T&EITEM 1
October 5, 2017
Worksession
MEMORANDUM
October 4, 2017
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney
(J411(Jvkf)}
Worksession:
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation - Amendments
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation - Amendments, sponsored by Lead Sponsor Council President at
the request of the Planning Board, was introduced on July 25, 2017. A public hearing was held on
September 19 (see written testimony on ©33-45).
Bill 26-17 would:
• require certain administrative and minor subdivisions to comply with the Forest
Conservation Law;
• subject certain conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law;
• require park development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law;
• exempt certain modifications to existing residential development property under
certain circumstances;
• require certain projects requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand
delineation;
• modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation;
• alter the maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas;
• remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for
recommendation; and
• generally amend laws related to forest conservation.
Issues for Committee Discussion
1
1.
Should projects already in the queue be grandfathered?
Bill 26-17 would require an
applicant to submit to the Planning Director a forest stand delineation to be reviewed concurrently
with a submitted sketch plan. Scott Wallace, on behalf of Global LifeSci Development Corporation
(Percontee), the developer of the "Viva White Oak" project, submitted written comments seeking
1
Council staff notes that technical, non-substantive edits are needed to Bill 26-17. These edits will be made to the
bill that incorporates the Committee's recommendation and presented in Council staff's packet for Council
consideration.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
an amendment to grandfather existing projects. Mr. Wallace noted that Percontee filed a Sketch
Plan application on August 1, but does not yet have Sketch Plan approval. Mr. Wallace
recommended language be added to Bill 26-1 7 specifically applying the provisions of the bill to
sketch plan applications filed after the effective date of the bill (©46-48).
Council staff comments:
Council staff generally supports grandfathering existing projects, but
recommends the deadline for grandfathering be the date of enactment of Bill 26-17, not the
effective date of the law. Council staff understands from Planning staff that they do not object to
grandfathering projects that have already submitted sketch plan applications.
2.
Should the law require the County Arborist to provide a recommendation for tree
variances?
Code Sections 22A-21(c) and 22A-30(c)(4) requires the Planning Board to send a copy
of any variance request to the County Arborist for a written recommendation, which must be
provided within 30 days or the recommendation will be presumed favorable. Bill 26-17 would
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist. The Planning Board
testimony on ©34-35 explains the rationale for this. Essentially, the County Arborist wants to
receive the tree variance requests fairly late in the development process, which Planning staff argue
is challenging to incorporate during the 120 day regulatory close for site plans and preliminary
plans. Lisa Feldt, on behalf of the Executive, generally supported the bill, but urged the Council
to retain the role of the County Arborist.
Council staff comments:
Council staff can understand the timing difficulties that are presented
during the regulatory process. Options for the Committee's consideration include the Planning
Board transmitting the variance requests to the County Arborist earlier in the development process
or changing the law's requirement of a "recommendation" to a "consultation", which is less formal
than requiring a recommendation from the Arborist. Council staff suggests discussing these
options with Planning staff and County staff at the worksession.
This packet contains:
Bill 26-17
Legislative Request Report
Planning Board memo
Planning Board staff memo
Fiscal and Economic Impact statement
Testimony and Correspondence
F:\LAW\BILLS\1726 PB Forest Conservation Amendments\T&E Memo.Docx
Circle#
1
17
18
20
28
33
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
---=2-=-6-__.1...:...7_ _ _ _ _ __
Conservation
Concerning: Forest
Amendments
Draft No._£_
Revised:
7/6/2017
July
25, 2017
Introduced:
January
25, 2019
Expires:
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: ~N-=on~e~-- ----
Ch. _ _ , Laws of Mont. Co. _ _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
Lead Sponsor: Council President at the Request of the Planning Board
AN ACT
to:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
require certain administrative and minor subdivisions to comply with the Forest
Conservation Law;
subject certain conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law;
require park development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law;
exempt certain modifications to existing residential development property under
certain circumstances;
require certain projects requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand
delineation;
modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation;
alter the maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas;
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for
recommendation; and
generally amend laws related to forest conservation.
By amending
Montgomery County Code, Forest Conservation
Chapter 22A,
Sections 22A-3, 22A-4, 22A-5, 22A-9, 22A-11, 22A-12, 22A-21, 22A-30, and 22A-31
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
Existing law unaffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No.
26-17
1
Sec.
1.
Sections 22A-3, 22A-4, 22A-5, 22A-9, 22A-ll, 22A-12, 22A-21,
22A-30, and 22A-31 are amended as follows:
22A-3. Definitions.
In this Chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated:
Administrative subdivision
means g plan for g proposed subdivision or
resubdivision prepared and submitted for approval
by
the Planning Director
under Division 50.6 of Chapter 50 before preparation of
_g
subdivision plat.
*
*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
*
Conditional use
means
_g
use approved under Chapter 59-7.3.1.
*
*
*
11
Development plan
means a plan or an amendment to a development plan
approved under Section 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59 or a floating zone plan approved
under Section 7.2.1 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter
59.
*
*
*
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Lot
means for the purpose of this Chapter a tract ofland, the boundaries of which
have been established as a result of deed or previous subdivision or a larger
parcel, and which will not be subject of further subdivision, as defined under
[Section 50-1] Chapter 50, without an approved forest stand delineation and
forest conservation plan
*
20
21
*
*
22
23
24
25
Minor subdivision
means g plan for g proposed subdivision or resubdivision
prepared and submitted for approval
by
the Planning Director under Chapter
50.7.
*
*
*
26
27
Municipal corporation
means a municipality without planning and zoning
authority or which has assigned its responsibilities under §5-1603(a) of the
-2-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No.
26-17
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Maryland Code [Subtitle 16 of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland
Code] to the County.
*
*
*
[Nontidal wetland
means an area regulated as a nontidal wetland under Title
8, Subtitle 12, of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland Code.]
*
*
*
Park development plan
means an application submitted
12y
the Montgomery
County Parks Department for the construction and development of~ specific
park.
*
*
*
38
39
40
41
Planned unit development means a development comprised of a combination
of land uses or varying intensities of the same land use, having at least 20%
of the land permanently dedicated to green area, and under an integrated plan
that provides flexibility in land use design approved by the Planning Board
under Section 7.2.1 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7. l.B of Chapter
59.
*
*
*
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Preliminary Plan of Subdivision
means a plan for a proposed subdivision or
resubdivision prepared and submitted for approval by the Planning Board
under Chapter 50.4 before preparation of a subdivision plan.
*
*
*
Project plan
means a plan or an amendment to a project plan [approved under
50
Division 59-D-2] referred to in Division 7. 7.1.B of Chapter 59.
*
*
*
51
52
53
54
55
Public utility
means any:
(1)
[the] transmission [lines and the] line or electric generating
[stations licensed under Article 78, Section 54A and 54B or 54-I
-3-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
56
of the Maryland Code; and] station; or
57
58
59
(2)
water, sewer, electric, gas, telephone, and cable service [facilities
and lines] line.
*
*
*
60
61
Site plan
means a plan or an amendment to a site plan approved under Section
7.3.4 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59.
*
62
63
64
65
66
*
*
Sketch plan
means
g
plan or amendment to
g
sketch plan approved under
Chapter 59.7.3.3.
*
*
*
Special exception
means a use approved as a conditional use under Section 7 .3 .1
or Section 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter
59.
*
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
*
*
Subdivision
has the same meaning as stated in Chapter 50.
*
*
*
Watershed
means [all lands lying with an area described as a watershed in the
Countywide Stream Protection Strategy] any area delineated as
g
watershed
in the Montgomery County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
Permit Implementation Program, or any smaller area within the watershed that
is delineated
.by
the State of Maryland as
g
12-Digit watershed.
74
75
76
77
78
Wetland
means an area that is inundated or saturated
.by
surface water or
groundwater at g frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal
circumstances does support, g prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life
in saturated soil conditions, commonly known as hydrophytic vegetation.
79
80
81
-4-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL No. 26-17
82
83
84
22A-4. Applicability
Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Chapter, this Chapter applies to:
(a)
a person required by law to obtain an approval or amendment to a
development plan, diagrammatic plan, project plan, floating zone plan,
sketch plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, administrative subdivision,
minor subdivision, or site plan;
(b)
a person required by law to obtain approval of~ special exception or~
conditional use, [approval] or a sediment control permit on a tract of
land 40,000 square feet or larger, and who is not otherwise required to
obtain an approval under subsection (a);
*
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
*
*
~
(d)
a government entity subject to a mandatory referral or
park
94
95
development plan on a tract of land 40,000 square feet or larger which is
not exempt under subsection 22A-5(f);
*
96
97
98
99
*
*
22A-5. Exemptions.
The requirements of Article II do not apply to:
*
*
*
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
(b)
an agricultural activity that is exempt from both platting requirements
under Section [50-9] 50-3 and requirements to obtain a sediment control
permit under Section [19-2(c)(2)] 19-2(b)(2).
Agricultural support
buildings and related activities are exempt only if built using best
management practices;
*
*
*
(i)
noncoal surface mining regulated under [Title 7 of the Natural
Resources Article of the Maryland Code] Subtitle
_a
of Title
.Ll.
of the
-5-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
108
109
110
111
112
113
Environment Article of the Maryland Code.
*
*
*
(n)
any rumor subdivision under [Section 50-35A(a)(2)-(3) involving
conversion of an existing recorded outlot created because of inadequate
or unavailable sewerage or water service to a lot or joining two or more
existing residential lots into one lot,] Division 50.7 of Chapter 50 if:
( 1)
the only development located on the resulting lot is a single family
dwelling unit or an accessory structure (such as a pool, tennis
court,orshed);an d
(2)
the development does not result in the cutting, clearing, or grading
of:
(A)
(B)
( C)
more than a total of 20,000 square feet of forest,
any forest in a stream buffer,
any forest on a property located in a special protection area
which must submit a water quality plan,
(D)
(E)
any specimen or champion tree, or
any tree or forest that is subject to the requirements of a
previously approved forest conservation plan or tree save
plan[.]; or
Q)
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
there is no proposed land disturbance and~ declaration of intent is
filed with the Planning Director stating that the lot will not be the
subject of additional regulated activities under this Chapter within
~
years of the approval of the minor subdivision.
131
132
133
134
(
o)
The cutting or clearing of public utility rights-of-way or land for electric
generating stations licensed under [Section 54A and 54B or Section 541
of Article 78] Sections 7-205 and 7-207 or 7-208 of the Public Utility
Companies Article of the Maryland Code, if:
-6-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
135
136
137
138
139
(1)
any required certificates of public convenience and necessity
have been issued in accordance with Section [5-1604(£)]
5-1603(f) of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland
Code; and
(2)
the cutting or clearing of the forest is conducted so as to minimize
the loss of forest.
*
*
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
*
(q)
a special exception.,_ or conditional use, application if:
*
*
*
(3)
the total disturbance area for the proposed special exception use.,_
or conditional use, will not exceed 10,000 square feet, and
clearing will not exceed a total of 5000 square feet of forest or
include any specimen or champion tree;
*
*
*
(t)
a modification to an existing_:_
ill
non-residential developed property if:
[(1)]
.(A}no more than 5,000 square feet of forest is ever cleared
at one time or cumulatively after an exemption is issued;
[(2)]
ill}
the modification does not result in the cutting, clearing,
or grading of any forest in a stream buffer or located on
property in a special protection area which must submit a
water quality plan;
[(3)]
.(g
the modification does not reqmre approval of a
preliminary [plan of] or administrative subdivision plan;
and
-7-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
[(4)]
02}
the modification does not increase the developed area
by more than 50% and the existing development is
maintained[.t or
ill
residential developed property if:
(A)
forest is not impacted or cleared;
the modification is not located in§; stream buffer or located
on property in§; special protection area which must submit
§;
ill}
water quality plan;
(g
the modification does not reqmre approval of a
preliminary or administrative subdivision plan;
the modification does not increase the developed area by
the existing structure is not modified.
*
*
*
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
22A-9. County Highway Projects.
*
*
*
(a)
General.
*
*
*
(2)
The construction should minimize forest [cutting or clearing]
removal, land disturbance, and loss of specimen or champion
trees to the extent possible while balancing other design,
construction, and environmental standards.
The constructing
agency must make a reasonable effort to minimize land
disturbance to avoid the cutting or clearing of trees and other
woody plants.
*
*
*
-
8
-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
22A-11. Application, review, and approval procedures
(a)
General.
(1)
Coordinated with project review.
The forest stand delineation
and forest conservation plan must be submitted and reviewed in
conjunction with the review process for a development plan,
floating zone plan, project plan, sketch plan, [preliminary plan
of] subdivision plan, site plan, special exception, conditional use,
mandatory referral, park development plan, or sediment control
permit under this Section. The Planning Director must coordinate
review of the forest conservation plan with the Director of
Environmental Protection, the Director of Permitting Services,
the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, other relevant
regulatory agencies, and entities that will provide public utilities
to the tract, to promote consistency between the objectives of this
Chapter and other development requirements. To the extent
practicable, entities providing public utilities should design
facilities that will serve a tract in a manner that avoids identified
conservation areas and minimizes tree loss.
(b)
*
*
*
Project requiring development plan, floating zone plan, project plan,
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
sketch plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, or site plan approval.
(1)
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
Planning Director a forest stand delineation with the application
for a development plan, floating zone plan, project plan, sketch
plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, or site plan, whichever
comes first. Within 30 days of receipt, the Planning Director
must notify the applicant whether the forest stand delineation is
-9-
f:llaw\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
NO.
26-17
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
complete and correct.
If
the Planning Director fails to notify the
applicant within 30 days, the delineation will be treated as
complete and correct. The Planning Director may require further
information or provide for one extension of this deadline for an
additional 15 days for extenuating circumstances. The applicant
must submit revised drawings to address comments within 90
days from the date the Planning Director sends comments to the
applicant.
If
the applicant fails to submit revised drawings, the
application is deemed withdrawn. The Planning Director may
provide for one extension of this deadline for extenuating
circumstances.
(2)
Forest Conservation Plan.
(A)
Application.
After being notified that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must
submit a forest conservation plan to the Planning Director.
If
the development proposal will require more than one of
the approvals subject to this subsection, the applicant must
submit a preliminary forest conservation plan to the
Planning Director in conjunction with the first approval
and a final forest conservation plan in conjunction with the
last approval.
If
only one approval subject to this
·-
subsection is required, an applicant must submit a
preliminary forest conservation and a final forest
conservation plan at the time of the development
application [and a final forest conservation plan before a
sediment control permit is issued for the tract, but no later
than a record plat is submitted].
- 10 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
*
*
*
(
c)
Project requiring special exception or conditional use approval.
(
1)
Forest stand delineation.
If a special exception or conditional use
proposal is subject to the requirements of this Chapter, the
applicant must submit a forest stand delineation to the Planning
Director before the Board of Appeals may consider the
application for the special exception.
The deadlines for
reviewing a forest stand delineation are the same as in paragraph
(b )(1) of this Section.
(2)
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit a
preliminary forest conservation plan to the Planning Director. The
Board of Appeals must consider the preliminary forest
conservation plan when approving the special exception or
conditional use application and must not approve a special
exception or conditional use application that [is in conflict]
conflicts with the preliminary forest conservation plan. A final
forest conservation plan must be submitted before obtaining a
sediment control permit, or at the time of preliminary plan of
subdivision or site plan application, if required. The deadlines for
reviewing a final forest conservation plan are the same as m
paragraph (d)(2) of this Section
*
*
*
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
(e)
Project requiring mandatory referral or Park Development Plan.
(1)
Forest stand delineation.
A person seeking mandatory referral or
~
park development plan for a project that is subject to the
requirements of this Chapter must first submit a forest stand
- 11 -
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
delineation to the Planning Director for review. The deadlines for
reviewing a forest stand delineation are the same as in paragraph
(b)( 1) of this Section.
(2)
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit to
the Planning Director a preliminary forest conservation plan. The
Planning Board must consider the preliminary forest conservation
plan when reviewing the mandatory referral application or the park
development plan. The deadlines for reviewing the final forest
conservation plan are the same as in paragraph (d)(2) of this
Section.
*
*
*
ill
Pro;ect requiring sketch plan approval.
ill
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
Planning Director, for approval,
~
forest stand delineation
reviewed concurrently with the sketch plan application. The
deadlines for reviewing
~
forest stand delineation are the same as
in paragraph (b )( 1) of this Section. The forest stand delineation
must be approved prior to Planning Board approval of the sketch
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
plan.
ill
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit
~
preliminary forest conservation plan to the Planning Director with
the first development application after approval of the sketch plan.
The deadlines for reviewing
~
preliminary and final forest
conservation plan are the same as in paragraph (b)(2)(B) and
(b)(2)(C) of this Section.
- 12 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
294
295
296
*
*
*
.(g}
Pro;ect requiring administrative subdivision approval.
ill
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
31 0
311
312
Planning Director
_g
forest stand delineation before the
administrative subdivision application. The deadlines for
reviewing
~
forest stand delineation are the same as in
paragraph (b)(l) of this Section.
ill
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest .
stand delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must
submit
s!
preliminary forest conservation plan to the
Planning Director. The Planning Director must consider the
prelimins!ry forest conservation plan when approving the
administrative subdivision application and must not
approve an administrative subdivision application that
conflicts with the preliminary forest conservation plan. A
final forest conservation plan must be submitted and
approved before obtaining
~
sediment control permit, or
record plat, whichever comes first. The deadlines for
reviewing
~
final forest conservation plan are the same as in
paragraph (d)(2) of this Section.
If
the Director defers the
approval of an administrative subdivision to the Planning
Board, the Planning Board must review and act on the
prelimins!ry forest conservation plan with the administrative
subdivision plan. The deadlines for reviewing
~
final forest
conservation are the same as in paragraph (2)(C) of this
Section.
22A-12. Retention, afforestation, and reforestation requirements.
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
- 13 -
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
(
e)
*
*
*
Standards for reforestation and afforestation.
*
*
*
(5)
Priority areas and plantings.
Afforestation and reforestation
should be directed to stream buffer areas, connections between
and additions to
forested
areas,
critical habitat areas,
topographically unstable areas, and land use and road buffers.
The use of native plant materials is preferred. [Unless the
Planning Board or Planning Director order otherwise, the
required use of natural regeneration under this Chapter
supercedes any prohibition under Chapter 58.]
*
*
*
(f)
Special provzswns for
afforestation.
*
mznzmum
retention,
reforestation
and
*
*
(2)
Retention, reforestation and afforestation.
Forest retention
should be maximized where possible on each site listed in this
subsection. At a minimum, on-site forest retention, and in some
cases reforestation and afforestation, must be required as
follows:
(A)
In an agricultural and resource area, on-site forest
retention must equal 25% of the net tract area.
(B)
In a planned development or a site development using a
cluster or other optional method of development in a one-
family residential zone, on-site forest retention must equal
the applicable conservation threshold in subsection (a).
This requirement also applies to any site seeking a waiver
- 14 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
or vanance from base zone standards under [Section
59-C-1.393(b), 59-C-1.395, 59-C-1.532, 59-C-1.621, or
59-C-7.131,] Sections 59.4.4.5.D, 59.4.4.6D, 59-4.4.7.C,
59-4.4.8.C, 59-4.4.8.C, 59-4.4.9.C, 59-4.4.10.C, 59-8.3.2,
59-4.9.16.B, and 59-5.2 ifas a condition of the waiver or
variance the Planning Board or County Council must find
that the resulting development is environmentally more
desirable.
*
*
*
(h)
Agreements
( 1)
Maintenance agreement.
A forest conservation plan must include
a two-year binding agreement for maintenance of conservation
areas, including the watering (as practical), feeding and replanting
of areas to be afforested or reforested outside of Special Protection
Areas, and five-years for plantings inside of Special Protection
Areas. The [2-year] binding agreement for maintenance starts
upon satisfactory [final] inspection of the plantings [measures]
required under the forest conservation plan. A staged project may
have more than one agreement.
367
368
369
370
*
22A-21. Variance.
*
*
*
*
*
(c)
Referral to other agencies for non 22A-12(k)(3) variance requests.
Before the Planning Board considers a variance not related to
22A-12(b)(3), the Planning [Board] Director must send a copy of each
request to the County Arborist[, Planning Director,] and any other
appropriate agency for a written recommendation before the Board.,_ or
371
372
373
374
- 15 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL No. 26-17
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
Planning Director,
as appropriate,
acts
on the request. If a
recommendation on the variance is not submitted to the Planning Board,
or Planning Director, as appropriate, within 30 days after the referral, the
recommendation must be presumed to be favorable.
*
22A-30. County Arborist
*
*
*
*
(c)
(4)
requests under Article IL
*
except for requests under 22A-12(b)(3), review and variance
*
*
*
*
*
*
22A-31. Forest Conservation Advisory Committee
(
c)
The Executive must designate a staff member from each of the
following departments to serve as an ex office member:
(A)
[Economic Development] Agricultural Services
*
*
*
Approved:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
Date
393
394
Approved:
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
Date
395
396
This is a correct copy ofCouncil action.
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council
Date
- 16 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUES T REPORT
Bill 26-17
Forest Conservation
-
Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
Bill 26-17 would require certain administrative and minor subdivisions
to comply with the Forest Conservation Law, subject certain
conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law, require park
development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law,
exempt certain modifications to existing residential development
property under certain circumstances, require certain projects
requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand delineation,
modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation, alter the
maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas, and
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County
Arborist for recommendation.
Current changes to county and state law have made some provisions
of the Forest Conservation Law out of date and in need of updating,
changing, and clarifying.
To update the code to reflect changes to state law and to streamline the
review process, codify practices, and clarify portions of the Forest
Conservation law.
Park and Planning
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7815
To be researched.
PROBLEM:
GOALSA ND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
Penalties for violations of Chapter 22A are in Section 22A-16
F:\LA W\BILLS\1726 PB Forest Conseivation Changes\LRR.Docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGO MERY COUNTY PLANNIN G BOARD
THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANN~f7
S9¥,is1~
RECEIVED
.,•·,
OFFICE OF THE
CHAIR
May 25, 2017
;--:QHTG(\"'~RY
,.
C::·-::TY
(·.
The Honorable Roger Berliner
President, Montgomery County Council
100 Maryland Avenue
Rockville, MD 20850
Dear Mr. Berliner:
On May 4, 2017, the Montgomery County Planning Board recommended 4-0 to transmit an
Expedited Bill to the County Council for changes to Chapter 22A of the County code (Forest Conservation
Law - FCL). The Forest Conservation Law needs to be updated to reflect recent changes to the County's
zoning ordinance and the subdivision of land article of the Montgomery County code, as well as changes
to State code. Other proposed changes will streamline the review process, codify practices, and clarify
portions of the Forest Conservation Law. Some of the proposed changes to the Chapter 22A of the
County code include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Clarifying that Administrative and Minor Subdivisions are subject to the FCL.
Creating a process in which the Planning Director can approve Forest Conservation Plans
associated with Administrative Subdivisions.
Clarifying that Conditional Uses (formerly Special Exceptions) are subject to the FCL.
Requiring Natural Resources Inventory/Forest Stand Delineations be submitted prior to the
submission of a Sketch Plan and approved concurrently with the Sketch Plan.
Creating a 90-day time limit for applicants to resubmit revisions to Natural Resource
Inventories/Forest Stand Delineations or the plan is automatically withdrawn, unless an
extension is requested under extenuating circumstances.
Clarifying that the maintenance period for all forest conservation plantings in Special Protection
Areas is 5 years. The maintenance period outside of Special Protection Areas remains at 2
years.
7.
Remove the requirement that all tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for a
recommendation. Any non-tree related variance will still be referred to the County Arborist for
a recommendation.
Change the modification to an "existing developed property" exemption that allows for certain
residential uses to qualify for an exemption from submitting a forest conservation plan.
6.
8.
At the Planning Board discussion, staff brought up an issue that the Board felt needed to be
addressed. Just prior to the hearing, staff received a request from a property owner that both staff and
the Board felt would be a hardship if an exemption from submitting a forest conservation plan was not
8787 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring,
Maryland
20910 Phone: 301.495.4605 Fax: 301.495.1320
www.montgome ryplanningboard .org E-Mail: mcp-chair@mn cppc-mc.org
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
The Honorable Roger Berliner
May 25, 2017
Page 2
granted. Staff requested permission from the Planning Board to revise the "modification to existing
development property" exemption from submitting a forest conservation plan so that certain residential
properties could qualify for an exemption from submitting a forest conservation plan. The example
presented to the Planning Board involved a residential townhouse community built in the 1970s that is
having drainage issues and all methods to alleviate the drainage issues required a sediment control
permit. In this case, the need to obtain a sediment control permit triggers the forest conservation law.
Currently, there are no exemptions from submitting a forest conservation plan for such situations. Staff
requested permission to develop a solution after the Planning Board hearing and the Board granted staff
permission to develop a solution. That language is now incorporated into the proposed amendment.
Enclosed is a complete copy of the proposed amendment that the Planning Board would like to
be introduced as an expedited bill and a copy of the staff report dated April 25, 2017. Members of the
Planning Board and staff ofThe Maryland-National Capital Park
&
Planning Commission are available to
assist the Council in its review of the proposed legislation.
Sincerely,
cc:
Jeff Zyontz
Mark Pfefferle
Enclosures
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION
MCPB
Item No. 6
Date: 5-4-17
Forest Conservation Law Amendments - Modifications, Corrections, and Clarifications
/fl
f
Mark Pfefferle, Chief, Mark.Pfefferle@montgomeryplanning.org, 301 495-4730
Completed:
4-25-17
SUMMARY
Changes to the zoning ordinance and the subdivision of land article of the Montgomery County
code, as well as changes to State code, requires Chapter 22A of the County code (Forest
Conservation Law) to be updated to reflect these changes. As well, staff is taking this
opportunity to request changes that will streamline the review process, codify practices, and
clarify portions of the Forest Conservation Law (FCL). Some of the proposed changes to the
forest conservation law incl(ide:
1. Clarifying that Administrative and Minor Subdivisions are subject to the FCL.
2. Creating a process in which the Planning Director can approve Forest Conservation Plans
associated with Administrative Subdivisions.
3. Clarifying that Conditional Uses (formerly Special Exceptions) are subject to the FCL.
4. Requiring Natural Resources Inventory/Forest Stand Delineations be submitted and
approved prior to the submission of a Sketch Plan.
5. Creating a 90 day time limit for applicants to resubmit revisions to Natural Resource
Inventories/Forest Stand Delineations or the plan is automatically withdrawn.
6. Clarifying that the maintenance period for all forest conservation plantings in Special
Protection Areas is 5 years. The maintenance period outside of Special Protection
Areas remains at 2 years.
7. Remove the requirement that all tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for a
recommendation. Any non-tree related variance will still be referred to the County
Arborist for a recommendation.
Staff requests the Planning Board to approve transmittal of the proposed changes to Chapter
22A of the County code to the Montgomery County Council President for introductions as an
expedited bill.
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
PROPOSED CHANGES
Below is a more detailed discussion of the proposed changes to the FCL by Section:
Section 22A-3. Definitions
Lines 5 through 7
Inclusion of the new definition "Administrative Subdivision" to reflect a
new subdivision type created from the revisions to Chapter 50
(Subdivision of Land Article) of the County code.
Lines 9
Inclusion of the new definition "Conditional Use" to reflect change in the
zoning ordinance when Special Exceptions were replaced with
Conditional Uses.
Lines 11 and 12
Additional language to the existing definition to reflect a change in the
zoning ordinance as "Development Plan" is no longer used in the zoning
ordinance, however, there are still properties that are subject to
Development Plan.
Lines 14 through 17 Deletion of "-1" from the definition of "Lot" to reflect a change that
occurred to Chapter SO of the County code.
Lines 19 through 21 Change to the definition "Mandatory Referral" to include the correct
citation to the Annotated Code of Maryland Code.
Lines 23 and 24
Inclusion of the new definition "Minor Subdivision" to include a
subdivision type that is currently missing from the FCL.
Lines 27 through29 Change to the definition "Municipal Corporation" to include the correct
citation to the Annotated Code of Maryland.
Lines 32 and 33
Deletion of the definition "Nontidal wetland". A new "Wetland"
definition is proposed later in FCL amendment.
Lines 36 and 37
Inclusion of the definition "Park Development Plan" to include a
development application type that is missing from the FCL, but used in
the Forest Conservation Regulation.
Lines 42 through 45 Additional language to the existing definition to reflect a change in the
zoning ordinance as "Plan Unit Development" is no longer used in the
zoning ordinance, however, there are still properties that are subject to
this plan type.
2
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Lines
48
through
SO
Addition of
".4"
to the definition "Preliminary Plan of Subdivlsion" to
reflect the correct reference as a result of changes to Chapter 50 of the
County code.
Lines 53 and 54
Additional language to the existing definition to reflect a change in the
zoning ordinance as "Project Plan" is no longer used in the zoning
ordinance, however, there are still properties that are subject to this plan
type.
Lines
58
through
61
Change to the definition "Public Utility" to include the exact language
used by the State in the Forest Conservation Model Ordinance.
Lines
64
through
66
Additional language to the "Site Plan" definition to reflect the changes
that occurred with changes to zoning code.
Line
68
Inclusion of the new definition "Sketch Plan" that was not previously
included in the FCL.
Additional language to the existing definition to reflect a change in the
zoning ordinance as "Special Exception" is no longer used in the zoning
ordinance, however, there are still properties that are subject to this plan
type.
Line 73
Inclusion of the new definition "Subdivision" that was not previously
included in the FCL but now encompasses "Preliminary Plan of
Subdivisions", "Administrative Subdivisions", and "Minor Subdivisions".
Lines 74 through 78 Revision to the existing definition "Watershed" to reflect current practice
and requirements that watersheds be tied to the Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System Permit and no longer the Countywide Stream
Lines
70
and
71
Protection Strategy.
Lines 80 through 83 Inclusion of the new definition "Wetland" to replace the "non-tidal
wetland" definition that was previously included in the FCL. The new
definition is identical to the one used in the
Environmental Guidelines:
Guidelines for Environmental Management of Development in
Montgomery County,
which was published in January 2000.
3
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Section 22A-4. Applicability
Lines 89 through 91
Addition of "Sketch Plan", "Administrative Subdivision", and "Minor
Subdivision" to the list of plan application types that are subject to the
FCL.
lines 93 and 94
Addition of "Conditional Use" as a plan application type this is subject
to the FCL.
Addition of "Park Development Plan" as a development application
type subject to the FCL. The Forest Conservation Regulation already
identifies park development plans as requiring a forest conservation
finding but by putting it into the law the approving authority is clarified.
Lines 97 and 98
Section 22A-5. Exemptions
Lines 103 through 106 Clarifies the reference for an agricultural exemption from submitting a
Forest Conservation Plan (FCP). Changes to Chapter 50 of the code
required the reference change from Chapter 50-9 to 50-3 and the
reference to Chapter 19 was incorrect and is now being corrected.
Lines 109 through 126 Changes to three separate exemptions from submitting a FCP with
correct reference to the Annotated code of Maryland.
Lines 129 through137 Inclusion of "Conditional Use" in the exemption from submitting a FCP
thatis specific to "Special Exceptions".
Line 145
Inclusion of the word "forest" to clarify that the cutting, cutting, or
grading is limited forest and does not include grading of unforested
lands.
Lines 147 and 148
Inclusion of the phrase "or amendment to a preliminary plan" to clarify
that the modification to an existing property is also applicable to
Preliminary Plan amendments.
Section 22A-9. County Highway Projects
Lines 157 and 158
Replacement of the words "cutting or clearing" with "removal, land
disturbance" to clarify in order to minimize impacts to trees that it is
not just minimization of forest removal or cutting but also the
disturbance of land which causes forest removal, particularly when land
disturbance is next tree trunk.
4
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Line 160
Inclusion of the phrase "land disturbance to avoid" to reaffirm that
disturbance of land is the primary cursor for cutting or clearing of
forests. In some instances, by minimizing land disturbance through the
use of retaining walls or different stormwater management practices
the area of forest to removed can be reduced ..
Section 22A-11. Application, review and approval procedures
Lines 169 and 170
The inclusion of "Sketch Plan", "Conditional Use", and "Park
Development Plan" clarifies that these plan types are subject to Article
II of the FCL. In this section "preliminary plan of subdivision" is
replaced with "subdivision plan". Using the phrase "subdivision plans"
captures all three plan types and "subdivision plans" are now defined in
section 22A-3 of the proposed revisions to the FCL.
Lines 183 through 186 Staff must review all Natural Resource Inventories/Forest Stand
Delineations (NRI/FSDs) within 30 calendar days, otherwise the plan is
automatically deemed approved. Applicants do not have a timeframe
to respond to staff's comments. The amendment proposes to create a
90 day regulatory clock for applicants to respond to staff comments
otherwise the application is automatically withdrawn. In the last "plan
status" update there were 30 NRI/FSDs in various stages of review.
Four of those plans were under review by staff and comments were
sent to the applicants for the remaining 24 plans. Twelve of 24 plans
have been outstanding for more than 365 days with an average of 784
days. Eight of the 24 plans have been stopped for more than 90 days
with an average of 197 days. Finally six of the plans have been stopped
for less than 90 days. The existing FCL does not have a process to
withdraw applications due to inactivity. In order to be consistent with
the subdivision of land article in the Montgomery Code and the Zoning
Ordinance staff believes a deadline is necessary to withdraw
applications that have prolonged inactivity.
Lines 196 through 199 In the current FCL the applicant submits a Preliminary FCP with the first
development application such as a Preliminary Plan and a final with the
Site Plan. If the development application only requires one appr.oval,
such as a Preliminary Plan the applicant would submit the Preiiminary
Forest Conservation with the Preliminary Plan and obtain approval of
the Final FCP before approval of the Record Plat or issuance of a
Sediment Control Permit. In order to streamline the review process
5
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
staff would like applicants to submit both a Preliminary FCP and a Final
FCP with any development_ applicant that only requires approval of one
development application. This ensures a single reviewer for both FCPs
and allows for both plans to be certified at the same time. This
requirement would require information be submitted sooner. For the
most part the difference is that applicants will need to identify the trees
to be planted, if planting is required, and specific tree protection
measures to protect on and off-site trees
by
the time the first
development plan is approved. In some plan types, such as those
associated with a sediment control application, the applicant is already
submitting a single FCP that satisfies the needs of both the preliminary
FCP and a final FCP.
Lines 201 through 217 Inclusion of the phrase ", or Conditional Use" in this section to clearly
identify that a Conditional Use application has the same requirements
and approval process as "Special Exception" plans.
Lines 219 through 228 Inclusion of the phrase", or Park Development Plan" in this section to
identify that a Park Development Plan has the same requirements and
approval process as a Mandatory Referral.
Lines 232 through 241 This is a new subsection which will require properties subject to a
Sketch Plan to obtain approval of a NRI/FSD prior to submitting the
Sketch Plan. Staff feels this is a necessary and important requirement
particularly since the sketch plan deals with density. The NRI/FSD
documents and identifies the environmental constraints on a property
and those areas, such as stream buffers, flood plains and wetlands
which must be avoided. Approval of the
N
RI/FSD is necessary for it
means that both the applicant and the Planning Department agree to
the location of the onsite environmentally sensitive features. This new
section does not require an applicant to obtain approval of Preliminary
FCP at time of Sketch Plan. That will remain as a supporting document
to the Preliminary Plan of Subdivision.
lines 244 through 261 This new subsection identifies the procedure for any development
application that is subject to an Administrative Subdivision. Under the
current FCL Administrative Subdivisions are not identified and therefore
the FCPs associated with this plan type are being approved by the
Planning Board. This new section allows the Planning Director to
apprcval FCPs associated_ with an Administrative subdivision, however,
6
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
if the Planning Director chooses not to review the administrative
subdivision the new subsection identifies that the Planning Board must
review and act on the FCP.
Section 22A-12. Retention, afforestation, and reforestation requirements
Lines 270 through 272 Staff recommends deletion any referral to natural regeneration of
forest. Natural regeneration has not worked well in Montgome ry
County because the naturally regenerated native trees are either being
out competed by non-native and invasive species or are being browsed
by deer. In addition, staff has not permitted an applicant to meet their
forest conservation planting requirements through natural
regeneration for more than 15 years because it has not worked.
Lines 288 through 290 Revisions to the zoning ordinance changed references to certain
sections in the FCL that need updating. The purpose of the addition
language is to reflect the current zoning ordinance for those parts that
still exist in the zoning ordinance.
Lines 299 and 302
Clarifies in the law that a maintenance and management for all planted
forest in Special Protection Areas is 5 years. The FCL currently identifies
a 2-year maintenance period and does distinguish for plantings within a
Special Protection Area and those outside of the special protection
area. The S year maintenance period is consistent with maintenance
and management found on page 37 of the
Environmental Guidelines:
Guidelines for Environmental Manageme nt of Development in
Montgome ry County,
which was published in January 2000. In addition,
the standard forest conservation maintenance and management
agreement template requires that the applicant maintain the forest
planting for 5 years. This change is to codify current practices and the
Environmental Guidelines.
Section 22A-21. Variance
Lines 305 through 311 This section requires all variances to be forwarded to other agencies,
including the County Arborist for review and recommendation. In
2009, the State's enablin_g legislation changed which required a
variance to certain trees before they could be impacted by a
development application. The County Arborist is part of the
Department of Environmental Protection and the state enabling
legislation does not identify a County Arborist position. So the referral
7
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
of variances to the County Arbori st is unique to Montg omery County.
Since
2009
the numbe r of referrals to the County Arborist has gone
from, on average
0
per year to approximately
30
per year. The
County's Streamlining Task Force members identified the exclusion of
the County Arborist to review tree variances as a positive effort.
Unfort unatel y, the County never produced a final report with
recommendations to streamline the development review process. The
language proposed by this amend ment would remove the need for any
variance associated with trees to be forwar ded to the County Arborist.
However, it does retain the need for other non-tree variances to be
forwarded to the County Arborist for a recommendation. Staff has
contacted the Montg omery County Depar tment of Environmental
Protection and agrees with removal of need to refer "tree variances" to
the County Arborist.
Section 22A-30 . County Arborist
Line 315
The proposed changes on this section eliminates, as a duty of the
County Arborist, the need to review "tree variances".
Section 22A-31 . Forest Conservation Advisory Comm ittee
Line
322
The proposed amendment modifies the composition of one memb er of
the Forest Conservation Advisory Comm ittee from "Economic
Development" to "Agricultural Services". This change was precipitated
by the discontinuation of Economic Development Department. The
participant on the Committee has, for the most part, been a
representative of Agricultural Services, just now that section is an
Executive Office versus being part of the Economic Development
Department.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the Planning Board approval transm ittal of the proposed change
s to
Chapter 22A of the County code to the President of the Montg omery County Counc
il for
introdu ction as an expedited bill. Staff requests the bill be expedited for it will stream
line the
develo pment review process and allow for the Planning Direct or to approval FCPs
associated
with Administrative Subdivisions.
8
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND
MEMORANDUM
August 17, 2017
TO:
FROM:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
Jennifer
A.
Hughes, Director, Office of Management and Budget
--r:?\J'(.Alexandre A. Espinosa, Dirnctor, Department of Finance
'\ '--'
Jr-l
~
JM\-
~
a<
_pI/
b
SUBJECT:
FEIS for BILL 26-17, Forest Conservation - Amendments (
Please find attached the fiscal and economic impact statements for the above-
referenced legislation.
JAH:fz
cc: Bonr..ie Kirkland, Assistant Chief AdmiJ;istrative Officer
Lisa Austin, Offices of the County Executive
Joy Nurmi, Special Assistant to the C01mty Executive
Patrick Lacefield, Director, Public Info11nation Office
David Platt, Department of Finance
·
Dennis Hetman, Department of Finance
. Jennifer Nordin, Office of Management and Budget
Felicia Zhang, Office of Management and Budget
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Fiscal Impac t Statement
BILL 26-17, Forest Conservation
-
Amendments
1.
Bill Summa ry
Bill 26-17 amends Chapter 22A - Forest Conservation Law to require certain
administrative and minor subdivisions, conditional uses, and park development plans to
comply with Forest Conservation laws; exempts certain modifications to existing
residential development properties under certain circumstances; requires certain projects
requiri ng sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand delineation; modifies the process
for submit ting a forest stand delineation; alters the maintenance period for forest
conserv ation plans for certain areas; and removes the require ment that tree variances be
referre d to the County Arborist for recommendation.
These amendments update the Forest Conservation Law following changes in the County
and State code and clarify provisions of the Forest Conservation Law.
2.
An
estimate of changes in County revenues and expenditures regardless of whether the
revenu es or expenditures are assumed in the recomm ended or approved budget. Includes
source of information, assumptions
1
and methodologies used.
No change to revenues or expenditures.
3. Revenu e and expenditure estimates covering at least the next 6 fiscal years.
No change to revenues or expenditures.
4.
An
actuarial analysis through the entire amortization period for each bill/regulation that
would affect retiree pension or group insurance costs.
Not applicable.
5. Later actions that may affect future revenue and expenditures if the bill/regulation
authorizes future spending.
Not applicable.
6.
An
estimat e of the staff time needed to implement the bill/regulation.
No staff time is needed.
7.
An
explana tion of how the addition of new staff responsibilities would affect other duties.
Not applicable.
8.
An
estimat e of costs when an additional appropriation is needed.
Not applicable.
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
9. A description of any variable that could affect revenue and cost estimates.
Not applicable.
10.
Ranges of revenue or expenditures that are uncertain or difficult to project.
Not applicable.
11.
If
a Bill is likely to have no fiscal impact, why that is the case.
These amendments update the Forest Conservation Law following changes in the County
and State code and clarify provisions of the Forest Conservation Law.
12. Other fiscal impacts or comments.
Not applicable.
13. The following contributed to and concurred with this analysis,
John
Kroll, MNCPPC
Rick Brush,
DPS
Stan Edwards,
DEP
Greg Ossont,
DGS
Jennifer Nordin,
0MB
Je7e~Hughes, Director
Office of Management and Budget
Date
..
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact Statement
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation
-
Amendments
Background:
Bill 26-17 would update the County Code to reflect changes to state law and to
streamline the review process, codify practices, and clarify portions of the Forest
Conservation Law. Specifically, Bill 26-17 would:
require certain administrative and minor subdivisions to comply with the Forest
Conservation Law;
subject certain conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law;
require park development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law;
exempt certain modifications to existing residential development property under
certain circumstances;
require certain projects requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand
delineation;
modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation;
alter the maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas;
I
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for
recomm.endation;and
generally amend laws related to forest conservation.
1.
The sources of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
The source of information is the Montgomery County Planning Department
(Planning), the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. The
Department of Finance (Finance) made no assumptions or developed methodologies
in the preparation of the economic impact statement. According to Planning, "the
changes to the forest conservation law do not increase the size of the regulated
comm.unity nor make the requirements more difficult. The purpose of the amendment
is to codify references that have already occurred to the zoning ordinance and the
subdivision of the
land
article of the County code."
2. A description of any variable that could affect the economic impact estimates.
Not applicable.
3. The Bill's positive or negative effect, if any on employment, spending, savings,
investment, incomes, and property values in the County.
Bill 26-17 would have no economic impact on employment, spending, savings,
investment, incomes, and property values in the County.
Page
1
of2
(jj)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact Statement
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation
-
Amendments
4.
If
a Bill is likely to have no economic impact, why is that the case?
Bill 26-17 would have no economic impact because it does not have an impact on
employment, spending, savings, investment, incomes or property values. As stated
in
paragraph 1, "the purpose of the amendment is to codify references that have already
occurred to the zoning ordinance and the subdivision of the land article of the
County
code."
5. The following contributed to or concurred with this analysis:
David Platt,
Finance.
Alexandre A. Espinosa, Director
Department of Finance
Page
2
of2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
\~
TESTIMONY ON BEHALF OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE ISIAH LEGGETT
ON BILL 26-17, FOREST CONSERVATION - AMENDMENTS
Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Feldt. I am the Director of the Department of
Environmental Protection. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of County
Executive Leggett regarding Bill 26-17, which would amend the County's Forest Conservation
Law.
Bill 26-17 has been offered as another step in the streamlining continuum, which the
County Executive firmly supports. The Cross-Agency Streamlining Initiative successfully
produced many positive changes to the processing of development approvals and permits. There
is much to be proud of in the work that has been done by all agencies, and our businesses have
realized the benefits of improved processing times. In furtherance of these efforts, Bill 26-17
would fix timelines for processing of applications and clarify development activities that are
subject to the Forest Conservation Law.
Bill 26-17 would also remove the requirement that certain forest conservation variance
requests be referred to the County Arborist in the Department of Environmental Protection for a
recommendation prior to issuance of the variance. This change deserves further discussion as
the review by the County Arborist is an important independent environmental review that adds
value to the protection of trees in the County. The County Arborist provides both consistency
and independence in review.
The role of the County Arborist is important to the process because the County Arborist
is not part of the agency, team, or decision maker responsible for the processing and balancing
decisions inherent in the review and approval of development applications. Therefore, the
County Arborist currently provides an important independent review providing a centralized
approach, which leads to better consistency in the process and outcomes.
Under the current organization at the Planning Department, environmental reviews,
including those with variances, of development applications are handled by area reviewers
within the development review process. This could result in decentralized and inconsistent
outcomes.
In conclusion, while the County Executive generally supports the streamlining objectives
of Bill 26-1 7, the role of the County Arborist in the forest conservation variance process should
be maintained. We would be happy to engage in further discussion of the process for these
reviews going forward.
I would be happy to address any questions the Council may have.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Comments to the Montgom ery County Council on Bill 26-17
Good afternoon. I am Mark Pfefferle and am presenting comments on Bill 26-17 on behalf of
the Montgom ery County Planning Board. The amendments proposed by the Planning Board
include:
1.
Clarifying that Administr ative and Minor Subdivisions are subject to the Forest
Conservation Law (FCL).
2. Creating a process in which the Planning Director can approve Forest Conservation Plans
associated with Administrative Subdivisions since Administrative subdivisions did not
exist prior to February of this year.
3. Clarifying that Conditional Uses (formerly Special Exceptions) are subject to the FCL and
approval of forest conservation plans associated with Conditional Uses is the same as
the one used for Special Exceptions.
4. Requiring Natural Resources Inventory /Forest Stand Delineations be submitted and
approved currently with a Sketch Plan. Since the sketch plan sets the maximum density
of a development application it is importan t to know what environmental restrictions
may be on the property prior to the Planning Board approving the sketch plan.
5. Creating a 90-day time limit for applicants to resubmit revisions to Natural Resource
Inventories/Forest Stand Delineations or the plan is automatically withdrawn , unless an
extension is requested under extenuatin g circumstances. Planning staff has had a 30-
day regulatory clock to review submitted documents since the inception of the FCL in
1992, however, applicants had no deadline in which they needed to submit revised
documents in response to staff comments. Sometimes the responses are years after the
comments were delivered to the applicant.
6. Change the "modificatioi:, to existing developed property" exemption from submitting a
forest conservation plan to allow for certain existing residential uses to qualify for the
exemption. For example, some existing developments have wanted to improve, or in
some cases implemen t, stormwate r management controls. Under the existing law these
types of projects would not be eligible for an exemption, but the proposed language
would allow for existing residential properties that met certain criteria to qualify for an
exemption from submitting a forest conservation plan.
7. Remove the requireme nt that all tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for a
recommendation. This was a recommen dation of the County's Streamlining
Development Initiative that began in 2012. The FCL requires the County Arborist, who is
with the Departme nt of Environmental Protection, to review tree variances. The
Arborists only wants to receive tree variances after the final layout and prelimina ry
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
limits of disturbance is set, and Planning Staff has reviewed and comm ented the
variance request. Unde r the FCL the County Arbor ist has 30 days to provide a
the
recom mend ation to the Planning Board. If no response is received within 30 days
clock for
recom mend ation is assumed to be favorable. However, the 120-day regula tory
site plans and prelim inary plans and the timing in which DEP wants to receive tree
final
variances does not fit into the regulatory clocks. The applicant must upload their
review ing
versio n of the application within 65 days of the Planning Board hearing and all
hearing.
agencies must provide recom mend ations within 45 days of the Planning Board
itted
This schedule does not allow for the Arbor ist to recom mend changes to the subm
varian ce because they are gettin g involved too late in the review process.
s to
If his change is approved, the Planning Depa rtmen t will create an intern al proces
plan
review tree variance separate from the review done by the forest conservation
ist for a
review er. All non-tr ee relate d variances will still be referr ed to the County Arbor
recom mend ation.
That concludes our testim ony and we look forwa rd to workin g with the Council
memb ers and Council staff on gettin g this amen dmen t approved.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Robert Nelson's Testimony to the Montgo mery County Council
in Support of Bill 26-17, "Forest Conservation - Amend ments"
Septem ber 19, 2017
My name is Robert Nelson and I am from the Upcounty, Montgom ery County's fastest growing
area. I'm here to support the amendments to the Forest Conservation Law and want to share
why park develop ment plans should also comply with this law.
Just a couple blocks from my home across from the historic Goshen Post Office and next to a
marker for the historic Goshen Mills is one of the ICC environmental mitigatio n projects, SC-A.
According to the Maryland Department of Transportation,
"The objectives of the SC-A project are to create forested wetlands and uplands to restore the adjacent
stream channels. The established wetland objectives are to provide flood storage, habitat for
amphibian s and other wildlife, surface water filtration and recreation al opportuni ties .... The project
proposes the creation of 19.80 acres of forested wetlands, the enhancem ent of 1.46 acres of existing
wetlands and the creation of 8.99 acres of riparian floodplain forest and 8.94 acres of upland forest
communit ies. The wetland creation and upland forest areas will be seeded and planted with native
species, suited to the site's specific hydrologic characteristics."
Until construction began in June 2011, the Greater Goshen Civic Association (GGCA} was
complete ly unaware of this construction project. The objectives sounded noble, but actually
having an ICC contract or take over Goshen Branch Stream Valley Park was very unsettling. We
saw over 100 mature trees of a foot and more in diamete r destroyed, birds and other wildlife
were displaced and heavy earth-moving equipme nt invaded the park. Dump trucks hauled
away two to three feet of the topsoil to bring the level down to that needed for wetland
construction. A few trees were saved, but some of those remaining had damage to their root
systems. Where nearly a mile of bank restoration work was completed, the meandering
bubbling brook has been converted into a wider engineered stream. We have not seen tree
replacements of the size and stature that line the ICC route.
GGCA was not involved in the planning for the project, was not notified of a public hearing in
March 2010 nor the M-NCPPC decision meeting in June 2010. No signage was posted on the
construction site to describe the project as is frequent ly the case on state projects. Five
members of the GGCA Executive Board toured the site with state contractors in October 2011.
The contract called for "recreational opportun ities", but we were unable to identify amenities
that would be added to the park within the scope of the $2.6M state contract. For example,
walking paths could be easily added since the soil had already been disrupted and stone laid
?:;'\
~
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
for a construction access road. An existing construction trailer site off Huntmaster Road could
have been finished off as a parking lot for park visitors. There could have been a kiosk
constructed that would provid e a learning experience about wetlands for the public to
experience. We understand that approximately one-th ird of the wetlands lost in the 18-mile
const ructio n of the ICC was recreated in Goshen. Certainly the people of Goshen would feel
some what better about this massive intrusion to their park if what is created ultima tely
becomes beneficial to all concerned.
This past summ er anoth er contra ctor funded by the state, Ashton Mano r Environmental,
perfor med major work in the park blazing a trail to plant over 8000 small trees and bushes.
They are also eliminating invasive species and doing a nice job. Again, there is no plan to let
Goshen residents have a community-maintained trail and none of the plantings is of the size
and statur e that line the ICC route. So as you can see from photos taken earlier this month ,
Goshen Branch Stream Valley Park is still a work in progress.
So when is it appro priate to cut down over 100 matur e trees? As we see in Goshen Branch
Stream Valley Park, one has to look at the ultima te benefits. For many years residents of
Goshen have been requesting relief from increasing comm uter traffic along our historic two-
lane roads. Goshen residents have seen their park sacrificed to create 25 acres of wetlands.
But some of you on the County Council continue to obstru ct the much needed completion of
the Mid-C ounty Highway on the Master Plan Route because it impacts less than one acre of
wetlands. Some trees do have to be removed, but a comm itmen t to reforestation such as was
done in Goshen Branch Stream Valley Park will make the M-83 a very valuable comm unity
asset. Please don't pass a resolution with the rationale that the Paris Climate Agreement will
be violat ed when M-83 is constructed. Ongoing roadw ay congestion and developers'
construction of an outlet mall, shopping centers and residential units certainly have much
more enviro nmen tal impac t than completing the 5.6-mile gap in the Mid-County Highway.
A bus on the completed Mid-C ounty Highway will convey commuters from Clarksburg to Shady
Grove Metro Station in less than half the travel time of the Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT).
The construction of M-83 costs less than half as much as the CCT and can be funded by a small
toll on the southern connection to the ICC (ref.
"'The Case for Completing and Funding M83
Mid-C ounty Highw ai'
by Gerald Cichy).
Let's suppo rt practical solutions to Upcounty problems. Let's stick with the plan and give the
Upcounty its fair share. Let's resolve to build the Mid-C ounty Highway now on the Maste r
Plan Route.
@)
Robe rt Nelson, Goshen
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
GazetteNet
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Construction on wetlands begins at Goshen Park
Residents taken aback by project's scope
\Jen
Bondeson, StaffWriter
Tractors and construction workers will make noise in the usually tranquil Goshen Branch Stream
Valley Park for the next year, but an environmentalist says the stream and wetlands will be much
better off as a result.
The $2.6 million State Highway Administration project is designed to restore about 4,800 linear
feet of Goshen Branch, a tributary of Great Seneca Creek, and create about 20 acres of forested
wetlands, 9 acres of riparian floodplain forest in the area near the stream, and 9 acres of upland
forest habitat.
Construction in the park, north of Brink Road and east ofHuntmaster Road in Goshen, will
continue until June.
The project is one of 63 that will mitigate the environmental effects of building the Intercounty
Connector, a highway linking Interstate 270 to Interstate 95.
A total of $3 70 million will be spent to restore 37,500 linear feet of stream, create about 56 acres
of wetlands and mitigate about 330 acres of forest, along with other projects, according to an
ICC document.
Some Goshen residents were surprised when they saw the construction begin in their park last
month.
They missed the county's March 2010 public meeting about the project before the planning
board approved it in June 2010.
Chuck W einkam, an environmental scientist serving as environmental stewardship and
mitigation manager for the ICC project, said he was not sure if all civic groups were invited, but
they normally are, along with nearby neighbors.
Robert Nelson, a member of the Greater Goshen Civic Association,
along with Joanne Atay, a
member of the Goshen Historical Preservation Society, thought the land would remain
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
unchanged because, in December, the county provided a matching grant to place a
commemorative plaque at the southern edge of the park.
It explains the history of Goshen Mill, built in 1737 just north of Brink Road and used as a
political meeting place until it burned down in 1890.
Placing a plaque on a site does not mean the land will be preserved, said Scott Whipple,
supervisor of the Historic Preservation Unit of Montgomery County Planning.
The Goshen parkland is not designated a historical site, Whipple said.
A 2009 cultural resource study did not identify any significant archeological sites or historic
properties on the site, Weinkam said.
Nelson is concerned that the project is destroying the naturally existing habitat in the park, and
he questions the extent of the work.
About six trees were chopped down to make a construction entrance, Weinkam said. Logs piled
at the site were brought from other places to help stabilize the stream.
The project is crucial for the health of the stream, and the State Highway Administration
conducted numerous environmental studies before it was approved, Weinkam said.
Without the project, the tributary could not serve as a sediment collector, so areas downstream,
such as in Montgomery Village, would see more sediment buildup, he explained.
jbondeson@gazette.net
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files  PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files  PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Goshen Branch
Stream
Valley Park 2017
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
·:Stream
Valley
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Upcounty Primary Road System
M-83
0
Completed Sections of M83 - Snowden Farm Parkway
and
Midcounty Highway
Preferred Alternative to complete Eastern Arterial - Alternative 9A, Master Plan Route
Western
Arterial - Great Seneca Highway
Connections; East
to West,
and both
high
ways
to
the
ICC.
Solid-completed,
Dashed- planned
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
The Mid-C ount y High way (M-8 3) is a Master-Planned 4-lan e north /sout h
of
park way that has been the basis for planned density in Upcounty areas east
h
1-270, especially in Clarksburg. The road way will provide a viable north /sout
t
trave l alter nativ e to 1-270 and MD 355 on the east side of 1-270, similar to Grea
Seneca Highway on the west side of 1-270. If the County does not build this
critical infrastructure it will be detri ment al to the quality of life for Upcounty
residents.
Here are some facts to remember:
./ Mont gome ry County Planning Board, the City of Gaithersburg, and the
Upco unty Citizens Advisory Board supp ort Alternate 9A .
./ Mid-C ounty Highway master plan alignment has been on area master plans
for nearly 50 years .
./ The roadway was reconfirmed in the 1994 Clarksburg master plan .
./ M-83 is the basis for density planned, approved and constructed in
Upco unty including Damascus, Clarksburg, Germantown, Mont gome ry
Village, Shady Grove, and othe r areas east of I 270 .
./ Corri dor Cities Transitway (CCT) to Clarksburg and BRT along MD 355 to
Clarksburg are needed in addit ion to M-83 to enhance Upcounty mobi lity
options, not as a REPLACEMENT of M-83 .
./ The Mont gome ry County Depa rtmen t of Transportation (MCDOT)
Midc ounty Corri dor Study (MCS) Draft Environmental Effects Report (DEER)
clearly documents that M-83 Alter nativ e 9 provides the highest
trans porta tion effectiveness among all alternatives considered.
tantial
~
Through bridging, align ment shifts, and retaining walls, all with subs
added costs, align ment Alternative 9A minimizes impa ct to wetlands,
streams, forest, floodplains, and parklands .
./ The DEER also proposes substantial mitigation to fores t and parkland losses
native 9A ..·
to fully offse t any impa ct from Alter
./ M-83 Alter nativ e 9A will prote ct long-established and historic communities
such as Prath ertow n and Goshen along Brink Road, Wigh tman Road, and
Warf ield Road .
./ Upco unty residents, especially in Clarksburg, have made decisions abou t
their purchases of residence based on area master plans, which includes
M-83.
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Wallace, Scott
C. -
SCW <SWallace@linowes-law.com>
Thursday, September 28, 2017 4:42 PM
Gibson, Cindy
Mihill, Amanda; Genn, Jonathan
Viva White Oak -Bill 26-17-Forest Conservation Law Amendments (the "Bill")
20170928162032850.pdf
Cindy - I wanted to follow up on our conversation regarding the applicability of the referenced Bill, which proposes
comprehensive changes to the County's Forest Conservation Law ("FCL"), to development approval applications
that are
pending review and action by the Planning Board. As we discussed, Linowes and Blocher represents Global LifeSci
Development Corporation (Percontee), the developer of the Viva White Oak project. Percontee filed a Sketch Plan
Application for Viva White Oak on August 1, 2017. The Application was reviewed by the Development Review Committ
ee
on September 29, 2017 and is tentatively scheduled for a Planning Board hearing on November 30, 2017. Neither
the
current FCL nor the Zoning Ordinance require submission of a Natural Resources Inventory/Forest Stand Delineati
on
("NRI/FSD") at the time of Sketch Plan. Accordingly, the Application included an Existing Conditions/Natural Features
Plan as required under the Sketch Plan application submittal requirements set forth in Section 59. 7.3.3.B.3.C of the
Zoning Ordinance. (An NRI/FSD has been filed for the subsequent Preliminary Plan application for the project as
required
under the FCL (both current and as amended by the Bill) and is currently under review by the Planning Board staff.)
The Bill proposes an amendment to the FCL at lines 279-286 (attached) that would require an NRI/FSD for a Sketch
Plan
application. The Bill was not introduced as emergency legislation, and therefore if enacted by the County Council
it would
be effective approximately 90 days after the Council's action under County law. We believe that it is the intent to
apply
the changes to the FCL made by the Bill to Sketch Plan applications filed after the effective date of the Bill if
enacted. This would be in keeping with the Council's general practice not to apply changes to laws and procedur
al
requirements to pending applications, particularly if not enacted as emergency legislation, as a matter of fairness
to
applicants who proceeded in good faith under the laws in effect at the time of application.
However, there is no explicit statement as to applicability in the Bill. Although we hope to have Sketch Plan approval
from
the Planning Board before the effective date of the Bill if enacted, in order to avoid any confusion over whether the
requirement to provide an NRI/FSD at Sketch Plan applies to the Viva White Oak Application, and possibly delay
the
review of the Application, we would like the Transportation and Environment Committee to consider the following
modification to the Bill, shown in underline, at lines 279-282:
Project requiring sketch plan approval
Forest Stand Delineation
For any sketch plan application filed on or after [the effective date of the Bill), the applicant must
submit to the Planning Director, for approval, a forest stand delineation reviewed concurrently with the
sketch plan.
I believe this language is in accordance with the intent of the Bill and will provide clarity as to the applicability of the
proposed changes to the FCL with regard to the requirements for Sketch Plan applications, which will benefit and
be fair
to applicants and agency staff.
I have raised this point to Amanda Mihill, and she did not believe the Bill was intended to apply to pending Sketch
Plan
applications. I have copied Amanda on this email in case she has any questions on review.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Upon review of this request with Councilman Berliner, I would apprecia
te
is you can let us know if he is supports our request and will raise it when the Bill is reviewed by the Committee, schedule
d
for October 5th. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
(f)
(1)
Scott C. Wallace
Partner
Linowes and Blocher LLP
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7200 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
Direct:
Main:
E-mail:
Linkedln:
Website:
301.961.51 24
301.654.05 04
swallace@linowes-law.com
www.linkedin.com/in/scottwallace
www.linowes-law.com
This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any interception, review,
retransmission, dissemination, or other use of, or taking of any action upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
prohibited by law and may subject them to criminal or civil liability.
If
you received this communication in error, please contact us immediately at
the direct dial number set forth above, or at (30
I)
654-0504, and delete the communication from any computer or network system. Although this e-
mail (including attachments) is believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might negatively affect any computer system into which it is
received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and no responsibility is accepted by the sender for any loss
or damage arising in any way in the event that such a virus or defect exists.
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL No. 26-17
267
268
269
270
271
272
delineation to the Plann ing Director for review. The deadlines for
reviewing a forest stand delineation are the same as in parag raph
(b)(l) of this Section.
(2)
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is comp lete
and
correct, the applicant must submit to
the Planning Direc tor a preliminary forest conservation plan. The
Plann ing Board must consider the preliminary forest conservation
plan when reviewing the mandatory referral application or the park
development plan. The deadlines for reviewing the final forest
conservation plan are the same
as
in parag raph (d)(2) of this
Section.
*
273
274
275
276
277
278
*
*
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
ill
Proiect requiring sketch plan approval.
ill
Forest stand delineation.
The applic ant must submit to the
Plann ing Director, for approval,
~
forest stand delineation
review ed concu rrentl y with the sketch plan application. The
deadli nes for review ing~ forest stand deline ation are the same as
in parag raph
ili).(.D
of this Section. The _forest stand delineation
must be appro ved prior to Plann ing
Board appro val of the sketch
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
plan.
ill
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is comp lete and correct, the applicant must submi t
~
preliminary forest conservation plan to the Plann ing Director with
the first develo2ment application after awrov al of the sketch plan.
The deadlines for reviewing
~
preliminary and final forest
conservation plan are the same as in parag raph (b)(2){B) and
(b)(2)(C) of this Section.
- 12 -
t:\law\bills\1726 pb
forest
conseNatlon amendments\bill 2.docx
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
T&EITEM 1
October 5, 2017
Worksession
MEMORANDUM
October 4, 2017
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney
(J411(Jvkf)}
Worksession:
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation - Amendments
Bill 26-17, Forest Conservation - Amendments, sponsored by Lead Sponsor Council President at
the request of the Planning Board, was introduced on July 25, 2017. A public hearing was held on
September 19 (see written testimony on ©33-45).
Bill 26-17 would:
• require certain administrative and minor subdivisions to comply with the Forest
Conservation Law;
• subject certain conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law;
• require park development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law;
• exempt certain modifications to existing residential development property under
certain circumstances;
• require certain projects requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand
delineation;
• modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation;
• alter the maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas;
• remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for
recommendation; and
• generally amend laws related to forest conservation.
Issues for Committee Discussion
1
1.
Should projects already in the queue be grandfathered?
Bill 26-17 would require an
applicant to submit to the Planning Director a forest stand delineation to be reviewed concurrently
with a submitted sketch plan. Scott Wallace, on behalf of Global LifeSci Development Corporation
(Percontee), the developer of the "Viva White Oak" project, submitted written comments seeking
1
Council staff notes that technical, non-substantive edits are needed to Bill 26-17. These edits will be made to the
bill that incorporates the Committee's recommendation and presented in Council staff's packet for Council
consideration.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
an amendment to grandfather existing projects. Mr. Wallace noted that Percontee filed a Sketch
Plan application on August 1, but does not yet have Sketch Plan approval. Mr. Wallace
recommended language be added to Bill 26-1 7 specifically applying the provisions of the bill to
sketch plan applications filed after the effective date of the bill (©46-48).
Council staff comments:
Council staff generally supports grandfathering existing projects, but
recommends the deadline for grandfathering be the date of enactment of Bill 26-17, not the
effective date of the law. Council staff understands from Planning staff that they do not object to
grandfathering projects that have already submitted sketch plan applications.
2.
Should the law require the County Arborist to provide a recommendation for tree
variances?
Code Sections 22A-21(c) and 22A-30(c)(4) requires the Planning Board to send a copy
of any variance request to the County Arborist for a written recommendation, which must be
provided within 30 days or the recommendation will be presumed favorable. Bill 26-17 would
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist. The Planning Board
testimony on ©34-35 explains the rationale for this. Essentially, the County Arborist wants to
receive the tree variance requests fairly late in the development process, which Planning staff argue
is challenging to incorporate during the 120 day regulatory close for site plans and preliminary
plans. Lisa Feldt, on behalf of the Executive, generally supported the bill, but urged the Council
to retain the role of the County Arborist.
Council staff comments:
Council staff can understand the timing difficulties that are presented
during the regulatory process. Options for the Committee's consideration include the Planning
Board transmitting the variance requests to the County Arborist earlier in the development process
or changing the law's requirement of a "recommendation" to a "consultation", which is less formal
than requiring a recommendation from the Arborist. Council staff suggests discussing these
options with Planning staff and County staff at the worksession.
This packet contains:
Bill 26-17
Legislative Request Report
Planning Board memo
Planning Board staff memo
Fiscal and Economic Impact statement
Testimony and Correspondence
F:\LAW\BILLS\1726 PB Forest Conservation Amendments\T&E Memo.Docx
Circle#
1
17
18
20
28
33
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
---=2-=-6-__.1...:...7_ _ _ _ _ __
Conservation
Concerning: Forest
Amendments
Draft No._£_
Revised:
7/6/2017
July
25, 2017
Introduced:
January
25, 2019
Expires:
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: ~N-=on~e~-- ----
Ch. _ _ , Laws of Mont. Co. _ _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
Lead Sponsor: Council President at the Request of the Planning Board
AN ACT
to:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
require certain administrative and minor subdivisions to comply with the Forest
Conservation Law;
subject certain conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law;
require park development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law;
exempt certain modifications to existing residential development property under
certain circumstances;
require certain projects requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand
delineation;
modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation;
alter the maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas;
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County Arborist for
recommendation; and
generally amend laws related to forest conservation.
By amending
Montgomery County Code, Forest Conservation
Chapter 22A,
Sections 22A-3, 22A-4, 22A-5, 22A-9, 22A-11, 22A-12, 22A-21, 22A-30, and 22A-31
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
Existing law unaffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No.
26-17
1
Sec.
1.
Sections 22A-3, 22A-4, 22A-5, 22A-9, 22A-ll, 22A-12, 22A-21,
22A-30, and 22A-31 are amended as follows:
22A-3. Definitions.
In this Chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated:
Administrative subdivision
means g plan for g proposed subdivision or
resubdivision prepared and submitted for approval
by
the Planning Director
under Division 50.6 of Chapter 50 before preparation of
_g
subdivision plat.
*
*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
*
Conditional use
means
_g
use approved under Chapter 59-7.3.1.
*
*
*
11
Development plan
means a plan or an amendment to a development plan
approved under Section 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59 or a floating zone plan approved
under Section 7.2.1 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter
59.
*
*
*
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Lot
means for the purpose of this Chapter a tract ofland, the boundaries of which
have been established as a result of deed or previous subdivision or a larger
parcel, and which will not be subject of further subdivision, as defined under
[Section 50-1] Chapter 50, without an approved forest stand delineation and
forest conservation plan
*
20
21
*
*
22
23
24
25
Minor subdivision
means g plan for g proposed subdivision or resubdivision
prepared and submitted for approval
by
the Planning Director under Chapter
50.7.
*
*
*
26
27
Municipal corporation
means a municipality without planning and zoning
authority or which has assigned its responsibilities under §5-1603(a) of the
-2-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No.
26-17
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Maryland Code [Subtitle 16 of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland
Code] to the County.
*
*
*
[Nontidal wetland
means an area regulated as a nontidal wetland under Title
8, Subtitle 12, of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland Code.]
*
*
*
Park development plan
means an application submitted
12y
the Montgomery
County Parks Department for the construction and development of~ specific
park.
*
*
*
38
39
40
41
Planned unit development means a development comprised of a combination
of land uses or varying intensities of the same land use, having at least 20%
of the land permanently dedicated to green area, and under an integrated plan
that provides flexibility in land use design approved by the Planning Board
under Section 7.2.1 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7. l.B of Chapter
59.
*
*
*
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Preliminary Plan of Subdivision
means a plan for a proposed subdivision or
resubdivision prepared and submitted for approval by the Planning Board
under Chapter 50.4 before preparation of a subdivision plan.
*
*
*
Project plan
means a plan or an amendment to a project plan [approved under
50
Division 59-D-2] referred to in Division 7. 7.1.B of Chapter 59.
*
*
*
51
52
53
54
55
Public utility
means any:
(1)
[the] transmission [lines and the] line or electric generating
[stations licensed under Article 78, Section 54A and 54B or 54-I
-3-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
56
of the Maryland Code; and] station; or
57
58
59
(2)
water, sewer, electric, gas, telephone, and cable service [facilities
and lines] line.
*
*
*
60
61
Site plan
means a plan or an amendment to a site plan approved under Section
7.3.4 of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59.
*
62
63
64
65
66
*
*
Sketch plan
means
g
plan or amendment to
g
sketch plan approved under
Chapter 59.7.3.3.
*
*
*
Special exception
means a use approved as a conditional use under Section 7 .3 .1
or Section 7.7.1.B of Chapter 59 or referred to in Division 7.7.1.B of Chapter
59.
*
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
*
*
Subdivision
has the same meaning as stated in Chapter 50.
*
*
*
Watershed
means [all lands lying with an area described as a watershed in the
Countywide Stream Protection Strategy] any area delineated as
g
watershed
in the Montgomery County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
Permit Implementation Program, or any smaller area within the watershed that
is delineated
.by
the State of Maryland as
g
12-Digit watershed.
74
75
76
77
78
Wetland
means an area that is inundated or saturated
.by
surface water or
groundwater at g frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal
circumstances does support, g prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life
in saturated soil conditions, commonly known as hydrophytic vegetation.
79
80
81
-4-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL No. 26-17
82
83
84
22A-4. Applicability
Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Chapter, this Chapter applies to:
(a)
a person required by law to obtain an approval or amendment to a
development plan, diagrammatic plan, project plan, floating zone plan,
sketch plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, administrative subdivision,
minor subdivision, or site plan;
(b)
a person required by law to obtain approval of~ special exception or~
conditional use, [approval] or a sediment control permit on a tract of
land 40,000 square feet or larger, and who is not otherwise required to
obtain an approval under subsection (a);
*
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
*
*
~
(d)
a government entity subject to a mandatory referral or
park
94
95
development plan on a tract of land 40,000 square feet or larger which is
not exempt under subsection 22A-5(f);
*
96
97
98
99
*
*
22A-5. Exemptions.
The requirements of Article II do not apply to:
*
*
*
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
(b)
an agricultural activity that is exempt from both platting requirements
under Section [50-9] 50-3 and requirements to obtain a sediment control
permit under Section [19-2(c)(2)] 19-2(b)(2).
Agricultural support
buildings and related activities are exempt only if built using best
management practices;
*
*
*
(i)
noncoal surface mining regulated under [Title 7 of the Natural
Resources Article of the Maryland Code] Subtitle
_a
of Title
.Ll.
of the
-5-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
108
109
110
111
112
113
Environment Article of the Maryland Code.
*
*
*
(n)
any rumor subdivision under [Section 50-35A(a)(2)-(3) involving
conversion of an existing recorded outlot created because of inadequate
or unavailable sewerage or water service to a lot or joining two or more
existing residential lots into one lot,] Division 50.7 of Chapter 50 if:
( 1)
the only development located on the resulting lot is a single family
dwelling unit or an accessory structure (such as a pool, tennis
court,orshed);an d
(2)
the development does not result in the cutting, clearing, or grading
of:
(A)
(B)
( C)
more than a total of 20,000 square feet of forest,
any forest in a stream buffer,
any forest on a property located in a special protection area
which must submit a water quality plan,
(D)
(E)
any specimen or champion tree, or
any tree or forest that is subject to the requirements of a
previously approved forest conservation plan or tree save
plan[.]; or
Q)
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
there is no proposed land disturbance and~ declaration of intent is
filed with the Planning Director stating that the lot will not be the
subject of additional regulated activities under this Chapter within
~
years of the approval of the minor subdivision.
131
132
133
134
(
o)
The cutting or clearing of public utility rights-of-way or land for electric
generating stations licensed under [Section 54A and 54B or Section 541
of Article 78] Sections 7-205 and 7-207 or 7-208 of the Public Utility
Companies Article of the Maryland Code, if:
-6-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
135
136
137
138
139
(1)
any required certificates of public convenience and necessity
have been issued in accordance with Section [5-1604(£)]
5-1603(f) of the Natural Resources Article of the Maryland
Code; and
(2)
the cutting or clearing of the forest is conducted so as to minimize
the loss of forest.
*
*
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
*
(q)
a special exception.,_ or conditional use, application if:
*
*
*
(3)
the total disturbance area for the proposed special exception use.,_
or conditional use, will not exceed 10,000 square feet, and
clearing will not exceed a total of 5000 square feet of forest or
include any specimen or champion tree;
*
*
*
(t)
a modification to an existing_:_
ill
non-residential developed property if:
[(1)]
.(A}no more than 5,000 square feet of forest is ever cleared
at one time or cumulatively after an exemption is issued;
[(2)]
ill}
the modification does not result in the cutting, clearing,
or grading of any forest in a stream buffer or located on
property in a special protection area which must submit a
water quality plan;
[(3)]
.(g
the modification does not reqmre approval of a
preliminary [plan of] or administrative subdivision plan;
and
-7-
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
[(4)]
02}
the modification does not increase the developed area
by more than 50% and the existing development is
maintained[.t or
ill
residential developed property if:
(A)
forest is not impacted or cleared;
the modification is not located in§; stream buffer or located
on property in§; special protection area which must submit
§;
ill}
water quality plan;
(g
the modification does not reqmre approval of a
preliminary or administrative subdivision plan;
the modification does not increase the developed area by
the existing structure is not modified.
*
*
*
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
22A-9. County Highway Projects.
*
*
*
(a)
General.
*
*
*
(2)
The construction should minimize forest [cutting or clearing]
removal, land disturbance, and loss of specimen or champion
trees to the extent possible while balancing other design,
construction, and environmental standards.
The constructing
agency must make a reasonable effort to minimize land
disturbance to avoid the cutting or clearing of trees and other
woody plants.
*
*
*
-
8
-
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
22A-11. Application, review, and approval procedures
(a)
General.
(1)
Coordinated with project review.
The forest stand delineation
and forest conservation plan must be submitted and reviewed in
conjunction with the review process for a development plan,
floating zone plan, project plan, sketch plan, [preliminary plan
of] subdivision plan, site plan, special exception, conditional use,
mandatory referral, park development plan, or sediment control
permit under this Section. The Planning Director must coordinate
review of the forest conservation plan with the Director of
Environmental Protection, the Director of Permitting Services,
the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, other relevant
regulatory agencies, and entities that will provide public utilities
to the tract, to promote consistency between the objectives of this
Chapter and other development requirements. To the extent
practicable, entities providing public utilities should design
facilities that will serve a tract in a manner that avoids identified
conservation areas and minimizes tree loss.
(b)
*
*
*
Project requiring development plan, floating zone plan, project plan,
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
sketch plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, or site plan approval.
(1)
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
Planning Director a forest stand delineation with the application
for a development plan, floating zone plan, project plan, sketch
plan, preliminary plan of subdivision, or site plan, whichever
comes first. Within 30 days of receipt, the Planning Director
must notify the applicant whether the forest stand delineation is
-9-
f:llaw\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
NO.
26-17
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
complete and correct.
If
the Planning Director fails to notify the
applicant within 30 days, the delineation will be treated as
complete and correct. The Planning Director may require further
information or provide for one extension of this deadline for an
additional 15 days for extenuating circumstances. The applicant
must submit revised drawings to address comments within 90
days from the date the Planning Director sends comments to the
applicant.
If
the applicant fails to submit revised drawings, the
application is deemed withdrawn. The Planning Director may
provide for one extension of this deadline for extenuating
circumstances.
(2)
Forest Conservation Plan.
(A)
Application.
After being notified that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must
submit a forest conservation plan to the Planning Director.
If
the development proposal will require more than one of
the approvals subject to this subsection, the applicant must
submit a preliminary forest conservation plan to the
Planning Director in conjunction with the first approval
and a final forest conservation plan in conjunction with the
last approval.
If
only one approval subject to this
·-
subsection is required, an applicant must submit a
preliminary forest conservation and a final forest
conservation plan at the time of the development
application [and a final forest conservation plan before a
sediment control permit is issued for the tract, but no later
than a record plat is submitted].
- 10 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
*
*
*
(
c)
Project requiring special exception or conditional use approval.
(
1)
Forest stand delineation.
If a special exception or conditional use
proposal is subject to the requirements of this Chapter, the
applicant must submit a forest stand delineation to the Planning
Director before the Board of Appeals may consider the
application for the special exception.
The deadlines for
reviewing a forest stand delineation are the same as in paragraph
(b )(1) of this Section.
(2)
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit a
preliminary forest conservation plan to the Planning Director. The
Board of Appeals must consider the preliminary forest
conservation plan when approving the special exception or
conditional use application and must not approve a special
exception or conditional use application that [is in conflict]
conflicts with the preliminary forest conservation plan. A final
forest conservation plan must be submitted before obtaining a
sediment control permit, or at the time of preliminary plan of
subdivision or site plan application, if required. The deadlines for
reviewing a final forest conservation plan are the same as m
paragraph (d)(2) of this Section
*
*
*
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
(e)
Project requiring mandatory referral or Park Development Plan.
(1)
Forest stand delineation.
A person seeking mandatory referral or
~
park development plan for a project that is subject to the
requirements of this Chapter must first submit a forest stand
- 11 -
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
delineation to the Planning Director for review. The deadlines for
reviewing a forest stand delineation are the same as in paragraph
(b)( 1) of this Section.
(2)
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit to
the Planning Director a preliminary forest conservation plan. The
Planning Board must consider the preliminary forest conservation
plan when reviewing the mandatory referral application or the park
development plan. The deadlines for reviewing the final forest
conservation plan are the same as in paragraph (d)(2) of this
Section.
*
*
*
ill
Pro;ect requiring sketch plan approval.
ill
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
Planning Director, for approval,
~
forest stand delineation
reviewed concurrently with the sketch plan application. The
deadlines for reviewing
~
forest stand delineation are the same as
in paragraph (b )( 1) of this Section. The forest stand delineation
must be approved prior to Planning Board approval of the sketch
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
plan.
ill
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest stand
delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must submit
~
preliminary forest conservation plan to the Planning Director with
the first development application after approval of the sketch plan.
The deadlines for reviewing
~
preliminary and final forest
conservation plan are the same as in paragraph (b)(2)(B) and
(b)(2)(C) of this Section.
- 12 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
294
295
296
*
*
*
.(g}
Pro;ect requiring administrative subdivision approval.
ill
Forest stand delineation.
The applicant must submit to the
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
31 0
311
312
Planning Director
_g
forest stand delineation before the
administrative subdivision application. The deadlines for
reviewing
~
forest stand delineation are the same as in
paragraph (b)(l) of this Section.
ill
Forest conservation plan.
Upon notification that the forest .
stand delineation is complete and correct, the applicant must
submit
s!
preliminary forest conservation plan to the
Planning Director. The Planning Director must consider the
prelimins!ry forest conservation plan when approving the
administrative subdivision application and must not
approve an administrative subdivision application that
conflicts with the preliminary forest conservation plan. A
final forest conservation plan must be submitted and
approved before obtaining
~
sediment control permit, or
record plat, whichever comes first. The deadlines for
reviewing
~
final forest conservation plan are the same as in
paragraph (d)(2) of this Section.
If
the Director defers the
approval of an administrative subdivision to the Planning
Board, the Planning Board must review and act on the
prelimins!ry forest conservation plan with the administrative
subdivision plan. The deadlines for reviewing
~
final forest
conservation are the same as in paragraph (2)(C) of this
Section.
22A-12. Retention, afforestation, and reforestation requirements.
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
- 13 -
f:\law\bills\ 1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
(
e)
*
*
*
Standards for reforestation and afforestation.
*
*
*
(5)
Priority areas and plantings.
Afforestation and reforestation
should be directed to stream buffer areas, connections between
and additions to
forested
areas,
critical habitat areas,
topographically unstable areas, and land use and road buffers.
The use of native plant materials is preferred. [Unless the
Planning Board or Planning Director order otherwise, the
required use of natural regeneration under this Chapter
supercedes any prohibition under Chapter 58.]
*
*
*
(f)
Special provzswns for
afforestation.
*
mznzmum
retention,
reforestation
and
*
*
(2)
Retention, reforestation and afforestation.
Forest retention
should be maximized where possible on each site listed in this
subsection. At a minimum, on-site forest retention, and in some
cases reforestation and afforestation, must be required as
follows:
(A)
In an agricultural and resource area, on-site forest
retention must equal 25% of the net tract area.
(B)
In a planned development or a site development using a
cluster or other optional method of development in a one-
family residential zone, on-site forest retention must equal
the applicable conservation threshold in subsection (a).
This requirement also applies to any site seeking a waiver
- 14 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 26-17
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
or vanance from base zone standards under [Section
59-C-1.393(b), 59-C-1.395, 59-C-1.532, 59-C-1.621, or
59-C-7.131,] Sections 59.4.4.5.D, 59.4.4.6D, 59-4.4.7.C,
59-4.4.8.C, 59-4.4.8.C, 59-4.4.9.C, 59-4.4.10.C, 59-8.3.2,
59-4.9.16.B, and 59-5.2 ifas a condition of the waiver or
variance the Planning Board or County Council must find
that the resulting development is environmentally more
desirable.
*
*
*
(h)
Agreements
( 1)
Maintenance agreement.
A forest conservation plan must include
a two-year binding agreement for maintenance of conservation
areas, including the watering (as practical), feeding and replanting
of areas to be afforested or reforested outside of Special Protection
Areas, and five-years for plantings inside of Special Protection
Areas. The [2-year] binding agreement for maintenance starts
upon satisfactory [final] inspection of the plantings [measures]
required under the forest conservation plan. A staged project may
have more than one agreement.
367
368
369
370
*
22A-21. Variance.
*
*
*
*
*
(c)
Referral to other agencies for non 22A-12(k)(3) variance requests.
Before the Planning Board considers a variance not related to
22A-12(b)(3), the Planning [Board] Director must send a copy of each
request to the County Arborist[, Planning Director,] and any other
appropriate agency for a written recommendation before the Board.,_ or
371
372
373
374
- 15 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL No. 26-17
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
Planning Director,
as appropriate,
acts
on the request. If a
recommendation on the variance is not submitted to the Planning Board,
or Planning Director, as appropriate, within 30 days after the referral, the
recommendation must be presumed to be favorable.
*
22A-30. County Arborist
*
*
*
*
(c)
(4)
requests under Article IL
*
except for requests under 22A-12(b)(3), review and variance
*
*
*
*
*
*
22A-31. Forest Conservation Advisory Committee
(
c)
The Executive must designate a staff member from each of the
following departments to serve as an ex office member:
(A)
[Economic Development] Agricultural Services
*
*
*
Approved:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
Date
393
394
Approved:
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
Date
395
396
This is a correct copy ofCouncil action.
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council
Date
- 16 -
f:\law\bills\1726 pb forest conservation amendments\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUES T REPORT
Bill 26-17
Forest Conservation
-
Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
Bill 26-17 would require certain administrative and minor subdivisions
to comply with the Forest Conservation Law, subject certain
conditional uses to the Forest Conservation Law, require park
development plans to comply with the Forest Conservation Law,
exempt certain modifications to existing residential development
property under certain circumstances, require certain projects
requiring sketch plan approval to submit a forest stand delineation,
modify the process for submitting a forest stand delineation, alter the
maintenance period for forest conservation plans for certain areas, and
remove the requirement that tree variances be referred to the County
Arborist for recommendation.
Current changes to county and state law have made some provisions
of the Forest Conservation Law out of date and in need of updating,
changing, and clarifying.
To update the code to reflect changes to state law and to streamline the
review process, codify practices, and clarify portions of the Forest