Testimony before the County Council

ZTA 08-14

July 29, 2008

Good afternoon, my name is Barbara Hankins, 2^nd Vice President of the League of Women Voters of Montgomery County. For many years the League of Women Voters of Montgomery County has been a steadfast supporter of the Agricultural Reserve and policies aimed at preserving the county’s agricultural land. We have actively supported the TDR program during this decade and are pleased to see approaches to expand beyond the residential use of TDRs.

In the ZTA 08-14 the League supports the use of buildable TDRs for non-residential development in the vicinity of transit stations. We would like to see this use expanded into other zones such as the CBD. Requiring the use of these TDRs for residential density increase in the mixed use transit zone is consistent with our consensus position.

Affordability of the BLT program has been a major concern of League members as we have discussed this approach to agricultural land preservation. The Ad Hoc Agricultural Policy Working Group recommended both a public and a private component to funding the program. The public component would allow the county to purchase and retire the BLT while the private component would be a market driven system as in the TDR program. Utilizing both of these approaches may result in a viable program. As the regulations for implementing the BLT program are developed, sufficient flexibility must be incorporated to make this approach affordable both for public and for private funding.

We recognize the need to make the use of the BLT or buildable TDR attractive to developers. Have ways of reducing some of the development costs when BLTs are used such as a more efficient review process or other means been considered? Even though only 12 ½ % of the density gain requires the use of these TDRs, we trust that this utilization will significantly reduce residential development in the Agricultural Reserve.

We do have some concern that the pricing mechanism in the ZTA to establish payment in lieu of BLT or for a partial BLT may result in a payment so low that few BLTs will actually be purchased by developers. It is important that the option to make a payment rather than to present a BLT not result in a lower cost than the market price of a BLT. Either through a better pricing approach or a restriction on the in lieu use, the goal of actually transferring development from the Agricultural Reserve must be made achievable. Thank you for consideration of our concerns.