances. He cautioned that not every recommended change would become a reality. While the principles recommended reducing sidewalks, the county recently changed ordinances to require sidewalks in most new developments to promote walking. "From an impervious surface perspective, that reduces water quality and requires a greater amount of stormwater management," Vtz said, "but from a quality of life perspective, it is really important to be able to walk down the sidewalk to your neighbor's house." Tippett noted that the goal of principles such as reducing sidewalks on both sides of the street can actually be more compatible with quality of life issues. ''''I'd rather my children play on a trail that weaves through a community greenway than draw them toward a dangerous street, as conventional sidewalk designs do. Right now, our local codes don't even give developers that as an option - they would have to do both." Stafford County has been moving forward as well. But Tippett acknowledged that change can be slow - he estimated it would take five to eight years before most of the recommended practices became adopted and broadly used. "We're certainly not there yet," agreed roundtable participant Zeke Moore, a stormwater engineer with Sullivan, Donohoe & Ingalls, a site design finn. "We've gotten consensus and there is a document out showing a model, but it is still kind of a theory and developing along." http://www.bayjournal.com/01-01Irappa.htm 4/15/1003 nay JVUrnaL Janu<uy-rt:U!ua!y ~VV~ - VVJ. 11 - !'1V. !V - Ji:lI-'I-'i:1 1. a~c ...' V.L ...' Moore caUed the roundtables "'a step in the right direction" but said their success hinges in implementation. What's needed, he said, is not just permission to use alternative designs, but encouragement to use them. For example, he said he could design alternative stormwater practices that promote infiltration rather than runoff. But unless builders get credit for using those devices - reflected in permission to build smaller stormwater ponds - there is little incentive to change. "These are great ideas, but they cost money," Moore said. "If we can get some credit for that and save some money on the stonnwater pond, aU of a sudden it might become feasible to do." Tippett agreed that such incentives need to be institutionalized, and that progress often may seem slow. "'Sometimes it doesn't go near as fast as r d like it to," he said. But now, at least, things are moving. "'Before, most of these ideas would die on the vine after we got a flying expert to come in and do a workshop." A sure sign of success, Tippett said, is that several home builders in the area started a new business to produce the soil media for bioretention practices, which hold runoff on site rather sending it into a stormwater system. "'I knew it was taking off when that happened," he said. [ ] [ ] ..\ . : " .... .; j "...._1. Last Modified: 0 1/10/02 ~'~. http://www.bayjournal.com/02-01/rappa.htm 4/15/2003