charles county, maryland department of planning and growth … · 2019. 5. 30. · mike hess, pe,...

Charles County, Maryland Department of Planning and Growth Management

Green Codes and Standards Study

Type of Document: Final Draft Project Name: Charles County EECBG Codes and Standards Study Project Number: 2011227-00 Prepared By: Kim Frith, LEED AP Reviewed By: Mike Hess, PE, LEED AP exp U.S. Services Inc. 2601 Westhall Lane Maitland, FL 32751 USA T: +407.660.0088 www.exp.com ________________________________________ Mike Hess, Principal Date Submitted: 6/18/12

Client: Charles County Project Name: Charles County EECBG Codes and Standards Study

Project Number: 2011227-00 Date: June 18, 2012

ii

Legal Notification

This report was prepared by exp U.S. Services Inc. for the account of Charles County, Maryland. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. Exp U.S. Services Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this project.

Acknowledgment This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-SC0003420. Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.



iii

Table of Contents

Charles County, Maryland .............................................................................................................. i

Department of Planning and Growth Management ...................................................................... i

Legal Notification............................................................................................................................ ii

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2

2 Policy Recommendations ................................................................................................. 5

2.1 Amending Existing Codes and Ordinances ......................................................................... 6

2.2 LEED Certification for New County Facilities ...................................................................... 7

2.3 ENERGY STAR Certification for Existing County Facilities ................................................ 8

2.4 LEED Accredited Professionals on Inspection Team .......................................................... 8

3 Summary of Recommended Incentives ........................................................................ 10

3.1 Property Tax Credits .......................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Expedited Plan Review and Permitting ............................................................................. 11

3.3 Reduction in Required Parking .......................................................................................... 12

4 Timeline for Implementation........................................................................................... 14

5 Recommended Code Changes ...................................................................................... 15

6 Recommended Additional Research ............................................................................. 35

Appendix 1 – Green Codes and Incentives Survey................................................................... 38

Appendix 2 – Green Building Rating System Registration and Certification Costs ............. 58

Appendix 3 – Model Lighting Ordinance .................................................................................... 63

Appendix 4 – Benefit/Cost Analysis of Proposed Tax Incentives ........................................... 82

Appendix 5 – Comparing LEED and the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) ..... 89

Appendix 6 – Sample Road Sections with Environmental Site Design (ESD) Stormwater Management .................................................................................................................................. 96



1

Executive Summary As part of the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant program, the Charles County Department of Planning and Growth Management tasked exp to review and update the existing codes and ordinances in place in Charles County to more greatly support energy efficient development and remove conflicts which might impair or impede green development. Through an iterative process of reviewing the codes, obtaining feedback from the Charles County staff and the local development community via monthly progress meetings and an intensive local workshop with the stakeholders, the consulting team has proposed a number of changes to the existing codes and ordinances as follows:

The team has also proposed several policy changes, such as requiring all new County facilities to obtain LEED® certification, pursuing Energy Star certification for all existing County facilities, and requiring LEED Accredited Professionals on the County building inspection team. Additionally, the team has proposed a number of incentive programs to encourage sustainable development. These incentives include tax deductions and expedited permit review for green-certified buildings, as well as reduced parking requirements for projects providing alternative transportation infrastructure. These recommendations will be presented to the Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners for approval in the summer of 2012.

Code/Ordinance

Number of Proposed Changes

Architectural & Site Design Guidelines 26

Roads Ordinance 4

Zoning Ordinance 36

Subdivision Regulations 12

Water and Sewer Ordinance 2

Historic Preservation Plan 2

International Residential Building Code 8

International Mechanical Building Code 1



2

1 Introduction

Charles County, Maryland received funding through the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program in December of 2009 to reduce fossil fuel emissions, reduce total energy use, and improve energy efficiency in the transportation sector, the building sector, and other appropriate sectors. A team of professionals (engineers, architects, and planners) was assembled to perform a comprehensive review of the Charles County Zoning Ordinance and related development ordinances, and the Building Code and related ordinances. The team was charged with recommending amendments that will eliminate or mitigate conflicts which impair or impede the County’s and/or the building community’s ability to create and construct environmentally and economically sustainable, energy efficient, transit and pedestrian friendly development and re-development throughout the County. The St. Charles Companies assisted in the preparation of the grants and participated on the implementation team for this project. In July of 2009, the St. Charles Companies finalized their “Green Paper”, which serves as a strategic plan to help turn St. Charles into a green city. St. Charles is a 9,100 acre Planned Unit Development in Charles County, with approximately 4,000 acres remaining to be developed. Over 12,000 homes have been built in this development, with approximately 11,000 more planned. The “Green Paper” provided a strategy to construct these homes and surrounding buildings in a more sustainable way. It also addressed integrating the new construction with the existing fabric to achieve a sustainable city. This plan encompassed the following:

Energy

Water

Materials and Waste

Green Certification

Education

Transportation

Health

Nature

Technology

Green jobs



3

As one of the first steps to implement this plan, the St. Charles Companies achieved Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) Gold Certification for their new headquarters. Their office includes rainwater re-use, high efficiency air conditioning, and daylighting controls among other green features. The St. Charles Companies also engaged the County to pursue Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grants from the Department of Energy. This report includes the proposed code/ordinance amendments, as well as recommended incentives and other policies to promote energy efficiency and sustainable development for Charles County. A survey of current and forecasted green or sustainable codes and standards around the country, including the Washington D.C. metropolitan region was performed and is included in Appendix 1. This appendix includes a list of economic incentives that may also be available at the state and federal level for green building. The purpose of this policy review is an exercise to update codes and standards to remove conflicts which might impair or impede green development – irrespective of costs - and to promote energy efficient development. The goal is to reduce/eliminate regulatory barriers to make it easier for owners to build (and/or renovate) to greener, more sustainable standards without being bogged down. Fundamentally, by lowering/eliminating these barriers the County will not



4

only be making it easier, but also lowering the costs for building greener projects. The team members involved in this report include:

Name Initials Organization

Shelley Wagner SW Charles County

Frank Ward FW Charles County

Steven Ball SB Charles County

Reed Faasen RF Charles County

Jason Groth JG Charles County

Amy Blessinger AB Charles County

Karen Wiggin KW Charles County

Kirby Blass KB Charles County

Beth Groth BG Charles County

Mark MacFarland MM The St. Charles Companies

Jim Lynn JL Meridian

Mike Hess MH Exp

Kim Frith KF Exp

Clive Graham CG Environmental Resources Management (ERM)

Jenifer Huff JH Environmental Resources Management (ERM)

Steven Piguet SP Sustainable Design Consulting (SDC)

Leslie Philip LP Sustainable Design Consulting (SDC)

Bobby Croghan BG Sustainable Design Consulting (SDC)

Doug Spencer DS Spencer Consulting Services (SCS)

A collaborative approach was used to formulate the recommendations in this report. Initially, the consulting team reviewed the existing codes, ordinances and standards for Charles County and proposed questions and comments in an extensive matrix of notes which was used as the primary communication tool between the Charles County staff and the consulting team members. The first draft of this report was created as an extension of this process. Monthly conference calls, additional research and the combined input and feedback from the Charles County staff, the St. Charles Companies, the consulting team and the local development community (including representatives from the Maryland National Chapter Building Industry Association) were utilized to revise and enhance the recommendations for the second draft of the report. In late February of 2012, the consulting team held a three-day workshop with the Charles County staff and the local developers to work through a detailed benefit/cost analysis of implementing the proposed recommendations, as well as revising the recommendations based on input from the stakeholders. This final draft of the report is the culmination of this combined effort.



5

2 Policy Recommendations

The consultant team conducted an extensive review of the existing County codes and ordinances to identify any potential conflicts and recommendations for improvement, as well as other policies which were not currently implemented in the County. Below is a list of all codes and ordinances which were reviewed within the scope of this project (effective in Charles County during 2011).

Transportation Codes and Standards

- Zoning Ordinance

- Subdivision Regulations

- Road Ordinance

- Storm Drainage Ordinance

- Water/Sewer Ordinance

- Adequate Public Facilities Manual

- Site Design and Architectural Guidelines and Standards

- Proposed solar / wind energy zoning text amendments

- Historical Preservation Plan

- Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan Draft (February 7, 2012)

Building Codes and Standards

- International Building Code 2009

- International Mechanical Code 2009

- National Electrical Code 2008

- International Plumbing Code 2009

- International Fuel Gas Code 2009

- International Energy Conservation Code 2009

- International Residential Code 2009

The team presented the initial recommendations to the County staff using the Notes Matrix in Appendix 3. This document was created and updated continuously throughout the project as the primary communication tool between the consultants, the County staff, the St. Charles Companies and the local development community. Monthly progress meetings were utilized to discuss questions and concerns directly



6

with the County Department of Planning and Growth Management staff. A public meeting with the local development community, including representatives from the Maryland National Capital Building Industry Association (MNCBIA) and the St. Charles Companies, was held to obtain real-world feedback on potential financial incentives and anticipated impacts of policy changes, as well as overall impressions of green development in the County. The team then finalized and compiled the recommended code amendments, policy changes and incentives for this draft report. The Notes Matrix includes the history of all review comments and input from the consultant team, Charles County staff, and the St. Charles Companies, and is included for reference only. The report includes the final recommendations, which exclude any initial recommendations/issues/questions that were addressed during the course of this project.

A suggested phase-in timeline for these policy changes is included later in this report.

2.1 Amending Existing Codes and Ordinances

Creating green buildings and development projects can be challenging if a project team encounters conflicts in the County codes and ordinances that go against the sustainable development principles of energy efficiency, water savings, environmentally sensitive site development, and transit friendly development. It is recommended that the County adopt a series of amendments to the existing codes and ordinances to address specific sustainability issues which are unclear in the current verbiage, as well as potential conflicts which may impair or impede green development. A detailed description of each issue is included later in this report.

The project team reviewed the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Fuel Gas Code, and Energy Efficiency Code also, and no conflicts with sustainable development strategies were found in these documents. In July 2012, Charles County will adopt the 2012 versions of the other International Codes Council (ICC) codes, including the International Building Code, International Plumbing Code, International Fuel Gas Code, International Energy Efficiency Code, and International Residential Code. Due to of the upcoming adoption of the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) which Maryland may address, some of the work in this report may need to be updated because of this newly released code. After adoption of the IgCC, it is advisable that there is a review done by individual counties to provide any necessary amendments based on the localities. The actual text amendments will be created after the briefings to the Charles County Commissioners and Planning Commission.



7

2.2 LEED Certification for New County Facilities

Many local jurisdictions require LEED Certification for new and existing buildings as a way to reduce operating expenses and educate the local community on the benefits of sustainable development. This would apply to new construction facilities (using LEED for New Construction/Core & Shell/Commercial Interiors/Schools).

The consultant team utilized many of the items researched and items proposed by the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) because of the long standing acceptance of their credential system in the country. LEED allows for different levels of sustainable building processes. As such, the upcoming International Green Construction Code utilizes many items as they relate to LEED criteria. Cost estimating for a more sustainable building environment is extremely difficult when attempting to produce hard costs (see Appendix 4 for industry findings regarding the additional cost for various levels of LEED certification). In building with alternative materials, systems, etc. total project costs can be held in check depending on the values the client puts on different aesthetics vs. the operating systems. When determining a more holistic building design and approach, it’s not a one-for-one comparison or simple substitution for different materials. As research has shown, the more involved the entire team is at the beginning of any construction project, the less of the cost for LEED certification, or simply constructing a building with a lower environmental impact, becomes. Another reason to use LEED references is the wealth of comparative data that the GBCI collects on various projects and ability to utilize that data for research. The GBCI mandates that all projects must allow for their energy rates to be collected. This in turn allows better tracking of green building performance, and allows the building community to better inform clients on initial costs and long term impacts of a more environmentally sustainable project. Rather than assigning a line item hard cost for requiring all County Buildings to be LEED certified, a Life Cycle Analysis is the recommended manner in which to measure LEED impacts from County buildings. One clear area of measurement and long term cost savings is utilizing the Energy Star program as a first-run benchmark and basis for energy-efficient design. The document below, as seen on the website link, helps to provide a broader picture of energy savings achieved by using the Energy Star program. Energy Star Calculator http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=comm_real_estate.building_upgrade_value_calculator

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=comm_real_estate.building_upgrade_value_calculator

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=comm_real_estate.building_upgrade_value_calculator



8

2.3 ENERGY STAR Certification for Existing County Facilities

To reduce operating expenses and improve energy efficiency in existing buildings, it is recommended to pursue ENERGY STAR certification for the existing County facilities. This program focuses on reducing energy consumption in existing buildings and tracking energy efficiency improvements over time. Buildings with the ENERGY STAR label rank in the top 75% for energy efficiency in the country. At a minimum, the County should be required to use the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager online tool to benchmark the energy performance of all existing County facilities.

Energy Star Portfolio Manager is a free, web-based tool commonly used by property owners and municipalities to track the energy performance of their building portfolio. It is very user-friendly. Note that all new LEED certified projects are required to track and report at least 5 years of energy and water consumption data and provide that information to USGBC for research. The Portfolio Manager Tool is the most commonly used method for sharing this information with USGBC.

2.4 LEED Accredited Professionals on Inspection Team

It is recommended to include at least one LEED AP on the County code inspection team to help oversee the code review for LEED projects. Currently, the Charles County Planning Director, Steven Ball, is the only LEED Accredited Professional (LEED AP) on the County code inspection team. It should be noted that USGBC offers training and exam preparation for the LEED AP test, and also provides continuing education (required 30 hours every two years). Additionally, including a LEED AP on the inspection team will help the County staff to become more familiar with sustainable building practices and to assist in pursuing green building certification for County facilities. The cost for a person to obtain a LEED AP credential requires a standardized test to be taken, $200 plus a renewal fee of $50 every two years. However, the applicant must have worked on a LEED Certified project prior to applying for the LEED AP credential (or have been employed in a sustainable field of work, or complete an education program that addresses green building principles). There are many study guides and resources that are available to study as well. To maintain the credential, the LEED AP must obtain continuing education credits which can be free or cost, dependent on the media. http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/professional-credentials/credentials.aspx#

http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/professional-credentials/credentials.aspx



9

If the County decides to adopt the International Green Construction Code (IgCC), training should be provided for code inspectors, commercial/residential developers and local designers. Training should include the new code requirements, as well as the ASHRAE Standard 189.1 compliance path.



10

3 Summary of Recommended Incentives

Charles County public policies and incentive programs may be established to complement the current local and national programs applicable in Charles County. A benefit/cost analysis was developed for each of the recommended incentives for Charles County. A detailed explanation is provided with the summary of each incentive.

Based on review of the established green building programs and policies around the country, the following preliminary recommendations are presented for Charles County.

3.1 Property Tax Credits

It is recommended that Charles County adopt a property tax credit incentive program for both commercial/multi-family residential and single family residential projects to earn a minimum level of green building certification, similar to Baltimore County. The property tax would be for real property, not personal property. The credit would apply to new construction and renovations to encourage new development within the County. A more detailed benefit/cost analysis is presented in Appendix 4. The following tax credits are recommended varying between green building rating systems and certification levels:

Rating System Certification Level

Property Tax Credit

Duration

COMMERCIAL/MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES

LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)*

New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Schools, Retail, Healthcare, Core and Shell

Certified 20% 5 consecutive years

Silver 40%

Gold / Platinum

50%

RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES


Homes All Levels 100% 3 consecutive years

ICC 700 National Green Building Standard Certification


*LEED, ICC 700 or equivalent third-party certification

Note that Energy Star certification for homes is not proposed as an option to obtain the property tax credit for residential projects. This is due to feedback from the development community that Energy Star for homes has become industry standard practice within Charles County and does not warrant an additional incentive.



11

3.2 Expedited Plan Review and Permitting

Expedited permitting review for commercial/multi-family buildings pursuing LEED certification is a very common initiative program. For example, Ferguson, Missouri aims to process green building permits within 30 business days. Las Vegas provides a $1000 credit towards expedited plan checks. Catawba County, NC provides a rebate of 50% of the expedited plan review fees for LEED projects. Salt Lake City projects seeking LEED Silver certification or greater are notified of their permit status within three days of submitting an application. It is recommended for Charles County to require commercial and multi-family projects seeking an expedited plan review to be pursuing LEED certification or NAHB ICC 700 certification. Note that LEED / NAHB projects would not all automatically be granted the permit expedite (LEED / NAHB is a factor to consider, note the sole requirement to qualify for permit expedite); LEED registration (or an equivalent third-party green building standard) would be a minimum requirement to apply for permit expedite. The projects seeking the expedited plan review should be required to provide a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) confirming the developer will begin construction within a set time frame, a copy of the project registration confirmation, the LEED / NAHB Scorecard for the project, and a copy of at least one LEED AP certificate from the project team members. This incentive would not be applicable to single-family residential permits as the typical review cycle is only two weeks for those projects. The current permitting process for residential projects in Charles County requires fourteen days. The expedited permit process would pertain to the development services permits (such as new utility lines), which can take much longer to review than an individual building permit. Note that LEED certification (or any other third-party certification such as NAHB ICC 700) reduces the administrative burden on the County staff by having the developer/owner pay for the third-party review, rather than the County staff reviewing the detailed sustainability practices implemented on each project.

County Benefits

- The County can enjoy the inherent environmental benefits associated with LEED

/ NAHB certified buildings (reduced energy and water consumption, optimal

indoor air quality, waste management, reduced air pollution from power

generation, etc.). This incentive may also encourage developers to build their

projects in Charles County as opposed to a county without incentives for green

buildings.

County Costs



12

- Anticipated costs to the County include staff time to process the expedited plan

reviews and permit applications.

Development Community Benefits

- The development community can benefit from this program by reducing the time

required to begin construction on green building projects.

Development Community Costs

- Anticipated costs to the development community include the soft costs

associated with preparing the up-front LEED / NAHB strategy for the building.

3.3 Reduction in Required Parking

Some jurisdictions struggle with balancing architectural design intent with the strategies utilized on many green building projects (such as rooftop renewable energy equipment, highly reflective roofing materials, and pervious pavement). In many green buildings, these unique features can be one of the main visual highlights of the building. For this program to be successfully adopted in Charles County, it is recommended that the Planning Director clearly outline the circumstances under which the parking requirements could be reduced and publish the information on the Charles County website. This would apply to commercial/multi-family projects. This incentive was recommended to remove potential barriers to sustainable development. It is recommended to allow a 10% reduction in required parking if the commercial/multi-family project includes the following elements to promote alternative transportation: Require all new buildings within the Transit Oriented Development zone (including Waldorf) to install electric vehicle charging stations. At least one electric vehicle charging station per office building would be required. The County desires to encourage private entities to install electric vehicle charging facilities.

AND

Secure bicycle storage in accordance with the Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan: One bicycle parking space for every 20 motor vehicle parking spaces, or a rack(s) that will hold 10 bicycles (permanently anchored) must be provided. The bicycle rack(s) must be visually and physically accessible from the public sidewalk and street. Allow a fee in lieu of providing bicycle parking, and the fee would be applied to an enterprise fund to invest money into



13

expanding County bicycle infrastructure in the future (i.e. expanding bicycle trails & lanes).

OR

Preferred parking for carpool/vanpool vehicles. Provide preferred parking for 5% of total parking spaces (designated with signage and/or striping). Preferred parking is defined as located closest to the main building entrance aside from ADA-designated spaces. Providing a discounted parking rate is an acceptable substitute for preferred parking for carpool or vanpool vehicles. To establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available to all customers (not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity), publicly posted at the entrance of the parking area, and available for a minimum of 2 years. In multi-family developments, provide infrastructure and support programs to facilitate shared vehicle use such as carpool drop-off areas, designated parking for vanpools, car-share services, ride boards, and shuttle services to mass transit.

County Benefits

- The County can benefit by having less impervious area for parking (and thereby

reducing the load on the stormwater system), and reduced air pollution

associated with single occupancy vehicles. This incentive may also encourage

developers to build their projects in Charles County as opposed to a county

without incentives for green buildings.

County Costs

- Anticipated costs to the County include the time to review bicycle storage and

parking plans, and are typically negligible.

Development Community Benefits

- The development community can benefit from this program by reducing costs

associated with providing required parking, and by enabling creativity in design

beyond the architectural standards in the County.

Development Community Costs

- The costs include the price of the bicycle racks and signage for carpool spaces,

which are typically negligible.



14

4 Timeline for Implementation

When developing a timeline to phase in the recommended policy changes and incentive programs, careful consideration was given to the pending release of the International Green Construction Code in 2013, as well as the potential response from the building community.

To promote green development in Charles County, the following phase in timeline is suggested. The standards apply based on the date of site plan or building permit application.

Late 2012

- IgCC released

By July 2013

- Publish New Lighting Ordinance and Amended Language to Existing Codes and

Ordinances

- All projects applying for permit after August 1, 2013 must comply with

amendments.

Beginning August 1, 2013

- Begin Incentive Programs for Green Projects

- Property Tax Credits

- Expedited Review

- Waiving Architectural Standards and/or Required Parking

- Require All New County Buildings to be LEED Certified

- Require a LEED AP on County Building Inspection Team

It should be noted that if Charles County adopts the IgCC in 2012, this would complement some of the code amendments by translating similar LEED requirements into code language. Appendix 5 includes a comparison of the IgCC and the LEED program requirements.



15

5 Recommended Code Changes

Below are the recommended code changes, organized by topic/issue.

LIGHTING

I. Architectural and Site Design Guidelines and Standards

A. 4.5.8.6 Exterior Lamp Type: Require catalogue sheets or photographs

of proposed light fixtures to be submitted to the Site Design &

Architectural Review Board (SDARB) for approval prior to installation.

Prohibit permanently installed fixtures utilizing incandescent lamps.

Examples of incandescent lamps include xenon, and halogen.

Examples of permanently installed includes pole fixtures, sconces,

pathway lighting, security lighting, etc. Manufacturing of incandescent

lighting is currently being phased out by federal law.

II. Roads Ordinance

A. Article VI Traffic: Streetlights should be allowed within the Right of Way

if the County can get a maintenance and cost agreement from the

developer or local utility provider. For example, in the St. Charles

development area, Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative (SMECO)

owns the street lights and the Homeowners Associations (HOAs) pay

for them. SMECO is responsible for maintenance and repairs. The

HOAs are responsible for paying the electricity bill which includes a

special rate for street light maintenance. SMECO will provide street

lights to any interested parties; their service is not limited to the St.

Charles area. However, they only have one style of street light

available, so aesthetic options may be limited.

III. Zoning Ordinance

A. 297-306 Lighting Standards: Adopt the Model Lighting Ordinance

presented in Appendix 3. The proposed recommendations are not

expected to create more electrical demand and are designed to reduce

energy consumption for exterior lighting. Cost impacts are not

anticipated – the recommendations are designed to put energy-

efficient lighting technologies on an even playing field with traditional

lighting systems. No new equipment will need to be purchased by the

County to inspect for compliance with the proposed Lighting

Ordinance. There is a section for specialty permitted lights (non-



16

conforming), and Professional Engineer (PE) sign & seal is required on

the lighting layouts before & at completion.

IV. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Improved safety, energy efficiency and less visual

impacts on neighbors.

B. Applicant/Developer Costs = Negligible – developers already have to

develop lighting plans for photometrics.

C. County Administration/Staff Costs = Negligible – County already

reviews lighting plans.

RENEWABLE ENERGY

I. Zoning Ordinance, Solar and Wind Amendments (Bill 2009-108):

A. 297-49 Definitions and Interpretations: Clarify the definition of Owner,

which could be multiple parties in the case of a Power Purchase

Agreement.

B. 297-298.D.9 General Site Design Standards: Clarify that no zoning

ordinance or by-law shall prohibit or unreasonably regulate the

installation of solar energy systems or the building of structures that

facilitate the collection of solar energy, except where necessary to

protect the public health, safety or welfare.

C. 7.07.000 Alternative Energy Systems: Recommend to commissioners

to reduce/eliminate property taxes on solar and wind energy system

projects. Suggested percentage reduction in property taxes on

solar/wind projects: 100% for free-standing solar for 10 years, 50% of

year 10-20, and 100% after that. 50% on roof-mounted solar. 100% for

wind for 10 years and 50% for year 10-20. Note that the state of

Maryland already provides a 50% credit on the personal property tax

for utility-scale renewable energy projects (i.e. the SMECO solar field).

Solar panels are taxed as personal property, while land is taxed as real

property. The state exempts residential solar systems (not utility-scale)

for 100% of taxes. The reduction would be based only on the taxable

value of the improvements related to alternative energy systems.

D. 7.07.100 D (2) and 7.07.200 D (2): Require designs for wind and solar

rack systems to be signed by a licensed Professional Engineer, and

pole and rack designs must be consistent with current code for



17

structures to ensure compliance with load path, uplift, and wind design

requirements.

E. 7.07.100 D (3): Determine spacing requirements that are acceptable to

the County’s Life Safety Departments. Large solar installations can

have significant life safety issues. For Greenfield sites, typical 16 feet

clearance between rows of collectors, passable road for fire trucks,

turnarounds, and life safety standards can conflict with large scale

solar design. Could use narrower clearance with Gator tractors for life

safety access. Code should be flexible to allow as much of the site to

be covered in solar collectors as possible.

F. 7.07.100 E (2) (B): Clarify definition of a flat roof to be a roof with a

pitch of less than 1 to 5 vertical: horizontal.

G. 7.07.100 E (3): Delete this provision and adding wind/solar equipment

to the height exception for roof-mounted equipment.

H. 7.07.100 E (4): For clarification, replace with “access and egress shall

be provided to the roof and pathways on the roof.”

I. 7.07.100 F (1): Add the following language: “… or color to match the

exterior of the home on which the solar system is mounted.”

J. 7.07.100 F (2) and 7.07.200 F (2) and 7.07.300 E: Since the rack

system will likely be a different manufacturer than the panels, allow a

maximum of two manufacturer labels and appropriate warning signs.

K. 7.07.100 I and 7.07.200 I: Require battery systems to be hidden in

some method in small projects to appropriately screen from view.

Large projects can have a specialty-built building for battery storage.

L. 7.07.200 C: Recommend a smaller setback than 100 feet. Twenty-five

(25) feet would help project economics since complete buffer

(landscape) can be expensive and requires maintenance. Not

necessary to require landscaping for road frontages to hide

environmental projects. These sites can be 150 acres typically (very

large to help economics), and most large scale projects in agricultural

settings do not have setback requirements or landscaping. If buffer

requirement is not removed, require buffer to only apply to street

frontage line, not adjacent property lines.

M. 7.07.200 D (4): Require appropriate fencing for safety. Consider that

this is not an eyesore but an interesting facility that should not be

hidden.



18

N. 7.07.200 D (9): Add language “Inverters and transformers shall be

located in a secure area and shall minimize the impact on adjoining

property owners.”

O. 7.07.200 E (2) (B): Solar panel mounting systems come standard and

depending on which product is selected, the five foot height restriction

may be prohibitive. Recommend 8 foot height restriction for a large

roof-mounted solar project.

P. 7.07.200 F (1): Add language “…or color to match other structures

within the project.”

Q. 7.07.300 C (1): Define Total Height as Tip Height, and increase

setbacks for utility lines: “A wind tower for a small wind energy system

shall be set back a distance equal to its total tip height plus 5 feet of

any overhead utility line (tip height is the distance from the base of the

structure to the highest point of the rotor).”

R. 7.07.300 D: Revise language to address various styles of wind turbines

such as those without exposed blades.

S. 7.07.300 E: In commercial and industrial districts, allow wind energy

systems to extend a limited distance above the roof of a structure,

even if the roof is already at the maximum height for the zone.

T. 7.07.300 J: Allow installation of small wind energy devices on existing

towers and/or structures. Require licensed Professional Engineer

signature for structural design. Require owner of tower/structure to

coordinate interference with existing equipment on tower.

U. 7.07.400 A (1): Require a special exemption hearing review for

anything above 150 feet.

II. International Mechanical Code

A. 306.5.1 Sloped Roofs: Provide language to exempt small roof-mounted

solar energy systems from the maintenance access platform

requirements.

III. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Improved power grid reliability, energy efficiency and

reduced fossil fuel consumption and associated pollution.

B. Applicant/Developer Costs = Low. These recommendations do not

require installation of renewable energy systems, only encourage.

Renewable energy projects can be eligible for significant Federal tax

benefits (up to 30% of the installed cost for many projects). Owners

can use net metering to sell the renewable energy back to SMECO.



19

C. County Administration/Staff Costs = Negligible amount of time to

review plans.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Road surfaces are a substantial portion of the County’s impervious surface and

generate run-off containing residual oil and other pollutants. Modified designs for

roadways are recommended as part of the County’s response to Environmental Site

Design (ESD) stormwater requirements.

Stormwater from roads with curb and gutter is usually collected in storm drains and

piped to stormwater management facilities or directly into streams or rivers. New

designs developed in response to ESD requirements allow water to flow through

curb breaks into swales, rain gardens, small vegetated stormwater measures or

other acceptable ESD practices within the street right-of-way, as shown in the

photographs below. These allow treatment of stormwater close to the source.

ESD stormwater management is easier to accomplish for roads without curb and

gutter, which have traditionally had simple roadside grass swales that convey sheet

flow runoff. Grass swales reduce stormwater volume through infiltration and improve

water quality through vegetative and soil filtration. Additional benefit can be attained

through more complex forms of swales, such as those with amended soils, gravel

storage areas, under drains, weirs, and diverse vegetation.

(www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/greenstreets/background.htm).

EPA’s menu of stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) promotes revisions

to road regulations to allow engineered grass swales as an alternative to curbs and

gutters in low and medium density residential zones where soils, slope and housing

density permit. Elimination of curbs and gutters is generally not recommended for

streets with high traffic volume or on-street parking demand. Effective ESD

stormwater measures can be provided at much lower cost along streets without curb

and gutter. (http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps)


A. 4.5.6.4 Underground Drainage: Reference that all new projects must

comply with the Maryland Environmental Site Design to the maximum

extent possible (ESD to the MEP) process.

II. Zoning Ordinance

http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/greenstreets/background.htm

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps



20

A. 297-358 Perimeter Landscaping E (2): Delete “stormwater management

systems” from language. Allow ESD stormwater management measures

in the buffer provided they complement the bufferyard. Specify that no

structural stormwater management facilities shall be allowed in the buffer.

Refer to the Stormwater Management Ordinance as the determinant of

structural and ESD stormwater measures. (Section 8.4 of the Ordinance

includes the following as structural stormwater measures: stormwater

management ponds, wetlands, infiltration, filtering systems and open

channels.) Allow perpendicular, underground utility crossings that do not

interfere with the plantings required to make the buffer functional and

attractive.

III. Roads Ordinance

A. 3.4 Cross Section Elements, A. Typical Sections. Add code language

similar to the following to allow ESD stormwater practices within the right-

of-way of streets: “The County Engineer may approve alternative road

sections which allow stormwater management facilities within the right of

way provided it is demonstrated that it is a professionally acceptable

design based on existing site conditions and proposed maintenance

responsibilities are clearly defined and approved by the Chief of Codes,

Permits, and Inspection Services.” Samples of road sections that include

ESD stormwater practices within the road right-of-way are provided in

Appendix 6, which would need to be adapted to match Charles County

road standards. In response to the most recent Maryland stormwater

management requirements, road designs have been developed in

neighboring jurisdictions that include ESD stormwater practices within the

road right-of-way of open sections as well as roads with curb and gutter.

The language suggested above is consistent with current text in the

Stormwater Management Ordinance and Storm Drain Ordinance that

provide flexibility on a case-by-case basis:

a. Stormwater Management Ordinance Section 9.9: “Unless approved

otherwise by the County Engineer, stormwater management for

private residential, private commercial, private industrial or

institutional developments shall be located outside of County rights-

of-way, properties and public easements.”

b. Section 8.1.C.4.a of the Storm Drain Ordinance allows curb cuts

with approval of the County Engineer.




21

A. Public Benefits = Reduced impact on existing stormwater management

infrastructure, improved aesthetics from increased green space in

urban/suburban areas.

B. Applicant/Developer Costs = Negligible – developers already have to

develop stormwater management system designs to comply with

Maryland Environmental Site Design requirements.

C. County Administration/Staff Costs = Moderate – small amount of time

to review non-standard road plans. The County would assume

additional costs if it maintains stormwater management facilities within

the right-of-way.

SITE DESIGN & PLANNING


A. 4.8.2.4 Public Alleys: Encourage alleyway driveways for easier

installation and repair of public utilities under alleys. Encourage

developers to utilize permeable surfaces. Reference Chicago’s Green

Alley Program and Baltimore’s Blue Alleys Program.


A. 297-89 Village Zones Figure VI-3: Reduce minimum front setback in

RV zone to 20 feet. Reduce minimum front setback in CV zone to 10

feet if there is potential for sidewalk and pedestrian travel.

B. 297-01 B (3) (a) Commercial Zones: Clarify by adding reference to

297-340 and 341, joint parking and satellite parking. This refers to

commercial zones. 297-338 (N) limits parking to 40% of required front

yard in residential zones.

C. 297-91 D Accessory uses permitted in the BP Zone: Require

pedestrian connections between accessory commercial services and

primary uses within the business park.

D. 297-91 Table VI Schedule of Zone Regulations – Commercial Zones

and 297.338 (Q) Off-Street Parking: Reduce minimum front building

setbacks in CN, CC and CB to 10 feet. (For commercial development

facing highways, the Highway Corridor Overlay District supersedes a

small front setback, requiring a landscape buffer and a 25 to 100-foot

setback from the road right-of-way, depending upon the zoning district

and road classification.) Use “build to” lines rather than minimum



22

setbacks in urban and planned development zoning districts (the

Activity Center districts, Core Mixed Use Zones, and planned

development districts such as MX and TOD). Delete 297-339.Q or

revise to be consistent with the Architectural and Site Design

Guidelines and Standards.

E. 297-95.C.14 (f) (4) Core Mixed Use Zones and 297-301.E Road and

Sidewalk Requirements: Require street trees between the curb and the

sidewalk by adding a standard to the Zoning Regulations Site Design

standards (Section 297-301) to apply to townhouse and apartment

developments. Apply in Development District only, not rural areas.

Revise street tree planting standards (Appendix E of the Zoning

Regulations). Add planting techniques that address soil volume to

improve street tree survival and growth. Review the street tree species

list in Appendix Table 2.09 to determine whether any of the listed trees

are not appropriate to minimize damage to County infrastructure.

F. 297-154: Revise the last phrase of B (3) to allow paths to reduce the

vegetative buffer. Require pathways within the front setback area

where needed.

G. Appendix I: Clarify criteria to address for mixed use development within

the Development District: pedestrian links to retail, service and civic

uses; mix of land uses including residential, retail, services,

employment, and civic uses.

H. Article V, Article VI, and Article XIV: Following adoption of a new

Comprehensive Plan, evaluate cluster and conventional subdivision

regulations. Increase open space for all subdivisions, while providing

flexibility in lot sizes so housing yield is not reduced. Require at least

20% open space for single-family detached development and 30% for

townhouse and apartment developments.

III. Subdivision Regulations

A. 59(a) Neighborhood Parks Required: Text amendments to be drafted

as part of this project if desired by the County; Coordinate this section

with the requirements in Article XIV of the zoning regulations for

“recreation facilities.” Clarify that neighborhood parks are part of the

required open space and recreation facilities. After completion of the

Comprehensive Plan process, as part of comprehensive review of

cluster zoning provisions: consider applying the neighborhood park



23

requirements to all subdivisions based on a size threshold and

eliminate the distinction between cluster and non-cluster subdivisions.

B. 61(c) Provision of Open Space: Require a minimum distance from a

trail bed to a side or rear residential lot line rather than the broad

language in (c).

C. 73(c) Coordination with Surrounding Roads, Sidewalks, and Trails:

Revise this standard to more strongly encourage road, sidewalk and

trail connections between adjoining neighborhoods. Require

connections with surrounding roads wherever possible to permit

movement of traffic and pedestrians between residential

neighborhoods. Discourage neighborhoods that do not have

connections to other neighborhoods. Retain provisions discouraging

through traffic (traffic that does not have its origin or destination within

the connected neighborhoods) on local or minor roads.

D. 74 (a) General Layout of Roads: Add a new provision or expand on (a)

to support the zoning and site design guidelines that encourage

interconnected street networks.

IV. Roads Ordinance

A. Table 2.01.02: Add references within the Zoning Regulations to the

Urban Road Standards. Provide an option allowing the County to

amend the designated “Urban Areas” of the Roads Ordinance in

conjunction with applications for floating zoning districts (Planned

Development Zones).

V. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Improved aesthetics from more open space, reduced

transportation time between neighborhoods, more vibrant and walkable

neighborhoods can lead to improved health.

B. Applicant/Developer Cost = Negligible costs associated with new site

designs and added roads/sidewalks for connectivity.

C. County Administration/Staff = Negligible amount of time to review

plans.



24

PARKING AND GARAGES


A. 4.5.5.1 Garages: Limit carports or garages to “2” vehicles, which

includes “2” vehicle openings in the façade. Prohibit tandem

parking, which exceeds the “2” vehicle garage. Allow parking pads

if constructed utilizing permeable surfaces. This recommendation is

encouraging less garages to be built, which could impact having

less impervious surfaces (less water being diverted into county

systems), less building materials utilized, less heating and electrical

being put into an accessory building which is not a regularly

occupied space, among some of the resulting effects of

encouraging less built garages for the sole purpose of housing

vehicles.

B. 8.1.4.3.1 Urban Core Commercial Areas, 8.1.4.3.2 Town Centers,

8.1.4.3.3 Highway Corridors, and 8.1.4.3.4 Rural Village Centers:

Encourage underground parking garages (or ½ below grade in

areas with high water tables) for new construction to reduce large

expanse of paving, therefore reducing heat island effect and water

runoff issues. Plan for shelters for public transit points; establish a

minimum distance per covered shelter. Plan for bikeways in new

road design and bike storage.

C. 8.1.4.3.5 Industrial Districts and 8.1.4.3.6 Industrial Parks:

Encourage underground parking garages for new construction to

reduce large expanse of paving, therefore reducing heat island

effect and water runoff issues. Plan for shelters for public transit

points; establish a minimum distance per covered shelter. Although

an industrial area, residential units should be considered to be built

above industrial buildings for a lower cost residence. This can also

appeal to younger audiences and contribute to a socio-economic

diverse community.

D. 8.1.4.3.7 Business Parks: Allow any built parking garage over ‘3’

stories to be fitted with a vegetated roof or installation of an energy

producing solar array. The energy array is to produce a minimum

of 2% of the associated building’s projected annual energy usage.


A. Article XX Parking Facilities: Allow on-street parking abutting the

property and on the same side of the street to count towards



25

required parking in commercial and mixed-use areas, including

multi-family residential. The intent is not to encourage on-street

parking in single-family residential developments. On-street parking

should be coordinated with the Fire Marshall. Add a parking

standard for business offices. For employment sites, add provisions

allowing parking reductions for carpooling, vanpooling and transit

availability.

III. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Reduced impact on stormwater treatment

systems due to reduced impervious area, improved aesthetics and

outdoor environment due to reduced surface parking areas,

improved access to public transportation.

B. Applicant/Developer = Medium. Covered/underground parking

garages are inherently more costly than surface parking.

Developers would like incentives for structured parking since they

do not typically make sense financially on low-rent properties.


plans.

ROADS/TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC


A. 4.9.4 Sidewalks and Bikeways: Review standard for creating safer

sidewalks and bikeway integration into the street. Review locations of

curbs in relation to the corner of walkways. Refer to illustration below

and Netherland’s strategies for bike lanes:

(www.youtube.com/user/markenlei)

http://www.youtube.com/user/markenlei



26

B. 4.11.2.3 Driveway Surface: Encourage use of pervious surfaces for

driveway; permeable pavement, loose lay stone/concrete products,

recycled materials and alternative engineered paving sections.

C. 4.11.2.4 Hollywood Driveways: Encourage use of such driveways for

all homes to reduce impermeable surface. Ensure there is associated

water collection/run-off plans initiated into plans. Hollywood Driveways

have a dividing strip of grass in order to reduce the amount of

impervious surface (the tracks for the car are separated by strips of

green lawn).

D. 8.1.4.3.8 Business Districts: Require all new approved business

districts to include a transit stop (for shuttles or bus service) every

1,300 feet to the associated main street artery. A traffic study may

need to be implemented to review current local routes vs. longer

distance public transportation routes in order to reallocate funds for

redistributing bus stops. 1,300 feet (1/4 mile) is a distance in which the

type of incoming riders will travel by foot to board public transportation.

This distance is decreased in more urban, dense areas.




27

A. 297-298 D and 297-301: Expand and clarify both sections to clearly

address pedestrian connections within and between neighborhoods

and services.

B. 297-308 Public Transit: Add multi-family residential development

exceeding a threshold (number of units and density) to the criteria for

transit stops.

C. Article XX Parking Facilities: Require on-site bicycle parking for the

following areas in the Urban Area: parks and plazas; office and

commercial uses above a minimum size threshold; recreational or

cultural uses; and institutional uses. The amount of parking is per the

Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan: One bicycle parking space for every

20 motor vehicle parking spaces or a rack(s) that will hold 10 bicycles

(permanently anchored) should be provided. The bicycle rack(s) must

be visually and physically accessible from the public sidewalk and

street. In addition, the zoning standards for the two new Waldorf zones

include bicycle parking for these zones. The requirements are

contained in §297-96(k)(10) of the Charles County Zoning Ordinance.

Allow a fee in lieu of providing bicycle parking, and the fee would be

applied to an enterprise fund to invest money into expanding County

bicycle infrastructure in the future (i.e. expanding bicycle trails &

lanes).

III. Subdivision Regulations:

A. 44(c) Circulation System Design: Establish pedestrian travel and

convenience, as well as safety, as goals of the path system. Clarify

that any subdivision can have sidewalks along the road and off-road

pathways. Clarify in code language that sidewalks must be separated

from the road for safety.

B. 46(a) Lot and Block Standards: Limit most residential blocks within the

Development District to 800 feet, with provision of pedestrian

connections within the block for blocks longer than 500 feet. This will

not conflict with the current Roads Ordinance minimum spacing

requirements.

C. 74 General Layout of Roads: Add a requirement that cul-de-sacs

include a pedestrian or bicycle through connection whenever practical.

D. 77(a) Sidewalk Requirements: Amend to require sidewalks: along both

sides of the street for subdivision of land zoned for commercial,

employment, mixed use or multi-family use; along both sides of the



28

street for single family detached (SFD) development of more than 10

units where the density of the project is more than 2 units per acre net;

along one side of the street for SFD development where the density of

the project is one to two units per acre; does not need to be concrete

sidewalk with curb and gutter if the street does not have curb and

gutter; on all Major Collector and Arterial roads in the Development

District along a subdivision frontage. Provide for exception/waiver

when warranted. Retain the required sidewalks for site plans currently

in the Zoning Ordinance.

E. 77(b) Sidewalk Width: Change minimum sidewalk width to 5 feet for

retail and mixed use development. For residential areas, retain the 4-

foot width, and the 5-foot criteria for “superior design.” In mixed use

floating zones, require 6 to 8-foot sidewalks, possibly applying the

urban road standards.


A. Public Benefits = Reduced impact on stormwater treatment systems

due to reduced impervious area, improved access to public

transportation.

B. Applicant/Developer Costs = Negligible costs associated with new site

designs and added roads/sidewalks/transit stops for connectivity.

Added cost of purchasing and installing electric vehicle charging

stations.


plans.

LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION


A. 4.12.4 Existing Vegetation: Require all invasive plants to be removed

(to the extent known, and within the Limits of Disturbance). Only allow

native vegetation to remain on site.

B. 4.13.12.B Lawn Area: Prohibit irrigation for more than 50% of the

landscaped area. The intent of this recommendation is to reduce water

consumption for irrigation.

II. Subdivision Regulations



29

A. Article V, 51 (c): Amend subdivision regulations to require street trees

at intervals averaging no more than 40 feet. As an alternative, require

street trees at intervals of no more than 30 feet for trees with an

expected canopy spread of 15 to 30 feet. Trees with the larger canopy

spread are preferred. Smaller trees may be planted to add variety to

the streetscape in the median of divided highways and in other

circumstances where a smaller tree is desirable. Smaller trees are just

to add variety and are not an equal substitution for shade trees. Add

street tree planting standards that address soil volume and surface

treatments to Appendix E of the Zoning Ordinance to improve the

growth and life.

B. Article V 51: Conflicts with Architectural and Site Design Guidelines

and Standards, Zoning Regulations and Roads Ordinance. Select a

consistent standard for all county requirements for size of street trees

when planted, such as 2.5-inch caliper trees. The landscape/nursery

industry uses the following definition for the unit of measurement:

Caliper = the diameter of the trunk measured six inches above the

ground line.

III. Water and Sewer Ordinance

A. Irrigation Requirements: Add new text to require all new landscape

irrigation systems to install rain sensors in accordance with

manufacturer recommendations to conserve potable water. To receive

a permit to install a new irrigation system, the owner/contractor must

submit an irrigation plan showing the rain sensor and the 50%

maximum landscape coverage limits (per the Architectural Site Design

Guidelines).

B. Time of Day Restrictions for Irrigation Activities: Add new text to

require time of day restrictions for landscape irrigation activities. For

continuity between Charles County and the Town of La Plata, it is

recommended to use the permitted hours of 6:00 pm and 10:00 am

each day. Require all new irrigation systems to have the programmed

schedule verified by the County inspector for compliance. Establish a

schedule of fines for individuals irrigating during restricted hours and

during rain events to fund an enforcement program.

IV. Roads Ordinance

A. Appendix A, Table 2.09: Replace with the revised table below (includes

only native species to Maryland).



30

Botanical Name Common Name

Acer rubrum Red Maple

Acer saccharum Sugar Maple

Amelanchier aborea, A. canadensis Serviceberry

Celtis occidentallis Hackberry

Liriodendron tuliptree Tuliptree

Nyssia sylvatica Blackgum or Black Tupelo

Ostrya virginiana Tree Form American Hophornbeam

Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak

Quercus palustris Pin Oak

Quercus phellos Willow Oak

Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak

Carpinus caroliniana Tree Form American Hornbeam

Fraxinus Americana White Ash

Liquidambar styraciflua Sweetgum

Taxodium distichum Baldcypress

The following trees were removed from the approved street tree list due to non-

native Maryland status, disease susceptibility, and/or difficulty growing in urban

settings: Trident Maple, Hedge Maple, Queen Elizabeth Hedge Maple, Amur Maple,

Paperbark Maple, Greencolumn Black Maple, Tatarian Maple, Freeman Maple,

Fastigiate European Hornbean, American Hornbeam, Katsura Tree, White Ash,

Ginkgo or Maidenhair Tree, Kentucky Coffeetree, Goldenrain Tree, Corktree,

Bloodgood London Planetree, Sargent Cherry Tree, Amanowaga Oriental Cherry,

Shubert Chokecherry of Canada Red Cherry, Whitehouse Callery Pear, Capital

Callery Pear, Pagodatree or Scholartree, Ivory Silk Japanese Tree Lilac, Littleleaf

Linden, Chinese Elm, Japanese Zelkova, Honeylocust, Snowdrift Crabapple,

Hawthorns, Redbuds & Dogwoods. Emerald Ash was removed as the state of

Maryland does not recommend planting any new ash trees due to the emerald ash

borer.

V. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Reduced water consumption, lower water bills for

irrigation, improved aesthetics from increased vegetation in

urban/suburban areas.

B. Applicant/Developer Costs = Negligible costs associated with added

irrigation rain sensors.

C. County Administration/Staff = Low. Resources required to enforce

irrigation restrictions could be funded by fines paid by violators.



31

BUILDING MATERIALS AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

1. Architectural and Site Design Guidelines and Standards

A. 4.2.3.6 Ventilation Equipment or Penetrations and 8.2.9.5 Roof

Penetrations: Clarify skylights are exempt from requirements.

B. 4.5.2.3 Retaining Walls: Revise to allow wood retaining walls with a

height less than 2’0” above finished floor. Wood beams can be

harvested from local deconstruction projects.

C. 4.5.3.3 Roof Slope: Require low-pitched roofs to use a green roof

and/or a reflective roofing material with a Solar Reflectance Index

(SRI) of 78 or higher.

D. 4.5.3.5 Roof Overhangs: Require 12” or larger overhangs where

provided on eaves.

E. 4.5.6.1 HVAC Equipment: For exterior heating, ventilating and air

conditioning (HVAC) equipment, give preference to northern or eastern

installation locations to allow equipment to run more efficiently and last

longer. Note that for residential installations, it is assumed that the

mechanical, electrical & plumbing (MEP) consultants who designed the

system, along with the contractor and architect, can decide how to

coordinate site location conflicts with shading, grade & HVAC

locations.

F. 4.6.1.5 Addition Roofs: Add reference to 4.5.3.3 Roof Slope.

G. 8.2.6.3 Façade Articulation: Clarify that each façade which demands a

sufficient relief and is facing a major traffic artery is to include sufficient

space for a county standard bus terminal with roof.

H. 8.2.6.6 Blank Walls: Allow vegetated wall systems.

I. 8.2.6.11 Window Openings: Add language to specifically allow

horizontal windows such as ribbon windows to bring in natural light.

J. 8.2.7.1 Customer Entrance: Require 10’-0” of integrated walk-off mat

surface at main customer entrances.

K. 8.2.9.4 Roof Materials: Prohibit the following roof types: A)

Translucent, backlit fixed awnings used as a mansard or canopy roof.

B) Sloping roofs of less than 2 to 12 pitch unless combined with a

parapet of at least three (3) feet in height. Roofs less than 12 pitch are

subject to a finished roof which complies with a minimum of 78 SRI. C)

Mansard roofs unless they have a minimum height of eight (8) feet and

an angle of at least twenty-five (25) degrees and no more than



32

seventy-five (75) degrees. D) A vegetated roof or a roof which contains

energy producing panels, which does not contain a fascia treatment.

Refer to the above for the finished edges which must accompany. Also

allowed are photovoltaic panels and solar water heaters under the roof

types with the edge treatment.

2. International Residential Code

A. R301.1 Habitable Rooms: Require all habitable rooms to have an

aggregate glazing of not less than 20 percent of the floor area of such

rooms. Require the minimum open-able area to the outdoors (for

windows, doors, louvers, etc.) to be 10 percent of the floor area being

ventilated. Require glazing systems to meet the current ENERGY

STAR requirements for energy efficiency.

B. R301.2.3 Snow Loads: Include verbiage for green roof structural loads

also.

C. R303.6 Stair Lighting: Encourage all interior stairways which share an

exterior wall above grade (i.e. not in basements) to be provided with

natural daylight, horizontal or vertical means. The lens area shall be no

less than 24 square inches, and an artificial light source must also be

located in the immediate vicinity of each landing of the stairway.

D. R303.8.2 Required Heating: Allow exemption to Table R301.2(1) if the

building design team can comply and demonstrate with energy

modeling with the set temperature points through other integrated

design methods such as passive solar heating. An aggregate of natural

heating and artificial heating may be applied to demonstrate the noted

temperature set points.

E. R306.3 Sewage Disposal: Require alternate private sewage disposal

systems to be reviewed prior to issuance of permit submission.

F. R603.3.1 Wall to Foundation or Floor Connection: Where metal to

metal building envelope connections are made to internal points,

require a physical barrier to be installed between the materials to

provide resistance for heat/cold transference. The specification for this

connection is the responsibility of the project architect.

G. R702.3.1 Gypsum Board: Require all wet walls to be covered, in the

minimum, of paperless gypsum wall board. Require all areas where a

water fixture penetrates the partition to have paperless gypsum board

extending 36” to all sides.



33

H. R703.7.6 Weep Holes: Require a weep hole cover to be installed in all

weep holes to help prevent infiltration of pests into the structure. The

covers do not have to be a manufactured item but can be made on

site.

3. Benefits & Costs

i. Public Benefits = Improved energy efficiency and reduced

environmental impact (pollution) associated with conventional

materials.

ii. Applicant/Developer Cost = Negligible. Many of these

recommendations are best practices for new building projects

(i.e. reflective roofing materials).

iii. County Administration/Staff Cost = Negligible amount of time to

review plans.

ADMINISTRATIVE AND MISCELLANEOUS


A. 8.2 Architecture: Include “Sustainable Design Recommendations” in

the list of design issues.

B. 8.2.2 Architectural Relationship: Include clear text that new

communities, as a whole, may establish their own design language,

apart from the traditional styles the SDARB is seeking through these

standards. By doing so, it requires new technologies to be embraced

and therefore benefiting all; newer environmental technologies

(materials, systems, design) are usually tried on modern architecture.


A. Article VII Planned Development Zones: Clarify in the standards for the

MX, TOD, and PRD Zone that development is to facilitate pedestrian

travel, bicycle travel and transit.

III. Subdivision Regulations

A. Article V Section 44 (b) Subdivision Design: Clarify acceptable uses for

development (i.e. passive recreation).

IV. Historic Preservation Plan

A. Section IV Goal 1.8: Add new goal to explore incentives and design

guidelines for historic property owners to pursue upgrades in energy

efficiency while protecting historic integrity.



34

B. Section 2.6: Add section to promote energy conservation and

sustainability in all preservation efforts. The Historic Preservation

Commission should work with sustainability groups to educate the

public about the shared goals of preservation and sustainability.

V. Benefits & Costs

A. Public Benefits = Improved aesthetics associated with maintaining

historic properties.

B. Applicant/Developer Cost = Negligible. These recommendations are

administrative clarifications for the County.

C. County Administration/Staff Cost = Negligible amount of time to

manage historical preservation efforts.



35

6 Recommended Additional Research

During the course of this study, three topics were raised regarding the large-scale environmental impacts of construction practices within Charles County. These topics include mass grading / tree replacement policies, vinyl building materials, and stormwater management within the County right-of-way. It is recommended that these issues be given further attention after this study is completed to allow the County to determine a course of action for each topic of concern. Additionally, notes have been included regarding potential redundancies in the current building inspections and the Energy Star inspection procedures. Mass Grading / Tree Preservation The practice of mass grading and tree preservation was the most debated topic discussed during the three-day workshop with the Charles County staff and the local development community. Charles County proposed a tree preservation ordinance in 2003 prohibiting mass grading within the Right of Way and requiring preservation of trees with 8” diameter or larger; the ordinance was not enacted. Currently the County has Forest Conservation requirements which do not address mass grading on wooded sites, a common construction practice for new residential developments. The consulting team originally proposed requiring an inch-for-inch equal tree replacement on new neighborhood developments, which was found to be impractical in Charles County since most sites are heavily wooded. Although several developers have successfully maintained a large portion of existing trees on site (such as the Swan Point development) by clustering homes and constructing smaller lots, trees left on site can be damaged during construction and the homeowner may incur the costs for tree removal later. The Forest Conservation requirements apply to specimen trees with 30” diameter or greater. One recommendation from the Charles County staff was to modify this threshold (30” is the state of Maryland requirement) within the Architectural Site Guidelines to mandate that all trees with 8” diameter or greater be preserved within the boundary areas. This would require a more detailed preliminary forest conservation plan to be developed and would encourage preserving the native genetic tree material within the County. Another suggestion from the Charles County staff was to use a shading requirement within the Subdivision Regulations to enforce tree preservation. The shading requirement could be a percentage (50% canopy shading) or a standard for all lot sizes (i.e. two trees per unit for housing). This would allow the new developer to choose between preserving an existing tree and providing a new one.



36

Vinyl Building Products The use of vinyl siding is common practice for many residential developers in Charles County. Due to the harmful environmental impacts of manufacturing and disposing of vinyl, the consulting team originally proposed prohibiting vinyl siding new homes constructed in Charles County. This recommendation was revised to limit the amount of vinyl siding to 25% of the total building façade. Discussions during the three-day workshop with the development community revealed that this recommendation is not practical from a cost perspective, since alternative siding materials (such as Hardie Plank) can cost twice as much as vinyl siding materials. One suggestion from the development community was to provide an incentive to reduce the amount of vinyl siding. Before proposing any limits or incentives regarding reducing vinyl siding for new homes, it is recommended that further study be conducted to determine the environmental benefits and feasibility of using alternative siding materials. Stormwater Management within the Right of Way To remove hindrances to ESD stormwater designs, the County may want to develop road sections that incorporate curb breaks and ESD stormwater practices within the road right-of-way. Appendix 6 contains examples of road sections with curb and gutter and stormwater features developed for use in northern Virginia (provided for this report by the St. Charles Companies), as well as road sections developed for Montgomery County and photographs of roads that incorporate stormwater practices with curb and gutter. These are provided for illustrative purposes; sections would need to be developed for Charles County. Redundancy with Residential Building Inspections and Energy Star Certification Based on input from the local development community, it is common practice to

pursue Energy Star certification for most new single family dwellings within Charles

County. The Energy Star certification process for single family homes includes a

series of extensive third-party field inspections to verify energy efficient construction,

including building insulation, HVAC equipment, and ductwork, among other items.

The Charles County residential building permit inspections include several items

which are also addressed within the Energy Star certification process as discussed

below.



37

1. Mechanical Rough Inspection (Code 62) – It appears that the main focus of

this inspection is to ensure ductwork integrity and proper insulation levels.

The Energy Star inspection process includes verifying ductwork insulation

and performance testing. The level of scrutiny and testing required by Energy

Star is likely to meet or exceed the local code official inspection. The County

currently charges a $52 fee for the Mechanical Rough Inspection.

2. Building Energy Efficiency Inspection (Code EE) – It appears that the main

focus of this inspection is to ensure the building envelope is properly sealed

and insulated. The Energy Star inspection process includes inspecting the

Thermal Enclosure System as well as performance testing. The level of

scrutiny and testing required by Energy Star is likely to meet or exceed the

local code official inspection. The County currently charges a $47 fee for the

Building Energy Efficiency Inspection for single family dwellings.

The homeowner or developer would benefit by allowing the Energy Star inspection

report to substitute for these two inspections. The County would benefit by reduced

time required in the field for these permit inspections.



38

Appendix 1 – Green Codes and Incentives Survey



39

Charles County Green Codes Survey OBJECTIVE: Conduct a survey and provide a summary of current (and forecasted) green or sustainable codes and standards around the Country, including the Washington D.C. metropolitan region. Discuss the codes and standards that may be applicable to Charles County in detail. INTRODUCTION: Planning for a sustainable community involves input from many levels, including local, state and federal governments. Many green building public policies are in place within the Maryland/Washington D.C. metropolitan region which drive sustainable development in Charles County. Additionally, many government entities and utility providers offer incentive programs to encourage green building. This report is a summary of the policies and incentive programs applicable to Charles County and the surrounding geographical areas including Washington, D.C. and Northern Virginia. Recommendations for incentive programs and public policy for Charles County are also provided based on a survey of green building programs locally and nationwide. Many of the public policies discussed reference the LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) green building certification program, developed by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). The LEED green building certification program is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of green buildings. Another popular benchmark is the ENERGY STAR® program administered by the EPA, which addresses energy efficiency in buildings, homes, and appliances. For residential projects, the National Green Building Standard ICC 700 is administered by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). The LEED, ENERGY STAR and NAHB programs offer extensive training and support for governments to assist in developing policies to implement sustainable development practices. *Disclaimer: this report includes information from the following websites and is not all-inclusive; new policies & incentive programs may be available, and certain policies & programs may have expired:

USGBC Public Policy Database:

http://www.usgbc.org/PublicPolicy/SearchPublicPolicies.aspx?PageID=1776

Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE):

www.dsireusa.org

Charles County Going Green:

http://www.charlescounty.org/green/incentives.html

http://www.usgbc.org/PublicPolicy/SearchPublicPolicies.aspx?PageID=1776

http://www.dsireusa.org/

http://www.charlescounty.org/green/incentives.html



40

NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING & SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS The green building marketplace has grown extensively during the last decade, and many national standards have been developed to encourage sustainable development. The most common standards include the LEED rating systems, the International Green Construction Code, National Green Building Standard ICC 700, ASHRAE Standard 189.1, and ENERGY STAR. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) www.usgbc.org/leed LEED is an internationally-recognized green building certification system. Developed by the US Green Building Council (USGBC) in March 2000, LEED provides building owners and operators with a framework for identifying and implementing practical and measurable green building design, construction, operations and maintenance solutions. LEED promotes sustainable building and development practices through a suite of rating systems that recognizes projects that implement strategies for better environmental and health performance. The LEED rating systems are developed through an open, consensus-based process led by LEED committees, diverse groups of volunteers representing a cross-section of the building and construction industry. Key elements of the process include a balanced and transparent committee structure, technical advisory groups that ensure scientific consistency and rigor, opportunities for stakeholder comment and review, member ballot of new rating systems, and fair and open appeals. LEED is flexible enough to apply to all building types – commercial as well as residential. It works throughout the building lifecycle – design and construction, operations and maintenance, tenant fitout, and significant retrofit. And LEED for Neighborhood Development extends the benefits of LEED beyond the building footprint into the neighborhood it serves. LEED also makes business sense, benefiting commercial building owners as well as tenants. International Green Construction Code (IgCC) The IgCC is the world’s first green construction code developed for governing jurisdictions to ensure that safe and sustainable green construction is done “by the book.” It integrates with the existing family of ICC codes (Charles County has adopted the IBC, IMC, IPC and IECC codes).

http://www.usgbc.org/leed



41

The IgCC creates a regulatory framework for new and existing commercial and high-performance buildings. Rating systems are not written in the form of enforceable codes, acting as optional approaches, such as awarding points based on the inclusion of certain design elements and other features. The assumption is that the combination and concentration of favored elements will result in a positive environmental impact. The IgCC builds on that foundation, including measurable building performance criteria and an adherence to building safety protocols in the model code language. The IgCC addresses key sustainability components such as energy and water conservation and efficiency, land use and development, practices for adapting existing buildings, project electives (based on jurisdiction-specific needs), and pre- and post-occupancy commissioning. ASHRAE/USGBC/IESNA Standard 189.1 Standard for the Design of High-Performance, Green Buildings (Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings) www.ashrae.org/greenstandard Standard 189.1 combines the sustainability best practices established by the USGBC along with the design standards of ASHRAE (the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers) and IESNA (the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America). The standard is not a design guide or a rating system like LEED; it provides minimum requirements in model code language for high-performance green buildings. Local jurisdictions can adopt Standard 189.1 as an alternate compliance option to the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) for new and remodeled commercial buildings, as well as residential spaces in buildings more than three stories. The standard covers site sustainability, water use efficiency, energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality and the building’s impact on the atmosphere, materials and resources. The standard sets aggressive performance levels for energy efficiency (energy savings of 27% over ASHRAE 90.1-2007) and requires that each building project be designed to be ready for renewable energy in the future, moving toward the goal of net-zero-energy buildings. ASHRAE and USGBC can offer training to code officials on the detailed requirements of the standard. ENERGY STAR www.energystar.gov/buildings The ENERGY STAR program for buildings was created by the EPA to encourage energy efficient design and operation of buildings. The program is free and includes

http://www.ashrae.org/greenstandard

http://www.energystar.gov/buildings



42

expert help and training to find opportunities for energy savings. Designers can use the popular Target Finder tool to set energy reduction goals. Owners can use the Portfolio Manager tool to track energy consumption and benchmark their building portfolio against other buildings in the country. The top 75% of energy-efficient buildings in the country are awarded the ENERGY STAR Label for buildings. STATE LEVEL GREEN BUILDING PUBLIC POLICIES Executive Order 01.01.2001.02 Maryland's governor issued an Executive Order in October 2001 calling for all capital projects greater than 5,000 square feet to earn LEED certification. High Performance Building Act On April 24, 2008, Governor O’Malley signed the High Performance Building Act into law, requiring all new public construction and major renovation projects of 7,500 sq ft or greater, and intended for occupation, to earn LEED Silver certification or two Green Globes. The High Performance Building Act further requires that MD public schools using state funds earn LEED Silver certification or two Green Globes. The High Performance Building Act further adds that “the State will pay half of any extra costs” incurred in building green public schools. House Bill 196 High Performance Buildings The House and Senate passed legislation in March 25, 2005 requiring a green building standard, such as LEED (Silver), be used for state capital projects. Real Property Code Maryland has a long-standing law protecting the rights of solar energy system owners. The original law prohibited restrictive land use covenants that imposed unreasonable limitations on the installation of solar collection panels on the roof or exterior walls of improvements and which became effective after July 1, 1980. (The grandfathering date was removed in 2008). This statute and its 2008 amendments do not apply to a restrictive covenant on historic property that is listed by the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties or by the Maryland Register of Historic Properties.* Maryland also provides for the creation of easement agreements for a variety of purposes, including the "preservation of exposure of solar energy devices." While similar provisions exist as standalone laws in some states, in Maryland they are included under the more general heading of conservation easements.



43

The Maryland Real Property Code was amended in April 2008 by H.B. 117 to provide much more detailed protections for solar energy systems and to expand upon the required content of solar easement agreements. Under the new law (effective October 1, 2008) restrictions on the use of solar energy systems that serve to significantly increase the cost of a solar collector system or significantly decrease its efficiency are prohibited. The definition of "restrictions on use" includes any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in a deed; declaration; contract; bylaws of a homeowners or condominium association; security instrument; and any other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of real property or interest in real property. The only condition for this protection is that the owner own or have rights for the exclusive use of the roof or exterior walls of a structure. In addition to the added detail, other notable changes to the law are: (1) the removal of the July 1, 1980 grandfathering date for existing restrictive covenants; and (2) the replacement of the term "solar collection panels" with "solar collector systems". Solar collection systems are defined to include solar devices primarily used to collect, store, and distribute solar energy for electricity generation, space heating, space cooling, and water heating. This definition appears to include technologies such as passive solar space heating and solar pool heating. Under H.B. 117, the right of property owners to enter into solar easement agreements is affirmed. Written instruments for this purpose are required to contain a description of the dimensions of the easement (e.g., vertical and horizontal angles), restrictions on potential impairments (e.g., vegetation, structures, etc.), and terms for revision or termination. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD01R&re=1&ee=1 Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) The Maryland RPS requires 20% Renewable Energy by 2022 (2% must be solar). Details at: http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD05R&re=1&ee=1

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD01R&re=1&ee=1






44

STATE LEVEL REBATES AND INCENTIVES The State of Maryland offers a wide variety of tax credits, rebates, loan programs and other financial incentives to support sustainable development. Many of these programs are managed through the Maryland Energy Administration. Green Building Income Tax Credit ($) The state approved a green building tax credit for commercial developers. The project must be at least 20,000 square feet and located in a priority funding area or qualified brownfield site and not on wetlands. http://business.marylandtaxes.com/taxinfo/taxcredit/greenbldg/default.asp

Clean Energy Production Tax Credit (Corporate)

Maryland offers a production tax credit for electricity generated by wind, geothermal

energy, solar energy, hydropower, hydrokinetic, municipal solid waste and biomass

resources. Eligible biomass resources include anaerobic digestion, landfill gas,

wastewater-treatment gas, and cellulosic material derived from forest-related

resources (excluding old-growth timber and mill residues consisting of sawdust or

wood shavings)*, from waste pallets and crates, or from agricultural sources. The list

of eligible resources is generally the same as those eligible for the federal renewable

electricity production tax credit (PTC), except the Maryland law contains added

provisions related to biomass and biogas technologies.

http://www.energy.state.md.us/Residential/cleanEnergyGrants.html

Bio-Heating Oil Tax Credit (Corporate)

Maryland allows individuals and corporations to take an income tax credit of

$0.03/gallon for purchases of biodiesel used for space heating or water heating. The

maximum credit is $500 per year. It may not be refunded or carried over to

subsequent years. In order to qualify for the tax credit, the heating oil must be

sourced from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved feedstocks or

be accepted under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard. As originally enacted, the

credit was only available for purchases made during the 2008 - 2012 tax years, but

this was extended by 5 years through 2017 by S.B. 959 in May 2011. This legislation

also modified the definition of qualifying heating oil to remove a former 5% minimum

biodiesel content requirement for blends and to insert the language described above

pertaining to approved feedstocks and the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard.

http://business.marylandtaxes.com/taxinfo/taxcredit/greenbldg/default.asp

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F&re=1&ee=1

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F&re=1&ee=1

http://www.energy.state.md.us/Residential/cleanEnergyGrants.html



45

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD31F&re=1&ee=1 Sales Tax Holiday for Energy-Efficient Appliances In November 2007, Maryland enacted legislation creating a sales and use tax "holiday" for certain energy-efficient appliances, beginning in 2011. Under the law, qualifying appliances purchased during a designated period are not subject to the state sales and use tax (6%). The holiday time frame is established as a three-day period running from "the Saturday immediately preceding the third Monday in February through the third Monday in February each year". In 2011, the holiday runs from February 19 to February 21. (It will vary in future years depending on how the designated time frame falls on the calendar.) http://www.comp.state.md.us/shopmd/ Sales Tax Exemption for Renewable Energy Equipment

In April 2008, the Maryland enacted legislation exempting geothermal and solar

energy equipment from the state sales and use tax. Geothermal equipment is

defined as "equipment that uses ground loop technology to heat and cool a

structure". Solar energy equipment is defined as "equipment that uses solar energy

to heat or cool a structure, generate electricity to be used in a structure, or provide

hot water for use in a structure". Solar energy equipment does not include

"equipment that is part of a non-solar energy system or that uses any type of

recreational facility or equipment as a storage medium". These distinctions appear to

indicate that solar pool heating equipment, and possibly passive solar materials, are

not eligible for the exemption.

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD27F&re=1&ee

=1 Sales Tax Exemption for Residential Solar and Wind Electricity Sales

In May 2011 Maryland enacted legislation providing a sales and use tax exemption

for sales of electricity from qualifying solar energy and residential wind energy

equipment to residential customers. In order to qualify for the exemption, the sale of

electricity must be for residential use on a property owned by a net metering eligible

customer-generator. Maryland already exempted energy sales under residential or

domestic rate schedules on file with the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC)

from the sales and use tax. The law therefore places sales/purchases of electricity

under residential solar or wind retail power purchase agreements (PPAs) on a level

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD31F&re=1&ee=1


http://www.comp.state.md.us/shopmd/





46

playing field with customer purchases of electricity from the grid. The exemption took

effect July 1, 2011.

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=MD73F&re=1&ee

=1 Jane E. Lawton Conservation Loan Program

The Jane E. Lawton Conservation Loan Program (JELLP) takes the place of the

former Community Energy Loan Program (CELP) and the Energy Efficiency and

Economic Development Loan Program (EEEDLP). This program provides local

governments, nonprofits, and businesses in the State with an opportunity to reduce

their operating expenses by identifying and installing energy conservation

improvements. It allows borrowers to use the cost savings generated by the

improvements as the primary source of revenue for repaying the loans. The program

operates as a revolving loan fund where loan repayments from prior awards

replenish the fund and allow it to support additional projects. Projects may include

renewable installations for eligible non-profit organizations and local governments

only. For businesses, only energy conservation and energy efficiency projects are

eligible for loans.

http://www.energy.state.md.us/Govt/janeelawton.html MARBIDCO Rural Business Energy Efficiency Improvement Loan Program

The Maryland Agricultural and Resource Based Industry Development Corporation

(MARBIDCO) offers low interest loans for energy efficiency improvements to farms

and rural businesses through the Rural Business Energy Efficiency Improvement

Loan Program. The program is designed to facilitate the purchase of equipment or

technology that lowers business energy consumption. Applicants must have a credit

score of at least 650 without any bankruptcy during the prior seven years in order to

qualify for a loan.

Unsecured loans from $2,500 to $15,000 are available at a fixed interest rate of 4%

under this program. Loans will be fully amortized over a term of two to seven years,

not to exceed the anticipated energy savings payback period. Loan payments will

correlate with the anticipated energy savings payback with at least a 1.0:1.0 ratio of

debt service coverage to annual energy savings payback. Loans may not exceed the

cost of improvements minus any grants received for the project. All applicants must

include a letter of referral from a commercial lender and a copy of an energy audit

report completed by a qualified third party auditor with the application. There is a $75

loan origination fee associated with participating in this program, payable at closing.



http://www.energy.state.md.us/Govt/janeelawton.html



47

http://www.marbidco.org//loans/rbeeil.html

Maryland Clean Energy Center – Home Energy Loan Program

The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) joins the Maryland Clean Energy Center

(MCEC) in offering low interest loans for projects which increase the energy

efficiency of participating residences. Loans are available for up to $20,000, at a

6.99% interest rate. Measures typically include insulation and HVAC equipment

upgrades but are not necessarily limited to these improvements. Property must be a

primary residence and located in the state of Maryland in order to be eligible. Single-

family detached homes and townhouses are eligible for loans while condominiums

and coops are unable to participate.

Homeowners must have a complete home energy audit to determine the scope and

cost of potential projects. Auditors must be MCEC approved and certified. Based

upon the audit findings, homeowners may determine the most effective energy

efficient measures to pursue. Participants must then enter a contract with an

approved contractor indicating the measures and costs included. After the

completion of a contract, participants may register and apply for loans through

MCEC. Interested homeowners may register and apply at MCEC web site listed

above. Contact MCEC for any other information on this program.

http://mcecloans.com/

State Agency Loan Program (from Energy Overcharge Restitution Fund)

The State Agency Loan Program (SALP) was established in 1991 using funds from

the Energy Overcharge Restitution Fund. Through this revolving loan program, the

Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) provides loans to state agencies for cost-

effective energy efficiency improvements in state facilities. Typical loan amounts

range from $50,000 to $250,000. State agencies pay zero interest with a one

percent administration fee. Their repayments are made from the agency's fuel and

utility budget, based on the avoided energy costs of the project. Repayments

replenish the fund so that it can continue to make additional loans each year. The

MEA indicates that since the program's inception the SALP has loaned state

agencies more than $16.5 million to upgrade lighting, controls, boilers, chillers and

other energy efficient equipment. The value of the resulting energy cost savings from

these loans was almost $20.2 million.

http://energy.maryland.gov/Govt/stateLoan.html

http://www.marbidco.org/loans/rbeeil.html

http://mcecloans.com/

http://energy.maryland.gov/Govt/stateLoan.html



48

Clean Energy Grant Program – Commercial Solar

The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) is offering grants for mid-sized

photovoltaic (PV) systems and solar water heating systems (SWH) installed by

businesses, non-profits, and local governments. Incentives are set at $500 per

kilowatt (kW) up to $50,000 for PV systems and 15% of installed cost up to $1,000

for SWH systems. In order to qualify for funding, PV projects must be less than 200

kW in size, although incentives limited to the first 100 kW of installed capacity. Solar

hot water systems must have a collector area of at least 100 square feet.

http://energy.maryland.gov/Business/cleanenergygrants/index.html

Clean Energy Grant Program – Geothermal Heat Pumps

The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) offers rebates of up to $2,000 for

residential geothermal heat pump systems and $7,000 for non-residential

geothermal heat pump systems. Grants for both are provided at a rate of $500 per

ton of refrigeration capacity, equivalent to 12,000 BTUs. Funding for the program is

provided annually from the Maryland Strategic Energy Investment Fund (SEIF),

which receives income from greenhouse gas emission auctions under the Regional

Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). The total FY 2011 budget for all renewable

energy programs (geothermal heat pumps, wind, and solar) is expected to be

roughly $3.2 million. A substantial component of total FY 2011 funding is expected to

come from federal economic stimulus funds under the American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act (ARRA). As of February 2011, ARRA funds are no longer used for

geothermal projects.

http://energy.maryland.gov/renewable/geothermal.html

Clean Energy Grant Program – Residential Solar

Maryland's Residential Clean Energy Grant Program, administered by the Maryland

Energy Administration (MEA), provides financial incentives to homeowners that

install solar water-heating systems or solar-electric (PV) systems. Both grid-

connected and off-grid PV systems are eligible for support.

http://energy.maryland.gov/residential/cleanenergygrants/index.html

http://energy.maryland.gov/Business/cleanenergygrants/index.html

http://energy.maryland.gov/renewable/geothermal.html

http://energy.maryland.gov/residential/cleanenergygrants/index.html



49

Clean Energy Grant Program – Windswept

The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) provides rebates for the installation of

residential and non-residential wind energy systems through the Windswept

program, which is part of the Clean Energy Grant Program. Residential systems

must be less than 100 kilowatts (kW) in size. Effective for all applications received

after July 1, 2009, rebates are based on the normalized energy production capacity

of the wind system at a reference speed of 11 meters per second (roughly 25 mph),

which may differ from the rated capacity of the turbine as listed by the manufacturer.

Participants are eligible for an incentive of $2,800 per kilowatt (kW) for the first 5 kW

of normalized capacity, $750/kW for the next 15 kW, and $1,700/kW of normalized

capacity over 20 kW. Incentives are allocated on a per property basis, meaning that

incentives will not be awarded for multiple turbines on the same property.

http://energy.maryland.gov/windswept/index.html

Home Performance with Energy Star Rebates

The Maryland Energy Administration is now offering rebates for energy efficiency

improvements in owner-occupied, single family residences in Maryland through the

Home Performance with Energy Star Program. In order to participate in the program,

residents must first have a comprehensive home energy audit performed by a

program-approved auditor. The cost of any energy audit varies by contractor, but an

energy audit incentive of $100 is available for residents that pursue the

recommended improvements. Based on the results of the audit, the homeowner will

arrange for energy efficiency improvements to be made using a program-approved

contractor. Upon completion of the work, rebates of 35% of the improvement cost up

to $1,500 per measure are available for the following improvements:

http://www.energy.state.md.us/homeperformance/index.html

http://energy.maryland.gov/windswept/index.html

http://www.energy.state.md.us/homeperformance/index.html



50

COUNTY LEVEL GREEN BUILDING PUBLIC POLICIES & INCENTIVES Of the 24 counties in Maryland, four (4) require LEED Certification for county buildings and five (5) have established incentive programs for LEED Certification.

Maryland Counties Requiring LEED

Certification

Maryland Counties with Incentives for LEED

Certification

Howard Howard

Montgomery Montgomery

Anne Arundel Baltimore

Gaithersburg Carroll

Harford

Baltimore County Bill #78-07 On October 15, 2007, the County Council passed bill #78-07 (modification of original Bill No. 85-06) that gives a county property tax credit to any commercial building that achieves LEED for New Construction, Core and Shell, or Existing Buildings Silver certification. The duration of the tax credit is for five consecutive years. Bill No. 78-07 was passed (modification of original Bill No. 85-06), which expanded the county property tax credit to include LEED for new construction, for core and shell, and for existing buildings. The tax credit was changed to 50% for Silver, 60% for Gold, and 80% for Platinum. Baltimore County Bill #28-08 On April 22, 2008 the Baltimore County Council adopted Bill #28-08 providing tax credits for new residential construction that earn a minimum of LEED Silver certification. Incentive Details: Projects earning LEED Silver will earn a 40% property tax credit, 60% for LEED Gold, and 100% for LEED Platinum. The tax credits will be in effect for 3 years or up to $1 million in total incentives. This act took effect June 4, 2008. Carroll County Ordinance 09-03 Green Building Tax Credit On April 30, 2009, the Carroll County Board of Commissioners adopted Ordinance 09-03, the Green Building Tax Credit, which provides a 25% tax credit for new buildings that achieve LEED Silver certification or equivalent, a 50% tax credit for new buildings that achieve LEED Gold certification or equivalent, and a 75% tax credit for new buildings that achieve LEED Platinum certification or equivalent for a



51

period of 5 consecutive years. This tax credit only applies to property that are principally used for business, commercial, or industrial purposes. Howard County Bills #47-2007 and #47-2008 On July 30, 2007, Howard County passed Bill #47-2008, requiring all civic construction (new construction, major renovation and core & shell) to achieve LEED Silver. Private construction greater than 50,000 gross square feet is required to achieve LEED Certification. Projects seeking LEED Gold or Platinum enjoy expedited permitting. On the same day, Bill #49-2007 established a tax credit against taxes imposed on LEED-NC and LEED-CS certified buildings for five years: 25% for LEED Silver, 50% for LEED Gold and 75% for LEED Platinum. County tax credits for buildings certified under LEED for Existing Buildings extend for three years: 10% for LEED Silver, 25% for LEED Gold and 50% for LEED Platinum. These tax credits are available for tax years beginning after June 30, 2008. On July 30, 2007, the Howard County Council adopted Council Bill 48-2007 and Resolution 90-2007, revising the County’s Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to reserve 100 housing unit allocations per year for green neighborhoods. A companion document, Council Resolution 116-2007, created a Green Neighborhood checklist which the County uses to determine whether a development is eligible for the housing allocations. A residential development project is eligible to receive Green Neighborhood Allocations if the project achieves at least 90 out of 167 possible points from the Green Neighborhood Checklist. In addition, the homes in the development must achieve points from a Green Neighborhood Home portion of the checklist in order to be eligible for a Building Permit. Montgomery County Bills #17-06 and #37-06 On November 28, 2006, the Montgomery County Council approved Bill #17-06, requiring new County buildings over 10,000 sq ft to earn a LEED Silver certification or the equivalent standard. The bill also requires all private commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential buildings over 10,000 sq ft to be LEED Certified or the equivalent standard. On December 17, 2007, County Executive Leggett signed Bill 37-06, providing property tax credits for buildings that achieve LEED Silver, Gold and Platinum, or their equivalents. Buildings over 10,000 sq ft that earn LEED for New Construction or LEED for Core and Shell certification receive five year tax credits of 25% for achieving Gold and 75% for Platinum. Buildings less than 10,000 sq ft that earn LEED for New Construction or LEED for Core and Shell certification receive five year tax credits of 25% for achieving Silver, 50% for Gold, and 75% for Platinum. Buildings over 10,000 sq ft that earn LEED for Existing Buildings certification receive



52

three year tax credits of 10% for achieving Gold and 50% for Platinum. Buildings less than 10,000 sq ft that earn LEED for Existing Buildings certification receive three year tax credits of 10% for achieving Silver, 25% for Gold, and 50% for Platinum. Arlington County, VA Green Building Density Incentive Policy

On March 14, 2009, the Arlington County Board approved the Green Building

Density Incentive Policy. The policy makes changes to the green building bonus

density incentives currently offered. Office projects earn a density bonus of 0.05

Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for LEED Certified, 0.15 FAR for LEED Silver, 0.35 FAR for

LEED Gold, and 0.45 FAR for LEED Platinum. Residential projects earn a density

bonus of 0.10 FAR for LEED Certified, 0.20 FAR for LEED Silver, 0.40 FAR for

LEED Gold, and 0.50 FAR for LEED Platinum. Also, the Green Building Fund

contribution guideline is increased to $0.045 per sq ft Gross Floor Area (GFA)

though the contribution can be waived if the project earns LEED certification.

Arlington County's Green Building Incentive Program, adopted in 1999 and

expanded in 2003, allows commercial projects and private developments earning

LEED Silver certification to develop sites at a higher density than conventional

projects.

All site plan applications for commercial projects are required to include a LEED

Scorecard and have a LEED Accredited Professional on the project team regardless

of whether or not the project intends to seek LEED certification. All projects must

contribute to a green building fund for county-wide education and outreach activities.

The contribution is refunded if projects earn LEED certification. Arlington sponsors a

voluntary green home program that encourages builders of new single-family homes

to incorporate energy efficient and other green building components in their projects.

The County offers "front-of-the-line" plan review, site signs, and publicity to program

participants who achieve a given number of points as outlined by Arlington's Green

Home Choice program. Fairfax County, VA On February 11, 2008 the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors adopted a green building policy requiring all new construction or major renovation projects of county buildings over 10,000 square feet to earn LEED Silver certification. The policy further supports the July 2007 foundation of Cool Counties, of which Fairfax was a primary partner and signatory.

http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/EnvironmentalServices/epo/EnvironmentalServicesEpoIncentiveProgram.aspx

http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/EnvironmentalServices/epo/EnvironmentalServicesEpoIncentiveProgram.aspx

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/news/2008/030.htm

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/news/2008/030.htm

http://www.kingcounty.gov/exec/coolcounties.aspx



53

TOWN AND CITY LEVEL GREEN BUILDING PUBLIC POLICIES The Town of La Plata is the only town or city in Charles County with a green building public policy. Several other large cities in Maryland have adopted similar policies. Town of La Plata Resolution No. 08-2 On February 26, 2008, Mayor Ambrogio of the Town of La Plata signed into law Town Council Resolution #08-2 requiring all town-owned and town-funded new construction and major renovations greater than 5,000 square feet to achieve LEED Certified. The policy further recommends LEED for private sector construction and for public projects of smaller size. http://www.townoflaplata.org/vertical/Sites/%7BC5944482-8A4A-48D0-B56C-BE347B799FF3%7D/uploads/%7B68E1E36A-7D5E-4376-A689-0A569B432C03%7D.PDF City of Annapolis Green Building Law (0-56-07) On March 10, 2008 Mayor Ellen O. Moyer signed into law the City of Annapolis Green Building Law (0-56-07), requiring all public construction to earn LEED Silver certification beginning January 2009. The policy further applies new construction and major renovation of private sector commercial and residential projects as follows: commercial and mixed-use buildings of 7,500 sq ft or greater must earn LEED Certified; five or more single-family homes on one lot or any one home in excess of 3,250 sq ft must earn LEED Certified. The policy allows for projects to register and certify under the appropriate LEED Rating System or an energy and environmental design standard deemed equivalent by the Director of the Department of Neighborhood and Environmental Programs. Baltimore City Revised Code On August 14, 2007, Mayor Dixon signed into law Council Bill 07-0602 amending the Baltimore City Revised Code to require commercial buildings or multi-family residential buildings of 10,000 square feet or greater that request a permit on or after July 1, 2009 must achieve a minimum of LEED Silver of the appropriate LEED Rating System. The building official is directed to deny occupancy permits and certificates of completion for noncompliant projects. Successful achievement of energy and environmental design standards deemed by the city building official to be equivalent to the minimum required levels of LEED are in compliance with this code.

http://www.townoflaplata.org/vertical/Sites/%7BC5944482-8A4A-48D0-B56C-BE347B799FF3%7D/uploads/%7B68E1E36A-7D5E-4376-A689-0A569B432C03%7D.PDF





54

Gaithersburg City Ordinance O-11-2008 On September 15, 2008, the Gaithersburg City Council adopted Ordinance O-11-2008, requiring all commercial or residential buildings over four stories between 10,000 sq ft and 99,999 sq ft to earn at minimum LEED Certification and all commercial or residential buildings over four stories over 99,999 sq ft to earn at minimum LEED Silver certification. Washington, DC Bill #B16-0515 On December 5, 2006 the Washington DC City Council passed Bill # B16-0515 requiring publicly-owned, non-residential, commercial projects to achieve either LEED for New Construction or LEED for Core and Shell Silver certification. After the summer of 2007 new Public schools will be required to achieve LEED for Schools certification or an equivalent schools rating system that requires commissioning. In 2008, each tenant of a commercial building that improves a District-owned space of 30,000 square feet or more will be required to achieve LEED for Commercial Interiors certification. In 2009, all new construction or major renovations to non-residential, private buildings 50,000 square feet or more must submit a green building checklist outlining green features that will be pursued. After 2012, non-residential and post-secondary educational facilities shall achieve LEED for New Construction or LEED for Core and Shell certification. Bill #B16-0515 also called on the mayor to establish an incentive program for private residential and commercial buildings. Incentives will include an expedited permit review and may also include grants. The mayor will also establish a Green Building Fund for technical assistance and monitoring of green buildings, education, and incentive funding for private buildings. On February 20, 2008 Mayor Adrian Fenty joined leading mayors across the country in adopting the 30% Solution, supporting energy efficiency reforms to residential energy code. Alexandria, VA Green Building Policy

On April 18, 2009, the Alexandria City Council adopted their Green Building Policy

requiring all new municipal buildings to achieve LEED Silver certification and all new

commercial buildings to achieve LEED Silver certification. The policy also requires

all new residential buildings to be LEED Certified with the intention of increasing the

standard over time.

http://alexandriava.gov/uploadedFiles/planning/info/GreenBuildingPolicyhandout.pdf



55

The City's Department of General Services developed a Green Building Policy and

adopted by the City Manager in February 2004. The policy establishes procedures

for analyzing LEED feasibility for facilities 5,000 square feet or greater, outlines staff

resource and training goals, and identifies program participation opportunities,

including Energy Star, Rebuild America, and USGBC. CHARLES COUNTY LEED PROJECTS As of March 14, 2012, there are six LEED-certified projects and nine LEED-registered projects in Charles County. This list includes projects listed in the USGBC database as non-confidential and projects known to the Charles County consulting team. Other confidential LEED registered and certified projects may be present in Charles County.

Project Name Location Description

CERTIFIED

La Plata Town Hall La Plata LEED NCv2.1 Certified

PNC Bank Branch – Hawthorne Road La Plata LEED NCv2.2 Silver

Lucy School Middletown LEED for Schools 2.0 Platinum

PNC Bank Branch – Berry Road Waldorf LEED NCv2.1 Silver

ACPT Offices Saint Charles

LEED CIv2.0

Control Building for Sewage Treatment Plant

Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

REGISTERED

Advanced Energetics Research Lab Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

P-002V Change House Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

P-166 Energetics Systems & Tech Lab Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

P-190 Advanced Energetics Research Lab

Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

P-205 Hazardous Materials Facility Indian Head

LEED NCv2.2

Charles County New High School 2011 La Plata LEED for Schools 2.0

Chaney Enterprises Headquarters Waldorf LEED NCv2.2

Chaney Enterprises Office Building Waldorf LEED NCv2.2

Waldorf Library Waldorf LEED NCv2009



56

After February 26, 2008, all La Plata Town-owned or –funded buildings must be LEED certified (5000sf+) based on the Town Resolution #08-2. This requirement may be waived for special circumstances. In the past three years, there was only one new LEED registered project in La Plata (new high school). This may be a reflection of the economic downturn in the construction industry or special circumstances for new construction projects. RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS LEED for Homes (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) The LEED for Homes program stemmed from the commercial side of LEED. The Homes program is considered the “Cadillac” of green homes building. Because USGBC/GBCI requires many 3rd party reviews, the program is the most rigorous and, intensive, difficult, and most expensive to achieve. The program is still in its infancy as many developers, builders, and architects struggle to regain much of their efforts and increased project fees, through the process. The program works best for a developer who is submitting standard designs and replicating those designs throughout the development. This reduces costs and efforts. With six certified home raters in the District, Maryland, Virginia area, there is less competition available for project guidance and project bidding. ICC 700 National Green Building Standard The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) Research Center’s mission is to promote innovation in housing technology to improve the quality, durability, affordability, and environmental performance of homes and home building products. The Research Center was created in 1964 as an independent subsidiary of the NAHB; NAHB has no involvement or control in the research and operations of the Research Center. The NAHB Research Center has established itself as the source for reliable, objective information and research on housing construction and development issues, and serves an as accredited third-party testing and certification laboratory for housing products and residential buildings. The NAHB Research Center is the original Adopting Entity for ICC 700 and has been providing green certifications for buildings since January 2009. ICC is the only residential green building rating system approved by ANSI, the American National Standards Institute, as an American National Standard. The Standard provides practices for the design, construction, and certification of green residential buildings, renovations, and land developments. It also sets requirements



57

and environmental performance levels for green buildings and developments. In the past three years, architects, developers, and builders have increasingly selected ICC 700 as their green building rating system of choice because it is credible, flexible, and rigorous. Arlington Green Home Choice Program Provides a support system and resources for builders and homeowners. A guidance document describes green components which meet the criteria to achieve certification. A score sheet helps to track the components and track points. ReGreen Program This is an online guidance program which provides green strategies, resources, technologies and guidelines for home renovation projects. This can be done individually by utilizing the website guidelines, or through consultation with a ReGreen Trained Professional Associate.



58

Appendix 2 – Green Building Rating System Registration and Certification Costs



59

Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) Fees (as of August 2011, from www.gbci.org) LEED for New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, and LEED for Schools:

Less than 50,000

Square Feet 50,000- 500,000

Square Feet More Than 500,000

Square Feet

LEED NC, LEED CI, LEED CS, LEED for Schools

Fixed Rate Based on Square

Footage Fixed Rate

Design Review

USGBC Members $2,000 $0.04/sf $20,000

Non-Members $2,250 $0.045/sf $22,500

Expedited Fee* $5,000 regardless of square footage

Construction Review

USGBC Members $500 $0.010/sf $5,000

Non-Members $750 $0.015/sf $7,500


Combined Design & Construction Review

USGBC Members $2,250 $0.045/sf $22,500

Non-Members $2,750 $0.055/sf $27,500


CIRs (for all Rating Systems) $220 per credit

LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance:

Less than 50,000

Square Feet 50,000- 500,000

Square Feet More Than 500,000

Square Feet

LEED for Existing Buildings

Fixed Rate Based on Square

Footage Fixed Rate

Initial Certification Review

USGBC Members $1,500 $0.03/sf $15,000

Non-Members $2,000 $0.04/sf $20,000


Recertification Review**

USGBC Members $750 $0.015/sf $7,500

Non-Members $1,000 $0.02/sf $10,000


LEED for Homes:

Single Family Housing, Cost/Unit Non-USGBC Member USGBC Member

Registration $225 $150

Certification $300 $225

http://www.gbci.org/



60

LEED for Neighborhood Development:

LEED ND Project Application Review Fees1

SLL Prerequisite Review $2,250 (flat fee)

Expedited SLL Prerequisite Review

2

$5,000

Initial Stage Review Fees

For Projects under 320 Acres $18,000

for the first 20 acres $350

for each additional acre

For Projects 320 Acres or More $123,000 (flat fee)

Expedited Review2 $25,000

Subsequent Stage Review Fees

For Projects under 320 acres $10,000

for the first 20 acres $350

for each additional acre

For Projects 320 acres or More $115,000 (flat fee)

Expedited Subsequent Stage Review

2

$15,000

Additional Fees

CIRs3 $220 each

Appeal Review4 $500 per credit

Expedited Appeal Review2 $1,000 per credit

National Green Building Certification Program (NAHB Green) Fees (as of November 2011, from www.nahbgreen.org) Registration with the National Green Building Certification Program is free. Certification fees are as follows:

Non-NAHB Member NAHB Member

Single-Family Buildings (New Construction, Renovations, Additions)

$500 per building $200 per building

Multifamily Buildings (New Construction, Renovations, Additions)

$500 per building + $20 per unit

$200 per building + $20 per unit

http://www.nahbgreen.org/



61

Green Building Initiative (GBI) Green Globes Fees (as of November 2011, from www.thegbi.org) Below are the fees associated with registration and certification under the Green Globes rating system. Note that Green Globes only addresses commercial projects, not residential.

http://www.thegbi.org/



62



63

Appendix 3 – Model Lighting Ordinance



64

I. PURPOSE

A. Purpose- The purpose of this Ordinance is to provide regulations for outdoor lighting that will:

1. Permit the use of outdoor lighting that does not exceed the minimum levels specified in Illuminating Engineers Society (IES) recommended practices for night-time safety, utility, security, productivity, enjoyment, and commerce.

2. Minimize adverse offsite impacts of lighting such as light trespass, and

obtrusive light. 3. Reduce light pollution, reduce skyglow and improve the nighttime

environment. 4. Through the use of appropriate lighting levels, conserve energy and

resources to the greatest extent possible.

II. LIGHTING ZONES

A. Purpose- Lighting Zones shall determine the limitations for lighting as specified in this ordinance. The Lighting Zones shall be as follows:

LZ 0: Moderate ambient lighting Areas of human activity where the vision of human residents and users is adapted to moderate light levels. Lighting may typically be used for safety and convenience but it is not necessarily uniform or continuous. After curfew, lighting may be extinguished or reduced as activity levels decline.

LZ 1: Moderately high ambient lighting Areas of human activity where the vision of human residents and users is adapted to moderately high light levels. Lighting is generally desired for safety, security and/or convenience and is often uniform and/or continuous. After curfew, lighting may be extinguished, reduced in most areas as area activity levels decline.

LZ 2: High ambient lighting Areas of human activity where the vision of human residents and users is adapted to high light levels. Lighting is generally considered necessary for safety, security and/or convenience and is mostly uniform and/or continuous. After curfew, lighting may be extinguished or reduced in some areas as activity levels decline.



65

III. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

A. Conformance with All Applicable Codes All outdoor lighting shall be installed in conformance with the provisions of this Ordinance, applicable Electrical and Energy Codes, and applicable sections of the Building Code.

B. Applicability Except as described below, all outdoor lighting installed after the date of effect of this Ordinance shall comply with these requirements. This includes, but is not limited to, new lighting, replacement lighting, or any other lighting whether attached to structures, poles, the earth, or any other location, including lighting installed by any third party.

Exemptions from III.(B.) The following are not regulated by this Ordinance

1. Lighting for public monuments and statuary. 2. Lighting solely for signs (lighting for signs is regulated by the Charles

County Sign Ordinance).

3. Repairs to existing luminaires not exceeding 25% of total installed luminaires.

4. Temporary lighting for theatrical, television, performance areas and

construction sites; 5. Underwater lighting in swimming pools and public water fountains. 6. Temporary lighting and seasonal lighting provided that individual lamps

are less than 10 watts and 70 lumens. 7. Lighting that is only used under emergency conditions.

Exceptions to III.(B.) All lighting shall follow provisions in this ordinance; however, any special requirements for lighting listed in a) and b) below shall take precedence.

a. Lighting specified or identified in a specific use permit.



66

b. Lighting required by federal, state, territorial, commonwealth or provincial laws or regulations.

C. Lighting Documentation

All proposed lighting must be submitted with a lighting layout plan that is signed and sealed by a State of Maryland Registered Engineer. The lighting layout plan shall include the requested Lighting Zone. The final allowed Lighting Zone shall be determined by Charles County. The lighting layout plan shall include sufficient information to verify compliance with this Ordinance. After the installation is complete, the installing party shall provide documentation, signed and sealed by a Maryland Registered Engineer, that the installation is consistent with the lighting layout plan. Charles County reserves the right to request additional installation verification as required. Refer to the Electrical Code for information regarding permitting for site lighting.

D. Lighting Control Requirements

Automatic Switching Requirements: Controls shall be provided that automatically extinguish all outdoor lighting when sufficient daylight is available using a control device or system such as a photoelectric switch, astronomic time switch or equivalent functions from a programmable lighting controller, building automation system or lighting energy management system, all with battery or similar backup power or device.

Exceptions to III.(C.) 1. Automatic lighting controls are not required for the following:

a. Lighting under canopies. b. Lighting for tunnels, parking garages, garage entrances, and similar

conditions.

IV. NON-RESIDENTIAL LIGHTING

A. Purpose- For all non-residential properties, and for multiple residential

properties of seven domiciles or more and having common outdoor areas, all outdoor lighting shall comply either with Table A or Table B of this section.



67

B. Performance

1. Total Site Lumen Limit The total installed initial luminaire lumens of all lighting systems on the site shall not exceed the allowed total initial site lumens. The allowed total initial site lumens shall be determined using Tables A, B, C and D. For sites with existing lighting, existing lighting shall be included in the calculation of total installed lumens. The Total installed initial luminaire lumens are calculated as the sum of the initial luminaire lumens for all luminaires.

2. Limits to Off Site Impacts: In addition to meeting all Tables in Section IX: Illumination values at the property line of a project shall not be more than 1.0 f.c. at any point when the project is located next to any residential use or residentially zoned property. The illumination levels values at the property line of a project adjacent to any other use shall not be more than 2.0 f.c. Compliance with this criteria shall not be required between two adjacent non-residential properties of like zoning or use classification provided that the properties are under the same ownership, or have common parking areas and/or driveways, or the impacted adjacent property owners provide written consent in a format acceptable to the County Attorney’s Office expressly allowing the illumination values at their respective property lines to exceed the maximum allowable limit established herein.

Fixture Types:

i. All light fixtures shall be cutoff type unless specific authorization for use of another type of fixture is provided in this Part. Fixtures shall be equipped with shields as required to meet Section IV.2 .i and shall not be excessively pointed up to the sky.

ii. Floodlights may be permitted provided that all floodlights shall be

fitted with internal or external shielding and/or louvers. Floodlights shall be aimed so that the area illuminated is confined within the project boundaries in accordance with Section IV.2.i.

A. Luminaires shall be installed in the position recommended by the

manufacturer for the intended use provided that the fixture as installed maintains cutoff characteristics.



68

B. The lamp source shall be compact fluorescent, high pressure sodium, LED, or metal halide with a color rendering index above 65.

V. RESIDENTIAL LIGHTING

A. General Requirements For residential properties including multiple residential properties not having common areas, all outdoor luminaires shall be fully shielded and shall not exceed the allowed lumen output in Table F, row 2. Exceptions

1. One partly shielded or unshielded luminaire at the main entry, not exceeding the allowed lumen output in Table F row 1.

2. Any other partly shielded or unshielded luminaires not exceeding the allowed lumen output in Table F row 3.

3. Low voltage landscape lighting aimed away from adjacent properties and not exceeding the allowed lumen output in Table F row 4.

4. Shielded directional flood lighting aimed so that direct glare is not visible from adjacent properties and not exceeding the allowed lumen output in Table F row 5.

5. Open flame gas lamps. 6. Lighting installed with a proximity sensor, where the sensor extinguishes

the lights. No more than 15 minutes after the area is vacated. 7. Lighting exempt per Section III (B.).

B. Requirements for Residential Landscape Lighting

1. Shall comply with Table F. 2. Low Voltage Landscape lighting shall not exceed the allowed lumen

output in Table F row 6. 3. Shall not be aimed onto adjacent properties.

VI. LIGHTING BY SPECIAL PERMIT ONLY

A. High Intensity and Special Purpose Lighting The following lighting systems are prohibited from being installed or used except by special use permit:



69

1. Temporary lighting in which any single luminaire exceeds 20,000 initial luminaire lumens or the total lighting load exceeds 160,000 lumens.

2. Aerial Lasers. 3. Searchlights. 4. Other very intense lighting defined as having a light source exceeding

200,000 initial luminaire lumens or an intensity in any direction of more than 2,000,000 candelas.

B. Complex and Non-Conforming Uses Upon special permit issued by the Authority, lighting not complying with the technical requirements of this ordinance but consistent with its intent may be installed for complex sites or uses or special uses including, but not limited to, the following applications:

1. Sports facilities, including but not limited to unconditioned rinks, open courts, fields, and stadiums.

2. Construction lighting. 3. Lighting for industrial sites having special requirements, such as

petrochemical manufacturing or storage, shipping piers, etc. 4. Parking structures. 5. Urban parks. 6. Ornamental and architectural lighting of bridges, public monuments,

statuary and public buildings. 7. Theme and amusement parks. 8. Correctional facilities.

To obtain such a permit, applicants shall demonstrate that the proposed lighting installation has sustained every reasonable effort to mitigate the effects of light on the environment and surrounding properties, supported by a signed statement describing the mitigation measures. Such statement shall be accompanied by the calculations required for the Performance Method.

The Authority shall review each such application. A permit may be granted if, upon review, the Authority believes that the proposed lighting will not create unwarranted light trespass.

VII. EXISTING LIGHTING Lighting installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall comply with the following:



70

A. Amortization On or before [amortization date], all outdoor lighting shall comply with this Code.

B. New Uses or Structures, or Change of Use Whenever there is a new use of a property (zoning or variance change) or the use on the property is changed, all outdoor lighting on the property shall be brought into compliance with this Ordinance before the new or changed use commences.

C. Additions or Alterations 1. Major Additions.

If a major addition occurs on a property, lighting for the entire property shall comply with the requirements of this Code. For purposes of this section, the following are considered to be major additions:

Additions of 25 percent or more in terms of additional dwelling units, gross floor area, seating capacity, or parking spaces, either with a single addition or with cumulative additions after the effective date of this Ordinance. Single or cumulative additions, modification or replacement of 25 percent or more of installed outdoor lighting luminaires existing as of the effective date of this Ordinance.

2. Minor Modifications, Additions, or New Lighting Fixtures for Non-residential and Multiple Dwellings For non-residential and multiple dwellings, all additions, modifications, or replacement of more than 25 percent of outdoor lighting fixtures existing as of the effective date of this Ordinance shall require the submission of a complete inventory and site plan detailing all existing and any proposed new outdoor lighting.

Any new lighting shall meet the requirements of this Ordinance.

3. Resumption of Use after Abandonment

If a property with non-conforming lighting is abandoned for a period of twelve months or more, then all outdoor lighting shall be brought into



71

compliance with this Ordinance before any further use of the property occurs.

VIII. STREETLIGHT ORDINANCE

A. Purpose

The purpose of this Ordinance is to control street lighting, including all collectors, local streets, alleys, sidewalks and bikeways, as defined by ANSI/IES RP-8 Standard Practice for Roadway and Street Lighting and in a manner consistent with the Model Lighting Ordinance.

B. Scope All street lighting not governed by regulations of federal, state or other superseding jurisdiction. EXCEPTION: lighting systems mounted less than 10.5 feet above street level and having less than 1000 initial lumens each.

IX. TABLES

TABLE A – Allowed Total Initial Luminaire Lumens per Site for Non-residential Outdoor Lighting, Per Parking Space Method May only be applied to properties up to 10 parking spaces (including handicapped accessible spaces).

LZ 0 LZ 1 LZ 2

630 lms/space

840 lms/space

1,050 lms/space

TABLE B – Allowed Total Initial Lumens per Site for Non-residential Outdoor Lighting, Hardscape Area Method May be used for any project. When lighting intersections of site drives and public streets or road, a total of 600 square feet for each intersection may be added to the actual site hardscape area to provide for intersection lighting.



72

LZ 0 LZ 1 LZ 2

Base Allowance of lumens per SF of Hardscape

2.5 5.0 7.5

Outdoor Sales Lots. This allowance is lumens per square foot of uncovered sales lots used exclusively for the display of vehicles or other merchandise for sale, and may not include driveways, parking or other non-sales areas. To use this allowance, luminaires must be within 2 mounting heights of sales lot area

8 lumens per square foot



Outdoor Sales Frontage. This outdoor allowance is for lineal feet of sales frontage immediately adjacent to the principal viewing location(s) and unobstructed for its viewing length. A corner sales lot may include two adjacent sides provided that a different principal viewing area exists for each side. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be located between the principal viewing location and the frontage outdoor sales area.

1,000 per linear foot



Drive Up Windows (relate to building code for Drive up windows). In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be within 20 feet horizontal distance of the center of the window.

4,000 lumens per drive-up

window


window


window

Vehicle Service Station. This allowance is lumens per installed fuel pump

8,000 lumens per pump

(based on 10 fc horiz)







73

TABLE C Performance Method Allowed Total Initial Site Lumens May be used on any project

Lighting Zone LZ 0 LZ 1 LZ 2

Allowed Lumens per SF

2.5 5.0 7.5

Allowed Base Lumens Per

Site

7,000 14,000 21,000

TABLE D Performance Method Additional Initial Luminaire Lumen Allowances. All area and distance measurements in plan view unless otherwise noted.

Lighting Application LZ 0 LZ 1 LZ 2

Building Entrances or Exits. This allowance is per door. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be within 20 feet of the door.

2,000 4,000 6.000

Building Facades. This allowance is lumens per unit area of building façade that are illuminated. To use this allowance, luminaires must be aimed at the façade and capable of illuminating it without obstruction.

8/SF 16/SF 24/SF



74

Sales or Non-sales Canopies. This allowance is lumens per unit area for the total area within the drip line of the canopy. In order to qualify for this allowance, luminaires must be located under the canopy.

6/SF

12/SF

18/SF

Guard Stations. This allowance is lumens per unit area of guardhouse plus 2000 sf per vehicle lane. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be within 2 mounting heights of a vehicle lane or the guardhouse.

12/SF

24/SF

36/SF

Outdoor Dining. This allowance is lumens per unit area for the total illuminated hardscape of outdoor dining. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be within 2 mounting heights of the hardscape area of outdoor dining.

5/SF

10/SF

15/SF

Drive Up Windows. This allowance is lumens per window. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be within 20 feet of the center of the window.


window


window

8,000 lumens per

drive-up window

Vehicle Service Station Hardscape. This allowance is lumens per unit area for the total illuminated hardscape area less area of buildings, area under canopies, area off property, or areas obstructed by signs or structures. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be illuminating the hardscape area and must not be within a building, below a canopy, beyond property

8/SF

16/SF

24/SF



75

lines, or obstructed by a sign or other structure.

Lighting Application LZ0 LZ1 LZ2

Vehicle Service Station Canopies. This allowance is lumens per unit area for the total area within the drip line of the canopy. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be located under the canopy.

16/SF

32/SF

32/SF

Outdoor Sales Frontage. This allowance is for lineal feet of sales frontage immediately adjacent to the principal viewing location(s) and un-obstructed for its viewing length. A corner sales lot may include two adjacent sides provided that a different principal viewing location exists for each side. In order to use this allowance, luminaires must be located between the principal viewing location and the frontage outdoor sales area.

1,000/LF

1,500/LF

2,000/LF

Table E - Maximum Vertical Illuminance at any point in the plane of the property line

Lighting Zone 0

Lighting Zone 1

Lighting Zone 2

0.3 FC or 3.0 LUX

0.8 FC or 8.0 LUX

1.5 FC or 15.0 LUX



76

Table F –Residential Lighting Limits

Lighting Application LZ 0 LZ 1 LZ 2 Row 1 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for Unshielded Luminaires at one entry only

630

Lumens

630 Lumens

630

Lumens

Row 2 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for each Fully Shielded Luminaire

1,260

Lumens

1,260

Lumens

1,260 Lumens

Row 3 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for each Unshielded Luminaire Excluding main entry

315

Lumens

315

Lumens

315

Lumens

Row 4 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for each Landscape Lighting

1,050

Lumens

2,100

Lumens

2,100

Lumens

Row 5 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for each Shielded Directional Flood Lighting

1,260

Lumens

2,100

Lumens

2,100

Lumens

Row 6 Maximum Allowed Luminaire Lumens* for each Low Voltage Landscape Lighting

525

Lumens

525

Lumens

525

Lumens

*Luminaire lumens equals Initial Lamp Lumens for a lamp,

multiplied by the number of lamps In the luminaire



77

X. DEFINITIONS

Architectural Lighting- Lighting designed to reveal architectural beauty, shape and/or form and for which lighting for any purpose is incidental. Authority- Charles County Astronomic Time Switch- An automatic lighting control device that switches outdoor lighting relative to time of solar day with time of year correction. Canopy- A covered, unconditioned structure with at least one side open for pedestrian and/or vehicular access. (An unconditioned structure is one that may be open to the elements and has no heat or air conditioning.) Common Outdoor Areas- One or more of the following: a parking lot; a parking structure or covered vehicular entrance; a common entrance or public space shared by all occupants of the domiciles. Curfew- A time defined by the authority when outdoor lighting is reduced or extinguished. Emergency conditions- Generally, lighting that is only energized during an emergency; lighting fed from a backup power source; or lighting for illuminating the path of egress solely during a fire or other emergency situation; or, lighting for security purposes used solely during an alarm. Footcandle (FC) - The unit of measure expressing the quantity of light received on a surface. One footcandle is the illuminance produced by a candle on a surface one foot square from a distance of one foot. Fully Shielded Luminaire- A luminaire constructed and installed in such a manner that all light emitted by the luminaire, either directly from the lamp or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction from any part of the luminaire, is projected below the horizontal plane through the luminaire’s lowest light-emitting part. Hardscape- Permanent hardscape improvements to the site including parking lots, drives, entrances, curbs, ramps, stairs, steps, medians, walkways and non-vegetated landscaping that is 10 feet or less in width. Materials may include concrete, asphalt, stone, gravel, etc.



78

Hardscape Area- The area measured in square feet of all hardscape. It is used to calculate the Total Site Lumen Limit in both the Prescriptive Method and Performance Methods. Refer to Hardscape definition. Hardscape Perimeter- The perimeter measured in linear feet is used to calculate the Total Site Lumen Limit in the Performance Method. Refer to Hardscape definition. IESNA- Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Initial Lamp Lumens- Calculated as the sum of the initial lamp lumens for all lamps within an individual luminaire, multiplied by the luminaire efficiency. If the efficiency is not known for a residential luminaire, assume 70%. Although not applicable to solid-state luminaires tested with absolute photometry, initial luminaire lumens are approximated as 140% of luminaire lumens for all luminaires tested with absolute photometry. Lumen rating of a lamp or luminaire tested with absolute photometry when the lamp or luminaire is new and has not depreciated in light output. Initial Luminaire Lumens- Calculated as the sum of the initial luminaire lumens for all luminaires. Lamp- A generic term for a source of optical radiation (i.e. “light”), often called a “bulb” or “tube”. Examples include incandescent, fluorescent, high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps, and low pressure sodium (LPS) lamps as well as light-emitting diode (LED) modules and arrays. Landscape Lighting- Lighting of trees, shrubs, or other plant material as well as ponds and other landscape features. LED- Light Emitting Diode. Light Pollution- Any adverse effect of artificial light including, but not limited to, glare, Light trespass, skyglow, energy waste, compromised safety and Security, and impacts on the nocturnal environment. Light Trespass- Light that falls beyond the property it is intended to illuminate. Lighting- “Electric” or “man-made” or “artificial” lighting. See “lighting equipment”. Lighting Equipment- Equipment specifically intended to provide gas or electric illumination, including but not limited to, lamp(s), luminaire(s), ballast(s), poles,



79

posts, lens(s), and related structures, electrical wiring, and other necessary or auxiliary components. Lighting Zone- An overlay zoning system establishing legal limits for lighting for particular parcels, areas, or districts in a community. Lighting Equipment- Equipment specifically intended to provide gas or electric illumination, including but not limited to, lamp(s), luminaire(s), ballast(s), poles, posts, lens(s), and related structures, electrical wiring, and other necessary or auxiliary components. Low Voltage Landscape Lighting- Landscape lighting powered at less than 15 volts and limited to luminaires having a rated initial luminaire lumen output of 525 lumens or less. Lumen- The unit of measure used to quantify the amount of light produced by a lamp or emitted from a luminaire (as distinct from “watt,” a measure of power consumption). Luminaire- The complete lighting unit (fixture), consisting of a lamp, or lamps and ballast(s) (when applicable), together with the parts designed to distribute the light (reflector, lens, diffuser), to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Lux- the SI unit of illuminance. One lux is one lumen per square meter. 1 Lux is a unit of incident illuminance approximately equal to 1/10 footcandle. Mounting height- The height of the photometric center of a luminaire above grade level. New lighting- Lighting for areas not previously illuminated; newly installed lighting of any type except for replacement lighting or lighting repairs. Object- A permanent structure located on a site. Objects may include statues or artwork, garages or canopies, outbuildings, etc. Object Height- The highest point of an entity, but shall not include antennas or similar structures. Outdoor Lighting- Lighting equipment installed within the property line and outside the building envelopes, whether attached to poles, building structures, the earth, or any other location; and any associated lighting control equipment.



80

Partly Shielded Luminaire- A luminaire with opaque top and translucent or perforated sides, designed to emit most light downward. Pedestrian Hardscape- Stone, brick, concrete, asphalt or other similar finished surfaces intended primarily for walking, such as sidewalks and pathways. Photoelectric Switch- A control device employing a photocell or photodiode to detect daylight and automatically switch lights off when sufficient daylight is available. Property line- The edges of the legally-defined extent of privately owned property. Repair(s)- The reconstruction or renewal of any part of an existing luminaire for the purpose of its ongoing operation, other than relamping or replacement of components including capacitor, ballast or photocell. Note that retrofitting a luminaire with new lamp and/or ballast technology is not considered a repair and for the purposes of this ordinance the luminaire shall be treated as if new. “Repair” does not include normal relamping or replacement of components including capacitor, ballast or photocell. Replacement Lighting- Lighting installed specifically to replace existing lighting that is sufficiently broken to be beyond repair. Roadway or Highway Lighting- Lighting provided for freeways, expressways, limited access roadways, and roads on which pedestrians, cyclists, and parked vehicles are generally not present. The primary purpose of roadway or highway lighting is to help the motorist remain on the roadway and help with the detection of obstacles within and beyond the range of the vehicle’s headlights. Sales area- Uncovered area used for sales of retail goods and materials, including but not limited to automobiles, boats, tractors and other farm equipment, building supplies, and gardening and nursery products. Seasonal lighting - Temporary lighting installed and operated in connection with holidays or traditions. Shielded Directional Luminaire- A luminaire that includes an adjustable mounting device allowing aiming in any direction and contains a shield, louver, or baffle to reduce direct view of the lamp. Sign- Advertising, directional or other outdoor promotional display of art, words and/or pictures.



81

Street lighting- Lighting provided for major, collector and local roads where pedestrians and cyclists are generally present. The primary purpose of street lighting is to help the motorist identify obstacles, provide adequate visibility of pedestrians and cyclists, and assist in visual search tasks, both on and adjacent to the roadway. Temporary lighting- Lighting installed and operated for periods not to exceed 60 days, completely removed and not operated again for at least 30 days. Third Party- A party contracted to provide lighting, such as a utility company. Time Switch- An automatic lighting control device that switches lights according to time of day. Translucent- Allowing light to pass through, diffusing it so that objects beyond cannot be seen clearly (not transparent or clear). Unshielded Luminaire- A luminaire capable of emitting light in any direction including downwards. Uplight- For an exterior luminaire, flux radiated in the hemisphere at or above the horizontal plane.



82

Appendix 4 – Benefit/Cost Analysis of Proposed Tax Incentives



83

To encourage sustainable development within Charles County and to attract environmentally-conscious developers, property tax incentives are proposed for residential and commercial buildings which are certified by a nationally recognized green building program such as LEED or the National Green Building Standard, among others. In order for a tax credit to be beneficial to the property owner or developer, the incentive must outweigh the costs of pursuing a green building certification, including soft costs associated with the certification process and hard costs from capital improvements (such as higher efficiency HVAC equipment to maximize energy savings). Below is a breakdown of the recommended incentives as well as estimated costs for a typical residential and commercial green building. COMMERCIAL / MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL A clear benefit of incentivizing green development within Charles County is the potential to attract new developers with sustainability on their agenda. The environmental benefits include reduced air pollution from power production, improved indoor air quality & healthier occupants, reduced waste to landfills, and reduced impact on existing infrastructure for water/ sewer/ storm drain / roads. It should also be noted that the higher assessed value for green buildings may eventually increase tax revenue in the future. For this benefit/cost analysis, we are using a typical $5 million commercial or multi-family residential building (common building construction cost in Charles County). The figure below (courtesy of the USGBC) shows the estimated additional construction cost for LEED-certified buildings based on the certification level.



84

The real property tax rate for Charles County was used ($1.0665 / 100 * assessed real property value) as of 2012. Note that this does not include the State of Maryland tax rate of $0.112, and also the proposed tax incentive is only for Real Property (not Business Property).



85

For a $5 million new commercial building (or multi-family residential), the estimated annual County Real Property taxes would be $53, 325 per year.

The table below summarizes the estimated additional costs for each level of LEED certification, with the annual cost (total cost amortized over five years) to determine the recommended tax incentive threshold for a reasonable payback period (five years or less).



86

LEED Certification

Level

Total Added Construction

Cost (%)

Total Added Construction

Cost ($)

Annual Cost

Amortized over 5

years ($)

Percent of Taxes to Offset for Payback

(%)

Tax Incentive Proposed

(%)

Certified 0.66% $33,000 $6,600 / year

12% 20%

Silver 1.9% $95,000 $19,000 / year

35% 40%

Gold 2.2% $110,000 $22,000 / year

41% 50%

Platinum 6.8% $340,000 $68,000 / year

127% 50%

It should be noted that providing a tax credit for LEED Platinum certified properties is not anticipated to pay back within a five-year period. Keeping this in mind, we are proposing an identical incentive (50% for five years) for Gold and Platinum certified projects to still provide some incentive for Platinum projects while being conscious of lost tax revenue to the County. According to the LEED project directory (available at http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/CertifiedProjectList.aspx), as of April 16, 2012 there were 6 LEED certified and 9 LEED registered projects located in Charles County. There were 112 new building permits issued for new commercial projects and additions/alterations during Fiscal Year 2011 (FY2011) in Charles County. If all nine of the LEED registered projects achieved certification within the same fiscal year, this would be 8% of the new commercial buildings able to receive this incentive (9/112 = 8%). Assuming that each new LEED certified building was assessed at $5 million for the real property value, the table below estimates the annual tax revenue lost to the County by providing the tax credit.

LEED Certification

Level

Tax Credit

%

Annual Tax Revenue Lost Calculation

Annual Tax Revenue Lost

Certified 20% 9 buildings x $53,325/yr tax revenue x 0.20

$95,985 lost per year

Silver 40% 9 buildings x $53,325/yr tax revenue x 0.40


Gold / Platinum 50% 9 buildings x $53,325/yr tax revenue x 0.50


http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/CertifiedProjectList.aspx



87

The “worst-case scenario” for lost tax revenue would be if all nine of the LEED-registered commercial buildings in Charles County were LEED Gold or Platinum certified within the same fiscal year. If this were the case, the $239,963 tax revenue lost each year over a five-year period would amount to a total loss of $1,199,815 for each year that the tax credit was offered – if the tax credit was reinstated the following year, it could be assumed that the next round would include an additional nine buildings to be certified and receive the tax credit. It is recommended that the County establish a budget for the program and award the tax credit funds on a first-come, first-serve basis. RESIDENTIAL The large majority of development within Charles County is residential, although there are no LEED or National Green Building Standard certified homes located in Charles County. To incentivize sustainable development, a 100% real property tax credit for three consecutive years is proposed for any home which achieves either LEED certification or the National Green Building Standard certification (any level).

Rating System Certification Level

Property Tax Credit

Duration

RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES



NAHB ICC 700 National Green Building Standard Certification


The costs associated with certified green homes include soft costs (program administration and third-party Green Rater / Green Verifier fees) as well as added hard costs for sustainable & energy efficient materials. The main difference between the two most popular green home certification programs is that LEED for Homes includes an option for Energy Star certification to earn points and demonstrate compliance, while the National Green Building Standard (NGBS) does not. Feedback from the development community during the EECBG Green Codes workshop in early 2012 indicates that Energy Star certification for new homes is industry standard in Charles County. With this in mind, this benefit/cost analysis was performed with the assumption that any home pursuing the tax credit would already be obtaining the Energy Star certification, and those costs would be excluded from the analysis (including any cost adds for high performance glazing and HVAC equipment, and the Energy Star Green Rater inspection fee). Each project uses a customized approach to earn the LEED or NGBS certification, so the costs can vary for sustainable materials & finishes. Since the NGBS program certification costs are lower than LEED for Homes, this analysis specifically looks at the NGBS program



88

(expected to be more commonly pursued than LEED for Homes due to cost). The estimated added costs for NGBS certification are shown below:

Certification Cost: $200 per single family home (member pricing)

Green Verifier Fee: $500 per single family home (typical local pricing)

Hard Cost Add: $5,000 per single family home (including finishes, additional ductwork, and materials to meet base level of certification)

TOTAL: $5,700 per single family home Using a medium-sized home with an estimated real property value of $200,000, the homeowner would normally pay $2,133 each year in County property taxes (note this analysis does not include Maryland State property taxes). This is based on the property tax rates mentioned earlier in this report. To recuperate the additional costs for a certified green home, the homeowner would need a 100% tax credit over a three-year period.

Providing a 100% tax credit for three consecutive years on a typical $200,000 new green certified home would result in a total tax revenue loss to the County of $6,399 per home. As of February 8, 2012, the entire state of Maryland included 16 LEED certified homes and 52 NGBS certified homes, none of which are located within Charles County. Based on the current US census data, there are approximately 1,549,084 single-family homes in Maryland. Since only 0.0043% of the homes in Maryland are certified under either the LEED for Homes or NGBS programs, it is currently not a common practice to build certified green homes, and it is not anticipated that a significant number of new homes within Charles County would pursue this certification program. One of the greatest benefits of offering the tax credit would be to incentivize new residential developments to include a green certified model unit to educate future homeowners on the benefits of sustainable homes. The developer could potentially provide an option for homeowners to build the green certified home option and provide information on how to obtain the property tax credit. The educational value of having the model homes built as green certified homes is significant due to the volume of future homeowners touring the model homes. It should also be noted that the higher assessed value for green buildings may eventually increase tax revenue in the future.



89

Appendix 5 – Comparing LEED and the International Green Construction Code (IgCC)



90

The 2012 version of the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) will be adopted by Charles County during 2012. The IgCC contains mandatory and optional requirements chosen by the adopting jurisdictions. Additionally, ASHRAE 189.1-2009 Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings has been approved as an alternate compliance path for the IgCC. The requirements within both the IgCC and ASHRAE Standard 189.1 are closely aligned with the LEED for New Construction rating system. Since incentives are proposed for LEED certification of new buildings within Charles County, and requiring all new County facilities to achieve LEED certification, the team has put together a side-by-side comparison of the LEED for New Construction prerequisites and credits with the associated sections of the IgCC/ASHRAE 189.1. The IgCC sections marked with an *asterisk* are optional by jurisdiction or project electives. The italicized sections are within the ASHRAE Standard 189.1 alternate compliance path. All other IgCC sections noted below are required elements for all projects.

LEED NC Prerequisite / Credit

IgCC Section

Sustainable Sites

P1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

405.1.1 Soil and water quality protection plan 10.3.1.3 Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC)

C1 Site Selection 402.1 Protection by area 402.2 Flood hazard areas* 402.3 Surface water protection* 402.4 Wetland protection 402.6 Park land 402.7 Agricultural land* A104.1 Flood hazard area preservation* A101.1.2 Flood hazard area minimization* A101.1.3 Flood hazard area, existing building* 5.3.1.2 Prohibited Development Activity

C2 Development Density and Community Connectivity

402.8 Greenfield sites* 5.3.1.1 Allowable Sites

C3 Brownfield Redevelopment

5.3.1.1 Allowable Sites A104.4 Brownfield site project elective*

C4.1 Public Transportation Access

402.8 Greenfield sites* 5.3.1.1 Allowable Sites

C4.2 Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms

407.2 Changing and shower facilities 407.3 Bicycle parking and storage A104.7 Changing and shower facilities project elective* A104.8 Long-term bicycle parking and storage project elective*



91

C4.3 Low-Emitting & Fuel-Efficient Vehicles

407.4.2 Low-emission, hybrid and electric vehicle parking*

C4.4 Parking Capacity 407.4.1 High-occupancy vehicle parking*

C5.1 Site Development – Protect & Restore Habitat

402.8.1 Site disturbance limits on greenfield sites 405.3 Native plant landscaping A104.5 Site restoration project elective* 5.4.1.1 Effective pervious area for all sites 6.3.1.1 Landscape design

C5.2 Site Development – Maximize Open Space

5.4.1.1 Effective pervious area for all sites

C6.1 Stormwater Management – Quantity Control

403.1 Stormwater management

C6.2 Stormwater Management – Quality Control

Not addressed

C7.1 Heat Island Effect – Non-Roof

408.2 Site hardscape A104.9.1 Site hardscape project elective 1* A104.9.2 Site hardscape project elective 2* A104.9.3 Site hardscape project elective 3* 5.3.2.1 Site hardscape

C7.2 Heat Island Effect – Roof

408.3 Roof surfaces A104.9.4 Roof covering project elective* 5.3.2.3 Roofs

C8 Light Pollution Reduction

409.1 Light pollution control* 5.3.3 Reduction of light pollution

Water Efficiency

P1 Water Use Reduction 702.1 Fitting and fixture consumption 702.2 Combination tub and shower valves 702.3 Food establishment pre-rinse spray valves 6.3.2.1 Plumbing fixtures and fittings

C1 Water Efficient Landscaping

404.1.1 Water for outdoor landscape irrigation 404.1.2 Irrigation system design and installation 6.3.1.2 Irrigation system design 6.3.1.3 Controls 6.4.1 Site water use reduction

C: Innovative Wastewater Technologies

702.1 Fitting and fixture consumption 702.5 Non-water urinal connection 702.7 Municipal reclaimed water*



92

A107.2 Onsite waste water treatment project elective* A107.4 Alternate onsite nonpotable water for plumbing fixture flushing water project elective* 6.3.2.1 Plumbing fixtures and fittings

C3 Water Use Reduction 702.1 Fitting and fixture consumption 702.2 Combination tub and shower valves 702.3 Food establishment pre-rinse spray valves 6.3.2.1 Plumbing fixtures and fittings

Energy & Atmosphere

P1 Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems

611.1 Mechanical systems commissioning and completion requirements 611.2 Sequence of operation 611.3 Lighting and electrical systems commissioning and completion requirements 903.1 General 10.3.1.2 Building project commissioning

P2 Minimum Energy Performance

Chapter 6 Energy Conservation, Efficiency and CO2e Emission Reduction Chapter 7 Energy Efficiency Normative Appendix D Performance Option for Energy Efficiency

P3 Fundamental Refrigerant Management

9.3.3 Refrigerants

C1 Optimize Energy Performance

Chapter 6 Energy Conservation, Efficiency and CO2e Emission Reduction Chapter 7 Energy Efficiency Normative Appendix D Performance Option for Energy Efficiency

C2 On-Site Renewable Energy

610.1 Renewable energy systems requirements 7.3.2 On-site renewable energy systems A106.6 Renewable energy system project electives* 603.3.7 Renewable and waste energy 7.4.1.1 On-site renewable energy systems

C3 Enhanced Commissioning

611.1 Mechanical systems commissioning and completion requirements 611.2 Sequence of operation 611.3 Lighting and electrical systems



93

commissioning and completion requirements 903.1 General 10.3.1.2 Building project commissioning

C4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management

9.3.3 Refrigerants

C5 Measurement and Verification

603.5 Minimum energy measurement and verification 10.3.2.1.3 Energy efficiency

C6 Green Power Not addressed

Materials & Resources

P1 Storage & Collection of Recyclables

504.1 Recycling areas for waste generated post certificate of occupancy 9.3.4 Storage and collection of recyclables and discarded goods

C1 Building Reuse A105.6 Existing building reuse project elective* A105.7 Historic building reuse project elective*

C2 Construction Waste Management

503.1 Construction material and waste management plan* 505.2.3 Recyclable building materials and building components A105.1 Waste management project elective* A105.2 Construction waste landfill maximum project elective* 9.3.1 Construction Waste Management

C3 Materials Reuse A105.3 Material selection project electives*

C4 Recycled Content 505.2.2 Recycled content building materials A105.3 Material selection project electives* 9.4.1.1 Recycled content

C5 Regional Materials 505.2.5 Indigenous materials A105.3 Material selection project electives* 9.4.1.2 Regional materials

C6 Rapidly Renewable Materials

505.2.4 Bio-based materials A105.3 Material selection project electives* 9.4.1.3 Bio-based products

C7 Certified Wood 505.2.4 Bio-based materials 9.4.1.3.1 Wood building components

Indoor Environmental Quality

P1 Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

604.3 Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems 8.3.1.1 Minimum ventilation rates



94

P2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

803.3 Environmental tobacco smoke control 8.3.1.4 Environmental tobacco smoke

C1 Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

8.3.1.2 Outdoor air delivery monitoring

C2 Increased Ventilation Not addressed

C3.1 Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan – During Construction

803.1 Construction phase requirements 10.3.1.4 Indoor air quality (IAQ) construction management

C3.2 Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan – Before Occupancy

804.2 Post-construction, pre-occupancy baseline IAQ testing* 10.3.1.4 Indoor air quality (IAQ) construction management

C4.1 Low-Emitting Materials – Adhesives & Sealants

806.2 Adhesives and sealants A108.5 Total VOC limit project elective* 8.4.2.1 Adhesives and sealants

C4.2 Low-Emitting Materials – Paints & Coatings

806.3 Architectural paints and coatings A108.5 Total VOC limit project elective* 8.4.2.2 Paints and coatings

C4.3 Low-Emitting Materials – Flooring Systems

806.4 Flooring A108.2 Flooring material project elective* A108.5 Total VOC limit project elective* 8.4.2.3 Floor covering materials

C4.4 Low-Emitting Materials – Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products

806.1 Emissions from composite wood products 8.4.2.4 Composite wood, wood structural panel and agrifiber products

C5 Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control

803.4 Isolation of pollutant sources 803.5 Filters 8.3.1.5 Building entrances

C6.1 Controllability of Systems – Lighting

Not addressed

C6.2 Controllability of Systems – Thermal Comfort

Not addressed

C7.1 Thermal Comfort - Design

803.2 Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy 8.3.2 Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy

C7.2 Thermal Comfort – Verification

Not addressed

C8.1 Daylight and Views – Section 808 Daylighting



95

Daylight 8.3.4 Daylighting by toplighting 8.4.1 Daylighting by sidelighting 8.5.1 Daylighting simulation

C8.2 Daylight and Views – Views

A108.6 Views to building exterior project elective*

Innovation in Design

C1 Innovation in Design Not addressed

C2 LEED Accredited Professional

Not addressed

Although many of the LEED requirements will be addressed for most projects by adopting the 2012 IgCC, there are several sustainable design elements awarded within the LEED rating system that are not included in the IgCC:

Stormwater Management – Quality Control

Green Power

Increased Ventilation

Controllability of Systems – Lighting

Controllability of Systems – Thermal Comfort

Innovation in Design

LEED Accredited Professional By requiring LEED certification for all new Charles County facilities and incentivizing private developers to achieve LEED certification, it is anticipated that the overall environmental benefit will be greater than the benefit granted by compliance with the IgCC.



96

Appendix 6 – Sample Road Sections with Environmental Site Design (ESD) Stormwater Management



97

See next page for enlargement



98

MC-210.05 enlarged



99




100

MC-211.03 enlarged



101


MC-212.04 enlarged



102

Urban Road Standard with Environmental Site Design: Transit Street

(Courtesy of Parker Rodriguez, Virginia)



103

Urban Road Standard with Environmental Site Design: Major Village Street




104

Urban Road Standard with Environmental Site Design: Minor Village Street




105

charles county, maryland department of planning and growth … · 2019. 5. 30. · mike hess, pe,...

Documents