BUILDING in Maryland and Washington, DC

2012 CUSTOM BUILDER AWARDS

EXCLUSIVE MAGAZINE OF THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION JULY/AUG 2012

Also in this Issue: Will the Septic Bill Revive Smart Growth?

BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC | JULY/AUG 2012 5

BUILDINGIN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DCRepresenting Calvert, Charles, Montgomery, Prince George’s and St. Mary’s counties in Maryland and Washington, DC

JULY/AUG 2012

8

11

14

FEATURES 8 Will the Septic Bill Revive Smart Growth?

11 2012 Custom Builder Awards 18thAnnualCelebration

14 BIA’s Tennis Tournament Serves up 4th Year

DEPARTMENTS 6 A Message from the President

15 The Legal Pad

16 The Engineer’s Angle

17 MNCBIA Membership News

New Members

MNCBIA’s Most Wanted List

18 Events Calendar

STARS Club

Index of Advertisers

Maryland-National CapitalBuilding Industry Association

1738EltonRoad,Suite200SilverSpring,MD20903

Phone:(301)445-5400,Fax:(301)445-5499E-mail:[email protected]

Website: www.mncbia.org

2012 Executive Committee

2012 Board of Directors

MNCBIA StaffExecutive Vice President

Diane K. Swenson, CAE

Vice President, Government AffairsF. Hamer Campbell, Jr.

Associate Director/Government AffairsRobert Kaufman

Associate Director/Regulatory AffairsAnnette Rosenblum

Communications DirectorKelly H. Grudziecki

Director, Membership/EventsJean Mathis

Manager, Builders Development Guaranty GroupLisa S. Goheen

Director, Home Builders Care Foundation/HomeAid DCPatti Kane

Steve NardellaPresident

Rick BaileyVice President/Calvert Co.

Doug MeekerVice President/Charles Co.

Robert J. SpaldingVice President/Montgomery Co.

Hillary ColtVice President/

Prince George’s Co.

Mike MummuaghVice President/St. Mary’s Co.

Brian “A.J.” Jackson Vice President/Washington DC

Frank Bossong, IVAssociate Vice President

Clark WagnerTreasurer

Dave LundenVice President,

State Legislative/Secretary

Robert R. HarrisLife Director

Martin J. MitchellImmediate Past President

Stephen P. ElmendorfLegal Counsel

Diane K. SwensonExecutive Vice President

LynnElahiBrianAfnanHughCarrollJeffCaruso

ChuckCovellMikeConleyTonyCrane

TimothyDuganKenDunnMaryGiles

TomHudsonTomHyde

RobertA.Jacobs

HowardKatzDavidLittle

MarkMacFarlandTomMarshall

JimPlazakSteveRobinsGaryRubino

MichaelSchuelerCharleneThayer

PeggyWhiteMelWillis

CarterWillson

Publishedfor:Maryland-National CapitalBuilding Industry Association1738EltonRoad,Suite200SilverSpring,Maryland20903301-445-5400Fax:301-445-5499E-mail:[email protected]: www.mncbia.org

Publishedby:

E&M Consulting, Inc.1107HazeltineBoulevard,Suite350Chaska,Minnesota55318800-572-0011Fax:952-448-9928Website: www.emconsultinginc.com

PublishedApril2012MNC-S0210/9844

6 JULY/AUG 2012 | BUILDING IN MARYLAND AND WASHINGTON, DC

F R O M T H E P R E S I D E N T

Mid Year Checkup—Open Wide and Say YAY!

It’s difficult to believe, but 2012 is half over. Now that we are in the middle of summer, I hope everyone is enjoying all the wonderful activities that summer can offer. This

can include, as it does for my family and me, being on, in and around the Chesapeake Bay and feasting on its bounties including the famous blue crabs. Maryland officials reported earlier this year the Chesapeake’s blue crabs are in the middle of an extraordinary comeback. The estuary’s crab population has more than doubled in two years, they said, reaching its highest level since 1997! As extraordinary stewards of environmental assets perhaps we can take some pride in doing our part to help improve the bay area environs that are helping to boost the numbers of this delightful crustacean.

Of course the main reason for the rebound in crab populations has more to do with managing the harvest of female crabs than improving bay water quality. As an industry, new development and construction in tributary waters have been scientifically demonstrated to show that new development has very little impact on the nutrient and sediment loads that flow to the bay as a percentage of total impact. The real culprits are point source loads from wastewater treatment plants, fertilizer from turf and farm land and runoff from pre-1985 development when storm water was not managed. It’s an enormous challenge.

I had the opportunity earlier this year to meet with building industry leaders of the six Chesapeake Bay watershed states to review and discuss each state’s Phase II Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) and to determine if or how we can achieve imposed limits on total maximum daily nutrient loads (TMDLs). The meeting was sponsored by the NAHB and included building industry representatives of Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. New York was a no show. It would take the entire magazine to explain Maryland’s WIP, but it is critical to understand the goals of the plan and its prescribed methods to accomplish TMDL reductions. There will be statewide initiatives to both existing and new development in rural and urban areas involving the public and private sectors. For our part it will significantly change the way we develop and build far into the future.

It’s been a good year so far for our Association as well. A quick rundown of our accomplishments mid-year against goals we established at the beginning of the year demonstrates that we have made good progress but still have plenty of work ahead. • We have had substantive conversations with leadership

of the Realtors, Chamber of Commerce and other BIAs within Maryland and in neighboring states and have found opportunities to collaborate on legislative and regulatory initiatives particularly during the state legislative session in Annapolis. For example, I co-signed a letter to the governor and the legislature with the president of the Greater Capital

Area Association of Realtors in opposition to proposed limits of the mortgage interest deduction. Together we represent the entire housing market in the jurisdictions we represent. And many of our members and staff are active in committees at various chambers of commerce on land use or transportation matters. There is still plenty of opportunity, however, to work strategically with these other stakeholder groups rather than reacting to current challenges which can broaden and strengthen our voice.

• We had an active, expanded and successful lobbying effort in Annapolis through the combined and coordinated efforts of our legislative staff, the MSBA and its consultants who were also supported with additional financial and consulting resources this year as a result of the efforts and guidance of the “kitchen cabinet.” This experienced group of ex-presidents from MNCBIA, HBAM and MSBA helped prioritize our initiatives and provided significant financial resources that helped focus the effort. We tracked more than 40 bills and impacted many that involved environmental, land use, professional, property and ownership, tax and other issues that affect our business.

• At the county and local level there is a tremendous amount of engagement between committee members and jurisdictions who are actively working to reorganize, simplify and streamline government and the development approval process, which can have sustained cost and timing benefits for our industry.

• We held a number of education events and provided significant levels of communication to membership that focused on environmental issues and challenges, regulatory updates and market statistics.

• We enjoyed a couple of opportunities in the press to get the word out about our improving market conditions and reiterate to the public that it is a great time to buy.

• All of our networking, awards, and educational events have been successful with improved attendance over last year.

• Finally, we are well ahead of plan in terms of our financial position as a result of new member growth and strong non-dues revenue from events and member services.The success we have seen so far this year in the core

areas of advocacy, education, networking and business development, and public relations is the direct result of the efforts of our hardworking, dedicated, professional staff, and all of our committee chairs and their active members who invest their time, effort and knowledge to help move our association forward. On behalf of the executive committee and board of directors, I would like to extend a huge thank you for your continued commitment to our mission and congratulations on our collective results so far. m

Steve Nardella


T he recently enacted Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation

Act of 2012, SB 236, will shortly alter in a major way where

homebuilders can build homes in Maryland.

The vehicle for this change is the bill’s plan to limit the number of new

homes with septic systems and drive new development away from rural areas.

Gaining approval to build a house with a septic system has always

been fairly simple. It involves satisfying a series of basic environmental

requirements, a percolation test and design approval.

While that hasn’t changed, SB 236 sets in motion a plan to regulate

where and how many houses with septic systems can be built.

The law requires local jurisdictions to assign developable areas to one of

four tiers, each with its own rules about septic systems:

• Tier I: Mapped, locally designated growth area already served by public

sewer systems or a municipality designated as a state priority funding

area (PFA)and served by public sewer systems. Tier 1 areas are limited

to subdivisions with public sewer systems.

• Tier II: Areas that local governments intend to develop with public

sewer systems. Tier II may develop minor subdivisions with septic

systems.

• Tier III: Includes four categories — municipalities not served by public

“The good news is that SB 236 could have been a lot worse,” says Katie Maloney, chief lobbyist with the Maryland State Builders Association and part of a coalition of stakeholders that fought for amendments to the original bill. Here’s how the coalition changed the original bill.

Tier Definitions: Amendments gave local planning authorities more influence over land assigned to Tiers III and IV and removed a Tier III requirement that all lands assigned to the Tier must be contiguous with existing growth areas. Amendments also eliminated the requirement that state designated AgPrint and GreenPrint lands automatically go into Tier IV. Finally, the original bill allowed major subdivisions on septic in Tier IV when overall density was one unit per 25 acres. Now it is 20 acres.

It CouldHave Been

Worse

Maryland Bids To Revive Smart GrowthSB 236, the Septic Bill, aims to shoehorn the lion’s share of new development in the state back into denser, more urban areas.By Michael Fickes


sewer systems; a rural village; an area planned or zoned for large lot

development; and mapped, locally designated growth areas. There

must be no plans for public sewer systems in these areas. None may

be dominated by agricultural or forest land. None may be zoned for

land, agricultural or resource protection. SB 236 permits both major

and minor subdivisions on septic systems in Tier III areas.

• Tier IV: Areas planned for land, agricultural or resource protection,

preservation or conservation; areas dominated by agricultural

lands, forest lands, or other natural areas; and Rural Legacy areas,

Priority Preservation Areas as well as land subject to a state or local

conservation or preservation covenant, restriction or easement. In

general, Tier IV permits only minor subdivisions on septic systems. The

legislation allows one exception. If the Department of Planning verifies

that the subdivision and zoning requirements in a jurisdiction’s total Tier

IV acreage limits development to one dwelling unit per 20 acres, then

SB 236 permits major subdivisions on septic systems.

A local jurisdiction that does not adopt tiers must limit development to

subdivisions with public sewerage in Tier I areas and minor subdivisions on

septic systems, shared systems, or community systems in other areas.

For jurisdictions that choose to adopt tiers, Tier II is optional for both

counties and municipalities. Counties must adopt Tiers I, III and IV. A

municipality must adopt Tier I and may not adopt Tiers III and IV.

Local laws use different numbers to define the difference between major

and minor subdivisions. “A minor subdivision may include three to seven

units,” says Leslie Knapp Jr., associate director of the Annapolis-based

Maryland Association of Counties (MACo).

That means that some developments with four units would be considered

major developments, while other developments with seven units would be

considered minor.”

The point seems to be that minor subdivisions — which appear to be

favored by SB 236 — are very small to begin with.

How Will Tiers Affect Land Use and Agricultural Land Values“The impact of the four-tier plan will vary from county to county,” continues

Knapp. “It will have little effect on larger urban counties that are built out.

Suburban counties will see some effects.

“Rural counties will feel the effects of the legislation the most because

they have to rely on septic systems to attract development and to grow to

the point where it is affordable to bring in a public sewer system. SB 236

takes this ability away.”

Less clear is how the bill will affect agricultural land values and business

models. SB 236 prohibits development on land zoned for agriculture. “The

Farm Bureau raised two concerns about this,” Knapp says. “Will this cause

a decline in assessed values for agricultural land? If so, how will that affect

the ability to borrow capital?

“There was a lot of debate about this. Each side presented numbers. I

don’t think proponents of the bill managed to show that there would not be

an impact on borrowing. The debate on the impact on assessed values was

even less clear.”

What It Means To HomebuildersKnapp goes on to explain what SB 236 means to homebuilders. “It directs

where housing will be built, and by default controls the kind of housing that will

be built,” he says. “It directs housing into more dense infill where you would

expect to see high rise apartments and condos, often near transit stations.

In addition, close-in redevelopment costs more than building new.

Add to that the fact that the Maryland Department of Environment has

now issued regulations calling for all new septic systems to employ the best

available technology (BAT) for removing nitrogen. “That will add $10,000 to

$12,000 to the cost of a house,” Knapp says.

“This will create challenges for builders,” adds Katie Maloney, Chief

Lobbyist with the Annapolis-based Maryland State Builders Association.

“Rural builders may have difficulty finding parcels, and there will be

competition for available parcels.”

Grandfathering provisions in the bill will allow builders actively planning

projects to move forward.

Local Control: The amended bill gives each jurisdiction the power to set tiers based on statutory criteria. The Maryland Department of Planning can advise jurisdictions and require a public hearing if there is a disagreement. Originally, the state would determine whether Tier assignments met statutory criteria or not.

Major and Minor Subdivisions: The original language required jurisdictions to use current definitions. Those without definitions could choose one by the end of the year, as long as a minor subdivision was no larger than seven units. “We got them to rethink this,” says Maloney. “Now you can use the current definition if you want, or you can choose a new one by the end of the year.” The minor subdivision cap of seven units remains.

Grandfathering: “Grandfathering was greatly modified,” Maloney says. The final bill makes application dates contingent on how a local jurisdiction handles its soil percolation test schedule. No provision for that appeared in the original bill. Regardless of the perc test schedule, all projects must obtain preliminary plan approval by October 1, 2016.


Why Is Maryland Limiting Septic Development In This Way?SB 236 has two environmental roots: the Chesapeake Bay clean up effort

and smart growth.

The housing industry believes that the Septic law aims only at land

management and will provide little help to the Bay.

Nevertheless, the preamble to the bill presents the Bay cleanup side of

the story.

The preamble notes that septic systems discharge nitrogen-rich water

that, in many areas of Maryland, flows into the Chesapeake Bay or into rivers

and creeks that feed the Bay. Nitrogen is one of the pollutants targeted by

Bay cleanup efforts.

In 2010, about 275 million pounds of nitrogen — from all sources

— went into the Bay, according to the website of the Chesapeake Bay

Program (www.chesapeakebay.net), a regional partnership of federal and

state agencies, local governments, non-profit organizations and academic

institutions, dedicated to cleaning up the Bay.

Agriculture, wastewater treatment plants including sewer overflow,

atmospheric deposits and urban runoff produced 94 percent of the total.

Septic systems sent about 6 percent of the total or 40.5 million pounds

of nitrogen to the Bay in 2010. Septic has the smallest share of any source.

But that’s not really a problem the bill aims to solve. State planners believe

the problem lies in the future.

According to the preamble, about 411,000 Maryland homes use

septic systems with another 120,000 expected over the next 25 years.

That would push the septic share of nitrogen pollution to about 8 percent,

according to the preamble. It could be even higher if current efforts to

reduce the shares of agriculture, wastewater and runoff succeed. That’s

the Bay side of SB 236.

The Smart Growth Side of the StoryThe other side of the story is land management. Maryland has famously

pursued smart growth strategies for years now by trying to direct growth into

PFAs supported by state infrastructure spending.

According to a report released in January by the Housing Strategies

Group at the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education,

PFAs aren’t working very well. The percentage of acres with single-family

houses outside of PFAs has grown steadily while parcels inside PFAs have

grown in size, indicating decreasing densities.

The strict SB 236 Tier system aims to put smart growth and PFAs back

on track. Will it? m


Speculative Home Under 3,500 Sq. Ft.

Gold • Kettler Brothers Homes LLC • Architect: Creaser/O’Brien Architects

Speculative Home 3,500 to 5,000 Sq. Ft.

Gold • Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC • Builder: Foxhall Developers

Silver • Washington Metropolitan Homes •

Architect: Claude C. Lapp

Bronze • Douglas Construction Group, LLC •

Architect: Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC

2012 Custom Builder Awards 18th Annual Celebration

C ustom homebuilders, architects and remodelers throughout the greater

Washington region were awarded top honors for their fine design and

quality workmanship in the 18th annual MNCBIA Custom Builder Awards on May

24th at the Bethesda North Marriott Hotel.

Judging was done over a two-day period utilizing the expertise of architects,

builders, land planners and marketing consultants. The judges viewed both

interior and exterior of the homes in addition to detailed written information,

photographs and plans.

In this competitive custom housing market, all of these winners are shining

examples of the talent and expertise that our area has to offer.

SA

ND

Y S

PR

ING

BU

ILDE

RS

, LLC • A

RC

HITE

CT: G

LEN

N C

HE

N FO

NG

, AIA


Speculative Home 5,000 to 7,500 sq. ft.Gold • Castlewood Consulting, LLC • Architect: Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC

Speculative Home Over 7,500 sq. ft.Gold • Carter, Inc. • Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC

Custom Home 3,500 to 5,000 sq. ft. Gold • Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC • Builder: Sandy Spring Builders, LLC

Silver • Sandy Spring Builders, LLC • Architect: GTM Architects

Custom Home 5,000 to 7,500 sq. ft. Gold • Sandy Spring Builders, LLC • Architect: Glenn Chen Fong, AIA

Silver • Laurence Cafritz Builders • Architect: Sutton Yantis Associates Architects

Bronze • Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC • Builder: Sandy Spring Builders, LLC

Custom Home 7,500 to 12,500 sq. ft. Gold • Castlewood Consulting, LLC •

Architect: Housing Design & Architecture, Inc.

Custom Home Over 12,500 sq. ft. Gold • Visnic Homes, Inc. • Architect: J. Mayer Architects, LLC

Traditional Custom HomeGold • Sandy Spring Builder, LLC • Architect: GTM Architects


Custom Addition Under 2,000 sq. ft. - Gold • R & R Custom Homes • Architect: Ray Sobrino, AIA

Custom Addition Over 2,000 sq. ft. - Gold • Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC • Builder: Bloom Builders

Whole House Renovation Over 2,000 sq. ft. - Gold • Visnic Homes, Inc. • Architect: Hutchinson + Associates, LLC

Contemporary Custom Home Gold • Wood Visions Construction, Inc. •

Architect: Alt, Breeding, Schwartz Architectural Firm

Transitional Custom Home Gold • Sandy Spring Builders, LLC • Architect: GTM Architects

Silver • R & R Custom Homes •


Bronze • Chuck Sullivan Homes •


BEFORE AFTER

BEFORE AFTER

Congratulations to every winner!

And finally, a special thank you

to Home & Design magazine,

our Official Awards Partner. Keep

an eye out for the feature story

on our Custom Builder Awards in

an upcoming issue. m

BEFORE AFTER


BIA’s Tennis Tournament Serves up 4th YearNearly two-dozen members turned out for MNCBIA’s 4th Annual tennis

tournament at Congressional Country Club on May 4. Decked out in

traditional white attire, players were randomly paired for doubles play and

sweated through multiple matches.

Following the tournament, players traded their racquets for drinks and hors

d’oeurves as they anxiously awaited the final scores. In the ends, three

players took home top honors. Winning the French Open was Ken Malm, Craftmark Homes,Craftstar Homes. Wimbledon went to Don Bowles,

Newport Partners and the U.S. Open champ was Harris Rosenblatt, Eagle

Bank. Winners received gift certificates to Congressional’s Tennis Pro Shop.

Special thanks to our sponsors, Bar Sponsor, Craftmark Homes/Craftstar Homes, Ball Sponsor, Counselors Title, LLC, Refreshment Sponsor, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Water Sponsor, Capital Flex-Pave LLC. These generous members helped make this event possible. And thank you

to BIA past President, Rick Sullivan, Jr. who remains the driving force behind

this fun and exciting event.


The Legal Pad

FEELING ILL OVER ILSA (Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act)By Judyann Lee, Esq., Linowes and Blocher LLP

The Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure ActThe federal Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, commonly known

as “ILSA,” prohibits the sale or lease of “lots” in a “subdivision” using any

means of interstate commerce (radio, internet, print media, television, etc.),

unless the lots are exempt or the seller or lessor files a Statement of Record

with the recently-created Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB), a

sub-agency of the Department of Treasury. (On July 21, 2011, enforcement

of ILSA shifted from the Office of Interstate Land Sales Registration, which

was a sub-agency under the Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD) to the CFPB. The CFPB was established pursuant to the Consumer

Financial Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank), and was created to enhance

consumer protection as a result of the recent housing market crash. The

existing HUD rules will continue in effect until the CFPB publishes revised

rules). The applicable regulations define a “lot” to include “any portion,

piece, division, unit or undivided interest in land. . . if the interest includes

the right to the exclusive use of a specific portion of land.” A “subdivision”

refers to any land, whether or not contiguous, which will be divided into

separate interests for sale or lease as part of a “common promotional

plan.” A common promotional plan is any plan undertaken by a single

person or group of persons acting in concert to offer lots for sale or lease.

In determining whether a common promotional plan exists, consideration

is given to, among other things, whether there is a thread of common

ownership; same or similar name or identity; common sales agents and/

or sales facilities; common advertising; and/or common inventory. Thus,

parcels of land located miles apart could be considered a single subdivision

if they are part of a common promotional plan.

The ExemptionsThere are several full and partial exemptions from filing a Statement of

Record with the CFPB. One of the most commonly used exemptions is the

improved lot exemption, which exempts the sale or lease of improved land on

which construction of the lot is already complete or will be completed within

two years pursuant to a contract that obligates the seller or lessor to do so.

When using the improved lot exemption, developers must be careful not to

make force majeure clauses in their purchase contracts too broad, or limit

specific performance or other remedies, or unwittingly include contingencies

on the seller’s obligations to perform. These are potential violations that

could cause a project to fall outside the exemption.

The other commonly used exemption is the 100-lot exemption, which

exempts the sale of lots within a subdivision that contains less than 100 lots.

When using this exemption, developers must be mindful of the definition

of lot, which may include structures or spaces such as parking spaces or

storage facilities if they are made available for separate ownership. Such

structures or spaces may count toward the 99 lot limit. Developers must

also bear in mind that the lots in one project could be considered part of the

same common promotional plan with lots in another project. Something as

simple as a newspaper ad or promotional advertising on a website of two or

more projects could cause a project to lose the exemption. Developers should

consult with counsel when drafting their sales contracts and developing

marketing strategies to make sure their projects are in compliance with

ILSA. If a sales contract does not contain required language and/or contains

prohibited language, the project will not be exempt even though it contains

less than 100 lots or is completed within two years.

Proceed With CautionMany developers have “piggy-backed” these exemptions by selling the

first 99 lots in their project under the 100-lot exemption and then selling

the remaining lots using the improved lot exemption. Developers should

exercise extreme caution, however, when combining these exemptions in

this manner. Recently, several courts have held that this piggy-backing

approach will not be effective unless the developer can show that, at the

time a purchase contract is signed, all lots are actually exempt and not that

the developer simply intends to sell the lots under an exemption at some

point in the future. In other words, timing for the use of these exemptions

matters and all lots must be exempt at the time the purchaser signs the

contract. In a subdivision containing more than 99 lots, any lots over 99

must be exempt before the developer can take advantage of the 99-Lot

Exemption. Several courts have also recently held that in order to piggy-back

these exemptions the developer must show a legitimate business purpose

for using the exemptions and that they are not being used solely for the

purpose of evading ILSA requirements.

Given these recent court decisions and the myriad of potential pitfalls,

developers should consult with competent counsel to determine whether

their projects should be registered with the CFPB or are otherwise eligible

for exemption. Failure to comply could result in the return of purchasers’

deposits years after initial sales even after the sales have closed, as well as

significant penalties and fines. m

Judyann Lee is an attorney in the Common Interest Practice Group of Linowes and Blocher LLP and represents developers of condominiums and community associations. She may be reached at [email protected] or 301-961-5234.


The Engineer’s Angle

Soil and Tree Preservation on Infill Lotsby Michael Norton, RLA, Norton Land Design LLC

Trees and the urban canopy seem to be on everyone’s mind whether

developer or plan reviewer. There has been much discussion on how

to meet the needs of development while balancing the “ecological

infrastructure” already in place. When handling infill development on small

lots in urban areas it is critical to understand the importance of preserving the

soil structure around the roots of the big trees often encountered. Ever more

important is preservation of the existing roots on neighboring properties.

Neighbors are often tense to begin with when they see the equipment pull up

to the house next to them and silt fence placed at the property lines.

There are small steps that can be taken to reduce the impacts to onsite

trees that may provide character to the redeveloped site. Some of the most

overlooked techniques for good tree preservation actually start with sound

soil preservation. Soil compaction is harmful as it reduces the amount of

pore space in the soil normally filled by oxygen (micro-pores) and water

(macro-pores). The use of techniques such as root mats and vertical

mulching pay huge dividends in reducing root compaction.

Root Matting – This is a great option for areas within your limits of

disturbance where you will be driving, staging, stockpiling or needing general

access but will not be cutting or filling grades. First, establish the critical

root zone of the trees to be preserved and spread six inches of woodchips

or bark mulch and overlay thick construction plywood or a product such as

AlturnaMats. For added resistance to severe compaction areas lay geotextile

fabric over the ground area prior to the woodchips. The woodchips will

decompose during long construction periods and will need to be replenished

as necessary. After project completion remove the mat and geotextile but

use the woodchips onsite if possible. The soil surface may have to be lightly

tilled to break up the very top interface with the geotextile.

Vertical Mulching – In more extreme cases where root matting may not

have been feasible or after construction and root matting has been removed,

a series of holes is excavated with an air tool, such as Air Spade, in a grid

pattern within the critical root zone. This breaks up compacted soil and

promotes root growth while preserving any roots and infrastructure already

in place. Typically the holes start a few feet from the trunk and are spaced

18 to 24 inches apart and up to 18 inches deep and 2 to 3 inches diameter.

The holes are backfilled with compost material and amendments. Mound

the backfill slightly to allow for settling.

Root Aeration Matting - In areas of soil fill around potential save trees

an aeration matting may be used. This modified geotextile matting creates

artificial pore spaces allowing exchanges of air and gases with the root zones

and not smother the roots with the compacted fill material above. First

delineate the area of fill and add the matting beginning at the toe of slope

back toward the tree until grade is met. At this point the fill material can be

added over the modified geotextile.

Filter Logs – Above all, remember these techniques for preserving

roots and soils will not work if silt fence has been trenched in between the

subject trees and the area of soil preservation. Where applicable, work with

the sediment control plan reviewers and inspectors to use the filter systems

that are staked instead of trenched, thereby preserving roots within the

limits of disturbance. This is an extremely important technique for helping

to preserve trees on adjacent properties downhill where sediment control

measures are necessary.

Although there are not regulations in place everywhere (yet), mature

healthy trees preserved on existing lots not only add value to your and

your neighbor’s property while creating a desirable place to live and work,

but provide shade, while reducing summer air temperatures and stress

on residents. m

Michael Norton is Principal Landscape Architect and Site Development Consultant at Norton Land Design LLC (www.NortonLandDesign.com), a Landscape Architecture, Site Design and Environmental consulting firm providing effective design solutions to residential and commercial developers and builders. Mr. Norton is a Registered Landscape Architect and Certified Arborist with 16 years of design and planning experience.


BUILDERS DNF, Inc. General Contractor/ Home ImprovementKeith Towery 4390A Henninger Court Chantilly, VA 20151 Ph: 703-968-6700 x302 Fax: 703-968-8352 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Homefirst Communities, LLC Building Single Family Homes Douglas Nyce 10451 Mill Run Circle, Suite 400 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Ph: 410-356-8870 Fax: 410-356-8804 [email protected] Sponsor: Mike Rubinfield

NDI of Maryland, LLC Builder/Custom Building/ Remodeling Tom Lizzio 134 Holiday Court, Suite 300 Annapolis, MD 21401 Ph: 410-266-5634 Fax: 410-266-5635 [email protected] Sponsor: Larry Cafritz

Richmond American Homes of MD Builder/Single Family Homes Jeff Ott 6210 Old Dobbin Lane, Suite 190 Columbia, MD 21045 Ph: 410-312-2557 Fax: 410-312-2805 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Farasy

Walton Development & Management Land Developer Melanie Graf P.O. Box 899 Berryville, VA 22611 Ph: 540-432-2158 [email protected] Sponsor: William Shipp

ASSOCIATES Artelye Marble & Granite Building Materials/ Builders Specialty Items Josh Goltay 10116 Bacon Drive Beltsville, MD 21075 Ph: 301-931-6616 Fax: 301-931-0667 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Buhrstone Brick Inc. Water and Sewer Contractors Anne Vander Duim 25500 Old Hundred Road Dickerson, MD 20842 Ph: 301-370-3125 Fax: 301-874-3838 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Caliber Funding, LLC Mortgage Banking Tim Jarboe 6404 Ivy Lane, Suite 700 Greenbelt, MD 20770 Ph: 240-297-3810 Fax: 866-296-5003 [email protected] Sponsor: Mike Rubinfield

DCF Contracting Construction Consultant/ Construction Materials Travis Drawbaugh 7679 Limestone Drive Gainesville, VA 20155 Ph: 570-248-0494 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

E & E Carpenter, Inc. Carpentry-Finish Ever Ortiz 2270 Pimmit Run Lane, Suite 101 Falls Church, VA 22043 Ph: 703-863-9345 Fax: 703-533-3659 [email protected] Sponsor: Michael Rubinfeld

E.L. Roselle Carpentry L.L.C. Carpentry-Finish Gene Roselle 7914 Eagleview Drive Chesapeake Beach, MD 20732 Ph: 301-440-3199 [email protected] Sponsor: Jeff Caruso

Federal Home Solutions Inc. Renovation/Restoration Contractors Brian Brock 79 South Colonial Avenue Westminister, MD 21157 Ph: 410-409-8128 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Fraser Wallace Advertising Marketing/Advertising Specialties Susan Ackman 45195 Business Court, Suite 120 Dulles, VA 20166 Ph: 703-264-6400 Fax: 703-264-7437 [email protected] Sponsor: Howard Katz

Hughes Landscaping + Supply Co. Inc. Landscape-Contractors/ Architects John Hughes 16111 Morrow Road Poolesville, MD 20837 Ph: 301-330-4949 Fax: 301-977-4949 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Maryland Foundation, Inc. Concrete Contractors Scott Wyler 8810 Cooridon Road Annapolis Junction, MD 20701 Ph: 301-317-3324 Fax: 301-317-3377 [email protected] Sponsor: Jeff Caruso

Maryland Sign Design, Inc. Architects/Millwork/ Carpentry-Finish Kimberly Rentz 7741 Woodbine Road Woodbine, MD 21797 Ph: 410-549-2390 Fax: 410-549-2705 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Mendes Construction, Inc. Concrete Contractors Orlando Mendes 13075 Zekiah Drive Waldorf, MD 20601 Ph: 301-638-4153 Fax: 301-638-3636 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Paramount Steel, Inc. Construction Labor Steve Lee 5800 Ranchester, Suite 202 Houston, TX 77036 Ph: 713-787-6606 Fax: 713-787-6007 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Pro Build Brick & Mfg. Supplier/ Building Materials Clint Vance 7595 Technology Way Denver, CO 80237 Ph: 724-825-5846 [email protected] Sponsor: Jeff Caruso

S.B.S. Siding Co. Inc. Siding Contractors Kwang Ku 45710 Oakbrook Court Sterling, VA 20166 Ph: 703-430-7366 [email protected] Sponsor: Mike Rubinfield

Shipshape IT Consulting Chris Hall 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 810 Bethesda, MD 20850 Ph: 301-941-1444 [email protected] Sponsor: Michael Faerber

Skyetec Inc. Consulting Peter Staaf 4232 40th Street NW Washington, DC 20016 Ph: 202-280-3745 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Studebaker Submetering, Inc. Utilities Contractors Cory Ellenhorn 5350 Shawnee Road, Suite 103 Alexandria, VA 22312 Ph: 703-916-9004 Fax: 703-916-9011 cellenhorn@studebaker submetering.co Sponsor: Tom Marshall

Swift Flooring Contractors, LLC Floor Covering/Contractor Jim Parker 10611 Iron Bridge Road, Suite A&B Jessup, MD 20784 Ph: 301-543-8070 Fax: 301-543-8079 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Trussway Manufacturing, Inc. Roofing/Floor Contractors Craig Aufderhar 11540 Shannon Drive Fredericksburg, MD 22408 Ph: 540-898-3477 Fax: 540-898-3885 [email protected] Sponsor: Glen Ferguson

REINSTATEMENTS BBR Enterprises, LLC Builder/Developer Bob Davis P.O. Box 219 Solomons, MD 20688 Ph: 301-580-8801 [email protected] Sponsor: Steve Nardella

Denison Landscaping Landscape Contractors Duane Denison 8911 Oxon Hill Road Ft. Washington, MD 20744 Ph: 301- 567-0210 Fax: 301-839-4051 [email protected] Sponsor: Tom Marshall & Jeff Caruso

MNCBIA Membership

New Members & Reinstatements (4/1/12 – 5/31/12)

MNCBIA’s Most Wanted ListListed here are firms whose membership in MNCBIA has lapsed in recent months. WE WANT THEM BACK! Please encourage these companies to reinstate their membership. Also listed are prospective members we are working to add to our team.

All Temp Heating & Air Conditioning • AMEC Contracting • Augustine Plumbing • Clearwater Landscape & Nursery • Colorworld Painting & Drywall • Comstock Services • DeFore Designs • Digiterra Design, LLC • Domus Partners, LLC • DOW Solutions • Ferguson • Guardian Realty Management, Inc. • Hatfield Equipment Services • JW Shipley • K.V. Gessford, Inc. • Lee Building Supply • McCormick Paints • Patriot Land & Wildlife • Porcelanosa • Rexel • Stang Plumbing • Tower Companies


Events Calendar

JULY 2012

3 Custom/Small Builders Committee

5 50+ Awards Committee

10 Codes & Standards Committee

11 Green Building Committee Environmental Committee

12 MNCBIA Executive Committee meeting

19 Home Builders Care Foundation board meeting

25 MNCBIA’s Membership Committee

AUGUST 20121 Environmental Committee

2 50+ Awards Committee

8 Green Building Committee

9 MNCBIA Executive Committee meeting

14 Codes & Standards Committee

29 MNCBIA’s Membership Committee

STARS Club (as of 4/1/2012)The special members of MNCBIA’s STARS Club allow the Association to provide better services for your benefit, to function effectively, to continue special events dedicated to excellent net-working and to strengthen our Advocacy program.

GOLDDevelopment Guarantee Group of Montgomery CountyHanley Wood Market IntelligenceElm Street DevelopmentNVR, Inc.Pleasants Development, Inc.

SILVERAcacia Federal Savings BankBB& TGeorgetown Insurance Service, Inc.Lerch Early & Brewer, Chtd.Linowes & Blocher, LLPLoiederman Soltesz Associates, Inc.McMillan Metro, P.C.Miles & Stockbridge, P.C.Rodgers Consulting, Inc.Winchester Homes Inc.

BRONZEBallard Spahr LLPBurgess & Niple, Inc.Charles P. Johnson & AssociatesCraftmark/Craftstar

Greenhorne & O’Mara Inc.Gutschick, Little & Weber, PAMid-Atlantic Builders, Inc.Reznick GroupSandy Spring BankShulman RogersSt. Charles Community, LLCWashington Gas

FRIENDBaker TillyBowman Consulting Group, Ltd.Bozzuto HomesCaruso Homes Inc.DewberryDico, Inc.EYAFurey Doolan & Abell, LLPGeo-Technology Associates Inc.K Hovnanian HomesLiberty Homebuilder, Inc.Macris Hendricks & Glascock, P.A.Michael Harris HomesMiller & Smith HomesMitchell & Best Homebuilders LLCO’Malley Miles Nylen & GilmoreWard & Klein Chtd.

INDEX OF ADVERTISERS

Appliance Distributors Unlimited, Inc. ............................................Back Cover

Builders Mutual Insurance Company .................................................Page 19

Efficiect Homes .............................................................................Page 07

GE Appliances ..............................................................................Page 03

Georgetown Insurance Service, Inc. ..................................................

Linowes & Blocher LLP ..................................................................Page 07

Louis Tenenbaum ..........................................................................Page 09

Monument Bank ...........................................................................Page 16

Shulman Rogers ...........................................................................Page 07

Signature Companies .....................................................................Page 04

Tremco Barrier Solutions ................................................................Page 14

Vintage Security ............................................................................Page 02

1738 Elton Road, Suite 200Silver Spring, MD 20903

BUILDING in Maryland and Washington, DC

Documents

Transcript of BUILDING in Maryland and Washington, DC