Watershed Implementation Plan Phase II Septic System Conversion

Transcription

1 Watershed Implementation Plan Phase II Septic System Conversion July Septic Task Force Meeting # 6 07/25/17

2 Task Force Goals Develop a suite of recommendations that will inform decision making Identify near-term strategies to support effort Identify long-term strategies and approaches Identify areas requiring additional investigation for County Staff

3 Agenda Working Group Updates & Discussion Fiscal Policy Land Use Looking for discussion to be more interactive than earlier meetings.

4 WORKING GROUP AREAS FINANCIAL LAND USE PUBLIC POLICY SEPTIC CONVERSION PROGRAM

5 Working Groups LAND USE WORKING GROUP FISCAL WORKING GROUP POLICY WORKING GROUP Kate Fritz Eric DeVito Jim Doyle Sally Hornor Jerry Pesterfield Ben Wechsler Lloyd Lewis Jeff Holland Kincey Potter Eliot Powell Karen McJunkin COUNTY LIAISON COUNTY LIAISON COUNTY LIAISON Lynn Miller LaKisha Giles Karen Henry

6 Key Questions How & where could residents connect? How to finance? What policies are needed to develop a successful program?

7 Upcoming OSDS Efforts DPW working on procurement of an OSDS Conversion Program Manager Program Manager to have expertise in the following minimum areas: Engineering & Construction Financial Planning Public & Environmental Policy Public Relations Program Management

8 OSDS Conversion Program Management Team Task Force Input DPW Background Other Stakeholders Task Assignment

9 Key Questions Looking for guidance on how to structure the program No wrong answers looking for the best fit for Anne Arundel County

10 Land Use Consistency with GDP and WSMP Majority are in Tier 2 and consistent with current policies. Exceptions are Lakeshore, Epping Forest/Sherwood Forest, and Patuxent Manor Balance between extension and potential infill Less than 3000 vacant or developable properties within the 11 Priority Management Areas Some may be developed regardless of public sewer Infill within existing communities may be consistent with Smart Growth principles. Extension through a No Public Service Area? Not prohibited can be designated a no access line.

11 Land Use Would extensions be able to be used as basis for rezoning? Current policy in GDP is that extension should not be a justification by itself to change the land use plans and zoning. However, argument may still be presented during rezoning requests. GDP could be modified to clarify when or if land used plan changes are acceptable if related to WIP or TMDL goals. Projects able to bring in large septic areas may be most cost effective and provide environmental improvement.

12 Land Use Transferable Development Rights Examined by OPZ as related to agricultural and rural preservation (most typical use); not examined for specifically for septic communities. Current growth tier & zoning policies limit utilization since development capacity is reduced. Current zoning is considered to be consistent with demand; establishing receiving zones may be difficult. GDP would need modification or other legislative changed to implement receiving areas. Banking System for Nitrogen Credits Considered to be worthy of future exploration.

13 Land Use Banking system concept Developer funds a sewer extension to a nearby septic community, and in turn receives some sort of credit that could be applied to the current development project or a future development project. Credits could be toward impact fees, or exemptions from certain development requirements A similar approach is use with road improvements; a developer can make improvements beyond those directly required by the project and receive credits for traffic impact fees. Consider a working team including OPZ, I &P, DPW, and MBIA.

14 Fiscal Group Develop a ranking and prioritization of septic areas to be connected to public sewer based on a number of factors Use system to develop program budget for future years General priority Total septic systems in the Critical Area Total in HDPAs (excluding critical area and cluster solutions) Total in Tier 2 Total identified for cluster solutions NRUs can be used to fill in balance

15 Hierarchy Maps Gray independent; Colors dependent on other contracts

16 Policy Group County Should Actively Encourage Conversions from Traditional Septic Systems The County must take a leadership role in designating a Priorities List" that will receive targeted efforts and attention. County should develop a rubric for identifying what communities or areas to prioritize communities based on cost effectiveness and receptivity (including the community s history of petitioning for public sewer expansion). The County should develop both carrots and sticks to incentivize the retirement of traditional septic systems in these priority areas.

17 Policy Group Encouraging Conversions cont d The carrots should consist of education and outreach, and potentially availability of targeted financial assistance. A well organized and adequately funded public relations/outreach strategy would be helpful. The Public needs to better understand the costs of a do nothing approach specifically the eventual costs of new septic and private well. For communities that don t want to hook up, voluntary measures may not be enough, though the County should exercise care in threatening to deploy sticks.

18 Policy Group Changes to the Petition Process that Would Accelerate the Pace of Conversions Discrete changes to the petition process could make the process simpler. Petition process should be initiated at the community level, but perhaps with encouragement from the County consisting of mostly carrots but some sticks. The process needs to be amended so that relatively small changes to the boundaries of petition areas does not send process back to the beginning. DPW Engineering must play a more affirmative role in defining petition boundaries having gerrymandered sewer districts increases overall costs.

19 Policy Group Accelerating Conversions cont d Extending the financing term from 30 years to 40 years or longer would make more projects feasible. Either waiving sewer CFCCs or allowing the finance of CFCCs over period longer than 5 years would help. Need to be able to assess fees on a per-lot or ratable basis instead of front footage. In the cost estimate provided to community and homeowner, need to be able to provide an all in cost that includes cost for private plumbing connection.

20 Policy Group The Costs to the End User Need to be Reduced At current costs, conversion will continue at a slow pace. Extending financing to 50 years would help, and CFCCs need to be reduced, eliminated or spread over a longer period. Need to actively develop other federal and state funding sources. Securing a long-term commitment from MDE for BRF funding could help, especially if these funds were made available on a competitive basis. Requiring BAT Systems outside of the Critical Area is Probably Not the Most Cost Effective Approach.

21 Key Guidance Revenue approaches Cost Sharing Mandatory / Voluntary Incentives Community based Watershed based Nitrogen credit / transfer development rights

22 Key Guidance Subject Area Revenue Approaches Cost Sharing Mandatory/Voluntary Guidance - Maximize outside funding sources such as BRF & EPA - Extend financing timeline - Consider waiving some fees - Provide a all inclusive cost, including onsite work - More voluntary, but need to establish a process whereby it can transition to mandatory Incentives Community Based - Develop a process for actively encouraging communities and modifying boundaries Watershed Based Nitrogen Credits - Evaluating banking or credit system concept

23 Additional Guidance Develop new process in similar to petition process but one that enables the County to have a more active role Develop a ranking and prioritization system that can be used to identify projects and schedule Secure long-term commitment from MDE for BRF funding (multi-year??) Develop a robust public relations and outreach program

24 Additional Guidance Subject Area Guidance Revenue Approaches Cost Sharing Mandatory/Voluntary Incentives Community Based Watershed Based Nitrogen Credits

25 Future Plans Next meeting Not scheduled Considering whether we should try to reconvene next year after first round of tasks have been completed

26 FINAL QUESTIONS Working Group County Contacts Land Use Lynn Miller, OPZ Fiscal LaKisha Giles, DPW Policy Karen Henry, DPW