Commission on the Environment

 Meeting Minutes
January 9, 2007

1.	Welcome, News and Agenda Review
	The meeting was called to order at 7:33pm in the Blue Crab Room at Rockville City Hall. Introductions of guests were made: David Davis is a relatively new Rockville resident and a student in Applied Geography & Management.  Ruth Hanessian is a Rockville resident with a background in wildlife conservation and is the owner of the Pet Exchange.  Audra Lew and Beri Kravitz have been introduced at previous meetings. FK mentioned that the Commission would enter into closed session near the end of the meeting to discuss applicants for the Commission vacancies.
2.	Review and Approval of Meeting Minutes
	Motion to approve December 12, 2006 meeeting minutes passes by unanimous vote.
3.	Planning Commission Request for Porous Pavement Information
	FK mentioned that the Watersheds & Stormwater Management Working Group had been working on a statement from the Commission concerning the use of porous pavement, particularly at the planned Thomas Farm Community Center.  NW explained the requirements for both stormwater quantity and quality that must be met on sites, and that porous pavement was one method of achieving stormwater quality benefits.  NW said that the position of the Department of Public Works (DPW) with regards to porous pavement is that it can be a useful tool to address stormwater quality on a site, but that it needs to be considered alongside the many other SWM techniques for quality improvement, as well as techniques for quantity control, and should not be viewed as a stand-alone system. NW had also previously supplied the Commission with the Department of Recreation & Parks’ memo concerning porous pavement at the Thomas Farm Community Center; FK asks if in light of this memo and DPW’s position, should any changes be made to the Commission’s statement? SY said she had summed up the numbers on Parks’ Thomas Farm memo, and it appeared to be virtually cost neutral to go with porous pavement versus the bioretention area originally planned – perhaps $16,000 difference.  It seems that this minor difference would be worth it to try out a new technology. FK agrees – this would be a good opportunity for the City to test and showcase this technology before more widespread adoption to other projects in Rockville.  NW mentioned that SY had previously brought up LEED innovation credits, and that installing a monitoring system to determine the efficacy of the porous pavement could assist in Thomas Farm’s LEED rating as well. KD to finalize Commission statement for the Planning Commission in the next few days.
4.	Working Group Updates & Rotations
	BK gave the Community Outreach Working Group Update: Have been looking into the Energy Fair: want to get some local vendors, maybe Alan Abrams (a green builder / renovator) FK also mentioned inviting Sean McGuire, who heads up MD DNR’s Environmental Design Program (http://www.dnr.state.md.us/ed/) FK wondered if The Rockville Channel (Cable 11) could get involved in the fair? FK mentioned that Science Day is coming up, and that the Commission would like to have a presence.  Should this be in conjunction to NW’s water quality-related booth, or a separate booth altogether? PM detailed some of the new things for Science Day this year, and encouraged the Commission to be involved.  She also mentioned that NW’s rain barrel demonstration from two years ago had been popular. KD presented the Watersheds & SWM Working Group updates: SY has circulated comments on the Cabin John Watershed Study; the working group will be compiling comments to present to the City. BK has found a brochure to use as a template for some outreach material; KD to make comments and the group will attempt to have a draft ready by May 1st. AL has taken on the volunteer monitoring program – she is determining the best method(s) to use, taking classes to learn them, etc. Next meeting will likely be in 2-3 weeks TO presented information from the High Performance Green Buildings Working Group: They have not yet had another meeting – are planning to hold one soon.  Will pursue the working group goals and will report back next time. FK thanked AL for creating a draft poster that could be used to advertise the working groups.  Will want to finalize that, and float it to Rockville Reports, the Gazette, and City buildings. Looking back on the working groups, FK commented that they are now one year old.  Is everyone pleased with how the groups have been working?  Are folks interested in rotating leadership roles? SY thought that it had taken a while to get the groups moving, and that now that they are gaining momentum perhaps we should let the leadership remain unchanged for another year to let them start implementing projects. FK said that if any group leader was under pressure, to let her know and we could look at switching things up. FK would like to see each working group hold a meeting this month.  Plan to hold a meeting, and see if you can get the word out and attract new members.  Report back next month.
5.	Anti-graffiti ordinance
	KD has been spearheading this effort.  His interest in taking steps to curtail graffiti stems from his time living in Detroit. He started a Graffiti Busters volunteer group to remove graffiti in communities.  It seemed that the more you it, the less graffiti came back.  KD feels that graffiti is on the rise in Rockville, and the Washington Post has mentioned graffiti is on the rise in Montgomery County in general.  KD mentioned that there were a variety of reasons for this; often gang-related, used to communicate and mark turf.  By promptly removing graffiti, gangs get frustrated and may move to a different more “tagable” area. KD said that an ordinance could require the property owner to remove of graffiti within a certain amount of time.  RH wanted to know if graffiti would be prosecuted in addition to requiring its removal; also, what is the City doing now with respect to graffiti? KD thought this would mainly be a volunteer effort, utilizing donated paint, graffiti blaster, etc.  There are anti-graffiti ordinances in other communities and it has been proven effective.  TO questioned the source of the volunteers; KD mentioned mainly community groups, sometimes other organizations would help.  Possibility of having community service hours for vandalism offenders be removing graffiti. RH thought that there was already a 48-hour requirement to remove graffiti within the City.  Have problems with getting MARC line, Metro, Pepco property to comply with this.  Also, would such an ordinance unduly penalize businesses located near graffiti-prone areas?  KD didn’t think so, especially not if there was volunteer assistance.  He acknowledged that getting compliance from Pepco, etc. could be a problem. FK mentioned that there would definitely need to be a large education and outreach effort that would precede any possible ordinance.  Also will require more research into Rockville’s current regulations, as well as those of surrounding communities.  AL thought that Gaithersburg had instituted an ordinance targeting graffiti, as they used to have a big problem with it and it appears to have diminished.  PM said the Commission should definitely coordinate with Chief of Police Treschuk. AL will assist KD with further research for a possible ordinance.
6.	Mayor & Council Request for Green Building Program Information
	FK gave a re-cap of the discussion of green buildings from last month, and mentioned that the Commission would be preparing a matrix comparing Montgomery County’s and DC’s new green building ordinances.  FK explained the Commission’s interest in obtaining information on the building inventory within Rockville…  e.g., just how many buildings are there > 10,000 ft2 (the cut-off set by Montgomery County for inclusion into the green building requirements). PM detailed the Mayor & Council’s “Vision of Rockville in 2020”, and how green buildings played into an “exceptional built environment”.  Although Montgomery County and DC may have beaten Rockville to the punch, don’t feel as though you are constrained to make their programs work here – the sky’s the limit to create a program that is perfect for Rockville. PM also mentioned the work that RORZOR was doing with the zoning ordinance re-write, and mentioned that the Commission should review it to make sure the environmental aspects were being made clear. FK said that the Commission will be coming up with recommendations for a green building program to present to the Mayor & Council.
7.	Staff Updates
	NW mentioned that Jerry Leighton is on extended medical leave from the Commission, but hopes to return within 3 or 4 months.  Rockville’s new Chief of Environmental Management, Mark Charles, will start on January 16th.  He will likely be attending the February meeting.  Lastly, as has already been discussed, Science Day is Sunday April 29th; the City will be having a watershed / water quality related display.  The Commission could either add on to the City’s display, or come up with different material.
8.	Closed Session - Discuss and Vote on Commission Vacancies
	FK announced that the Commission would like to go into closed session to discuss applicants for the Commission vacancy, thanked guests for their attendance and asked non-Commission members to leave. After discussion of the applicants for the two vacancies, the Commission unanimously voted to recommend Audra Lew to the Mayor & Council for appointment to the Commission as the Student Member.  The Commission is deferring its vote on a recommendation for the other vacant position until next month.
9.	Wrap-Up and Adjourn
	Meeting adjourned at 9:25 pm.