Committee backs pilot to test green roofs on five city bus shelters, asks staff to include costs in budget

The Annapolis Environmental Matters Committee on April 10 recommended favorably on a draft demonstration program (legislation titled R225) to install green roofs on up to five city‑owned flat‑roof bus shelters, but asked staff to return with a detailed budget and maintenance plan before full implementation.

Committee members reviewed a staff survey of shelter types citywide and identified about eight potential flat‑roof, city‑owned shelters suitable for planting. Public Works staff said the pilot as drawn would target five shelters but noted further structural review and drainage assessment would be required before installation. Donovan Harold of Public Works and staff who toured shelters reported the city has three shelter types; some domed shelters are owned by an advertising company and cannot be modified.

Committee members pressed staff on costs and maintenance. The city’s initial work to site and evaluate green‑roof candidates is not yet a construction contract; staff said additional consultant design and structural review will be needed. The committee discussed watering needs, replacement plantings, staffing and whether ongoing maintenance could be folded into an existing green‑roof RFP the city recently issued for other municipal roofs. Staff said procurement could amend an existing contract used for green‑roof maintenance at the police station and Public Works buildings.

Aldermen also asked whether the pilot was the most effective environmental investment and discussed alternatives, including installing solar panels on shelters already planned by the Department of Transportation. Despite differing views on scale and impact, the committee’s procedural action was unanimous: members moved and seconded a recommendation that the council favorably endorse the pilot but only if staff return with exact locations, a full maintenance plan, and a budget amendment or identified funding source before installation.

The committee’s recommendation is advisory to the full council; staff said the pilot still requires formal budget approval and any required capital or maintenance allocations. The committee asked staff to include cost estimates for design, structural improvements, drainage updates, initial planting and long‑term maintenance in an amended staff report to accompany the legislation.

No specific dollar vote tally was recorded in the committee transcript; the clerk reported the motion “carries unanimously.”