Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCEA_09-24-09_Meeting_Minutes• MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY CONSERVATION EASEMENT AUTHORITY Held in the Executive Session Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on September 24, 2009 at 8:00 a.m. PRESENT: Diane Kearns, Chairman; Ritchie Wilkins, Vice - Chairman; Jim Lawrence, Treasurer: Robert Solenberger; John Gavitt; Todd Lodge; and Charles Triplett, Planning Commission Liaison. ABSENT: John Marker; and Gene Fisher, Board of Supervisors Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary; and Bev Dellinger, Secretary III. OTHER: Joe Wilder, Deputy Director of Public Works Department. PUBLIC MEETING: 1. Minutes. • On a motion made by Mr. Solenberger and seconded by Mr. Gavitt, the minutes of the August 27, 2009 meeting were approved. 2. Virginia Stormwater Management Regulations Update. Mr. Wilder explained that this regulation is coming from the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) and the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board. The program set up by the Clean Water Act was regulated by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), but in 2004 the Virginia General Assembly passed House Bill 1177, sponsored by L. Preston Bryant, and that transferred responsibility of permitting stormwater management MS4's from the DEQ to the DCR. Mr. Wilder stated this is being driven by the impacts on the Chesapeake Bay by development and agricultural run -off. The State not only transferred the responsibility of issuing stormwater permits to localities, they decided to change the way that the calculations are done; they are dramatically stiffening the requirements on the development community for reducing nutrients. Mr. Wilder continued that this new program will culminate with Frederick County issuing stormwater permits. Anyone who does development in this county will have to get a stormwater permit and they will have to design to the new standard. Frederick County must create a program, approved by the DCR, which will include issuance of the permit, calculate and charge permit fees, review plans, inspect at the beginning and the end of each job, enforce the standard, and maintain Best Management Practices (BMP) in perpetuity. A data base must also be created that allows us to remember who has and where is a BMP. All the while, this information must be turned in to the State because the State will receive 28% of each permit fee. • Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority - 126 - Minutes of September 24, 2009 The regulation is hinging upon a calculation of phosphorous removal, which is present in water. We are expected to input this calculation into a spreadsheet, by subdivision and /or by each lot, to figure how many pounds of phosphorous will come off the property. We then have to come up with BMPs to reduce it to a small level. For example, if the property is calculated to produce five pounds of phosphorous and it should only be two pounds, we have to treat three pounds. The State is saying if we put in bio- filters and rain gardens and create wetlands, that will remove the phosphorous. Many people have argued that there isn't that much phosphorous in the rain water or the run -off. If you remove phosphorous, you're also removing nitrogen and all the other heavy metals through these BMPs. Mr. Wilder further stated that this regulation is going to impact land use in a big way. You cannot get the numbers to work with curb, gutter and underground storm sewer — we can't get the numbers low enough on a development to get the phosphorous out. And that is in direct conflict with our subdivision ordinance regarding urban development. Everything is based on curb, gutter and underground stormwater because no one wants big drainage ditches and drainage problems. Developers may consider that if it isn't going to help them to be in a subdivision, the easiest thing to do is build in the rural areas. If this regulation gets approved, developers will have a difficult time building in urban areas because the numbers are so restrictive and it will be easier and less expensive to build in rural areas. The impact of the cost of the current regulation on one job, Greenwood Mills Elementary School, is $175,000; the new regulation would cost $575,000. That's just for the initial installation of the amount of BMPs needed and it would cost $20,000 to $30,000 per year to maintain those BMPs. Due to • opposition because of urban sprawl, the State made some changes to the regulation, but those changes have not been voted on yet. Another argument against this regulation is that the State has pushed it through; it's been a political situation and if it isn't approved this year under the current administration, it probably won't get approved. Mr. Wilder said that Frederick County, through an approved program, can come up with a methodology that would allow a less restrictive phosphorous removal number in urban development and that's what he's striving for. We need to come up with factors, based on the number of housing units per acre, floor to area (FAR) ratio, and level of imperviousness brown filter mediation mix used, and come up with a methodology that the State will approve so that we will be able to enforce and still encourage urban growth. This will require creating a new subdivision ordinance as well. The only way to get the numbers to meet is to change the way developments look. To get the phosphorous removal, we have to start as soon as the water hits the roof or parking lot and run that through what is called a treatment train. Roof water will have to go into a rain barrel or cistern and that water would go into a grass Filter strip and a bio- retention area. Part of the challenge is educating the development community as well as the engineers. If an area has already been disturbed, we're going to encourage redevelopment and in -fill. The State realizes that some sites can't reach these standards, so they developed a nutrient offset proposal. The amount of phosphorous is calculated on the job and the State will assign that a value; they've decided that a pound of phosphorous is worth $15,000. So if the developer can't meet the standard, the untreated phosphorous will be assessed the $15,000 per pound fee. The fee will either go to Frederick County where we develop concepts that we use in other places in Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority - 127- Minutes of September 24, 2009 that watershed to do nutrient management. Another option is the development writes a check to the State and it goes into the Virginia Stormwater Fund and that money will probably never come back to the locality. In summary, the issues and concerns involved when this regulation is approved are: Probable rural development rather than urban development. Need to regulate stormwater and develop a program in Frederick County. Need to create a new ordinance and get it approved. Need to educate the public, engineers and developers. Develop a nutrient management program. Maintain BMPs annually in perpetuity. Presidential edict requiring states to provide EPA with a program of how each state is going to deal with nutrients. 3. Fundraising Discussion. Ms. Kearns stated she has talked to Mr. John Truban, Attorney, concerning the voluntary $1 donation she spoke of at the August 27, 2009 meeting. Mr. Truban doesn't see any legal problem with this and Mr. Rod Williams, Frederick County Attorney, sees it as a tax deductible donation to Frederick County. Mr. Eric Lawrence suggested the CEA put together a proposal for the Board of Supervisor's information and review. Ms. Kearns asked for help in drafting a concept — Mr. Gavitt, Mr. Jim Lawrence and Mr. Eric Lawrence volunteered. Ms. Kearns mentioned roll -back taxes as potential funding and she will be talking with some of the Supervisors to get their input. Ms. Kearns said the Opequon Village Fair is scheduled for October 17th, and we're going to get an article in the Winchester Star about it. The Committee decided to again apply for the State grant money in hopes of being able to come up with federal matching money. Ms. Kearns will meet with the Chairman of the Board to assess appropriateness of returning to the Board at this time for a grant application. 4. Other The next meeting is scheduled for October 22, 2009 at 8:00 am. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Kearns, Chairman • Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Conservation Easement Authority - 128- Minutes of September 24, 2009