1 Prepared by Les Knapp, Associate Director, MACo* for the Homebuilders Association of Maryland, 2012-06-27 *Supplemented with certain information provided.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Issues for Council Discussion April 24, Critical Habitat Changes made to Chapter II, IV and V in response to comments received, and experience gained.
Advertisements

Past and Current Initiatives in Pinellas County to Coordinate Planning between the School Board and Local Governments 1996 – Interlocal Agreement and Comprehensive.
Smart Growth Update VCARD May 23, Growth Management & Schools during 2005 Volusia County Council adopts new school impact fee. School Board of Volusia.
Implementation of SB236 – Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012 MACo Planning Directors Meeting July 13, 2012.
Proposed Land Use & Development Regulations Public Hearing Month Day, 2012.
TA Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Current Features: 1.Floodways, 100 yr 2.Floodplain, outside floodway, 100 yr 3.Jurisdictional Wetlands 4.Stream.
Meeting the Letter and Spirit of the Law: Legal Components of Comprehensive Plans.
Policy Subdivisions Recently Adopted Amendments June 23, 2009 Miccosukee Community Center Open House.
What Can Local Government Do?. Utah Agriculture Code 4-1-8(1) “the science and art of the production of plants and animals useful to man including the.
Zoning Ordinance Update Planning Commission February 25, 2015.
Volusia Smart Growth Implementation Committee Final Report August 2005.
PRESERVATION and PROGRESS IN THE DRAGON RUN SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS PRESERVATION and PROGRESS IN THE DRAGON RUN SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS PARADIGM.
Citrus County Planning Division Evaluation and Appraisal Report Citrus County Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Legislation – Prof. H. Alshuwaikhat ZONING Zoning is the division of a municipality, city or town into districts for the purpose of regulating.
Noel H. Kaplan, Senior Environmental Planner
Local Planning Process The General Plan SB 18 Training Program.
8/29/20151 Docket Z (Easter Mountain, LLC) A Request to Rezone 556 Acres From RU-4 to SR-2 Cochise County Board of Supervisors October 25, 2011.
Sector Planning Process Alachua County Commission July 8 th,
8th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable Arlington, VA March 30, 2012 PlanMaryland Maryland Department of Planning.
Transfer of Development Rights
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING December 2, 2008.
Community Development Department GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT City Council June 3, 2014.
Transfer of Development Rights Policy
Rural Residential Zoning District & Subdivision Exemptions Southampton County Board of Supervisors Presented by Jay Randolph November 28, 2005.
HELEN THIGPEN STAFF ATTORNEY LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DIVISION MONTANA LEGISLATURE EDUCATION AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 18, 2011 County Zoning.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING January 5, 2010.
Water Supply Planning Initiative State Water Commission November 22, 2004.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING February 19, 2008.
From Mandate to Smart Growth: The Evolution of Growth Management in the United States Jesse J. Richardson, Jr. Department of Urban Affairs and Planning.
1 Prepared by Les Knapp, Associate Director, MACo and Amanda Stakem Conn, Principal Counsel to MDP* for the Maryland State Bar Association,
Presentation to the Placer LAFCO Commission September 10, 2014.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING December 2, 2008.
CPA-14-08: Transfer of Development Rights Large Scale Text Amendment Adoption Hearing Board of County Commissioners September 23, 2008.
Planning and Community Development Department Housing Element City Council February 03, 2014.
Updates to Title 8. Anticipated Timeline… July - December 2013 Ideas Compiled Research and Drafting January 2014 Planning Commission Worksession Review.
GEORGE WASHINGTON REGIONAL COMMISSION STORMWATER TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MAY 9, 2013 HB 2190 (2013) More Stringent Ordinances CHRIS POMEROY MEMBER & PRESIDENT.
California Measure SB375: Linking Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions to Metropolitan Transportation Planning Presentation to the National Capital Region.
A 1,240 Acre Master Development Plan Proposal, West of Willcox, AZ. Cochise County Board of Supervisors August 23, 2011 Docket MDP / Z
Community Development Department GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT Planning & Land Development Regulation Board May 21, 2014.
February 20, 2007 Macon County Planning Board. Structure Height Ordinance Allows construction to 4 stories or 48 feet, whichever is greater Measured from.
Planning.Maryland.gov The Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012 Arnold Preservation Council March 9, 2015.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 8, 2010.
Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code - MPC State enabling legislation for all municipalities except Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Newly Elected Officials.
Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act December 18, 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments Wekiva Parkway and Protection.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 29, 2010.
Implementing SB 1525: An Update Cheyenne Walsh Squire Sanders (US) LLP Government Finance Officers Association of Arizona Winter Conference Prescott, Arizona.
Presentation by Jon Laria, Chair to the Maryland Association of Counties Winter Conference January 6, 2011.
Jefferson County Agricultural Preservation and Land Use Plan Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan: Process and Strategies Presented to: Dane County Officials.
Dockets R-11-06;07;09 Zoning Regulation Amendments Proposed Amendments to the Cochise County Zoning Regulations regarding Lot Development Administrative.
San Antonio Unified Development Code Group 17. Numbering and Referencing The numbering system is consistent with the system used throughout the City's.
“ Grand Landings North” Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning City Council Public Hearing March 3, 2015.
Repeal and Replace the Boundary Adjustment Act with the Urban Reserve Act.
Community Redevelopment for Eastside Report on Advisory Committee Input and Request for Board Direction June 26, 2012.
“State Road 100 MPC Lots” Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning City Council Public Hearing November 17, 2015.
ANNEXATION Statutory Overview July 19, 2011 David L. Yearout, AICP, CFM.
The Crash Course for Municipal Planning Commission Members in Cumberland County 1.
ITEM 6.B ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT AT CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 25, 2009.
Chapter 15, Amended Article X Wetland Conservation Areas Presented by the Orange County Environmental Protection Division February 5, 2008 Presented by.
FIRE PROTECTION CONTRACTS Workshop on Senate Bill 239 (Hertzberg) July 21, 2016 Nevada LAFCo – Presented by P. Scott Browne, Counsel.
May 14, Planning Commission Planning Commission May 14, 2015.
OPEN SPACE/ CONSERVATION
Regulation of land use and building activities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 AMENDMENT PROCESS and DOCKET
New Comprehensive Zoning By-law December 12, 2016.
Planning Commission Public Hearing September 9, 2016
Land Use Challenges In Maryland Today
Towards An Institute for Sustainable Maryland September 16, 2013
Bay Restoration Fund (SB 240/HB446)
Board of County Commissioners
Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation Program
Presentation transcript:

1 Prepared by Les Knapp, Associate Director, MACo* for the Homebuilders Association of Maryland, *Supplemented with certain information provided by the Maryland Department of Planning

2 Prohibition on New Septic System Development Grandfathering Definition of Major/Minor Subdivisions Growth Tier Adoption Process Tier Criteria and Development Restrictions Tier Designation Conflicts MDE Tier Check Resubdivision Restrictions Clustering on Agricultural Land Community Systems and Shared Facilities Nutrient Offset Regulations Reporting Requirements

3 After December 31, 2012, a local jurisdiction that has not adopted a series of four “Growth Tiers” cannot authorize major residential subdivisions served by septic systems, community sewerage systems, or shared systems. May only authorize residential minor subdivisions served by septic systems or a major or minor subdivision served by public sewer.

4 Grandfathering requirements located in § 9-206(b) of the Environment Article Grandfathering is based making a submission for preliminary plan approval and an application for a soil percolation test before a certain deadline. Deadline is based on local county process regarding when and how applications for soil percolation tests and preliminary plan approvals. In addition to meeting the submission for preliminary plan approval and application for soil percolation test deadline, the preliminary plan must be approved by October 1, 2016 (ultimate cut-off date)

SB 236 Takes Effect July 1, 2012 If final plat approval by December 31, 2012: SB 236 limitations on septic system developments do not apply to that project No final plat approval by December 31, 2012: (1) Do grandfather provisions apply; or (2) If not, SB 236 limitations on septic system developments apply *Original chart provided by MDP, modified by MACo

6 County may set a definition of what constitutes a major/minor subdivision for purposes of SB 236 by December 31, 2012 Definition of minor subdivision limited to 7 housing units or less If a county does not elect to set a new definition, its existing definitions as of January 1, 2012, will apply

7 Adoption of Growth Tiers by a local jurisdiction is optional Tier adoption process and statutory criteria for the Tiers is located in Article 66B (and after Oct. 1, Title 1, Subtitle 5 of the Land Use Article). Tier development prohibitions and limits are located in § of the Environment Article. Four classes of Tiers (I-IV) that dictate whether residential development may occur on a public sewerage system or a septic system

8 A local jurisdiction does not have to adopt all 4 Tiers. Counties must adopt Tiers I, III, and IV and may adopt Tier II. Municipalities must adopt Tier I and may adopt Tier II. If a local jurisdiction does not adopt all of the authorized Tiers, the local jurisdiction must document the reasons for not adopting a particular Tier. Local jurisdictions may use their existing comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance to create the Tiers [Uncodified Section 4 of SB 236] Before adopting the Tiers, a local jurisdiction may submit proposed Tiers to Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) for technical assistance, review, and comment After adoption of the Tiers, a local jurisdiction shall provide a map and information to MDP demonstrating the location of the Tiers and existing or planned water and sewer services

9 MDP may comment on the Tiers adopted by a local jurisdiction. If MDP comments, then the local legislative body or planning board/commission must hold a public hearing and review the tiers based on the comments. If the planning board/commission holds the hearing, it must recommend to the local legislative body whether the Tiers should be changed or remain as adopted. The local jurisdiction is not bound to the recommendations of MDP

10 Initially, a local jurisdiction may adopt and amend the Tiers administratively. However, the Tiers must be incorporated into the jurisdiction’s local comprehensive plan during the jurisdiction’s next 6-year review of its plan. A local jurisdiction may adopt the Tiers as an amendment to its comprehensive plan and may include the Tiers as an appendix that delineates the Tiers and the comprehensive plan land use categories and zoning ordinance districts that are included in each Tier. [Uncodified Section 4 of SB 236]

*Chart provided by MDP

12 A Tier I area must: (1) be a mapped locally designated growth area served by public sewerage OR (2) a municipal corporation that is a priority funding area (PFA) and served by public sewerage

13 Tier I allows: (1) major and minor subdivisions on public sewerage

14 A Tier II area must: (1) be planned to be served by a public sewerage in a municipal growth element or a mapped locally designated growth area AND (2) be needed to satisfy the demand for development at densities consistent with the jurisdiction’s long-term development policy after considering the capacity of land areas available for development, including in-fill and redevelopment

15 Tier II allows: (1) major or minor subdivisions on public sewerage systems (2) minor subdivisions on septic systems

16 A Tier III area must: (1) not be planned for sewerage service (2) not be dominated by agricultural or forest land (3) not be planned or zoned by a local government for land, agricultural, or resource protection AND (4) fall in one of the following categories a municipal corporation not served by public sewerage a rural village as defined by § 5-7B-03(f) of the State Finance and Procurement Article an area planned or zoned for large lot development a mapped locally designated growth area NOTE: A local jurisdiction must strive to avoid creating a Tier III area that is bounded on all sides by land in a Tier IV area.

17 Tier III allows: (1) minor subdivisions on septic systems (2) major subdivisions on septic systems, community systems, or shared facilities if the local planning board has reviewed and recommended the approval of the major subdivision NOTE: Before approving a Tier III major subdivision the planning board must hold at least one public hearing and include as part of its review: (1) the cost of providing local government services to the subdivision (unless such review is already required); and (2) the potential environmental issues or a natural resources inventory related to the proposed subdivision)

18 A Tier IV areas cannot be planned for sewerage service and are: (1) areas planned or zoned by a local jurisdiction for land, agricultural, or resource protection, preservation, or conservation (2) areas dominated by agricultural lands, forest lands, or other natural areas OR (3) Rural Legacy areas, priority preservation areas, or areas subject to a State or local covenant, restriction, condition, or conservation easement for the purposes of natural resources or agricultural land preservation

19 Tier IV allows: (1) minor subdivisions on septic systems (2) IF the jurisdiction’s Tier IV area has been verified by MDP as having an actual overall yield of not more than one dwelling unit per 20 acres, major subdivisions on septic systems, community systems, or shared facilities at the local jurisdiction’s discretion

20 For exception to apply, a local jurisdiction may request that MDP verify that the jurisdiction’s subdivision and zoning requirements in the jurisdiction’s cumulative Tier IV area result in an actual overall yield of not more than one dwelling unit per 20 acres If requested by a local jurisdiction to verify, MDP shall: (1) review the local zoning code and any relevant subdivision or development regulations or rules to help determine the overall development yield; (2) request, if appropriate, information from the local jurisdiction to help determine the overall development yield in Tier IV; (3) examine any additional information that the local jurisdiction provides supporting the qualification of the jurisdiction’s zoning districts; (4) consult with the Maryland Sustainable Growth Commission; and (5) discuss any discrepancies or questions with the local jurisdiction before making a final determination [§ 9-206(h) of the Environment Article and Uncodified Section 5 of SB 236]

21 If two or more local jurisdictions adopt conflicting Tier designations for the same area, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) and MDP shall confer with the local jurisdictions to seek resolution. If the conflict is not resolved, MDE shall determine which Tier designation prevails MDP shall recommend to MDE a preferred Tier designation based on: (1) The local jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans, including applicable municipal growth elements, water resource elements, land use elements, and priority preservation elements; (2) Growth projections and development capacity; AND (3) Availability of infrastructure MDE may accept MDP’s recommendation or substitute its own decision when making a decision on which Tier designation prevails

22 As part of its current subdivision review process, MDE will now perform an additional check to make sure that a proposed subdivision is located in an appropriate Tier This is essentially a simple geographic and locational check against a local jurisdiction’s Tier map

23 After December 31, 2012, residential minor subdivisions and any remainder parcels or land tracts in Tiers II-IV may not be resubdivided or further subdivided unless: (1) the subdivision is within a PFA and is designated for public sewerage service in the 10- year water and sewer plan; OR (2) the initial subdivision specified the total number of lots, plats, and building sites for the subdivision and the subdivision is done in stages over time

24 A local jurisdiction may allow an owner of land used for agricultural activities to transfer up to 7 lots to another agricultural landowner A landowner subject to this provision is limited to a total of 15 lots on the property and must cluster the lots An owner cannot transfer lots from a Tier III area to a Tier IV area

25 If a community sewerage system or shared facility is used in a development, the system or facility must be under the supervision of a “controlling authority”, which could be a local government, a body public or corporate (like Maryland Environmental Services), or an authorized intercounty agency

26 By December 31, 2012, MDE must propose regulations that establish nutrient offset requirements for new residential major subdivisions within Tier III that will be served by septic systems or shared systems MDE must consult with counties and other stakeholders during the drafting of the proposed regulations This provision does not limit MDE to develop nutrient trading and offset programs related to Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load program [ Uncodified Section 8 of SB 236]

27 MDP, in consultation with MDE, must report to the General Assembly by February 1, 2013, on: (1) the adoption of the tiers by each local jurisdiction; (2) any ordinance or regulation changes made by a local jurisdiction in order to implement SB 236; AND (3) any MDP comments made to a local jurisdiction regarding its Tiers [ Uncodified Section 9 of SB 236]

MDP Planning Directors Meeting 5/24/127/1/12 10/1/12 12/31/ Feb 2013 Effective Date of Bill Recommended date for Tier Adoption If no tiers adopted, restrictions on major subdivisions in place; - adopt new definition of subdivision Public hearings on MDP comments MDP report due to General Assembly *Chart provided by MDP

29 *Chart provided by MDP

New water resources element, municipal growth element, and priority preservation element [HB 1141 and HB 2] 2007 New stormwater management requirements [HB 786/SB 784] 2008 New critical area requirements [HB 1253] 2009 New planning visions, Smart Growth measures and indicators, and plan consistency requirements [HB 294/SB 273, HB 295/SB 276, and HB 297/SB 280] 2010 New transportation planning requirements [HB 1155] 2011 PlanMaryland [Executive Order ] 2012 New Growth Tiers and septic system restrictions [SB 236] The Present – Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load requirements The Future – Greenhouse gas reduction initiatives

31 SB 236 has “teeth” and will limit future development on septic systems MACo expects local governments are expected to designate Tiers responsibly but also should be afforded a level of flexibility when designating the Tiers. Effect of SB 236 is further magnified when considered as part of cumulative package of recent land use and environmental initiatives As land use and environmental laws and regulations become increasingly complex, both local governments and developers will be challenged to comply with the many new requirements. However, Maryland land use attorneys will not suffer a shortage of work

32 Les Knapp Associate Director MACo