Building in Maryland and Washington DC

EXCLUSIVE MAGAZINE OF THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

2012 Environmental Awards Protecting and Preserving our Environment Also in this Issue: Builder Connections

NOV/DEC 2012

Maryland-National Capital Building Industry Association 1738 Elton Road, Suite 200 Silver Spring, MD 20903 Phone: (301) 445-5400, Fax: (301) 445-5499 E-mail: communications@mncbia.org Website: www.mncbia.org 2012 Executive Committee Steve Nardella President

Frank Bossong, IV Associate Vice President

Rick Bailey Vice President/Calvert Co.

Clark Wagner Treasurer

Doug Meeker Vice President/Charles Co.

Dave Lunden Vice President, State Legislative/Secretary

Robert J. Spalding Vice President/Montgomery Co.

BUILDING

IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC Representing Calvert, Charles, Montgomery, Prince George’s and St. Mary’s counties in Maryland and Washington, DC

FEATURES

Robert R. Harris Life Director

Hillary Colt Vice President/ Prince George’s Co.

Martin J. Mitchell Immediate Past President

Mike Mummuagh Vice President/St. Mary’s Co.

Stephen P. Elmendorf Legal Counsel

Brian “A.J.” Jackson Vice President/Washington DC

Diane K. Swenson Executive Vice President

2012 Board of Directors

Lynn Elahi Brian Afnan Hugh Carroll Jeff Caruso Chuck Covell Mike Conley Tony Crane Timothy Dugan Ken Dunn Mary Giles Tom Hudson Tom Hyde Robert A. Jacobs

Howard Katz David Little Mark MacFarland Tom Marshall Jim Plazak Steve Robins Gary Rubino Michael Schueler Charlene Thayer Peggy White Mel Willis Carter Willson

MNCBIA Staff

Executive Vice President Diane K. Swenson, CAE Vice President, Government Affairs F. Hamer Campbell, Jr.

9 Builder Connections Getting to Know you

9

10 2012 Environmental Awards 14 2012 MNCBIA Membership Survey The Results Are In

DEPARTMENTS 6 A Message from the President

10

Associate Director/Government Affairs Robert Kaufman

12 The Legal Pad 16

The Engineer’s Angle

17 MNCBIA Membership News

Associate Director/Regulatory Affairs Annette Rosenblum

New Members

Communications Director Kelly H. Grudziecki

MNCBIA’s Most Wanted List

Director, Membership/Events Jean Mathis

STARS Club

Manager, Builders Development Guaranty Group Lisa S. Goheen Director, Home Builders Care Foundation/HomeAid DC Patti Kane

NOV/DEC 2012

18

14

Events Calendar

Index of Advertisers

Published for: Maryland-National Capital Building Industry Association 1738 Elton Road, Suite #200 Silver Spring, Maryland 20903 301-445-5400 Fax: 301-445-5499 E-mail: building@mncbia.org Website: www.mncbia.org

Published by:

E&M Consulting, Inc. 1107 Hazeltine Boulevard, Suite #350 Chaska, Minnesota 55318 800-572-0011 Fax: 952-448-9928 Website: www.emconsultinginc.com Published October 2012 MNC-S0210/9844

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

5

FROM THE PRESIDENT

The Times, Are They a Changing?

W Steve Nardella

6

NOV/DEC 2012 |

hile I write my last message to our membership, the Presidential election is just a few short weeks away. When you read this article, however, the votes will have been cast and the races concluded. Not only will there be a decision on our next President but also on important House and Senate candidates. The individuals who win the privilege of serving next year and beyond will have the collective power to influence everything from tax, energy, and housing policy to social security and defense.

If and how they act, what decisions are made, and how they prioritize the issues will have a tremendous impact on how the economic and housing recovery responds and potentially benefits our members. Will they help to build a sense of certainty and confidence in the future and build on the momentum of the economic and housing recovery or will they cast a cloud of uncertainty and governmental gridlock?

Regardless of who wins, we look forward to the opportunity to continue to ensure our messages that Homeownership is the Foundation of the American Dream and a Major Driver of the U.S. Economy get to those who will listen, understand and work on our behalf.

Locally, Maryland faces a number of important constitutional questions that will have political, social and economic impacts on the future of the state in potentially profound ways. Congressional redistricting, marriage equality, immigration policy and the location and types of casino gaming are all up for grabs by the voters. While these issues may not, on their face, appear to be building industry issues, they all can have an impact on how Maryland is perceived as a place to live, work, and invest.

The NAHB and HousingMaryland Political Action Committees are vehicles that help ensure the industry’s political dollars are being spent to support candidates who will work to create favorable business, regulatory and political environments for the industry and our members.

A dedicated group of trustees decides how and whom to support. To quote a wise man who has been involved in the industry and politics for decades and who recently hosted an NAHB Build PAC event on October 2, “given the heavily weighted political infrastructure in Maryland, our politics is neither Democrat nor Republican but rather the politics of home building.” Well put Mr. Mitchell! Interested in becoming a PAC member? Contact Diane Swenson at 301-445-5401.

On the regulatory front, the Maryland State Builders Association (MSBA), with support from MNCBIA, HBAM and experts from around the state, continues its urgent work on the TMDL nutrient loading offset program being

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

proposed by the state. The MSBA’s Policy Committee, under the chairmanship of current MSBA President Elliot Powell with staff and leadership from the local BIAs across the state, is following this issue very closely. If you are building or developing in Maryland, you need to understand the offset policy and how it will impact your business. Visit the Advocacy page at www.mncbia.org to see a chart of how much you will pay if the regulations are passed as drafted.

In short, all new development will be required to account for and offset or neutralize all of the nitrogen on site in both existing and post-construction conditions. The Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) and Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) are developing a proposed Offset Plan due to be finalized by December 2012, developing a permit by the middle of 2013 and then implementing the offset trading program by January 2014.

The cost will be staggering and the plan as proposed will make developing land prohibitively expensive. This proposal will eclipse any previous regulation or legislation directed at the development industry and all MSBA and local Association resources will be needed to negotiate a fair and reasonable program to address potential pollution from new development. This is critical to the health of our industry!

As you know, another important election will be held before this is printed. Someone new will be chosen as your Association President to ferry us through 2013, so this is my last column. Therefore, I would like to extend my sincerest thank you and acknowledge our Executive Vice President Diane Swenson and her dedicated hard working staff for all of their help, guidance, support and assistance throughout the year. We started the year with an aggressive and active agenda. And while the committee meetings, events and regulatory environment are as active as ever, the work is being accomplished with a reduced association workforce. So a very special thank you to Hamer Campbell, Vice President, Government Affairs, Robert Kaufman, Director, Government Affairs, Annette Rosenblum, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Kelly Grudziecki, Communications Director, Jean Mathis, Membership & Events Director, Lisa Goheen, Manager, Builders Development Guarantee Group, and Patti Kane, Director, Home Builders Care Foundation.

I would also like to thank the executive committee in particular for their vision and guidance throughout the year and to the board of directors for their engagement and leadership. There have been many challenges that we have addressed together and I appreciated the opportunity to work with each of you.

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

7

8

NOV/DEC 2012 |

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

Builder Connections— Getting to Know you

M

any of MNCBIA’s most active builder members brought their key personnel to the 7th Annual Builder Connections event on September 27 at the Greenbelt Marriott. The ballroom was buzzing with handshakes, card-swaps and chatter as Associate members took their allotted five minutes to introduce, (or re-acquaint), builder companies with their products and services.

It is vital that our builder and developer members seek out bids and proposals from our Associate members, who repeatedly name “networking” as one of the number one reasons they joined our Association. Builder Connections continues to rank high on the list of favorite and most worthwhile BIA events and supports our motto of “Do Business with a Member.”

A BIG thank you to the builder companies who participated including, The Bozzuto Group, Carter, Inc., Caruso Homes, Covell Communities, LLC, Craftmark Homes, Dan Ryan Builders, D R Horton Inc., EYA, Foxhall Homes, K Hovnanian Homes, Michael Harris Homes, Mid-Atlantic Builders, Inc., Miller and Smith Homes, Mitchell & Best Homebuilders LLC, NAI-The Michael Companies, Rasevic Construction Company, Richmond American Homes, Timberlake Homes and Winchester Homes Inc.

And a special thank you to our Sponsors who keep this event going strong! Our Ultimate Bar Sponsors were GKA Advertising and Washington Gas. Our Event Sponsors were Dewberry, Geo-Technology Associates, Inc., Gutschick, Little & Weber, PA, McMillan Metro, P.C. and Patuxent Environmental Group (PEG). Our Friends were Macris Hendricks & Glascock, P.A. and Kim Engineering, Inc. and our Associate was Ben Dyer Associates Inc. Washington Gas was extra generous and sponsored our door prize drawing, two 32” flat screen TVs. When Bob Spalding of Miller and Smith Homes was called as one of the winners he promptly handed over the TV to HBCF’s Patti Kane to use as an item in the Silent Auction at BIA’s Winter Ball in December.

Overall the evening was a huge success, and the volunteer members on the Builder Connections Committee deserve much praise for calling and writing and twisting a few arms to get both Builders and Associates alike out to this important event. Thanks to Co-Chairs David Little, Gutschick, Little & Weber, P.A. and David Kaufman, and support from Lynn Elahi, Washington Gas. m

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

9

2012 Environmental Awards M AFTER

NCBIA’s Environmental Awards recognize builders, developers, land planners and engineering firms throughout the Greater Washington Region for their diligence in complying with a broad range of environmental regulations and for their commitment to preserve, protect and enhance the environment.

They say good things come in small packages.

This year our package of entries was rather small, but the quality and commitment to preserving and protecting our environment was impressive.

Below are the 2012 winners and a synopsis of their winning project. You can read the descriptions in their entirety at www.mncbia.org > “Industry Awards” > “Environmental Awards.”

In the Land Development category, Loiederman Soltesz Associates, Inc. (LSA) was honored with the only award.

BEFORE 10

NOV/DEC 2012 |

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

AFTER

LSA was recognized for its work on Smallwood Village Pond in Waldorf, MD. Originally called Wakefield Lake, the pond was designed and constructed in the 1970’s and serves as a drainage area in excess of 400 developed acres.

The pond’s primary purpose is to serve as a stormwater management pond, collecting runoff and filtering pollutants and litter from the water before it is passed downstream. The pond has deteriorated over the past 10 years. The side slopes were eroding, a silt island had built up at the inlet of the lake, and the pedestrian trail was crumbling and in danger of being lost to erosion.

Improvements to the pond included dredging, reclaiming eroded area, replacing the bridge at the outfall of the lake, repaving the walking trails and adding new landscaping along all sides of the lake. LSA provided design plans that repaired erosion at the shorelines around the lake, removed the silt island at the intake and created a forebay utilizing an underwater berm. The dredged area

at the pond intake provides for managed siltation fallout that benefits the longevity of the rest of the pond. The removal of the silt island extends the pond life for approximately 12-15 years before this maintenance will be needed again. As a

result of these improvements, the pond has been restored to its original splendor and the families of the Smallwood Village neighborhoods are able to utilize the area again to walk, fish and enjoy the playground.

Kettler Forlines Homes took home the only award in the category of Partnership with an Environmental or Civic Organization for teaming up with the Global Ecology House Magnet Program at Poolesville High School and the American Chestnut Foundation to establish a demonstration orchard of Chestnut trees at Kettler’s Brightwell Crossing community in Poolesville, MD. American Chestnut trees were virtually wiped out by blight in the 1990’s. The Chestnut Foundation developed a new hybrid tree that is resistant to blight. They provided technical advice for the orchard as well as donating the ten seedlings needed to start the orchard.

Kettler Forlines, along with representatives from Poolesville High School and the Chestnut Foundation toured orchards around Maryland to learn the techniques and procedures necessary to provide the best chance for success of the demonstration orchard. A classroom of high school students was involved in soils sampling and running lab tests in school to determine soil types, ph levels, etc. In the end, the team

planted two American Chestnuts, two Chinese Chestnuts, two American/Chinese hybrids and Four Restoration 1.0 Chestnut seeds. Signage can be found at the location identifying the orchard and detailing the history of the American Chestnut trees. A six-foot wide asphalt trail allows individuals to see the trees up close and watch their progress. Thanks to this partnership between a builder, community members and an environmental organization, the American Chestnut tree is being brought back from of extinction and returned to its former glory. m Congratulations to both of our winners.

Your communities and projects are shining examples that the building industry truly does care about the environment.

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

11

The Legal Pad The Evolution Of The Forest Conservation Variance

By Casey L. Cirner & Stephen J. Orens, Miles & Stockbridge, P.C.

F

orest retention has always been the primary objective of the State and County laws governing forest conservation. Since their enactment, forest Conservation laws required that priority trees, shrubs, plants and specific priority areas “be left in an undisturbed condition” unless disturbances were permitted by local or state reviewing authorities under certain circumstances. Initially the County’s forest conservation laws Chapter 22A of the County Code, allowed M-NCPPC to consider whether a proposed development plan made “maximum use of available planning and zoning options that would result in the greatest possible forest retention” and to consider whether “reasonable efforts have been made to protect (existing vegetation).” Whenever the disturbance or removal of one or more protected trees was necessary, the engineer would include in the preliminary forest conservation plan an explanation of the proposed protection efforts and common sense compromises enabled the M-NCPPC staff to recommend approval even when the disturbance of priority vegetation was required.

On December 1, 2011 the Planning Board considered a forest conservation plan and variance request submitted by the Montgomery County Board of Education (MCPS) as part of a Mandatory Referral review of a school construction project that included widening a public road, Allan Terrace.

According to MCPS the road widening was necessary “to relieve traffic congestion and provide proper fire access for the school.” The Planning Board approved a modified variance finding that:

Senate Bill 666 enacted in 2009, effective October 1, 2009 was enacted to require the development of laws and policies to achieve “no net loss of forest in the State.” SB 666 rejected the “reasonable efforts” approach substituting the requirement that an applicant “demonstrate that [it]… qualifies for a variance under Section 5-1611 of the Natural Resources Article.” SB 666 did not amend the existing variance test that previously applied only to requests for comprehensive exemptions from all forest conservation requirements. The requirement that an applicant qualify for a “variance” when priority trees and priority areas were to be “disturbed” raised the bar and virtually precluded flexible analysis.

And so began a paradigm shift in policy and the Planning Board began to apply a standard for determining the existence of “unwarranted hardship” that is not consistent with prior holdings of Maryland Courts. Maryland appellate courts considered the meaning of “unwarranted hardship” in connection with several environmental variances. The Court of Appeals compared the definitions from numerous jurisdictions of “unnecessary” or “undue” and similarly-worded hardship standards such as “unwarranted hardship” in Belvoir Farms Homeowners Ass’n, Inc. v. North, 355 Md. 259, 275, 734 A.2d 227 (1999). In Belvoir Farms the Court distinguished between a standard, which may result in the denial of beneficial or reasonable use of a parcel of land and the unconstitutional taking standard, which is a denial of all reasonable use of a property. Id. The Court held that “unnecessary,” “undue,” unwarranted, or similar hardship standards, are less restrictive than the unconstitutional taking standard that exists, concluding that “it is the denial of reasonable use that creates an unwarranted hardship.”..

Belvoir Farms, 734 A.2d at 240.

Natural Resources Article Section 5-1611 authorizes local authorities, such as the Planning Board, to grant a forest conservation variance “where owing to special features of a site or other circumstances, implementation of [Title 5] would result in unwarranted hardship to the applicant.” On November 30, 2010 the Montgomery County Council enacted Council Bill 53-10 to make County law “consistent with” SB 666. Council Bill 53-10 did not modify the standards under which variances were approved or rejected. Bill 53-10 became effective on December 10, 2010 and initially M-NCPPC staff took a practical and flexible approach to their review of forest conservation plans and on a case by case basis routinely recommended approval of plans that required the disturbance of critical root zones, requiring two variances only for the removal of protected trees.

“The Applicant’s variance request included the removal of Priority Trees solely because of the proposed widening of Allan Terrace, which fronts the Property. ***However, the Applicant has not demonstrated that the Applicant would suffer an unwarranted hardship without a variance to allow removal or impact to the CRZ of these Priority Trees for the proposed widening of Allan Terrace. Therefore the variance is not granted for removal of trees #142, 147, 148 and 149.”

The Court emphasized that: “the criterion for determining unnecessary hardship is whether the applicable zoning restriction when applied to the property in the setting of its environment is so unreasonable as to constitute an arbitrary and capricious interference with the basic right of private ownership.” Belvoir Farms, 734 A.2d at 237, citing, Marino v. Mayor of Baltimore, 215 Md. 206, 217, 137 A.2d 198, 202 (1957). (Emphasis added.)

Policy then shifted to require a “variance” when the critical root zone of a priority tree was proposed to be disturbed by development subject to a forest conservation plan. In the latter part of 2011 the Department of Natural Resources reminded M-NCPPC staff that the word “disturb” in the statute meant that a variance was required whenever a priority tree or area was within the limits of disturbance of development, ie. when a critical root zone will be impacted.

A §22A-21 forest conservation variance requires that development approval applicants show “that enforcement of Chapter 22A would result in unwarranted hardship.” The phrase “unwarranted hardship” is not defined in either Title 5 of the Natural Resources Article or in Chapter 22A of the County Code.

12

NOV/DEC 2012 |

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

Unwarranted hardship is not the only standard in the State variance law.

Section 5-1611 of the Natural Resources Article permits a variance “where owing to special features of a site or other circumstances, implementation of this subtitle would result in unwarranted hardship to the applicant.”

Chapter 22A of the Montgomery County Code includes other criteria relating to whether the variance will confer as special privilege, is a result of actions of the applicant, is based on a condition of the neighboring property or will degrade water quality. The Court of Appeals in White v. North articulated that when considering a variance, all the specifically stated requirements “are to be considered in the context of the entire variance ordinance, to the end that, when interpreted as a whole either they are or are not generally met.”

The variance standards that the Court considered in White v. North are strikingly similar to the variance requirements in Chapter 22A of the County Code and the State imposed requirements for a forest conservation variance. In considering the 10 variance criteria, the Court of Appeals in White acknowledges that, if total compliance with every specific requirement were necessary, relief would be nearly impossible and serious “taking” questions might arise. It is our view that these specifically stated requirements are to be considered in the context of the entire variance ordinance, to the end that, when interpreted as a whole, either they are or are not generally met. The Court then observed that if “[t]he individual provisions that must be considered are part of the entire matrix that defines what information is necessary to reach a finding as to the existence or nonexistence of an unwarranted hardship.”

The County Code requires a variance applicant to “describe the special conditions peculiar to the property which would cause the unwarranted hardship.” The Court noted in interpreting the wording of the Ordinance in White that unwarranted hardship depended on “the features of a site or other circumstances” and that “other circumstances almost always exist” such as widening a road in front of a school to alleviate congestion and provide safe access for emergency equipment. An applicant seeking to justify a variance should not be required, as was MCPS, to show that the entire project would fail if the variance was denied. The proper test under Maryland case law should be whether the applicant would be denied reasonable use of the area of the property for which a variance is requested and whether denial of the variance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by others in similar circumstances. Luckily, the pendulum has begun to swing back toward a more practical approach and a practical approach is needed. m Casey Cirner and Steve Orens are attorneys with Miles & Stockbridge P.C. in the firm’s Rockville, MD office. Ms. Cirner is an Associate at the Firm and represents clients in the areas of Land Use & Zoning and Real Estate Litigation. Mr. Orens is a Principal at the firm and has more than 30 years of experience representing builders, developers and property owners through various Land Use & Zoning processes in Montgomery County. Mr. Orens is also a life director serving on the MNCBIA Board of Directors. They may be contacted at ccirner@ milesstockbridge.com and sorens@milesstockbridge.com

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

13

2012 MNCBIA Membership Survey

T

his Fall MNCBIA surveyed its members to gauge satisfaction with benefits, including educational programs, networking events and advocacy efforts. The survey results will help Association leaders understand member expectations and concerns by identifying which services and programs are valuable, as well as providing insight into factors affecting membership retention and growth.

Who Responded?

The majority of the respondents are long-time members, reporting that they had been a part of the MNCBIA for more than 10 years.

Both builder and associate members participated in our survey. Historically our membership has been made up of more associates, (currently 64%) than builders (currently 35%) and the results fell in line with those numbers. According to NAHB, the average for the more than 800 BIAs around the country is about two-thirds or 67% associate members.

Why Our Members Join There are many good reasons why it makes sense to be an MNCBIA member. We advocate on your behalf. We provide unparalleled networking opportunities through a variety of events and we provide education ranging from economic forecasts to technical information workshops. It appears that most of our members joined for ALL of those reasons, but Advocacy was number one.

14

NOV/DEC 2012 |

Events & Education Programs We asked you about events and what gets you to come out. The top two answers were the topics and the speakers. And when do you like to attend events? You overwhelmingly chose evening. It seems nearly 60% of our members are night owls. Topping the ratings in events were, Celebrity Chefs, the Liaison Breakfasts, the PROS Awards, Builder Connections and the Multifamily Trends conference.

When it comes to education programs, 23% of you wanted your summers off, when building is really moving forward. And in terms of how you want to learn, there was a tie for first between online courses and webinars.

Other factors that were important to you in deciding whether to attend an educational program were, if the course counts toward a designation, time away from the office, cost and the availability of networking opportunities.

Our education committee is always open to new ideas for courses. When we asked you what your main interests were, Green Building and Energy efficiency topped the list.

Communication We live in a world of electronic everything. We text and tweet, post and pin, like it and link it and dig it and share it. And the cloud is not just that puffy, white thing in the sky. A whopping 77% of you are on LinkedIn and another 51% of you use Facebook (MNCBIA has a Facebook page. Did you know that?).

Staying in touch with our members is easier than ever. And with all the events and meetings and dinners we hold every month, we seem to be sending our members something every day. We were a little worried that you might block us, or even worse, unfriend us. So

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

we asked, do you feel the amount of email communications you receive from us is too much, too little or just right. We were happy to discover that 80% of you feel we are getting it just right!

specific events where they could present marketing materials to attendees.

Not as popular was an Associate-to-Associate referral evening, where Associate members could network and trade leads and ideas with each other.

When asked what message they would like to send to builders about how they could help keep associates in the MNCBIA, the overwhelming response was, builders should attend more events, followed closely by, builders ought to receive bids and proposals from MNCBIA Associate members.

Home Builders Care Foundation (HBCF) HBCF is the non-profit charitable construction affiliate of MNCBIA that builds for our neighbors in need. Member involvement is vital to HBCF’s success. We know our members are the giving type so we asked how you would like to participate with HBCF in the future.

More than half of you said that you would like to participate in a volunteer day of service or a community event. The other 50% was spread between attending a fundraising event, making a tax-deductible contribution (you can do that at www.hbcf.org), helping collect food & toys for the needy (food drive coming in October) and donating an item to the Winter Ball & Silent Auction.

Patti Kane is waiting to hear from you.

Website Everyone has a website. No matter how The survey results will help Association small your company, if you can’t be found The Big Picture leaders understand member expectations and on the World Wide Web you may as well We truly appreciate your feedback in concerns by identifying which services and not exist. MNCBIA’s website has seen many this survey. As with any organization, there programs are valuable, as well as providing changes over the years. The last big redesign are things that work and there are areas insight into factors affecting membership was more than five years ago, so it’s time for where we can improve. It’s always good to retention and growth. a facelift. Before we go under the knife we step back once in a while and look at the wanted your opinion on the site. big picture.

Most of you visit our website at some point during the year and 47% Two final important questions we asked were, how satisfied you are with of you are “somewhat satisfied”. Nearly 44% of you visit monthly, while your membership and how likely is it that you would recommend MNCBIA 25% stop by quarterly. There are 9% of you out there who NEVER visit membership to a friend or colleague. We are proud to report that 70% of you MNCBIA’s website (we know who you are). You don’t know what you’re would recommend joining. And for the most part you are very satisfied with missing. Almost everything you need to know about the BIA can be found your membership. So, thank you! We’re glad you’re here and we’re happy somewhere on the website. to help you.

The number one reason for visiting the website is to search our calendar of events (42%) followed by registering for an event (24%). You seem to be fairly happy with the accuracy of information, and the quality and quantity of the content, but navigating through the site is more of a challenge. This is something that will improve with a redesign, which will come as soon as there is funding available. We were happy to see that 52% of you would visit the website again. The 33% who said they were “somewhat likely” to visit will certainly change their minds to “very likely” after we complete our redesign.

What our Associates Say Our Associate members make up more than half of our membership.

Without them we wouldn’t have an Association. So we asked them a couple of questions.

While Builders are busy building and selling houses, Associates are trying to sell their products and services. We wanted to know how the MNCBIA could help them with that. One idea we proposed was putting a buyers’ guide on BIA’s website with a link to Associate member’s websites. This idea got a 53% approval rating. We will explore that more after our website redesign.

Also ranking fairly high, at 47%, was allowing associates to have tables at

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

15

The Engineer’s Angle Maryland’s Next Move on Water Quality – Accounting for Growth

By Ed Carroll, Loiederman Soltesz Associates, Inc.

H

ow does Maryland plan to reduce future nutrient pollutant loads associated with new development? The Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) has developed and is currently implementing the State’s Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) that will reduce existing levels of nutrients and sediment pollution entering the Chesapeake Bay—otherwise known as “loading.” MDE is now focusing its regulatory authority on untreated loading caused by new development. MDE is proposing regulations to ensure that nutrient pollution for new developments be quantified and mitigated through an offset/trading policy known as Accounting for Growth (AfG).

The AfG policy will establish a strategy requiring a complete and full offset of all nutrient pollutant loads from new developments. Although the planned AfG regulations seek to reduce nutrient and sediment loads similar to the WIP, this proposed policy is based on nitrogen exclusively. Being relatively soluble in water, nitrogen is much more difficult to manage than phosphorus or sediment. MDE concluded that if a developer can effectively offset their respective nitrogen load, then phosphorus and sediment are essentially managed as well. The proposed regulations define how nitrogen pollutant load from new developments are calculated and require the load to be fully offset by the developer through the purchase of nitrogen offset credits through a nutrient trading program established by Maryland legislature. A new development’s nitrogen load (in annual pounds), per MDE’s methodology, is generated from three sources: sewage waste load, stormwater load, and Vehicle Mobile Travel Emissions (for residential projects only). For development projects served by wastewater treatment plants without capacity, nitrogen loads will be much higher requiring even more credits and impacting rural developments even greater.

[

The pending AfG regulations will affect how new development moves forward within Maryland

What does the proposed trading program look like? Most likely, it will mimic the established Maryland Department of Agriculture (MDA) nutrient trading program. Trading will be structured through a unit of trade called a credit. A credit equates to one pound of nitrogen per year. The Maryland Nutrient Trading Program provides a public marketplace and registry for the buying and selling of nutrient credits based upon minimum requirements established by MDA. Trading may take place between any combination of eligible parties including public or private entities. For example, assuming a farmer has achieved his baseline nitrogen pollution control and reduction requirements on his property under the WIP, the farmer could then provide additional nitrogen reductions through such implementation strategies as cover crops or forested buffers for a specified timeframe. This additional nitrogen reduction above the minimum established baseline could then be

16

NOV/DEC 2012 |

converted into credits and placed on the Maryland Nutrient Trading Program marketplace. The developer (Buyer) who is in need of offset credits may contact the farmer (Seller) directly or through a nutrient trading broker. All new development must obtain their offset credits within the County for where the proposed development is located unless the project is located in a Targeted Growth and Revitalization Area (a PlanMaryland designated planning area) served by an Enhanced Nutrient Removal wastewater treatment plant.

What is the cost of a credit? MDE asserts that the price per credit will be driven by the market and not mandated by the State. The developer who desires the credit needs only to purchase the credits to fulfill their obligation.

It is the Seller’s responsibility to ensure that the nitrogen reduction controls being utilized for credits on their property remain and continue to function properly. MDE is currently debating timeframes for which the Seller’s nitrogen reduction controls remain in place. The Seller’s established credit negotiated price needs to account for this lengthy timeframe, required annual third party inspections to assure compliance, and potential additional costs to correct any deficiencies in the nitrogen control measures. Considering the financial obligations over this length of time, the local farmer may desire to establish a much higher price per credit or possibly elect not to participate in the trading program at all. Concerns of supply versus demand arise.

If offset credit supply is less than demand, which may be very possible given certain trading geography limitations or lack of participation by the agricultural community, credit prices could rise dramatically. What happens if the supply of credits is exhausted within a County where a development is proposed?

Would this require a moratorium on new development? Is a possible solution a fee-in-lieu managed by MDE? If a fee-in-lieu should be warranted, how will the price per credit be derived? Will MDE include grandfathering provisions? These are a few of the questions being posed to MDE by the building industry as MDE continues to develop the regulatory language.

The pending AfG regulations will affect how new development moves forward within Maryland. MDE is currently crafting the regulatory language for AfG with an anticipated effective date of December 31, 2014. Presently, it appears as if this policy will apply to any new development disturbing over one acre and seeking coverage under an NPDES General Permit or Individual Permits. Clearly, a developer’s costs and permitting delays could be significant. LSA will continue to monitor and inform the development community on the progress and on impacts on specific projects. m Ed Carroll, PE is a Vice President and the Director of Environmental Engineering for Loiederman Soltesz Associates, Inc. Mr. Carroll is recognized as a Qualified Professional by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources for the preparation of forest stand delineations and forest conservation planning. He possesses over 20 years of experience and is highly focused on understanding and shaping the evolving environmental regulations such as EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL, its seven respective jurisdictional WIPs, and MS4 permits. He can be reached at 301-870-2166 or ecarroll@lsassociates.net.

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

MNCBIA Membership New Members & Reinstatements (8/1/12 – 9/30/12) BUILDERS

Griffin Realty, LLC Developer/Builder Robert Jacobs 7600 Leesburg Pike, Suite #200, East Building Falls Church, VA 22043 Ph: 703-506-8149 Fax: 703-873-3592 rob.jacobs@afsb.com Sponsor: Rob Jacobs Paramount Construction Custom Building/Remodeling, Single Family Robert Maggin 15809 Paramount Drive Rockville, MD 20855 Ph: 301-330-9880 Fax: 301-330-9882 rmaggin@ paramountconstruction.net Sponsor: Steve Nardella

ASSOCIATES

BB&T Atlantic Risk Management Insurance & Bonds/Employee Benefits Kent Pagoota 5850 Waterloo Road, Suite #240 Columbia, MD 21045 Ph: 410-480-4417 Fax: 410-465-1584 kpagoota@atlanticrisk.com Sponsor: James Kettler Centretek Solutions Computer Software/New Homes Jay Miller 8318 Forrest Street Ellicott City, MD 21043 Ph: 410-465-4880 Fax: 410-465-5430 jmiller@centretek.com Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Levine Law Group, LLC Attorneys Darin Levine 839 Quince Orchard Boulevard, Suite M Gaithersburg, MD 20878 Ph: 301-519-9099 Fax: 301-519-0997 dlevine@levinelawgroupllc.com Sponsor: Jeff Caruso

Moxley-Kidwell Construction & Development Services Electrical Contractors Kevin Kidwell 12107 Merricks Court Monrovia, MD 21770 Ph: 301-865-6420 Fax: 301-865-6419 kevin@moxleykidwell.com Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Matthew Waksmunski Building/Remodeling Matthew Waksmunski 144 Pasture Side Way, Apt. E Rockville, MD 20816 Ph: 240-286-2909 mwcustombuilt@yahoo.com Sponsor: Jodi Kline

New Day Mortgage Banking Ken Harthausen 8171 Maple Lawn Boulevard Fulton, MD 20759 Ph: 954-232-8666 kharthausen@newdayusa.com Sponsor: Steve Nardella

REINSTATEMENT

The Bartley Corporation Concrete Foundations Justin La Chat P.O. Box 1299 Ashton, MD 20862 Ph: 301-384-2700 Fax: 301-252-1703 justin@bartleycorp.com Sponsor: Steve Nardella

MNCBIA’s Most Wanted List Listed here are firms whose membership in MNCBIA has lapsed in recent months. WE WANT THEM BACK!

Please encourage these companies to reinstate their membership. Also listed are prospective members we are working to add to our team.

All Temp Heating & Air Conditioning • AMEC Contracting • Augustine Plumbing • Clearwater Landscape & Nursery • Colorworld Painting & Drywall • Commercial Image Comstock Services • DeFore Designs • DeLeon & Stang • Digiterra • DOW Solutions • Ferguson • Guardian Realty Management, Inc. • Hatfield Equipment Services JK Moving & Storage • JW Shipley • K.V. Gessford, Inc. • Lee Building Supply • McCormick Paints • Porcelanosa • Rexel • Ruiz Contracting Inc. • Ryland Homes • Tower Companies

INDEX OF ADVERTISERS Appliance Distributors Unlimited, Inc..............................................Back Cover Builders Mutual Insurance Company..................................................Page 19 DR Horton....................................................................................Page 07 GE Appliances...............................................................................Page 03 Georgetown Insurance Service, Inc....................................................Page 18 Linowes & Blocher LLP...................................................................Page 13 Louis Tenenbaum...........................................................................Page 12 Monument Bank............................................................................Page 08 Shulman Rogers............................................................................Page 13 Signature Companies......................................................................Page 04 Vintage Security.............................................................................Page 02

STARS Club The special members of MNCBIA’s STARS Club allow the Association to provide better services for your benefit, to function effectively, to continue special events dedicated to excellent networking and to strengthen our Advocacy program.

GOLD

Development Guarantee Group of Montgomery County Hanley Wood Market Intelligence Elm Street Development NVR, Inc. Pleasants Development, Inc.

SILVER

Acacia Federal Savings Bank BB& T Georgetown Insurance Service, Inc. Lerch Early & Brewer, Chtd.

Linowes & Blocher, LLP Loiederman Soltesz Associates, Inc. McMillan Metro, P.C. Miles & Stockbridge, P.C. Rodgers Consulting, Inc. Winchester Homes Inc.

BRONZE

Ballard Spahr LLP Burgess & Niple, Inc. Charles P. Johnson & Associates Craftmark/Craftstar

Greenhorne & O’Mara Inc. Gutschick, Little & Weber, PA Mid-Atlantic Builders, Inc. Reznick Group Sandy Spring Bank Shulman Rogers St. Charles Community, LLC Washington Gas

FRIEND

Baker Tilly Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. Bozzuto Homes Caruso Homes Inc. Dewberry Dico, Inc. EYA Furey Doolan & Abell, LLP Geo-Technology Associates Inc. K Hovnanian Homes Liberty Homebuilder, Inc. Macris Hendricks & Glascock, P.A. Michael Harris Homes Miller & Smith Homes Mitchell & Best Homebuilders LLC O’Malley Miles Nylen & Gilmore Ward & Klein Chtd.

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

|

NOV/DEC 2012

17

Events Calendar NOVEMBER 2012 1

15

6

Home Builders Care Foundation Board meeting MNCBIA Executive Committee meeting

50+ Awards Committee meeting

Prince George’s Liaison Commettee meeting

6 Real Estate Finance Committee meeting Custom & Small Builders Committee meeting

7 Environmental Committee meeting

8

21 Montgomery County Liaison Committee meeting Calvert & St. Mary’s Joint Liaison Committee meeting MNCBIA Charles Liaison & Chamber of Commerce PGM Committees meeting

22 Happy Thanksgiving!

Multifamily Trends Conference WSSC Liaison Committee meeting MNCBIA Leadership Orientation

28 MNCBIA’s Membership Committee meeting

13

DECEMBER 2012

Codes & Standards Committee meeting BIA’s Business Networking Happy Hour

14 Green Building Committee meeting

18

NOV/DEC 2012 |

1 Winter Gala & Silent Auction

5 Environmental Committee meeting

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

7 Prince George’s Liaison Committee meeting

11 Codes & Standards Committee meeting

12 Green Building Committee meeting

13 WSSC Liaison Committee meeting MNCBIA Joint Executive Committee & Board meeting

19 Montgomery County Liaison Committee meeting Calvert & St. Mary’s Joint Liaison Committee meeting MNCBIA Charles Liaison & Chamber PGM Committees meeting

1738 Elton Road, Suite 200 Silver Spring, MD 20903