Environmental Sustainability Council

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COUNCIL (ESC) Thursday, April 19, 2018, Library, Thomas Jefferson Elementary School, 7:30 – 9:45 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES Call to Order: ESC Members: Cory Weiss, Thomas Cash, Andy Crawford, Andrew Young, Jon Ward, Sarah Balydon, Chris McCloud, Tim Stevens (ESC ETS), Katie Deal (student), Evelyn Duross (student), Niharika Singhvi (ESC Student). CACT Members: Andrea Caumont, Paul Baldino, Doug Deveraux, Bill Ackerman. City Staff: Kate Walker (ESC Staff Liaison), Jeff Sikes (CACT Staff Liaison), Paul Stoddard (Director of Planning), Chris McGough (Solid Waste Coordinator). City Council Members/Liaison: Dan Sze (ESC liaison), David Snyder, Phil Duncan, Letty Hardi. Public: Dalia Leven (Transportation Planner, AECOM) 1. Public comments: None. 2. Joint ESC-CACT Discussion: Potential for Shuttle Service. The first half of the meeting was a joint session devoted to transportation issues and was attended by members of the Citizens Advisory Council on Transportation (CACT). a. Presentation: Comprehensive Plan / Transportation Chapter. Paul Stoddard summarized the current Chapter (“Mobility for All Modes”), adopted in 2014, which emphasized improving pedestrian and transit options. He presented tables linking the Chapter’s short-, medium- (2018-2020) and long-term goals to the policies and projects implemented and/or planned. In response to questions from Cory, he stated that a 2013 feasibility study did not find that a fixed-route shuttle would be feasible. He expected new I-66 tolls to fund the resumption of the Metro 3T bus (rush only) between WFC and EFC stations along Washington & Broad. He cited analysis results showing that direct user payments generally cover ~30% of transit costs, ~50% for autos, and 50-100% for bike sharing, making bike sharing the more cost-effective way to reduce auto use (at current levels of market penetration). b. Commentary: Lessons from the “George” (Local Bus). City Council member David Snyder cited four lessons from the Metro System “George” bus that ran between within the City about a decade ago. i. Know your goals. With the George, they were: providing transit services; environmental performance; moving riders through the business corridors; supporting social equity; and safety. ii. Get citizen and City Council support. Mr. Snyder feels a well-understood process has evolved, with City staff conceiving and planning projects and City Council providing political approval. iii. Be careful of technical risk. The City opted for “clean diesel” technology, which brought uncertainty in maintenance costs. iv. Be careful with publicity. Images of low ridership (and sometimes empty buses) in times of an economic recession hurt support for the project.  c. Presentation: Connected and Automated Vehicles. Dalia Leven, a consulting manager with engineering firm AECOM, distinguished between ‘connected,’ ‘autonomous’ and ‘automated’ vehicles. She predicted widespread availability of ADAS (advanced driver-assistance systems) in 2020-2030, and a 40- to 60-year transition period to full market penetration. Statistics: 40-70% of transit cost is labor, the average US car is idle 96% of the time, and during peak hours only 10% of vehicles are in use simultaneously. For autonomous vehicle (AV) shuttle projects, ideal routes are short (< 2 miles) and low speed, with flat terrain (for EVs) and limited interactions with other things. Busy city streets are the most complicated. No local shuttle pilot projects with autonomous vehicles are profitable yet; a government decision to pilot a project would be a leadership position. With a higher ratio of capital-to-operating costs for AVs, leasing is a good idea, to keep up with advancing technology. There is not yet a timeline for adoption of connectivity standards. To provide transit options, consider subsidizing citizens’ use of existing services like Uber or Lyft, although they are not beneficial environmentally or for congestion with single riders. End of joint discussion. CACT members left the meeting. 3. Solid Waste Management (SWM): Update. Chris McGough reported that City contracts for residential curbside waste collection and management expire in September (although a short extension has been arranged). The City plans to release in late June or early July an RFP, which will enable dialogue on how to contract for collection, incineration, and recycling services. He may ask the ESC to comment on the draft RFP at or before its June meeting, and asked if any ESC members would volunteer for the RFP scoring committee or as technical advisors. The SWM Plan expires in 2020 but may be extended to 2025. It derives in part from the Environmental Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. He asked whether it may be time to attempt a bolder plan, such as a Zero Waste vision. Currently, about 15% of residents participate in curbside composting. In 2 years, when the GMHS site is modified, the leaf collection site will be lost and an alternative approach must be found, likely involving higher hauling costs. 4. On-Going Business: Comprehensive Plan Update: Kate Walker distributed a memo (see Attachment A) laying out the nominal timeline for updating a chapter of the City’s Comprehensive Plan (https://www.fallschurchva.gov/412/Comprehensive-Plan). Kate is leading the update of the Environmental chapter, and she is targeting February 2019 for final draft update and approval by City Council (the last step in the timeline). The May ESC meeting will address outline and topics for the Environmental Chapter. 5. On-Going Business: West Falls Church Transportation Project: The City has applied for NVTA 70% funds for the City’s $15.7M West Falls Church Transportation Project. This is an opportunity for ESC to advocate in support of pedestrian-friendly features in the GMHS/WFC area. Action Item #1: Chris McCloud will review the City’s application (emailed by Cory on April 17), draft a public-comment letter from the ESC, and provide it to Cory. 6. Subcommittee Reports: postponed until May meeting 7. Approval of Minutes: March 15, 2018, minutes were approved without objection 8. Next Meeting  Thursday, May 17, 2018. TJES Library (Media Room) Abbreviations / Terminology:  RFP: Request for Proposals  NVTA: Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (www.thenovaauthority.org  Attachment A DATE: April 25, 2018 TO: Chair Wodiska and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Kate Walker, Environmental Programs Coordinator SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update, Environment Chapter __________________________________________________________________________________________ Introduction Staff are beginning work on an update to the Environment (Natural Resources) Chapter of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, as called for in the City Council’s 2018-19 Work Plan. This update satisfies requirements of the Virginia state code to periodically review and update the Comprehensive Plan. Beyond satisfying state code requirements, the update allows for a City-wide conversation on environmental policy and priorities to achieve the City’s vision of environmental leadership. The updated chapter will collect and provide guidance from the public to City staff on how to optimize the City’s environmental resources to support and protect the community now and in the future. Tonight’s meeting kicks off the update process. Provided for your review are the following 1. Existing chapter, 2. Previously completed student studio project, 3. Recommended elements for consideration as part of the chapter update, and 4. Recommended public engagement schedule. Staff requests your feedback on the following 1. Recommended elements and 2. Recommended public engagement schedule. Scope of Environment Chapter The existing Natural Resources chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, written in 2005, contains extensive narrative descriptions of the geography, geology, air quality, waterways, flora and fauna of the City and takes an essentially defensive stance. Its vision is the protection, preservation, and restoration of the natural environment. Such defenses are essential, and indeed are required by laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. However, urban planning for the future should address how environmental goals can be incorporated in the development of the City’s thriving urban activity center in such a way that not only are natural resources protected and improved, but the community reaps the maximum benefit from incorporating natural resources in urban planning and development. Harry E. Wells Building • 300 Park Avenue • Falls Church, Virginia 22046 • 703-248-5001 • www.fallschurchva.gov For example, the preservation of mature tree canopy and incorporation of new plantings in urban environments offer benefits well beyond aesthetic enhancement; trees emit oxygen, store and sequester carbon, reduce air- and water-borne pollutants, contribute to stormwater management, protect the soil, provide habitat for birds and other animals, reduce energy consumption in buildings, improve business profitability, enhance real estate values and improve human health. In 2011, a Virginia Tech study estimated the value of ecosystem services (pollution removal, carbon sequestration, building energy savings and avoided carbon emissions) provided by the City’s urban forest at more than $330,000 annually. Proactive environmental planning is an essential part of smart growth. The revised chapter will address the same resources as the previous chapter: geography, geology, air quality, waterways, flora and fauna, and two additional topics:  Climate change: The threat posed by climate change was already recognized in 2005, but the importance of addressing it comprehensively on a local as well as regional, national and international level was not as clear then as it is now. The City needs to do what it can to mitigate climate change and also be prepared to manage and adapt to its effects.  Waste management is a recognized part of environmental protection, affecting greenhouse gas emissions and pollution, and should also be part of our plan to address environmental issues (it currently falls under Chapter 8, Community Facilities). The revised chapter will weave together related themes of the natural and built environments, and will cross- reference other documents such as:  Chapter 6: “Parks for People” (Falls Church Comprehensive Plan, 2015);  Chapter 7: “Mobility for All Modes” (Falls Church Comprehensive Plan, 2014);  Watershed Management Plan (City of Falls Church, Department of Public Works, 2012);  Bike Master Plan (City of Falls Church, 2015);  Washington & Old Dominion Railroad Regional Park (W&OD) Master Plan: “The City’s Greenest Street” (City of Falls Church, 2016);  Four Mile Run Restoration Action Plan (Virginia Tech Planning Studio, 2015);  Solid Waste Management Plan (City of Falls Church, 2004);  Five Environmental Goals for the City of Falls Church (Village Preservation & Improvement Society and the Environmental Services Council, 2015);  Ordinances referenced in Chapter 5: “Natural Resources and the Environment” (Falls Church Comprehensive Plan, 2005);  City Council Resolutions such as 2017-12, adopting greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and 2012-24, which adopted LEED Silver as the standard for public buildings. A Virginia Tech graduate student studio project completed in January 2017 will be used as a starting point to review progress against the goals of the 2005 chapter and generate ideas for best practices, goals and actions to be incorporated in the revised chapter. Process Staff expects development of the revised chapter will follow a similar process to that of other updates to the Comprehensive Plan such as the Mobility for all Modes and Parks for People chapters, including:  Review of progress against the goals of the existing Natural Resources chapter of the Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 5). Harry E. Wells Building • 300 Park Avenue • Falls Church, Virginia 22046 • 703-248-5001 • www.fallschurchva.gov   Review of best practices regionally and nationally in environmental planning in Comprehensive Plans.  Consultation with City Council, boards and commissions, civic groups, and the public to develop the vision, goals, and actions that should be incorporated into the environmental plan for the City. Project Timeline Below is an estimated timeline for the chapter update: May 2018: Project initiation with Planning Commission (PC), Environmental Sustainability Council (ESC) and Tree Commission (TC) May 2018: Review progress against existing goals; review of best practices May/June 2018: Draft vision statement, goals, example projects June 2018: Present draft to PC and City Council (CC) Work Session July 2018: First community meeting (Introduction/brainstorming) August/September Other events and survey 2018: September/October Boards and Commissions 2018: October 2018: Second community meeting (Evaluation of proposals) January 2019: Final review with PC, ESC & TC February 2019: PC action February 2019: CC action  Attachments 1. 2005 Natural Resources Chapter 2. 2017 Virginia Tech Student Study Harry E. Wells Building • 300 Park Avenue • Falls Church, Virginia 22046 • 703-248-5001 • www.fallschurchva.gov