Creating the Box: Recognizing the Need for Regulatory Change and Creating a Structure for Action

CREATING THE BOX
RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR REGULATORY
CHANGE AND CREATING A STRUCTURE FOR
ACTION
Presented by:
Valerie Massard, AICP, Town of Plymouth
Kevin Maguire, Managing Member, Building Initiatives, LLC
George Preble, PE, Principal, Beals and Thomas, Inc.
June 3, 2010

Creating a Flexible Box
 Consultants, Regulators, Developers spend
considerable time and resources working within the
confines of “The Box” of existing regulations.
 The need for regulatory change is often recognized
well in advance of formal regulations.
 Early discussions include a variety of stakeholders
 The pre- regulation period is an opportunity for
advancing flexibility to address new needs.

Creating a Flexible Box
 Do our existing regulations and design standards
lead us where we want to go?
 Are we addressing current issues and using best
practices?
 Today, a look at some case studies – examples from
the public and private sector of how to manage
change when existing standards are not up to the
challenge at hand.

How Best to Respond to Emerging
Environmental and Societal Issues?
 Stormwater and Flooding
 Global Warming – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Water Resources
 Water Supply and Protection
 Wastewater Disposal and Reuse
 Groundwater Protection
 Sustainable Energy
 Smart Growth
 Affordable Housing
 Transfer of Development Rights

The Catalysts to Adopt and Respond to
Emerging Issues
 Public Sector Stakeholders
 Private Sector Stakeholders

Public Sector Stakeholders
 Citizens of the Commonwealth
 Local, State and Federal Regulators
 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
 Environmental Protection Agencies
 Local Conservation Commission, Planning Board and
Board of Health
 Land Conservation and Advocacy Groups

Private Sector Stakeholders
 Developers and Land Development Organizations
 Business Interests
 Consultants, Architects, Attorneys, Engineers,
Environmental Professionals, Planners

Initiatives for Regulatory Change
 Convergence of Public and Private Sector Interests
 Adequacy and Protection of Water Resources/Supply
 Economic Development
 Address the Absence of Adequate Utility Infrastructure
 Address Sustainable Design
 Response to Emerging Technologies
 Advance Innovative Technology for the Common Good
 Highly Treated Wastewater Reuse – Reclaimed Water
 Renewable Energy
 Stormwater Pollutant Removal

Example of Regulatory Change
A Catalyst for Reclaimed Water Guidelines and Regulations
 A cooperative effort by the private sector and public sector
regulatory officials to implement an innovative wastewater treatment
and reclaimed water system, leading to regulatory change.
 Reclaimed Water is relatively new to Massachusetts – we perceive
ourselves as “water rich”
 Recognition of the limitation of the existing sewer infrastructure in a
targeted economic development area and seasonal shortages
experienced by the municipal water supply.
 Pilot projects allowed by DEP to advance the use of Reclaimed Water

Example of Regulatory Change
 Massachusetts Regulatory Guidelines (Issued After Initial Pilot Project):
 “Interim Guidelines on Reclaimed Water (Revised)”, issued by the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, effective
date January 3, 2000.
Initially considered for:
 Golf course irrigation
 Irrigation for nurseries
 Toilet flushing
 Reclaimed Water Regulations Codified ¶314 CMR 20
 Reclaimed Water Permit Program and Standards Promulgated March
2009 with expanded uses.
 Parks and Playgrounds
 Athletic Fields
 Cemeteries
 Landscaping at Schools and Residential Developments
 Snowmaking
 10 Year period from initial pilot projects to the promulgation of formal
regulations.

Case Studies for Innovative Responses
Leading To Regulation Change
1. Conversion of a former Nike Missile site in Wayland
to a sustainable residential development.
2. Development of stormwater
regulations to protect water
resources in Plymouth.

Local Change and Design Guidelines:
Plymouth's Experience
Presented to MAPD Annual Conference
June 3, 2010
Valerie Massard, AICP
Town Planner, Town of Plymouth

Plymouth is very large
Outline of
Plymouth
103 sq. miles

Active Development
Plymouth - some of
fastest growth
in Commonwealth
In recent years.
•Plymouth Rock Studios
•AD Makepeace River Run
•Pinehills Community
•Cordage 40R
•Colony Place
•Shops at 5

Special Considerations
 Large portions of Town mapped by
Massachusetts Natural Heritage
 Anadromous fish runs
 31 miles of coastline impaired ponds and
bays
 Sandy glacial soils – high permeability
 Plymouth-Carver Sole Source Aquifer
 Historic character
 Large undeveloped land areas

Often, existing guidelines lead
us to question:
“That’s what we said, but not what we
meant.”…

Opportunity: create better ‘box’
 Flexibility
 Focus on key issues – ask questions
 Include local community and
development community in dialogue
 Create design standards that lead to
win-win goal for Town and Developer
 Create reviews that reduce repetition
while focusing on core issues

Opportunities:
 Stormwater design guidelines
 Roadway design guidelines
 Development design guidelines
 Community design for rural areas and
TDRs
 Community design for more urban areas
 Mixed use overlay districts

Design issue: residential growth
 OSMUD – Mixed Use overlay Pinehills
 TRVD – Mixed Use overlay Makepeace
 Rural Density Development (RDD) Bylaw for
open space in rural areas
 Village Open Space Development (VOSD)
for open space in outskirts of village centers
 Used by every development since
implementation.

Residential Development
Pinehills
• $1.5 Billion Project Cost
• 600 Jobs Created
• Taxes
$2.3 Million 2005
$17 Million+ Buildout
MacKenzie Brothers

Design Issue: roads
 Pinehills OSMUD – developers
approached the Town: “What are your
favorite roads in Plymouth?”
 To create this kind of road – special
stormwater & road design standards
 These are often default for RDD,
enhanced for TRVD.

Plymouth
RDD & VOSD
Green Neighborhoods
Alliance OSRD
(1) Concept Plan
(product of Site
Plan, Yield Plan &
Sketch Plan
(2) File for Special
Permit
(3) File for Definitive
Plan
 Can allow for
incentives for
density
(1) Concept Plan
(2) File concurrently
for Definitive Plan
and Special Permit
 Allows for Transfer
of Development
Rights (50%)
 60,000 SF
minimum open
space per unit in
RDD

Plymouth’s RDD Bylaw
 50-foot frontage for a lot
 Can donate land to Town or land trust,
or hold land privately in some
circumstances for the benefit of the
residents
 20,000 SF minimum lot size; typically
40,000 SF is used to fit individual
septic and well on lots

Property Sales Comparison
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2001 2002
All Homes* New Construction* RDDs Pine Hills
Source: Assessors Office * Excludes Pine Hills and RDD Sales

Design Issue: Stormwater
 Stormwater guidelines adopted 1983
 New, large developments design using
Town’s out-dated practices (River
Eels, Plymouth Rock Studios)
 Resulting permit review: re-design
current best practices – how much,
what standard, how reach consensus,
what cost (time, dollars)?

Plymouth’s Stormwater Group
 DPW Engineering
 DPW Environmental Management
 Conservation
 Health
 Planning
Informal - focus: grants,
retrofitting, stream restoration,
water quality

Smart Growth Grant from EEA
 CZM grant (2004) - Model Bylaw [Plymouth,
Duxbury & Marshfield; Horsley Witten Group]
 Stormwater (2007) - implement consistent
design guidelines across all permitting
processes in Plymouth (EPA confirmation approach
meets requirements for NPDES Phase II)
Goals: no additional review, common ground,
participatory design
Lead – Planning Department

Development of Guidelines
 Plymouth’s Stormwater Group
 Comprehensive Environmental, Inc.
design services
 Core working group – local engineers
Include experts and volunteers, local
knowledge

Local Engineers
 Cubellis
 Associated Engineers of Plymouth,
Inc.
 Flaherty & Stefani, Inc.
 The Garrett Group, LTD.
 Beals and Thomas, Inc.
 VHB/Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

Implementation
 Guidelines replaced all other design
standards – subdivision rules & regulations;
consistency
 Guidelines already called out in zoning
 Pre-design conferencing with staff sets tone
of expectations for site
Pre-site design conferencing with Planning
Board is also a built-in for Plymouth’s
flexible development approaches

Similar approaches:
AD Makepeace
‘River Run’
 1,400 acres
 400 acre footprint
 Compact village
center
 TDR – hundreds
of acres preserved

Similar approaches:
Seaport at Cordage
(40R)
 Redevelop
waterfront mfg.
area
 Compact village
center
 New waterfront
public access

Similar approaches:
Plymouth Rock
Studios
 400 acres
 LEED buildings
 Screening

The Solution
“Yes, if it’s in the best interest of
the Town”

From Missiles to Housing
the Conversion of the Nike Missile Site into the
Residences at 89Oxbow
Wayland, Massachusetts
Kevin Maguire
Founder, Building Initiatives

The Residences at 89Oxbow
Kevin Maguire
1. Land Use that is Past its Useful Life

Kevin Maguire
2. Conversion of Abandoned Missile Site

Kevin Maguire
3. High Density Cluster Housing in an R-40 Suburban Neighborhood
(16 units on 2.75 acres w/ 10 acres set aside for Open Space)

Kevin Maguire
4. Low Impact Development (Energy Efficiency & LID)

the Residences at 89Oxbow
Kevin Maguire
5. Workforce Ownership Housing for Families earning at or below $90k/yr

Kevin Maguire
Thank
You

The Momentum of Possibility
the Residences at 89Oxbow Wayland
The “Momentum of Possibility”
that contributed to the creation of
Kevin Maguire

Objectives of Presentation
1. Understand ‘Momentum of Possibility”
Kevin Maguire

Objectives of Presentation
1. Understand ‘Momentum of Possibility”
2. Who Contributes to the ‘Momentum of
Possibility’
Kevin Maguire

Challenge of Presentation
1. Understand what the Heck is the
‘Momentum of Possibility”
2. Who Contributes to the ‘Momentum of Possibility’
3. Can One Facilitate the ‘Momentum of
Possibility’?
Kevin Maguire

The ‘Momentum of Possibility’
1. Attitude
2. Shared Among the Project Stakeholders
3. Becomes part of the Energy of the Project
Kevin Maguire

The ‘Momentum of Possibility’
1. Attitude
2. Shared Among the Project Stakeholders
3. Becomes part of the Energy of the Project
Kevin Maguire
Great - But How Does it Start???

Kevin Maguire

Kevin Maguire
Town Site Plan included in RFP
As
Model of Design Guidelines

Primary Physical Challenges
1. Site Located within Zone 2
Aquifer District;
2. Post Base Demolition- No Loam
(gravel)
3. Post Base Demolition– no Vegetation
within Site to Foster Privacy
4. Post Base Demolition- Site was Flat
Kevin Maguire

Design Concept
1. Minimize Amount of Impervious
Surface
2. Strong sense of Public with
ability to escape to Private
3. Block out Area for 2 Primary
Leaching Fields and Recirculating
Sand Filter
Kevin Maguire

Design Concept
Surface
Sand Filter
But How Does a Fire Truck
Turn Around???
Kevin Maguire

Design Concept
Surface
Sand Filter
4. Limited Manicured Grass – 2
public zones (3 yr old play area
and 11 year old play area) and
limited Private
Kevin Maguire

Kevin Maguire
Be Careful What You Watch on TV
PBS Documentary
Eden’s Lost & Found
How Ordinary Citizens are Restoring Our
Great American Cities
Seattle – the Future is Now
SEA Street and Low Impact Storm Water
Design (save the Salmon)

Site Plan emphasizing LID
1. Bio-Retention Basins become
Entry Gateway and Central Arrival
Feature
2. Loam Limited to 20% of Site
3. Storm Water Management
introduces Topography to Site
4. This is pretty cool – lets create
berms so that storm water sheet
flow on pervious areas is
managed/guided to “water” all
grass areas Kevin Maguire

Kevin Maguire
Septic System 1
Leaching Field - Before and After
beforebefore
afterafter

Kevin Maguire
Bioretention
Entry Statement via Choreographed Sequence

Kevin Maguire
Bio Retention Basin
Development of Central Design Element
after 1
before 1
before 1.5
before 2

Kevin Maguire
Introducing Topography
The Power of a Berm
afterbefore

Kevin Maguire
Introducing Topography
The Power of a Berm
before
after
before

Kevin Maguire
Rain Garden
Evolution of Final Grading
before after 1
after 2 after 3
after 1

Kevin Maguire
LID Inspired Details

Kevin Maguire
After our meeting I had an
idea……
Mass Technology
Collaborative
GAHI via DHCD
Inclusion of Photo Voltaics

Kevin Maguire
Energy Analysis
to Determine
Energy Star/Energy Efficiency
Program –
Projected Savings = $1,000
per Household per Year

Kevin Maguire
Energy Efficiency
Energy Star Certified – HERZ 42

LID Metrics to Date
1. ReCirculating Sand Filter – Effluent Levels
BOD - 8.4 mg/L vs. 30mg/L*
pH– 6.13mg/L vs. 6-9 range*
Nitrogen (incld Ammonia)– 8.8 mg/L vs. 25mg/L*
Total Suspended Solids - 2.0 mg/L vs. 30 mg/L*
*effluent limits per 310CMR15.202 (4) (a)&(b)
2. Water Usage (June thru September)
Wayland Per Home Standard = 2700/gal/mth
Oxbow Home to Date = 430/gal/mth(common & private)
3. Average Electricity Usage (June thru August)
Per Home Estimate = 220/kW/mth
Oxbow Home to Date = 140/kW/mth
Kevin Maguire

Kevin Maguire
1. Conversion of Abandoned Missile Site
2. Workforce Ownership Housing for Families
earning at or below $90k/yr
3. High Density Cluster Housing in an R-40
Neighborhood (16 units on 2.75 acres)
4. Title V Alternative Technology for Septic w/in
Zone 2 Acquifer Protection District
5. Town Initiated Development Utilizing CPA
Funds
6. Integrated Alternative Energy HERZ = 42
7. Utilizes LID as Central Site Design Element
8. Turning Technical Constraints into Creative
Design Solutions
9. Hopefully a Proud, Humble and Elegant
Neighbor to Existing Neighborhood Homes
10. Sold Out on Schedule with Savings Returned to
Town
89 Oxbow is Many Things:

Kevin Maguire
1. Clear Principles Identified by
Local Community
2. An Opportunity for various
Individuals to suggest Crazy
/Creative Ideas
-Town Departments
-State Administrators
-Design Professionals
-General Contractor
-Management Company
3. The Beneficiary of the
Momentum of Opportunity
4. A Built Project to See and
Touch
In a Very Simple Way…

Challenge to the Group
What are the On the Ground Issues that Need to
be Addressed??
Forward Thinking on How to Deal with Septic
Number of Private Systems Reaching End of Useful Life
Many New Systems Require Upgrades to Title V Standards
Can the Planning Community Work to Identify
these Issues and Encourage Pilot Projects??
Kevin Maguire

Kevin Maguire
Thank
You

Creating the Box: Recognizing the Need for Regulatory Change and Creating a Structure for Action

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (13)

Ähnlich wie Creating the Box: Recognizing the Need for Regulatory Change and Creating a Structure for Action

Ähnlich wie Creating the Box: Recognizing the Need for Regulatory Change and Creating a Structure for Action (20)

Mehr von Massachusetts Association of Planning Directors (MAPD)

Mehr von Massachusetts Association of Planning Directors (MAPD) (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Creating the Box: Recognizing the Need for Regulatory Change and Creating a Structure for Action