MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION FOUNDATION

MINUTES

 

July 24, 2001

 

 

TRUSTEES PRESENT:

 

Lloyd C. Jones, Jr., Acting Chairman

Allen H. Cohey

Mildred H. Darcey

Lewis Logan, representing Treasurer Dixon

Judith C. Lynch

Dan Rosen, representing the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Planning

Maurice L. Wiles

Douglas H. Wilson, representing Secretary Maryland Department of Agriculture

 

TRUSTEES ABSENT:

 

Joseph K. Scott

Gerald Thorpe, representing Comptroller Schaefer

Robert E. Wolf

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Darlene M. Athey, Secretary

Wendell R. Bietzel, Garrett County Commissioner

Christel Brenneman, Intern, County Commissioners

Debra Carpenter, Garrett County Planning

Carol S. Council, Administrative Specialist

Jo Donaldson, reporter for the Cumberland Times-News

Ernest Gregg, Garrett County Commissioner

Brooks Hamilton, President, Garrett County Farm Bureau

Frederick Holliday, Chairman, Garrett County Commissioners

Joy Levy, Queen Anne’s County Program Administrator

Monty Pagenhart, Garrett County Administrator

Paul W. Scheidt, Executive Director

Tammy Scheidt, Caroline County Program Administrator

 

 

Lloyd C. Jones, Jr., Acting Chairman, called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. at the Garrett County Courthouse, 203 S. Fourth St., Oakland, Maryland.

 

 

I.          APPROVAL OF MINUTES/ADDITION OR DELETION OF AGENDA ITEMS:

 

A.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES, June 28, 2001

 

Motion #1:         To approve the minutes of June 28, 2001.

 

Motion:             Mildred Darcey                                            Second:  Allen Cohey

Status:              Approved

 

 

B.         ADDITION OR DELETION OF AGENDA ITEMS:

 

Paul Scheidt, Executive Director, opened the meeting by introducing the members of the Board to the Garrett County Commissioners.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that State Delegate George Edwards, a resident of Garrett County, is the Co-Chairman of the Joint Sub-committee on Program Open Space and Agricultural Land Preservation.  He would have liked to have attended the meeting today; however, he was called to Annapolis.  He is the sponsor of the Gas and Oil Rights bill which was modified to allow mining of gas on district properties.

 

Fred Holliday, Chairman, Garrett County Commissioners, welcomed the Board and stated that the county is very interested in agricultural land preservation.

 

Ernest Gregg, Garrett County Commissioner, stated that the farmers in the county work under different soil and weather conditions than most in the state of Maryland.  Considering this, they are hoping that through legislation, the farmers will be allowed to conduct the mining of gas on easement properties.

 

Debra Carpenter, Garrett County Planning and Zoning, gave an outline of the day’s activities and distributed itineraries and maps to the Board members.

 

 

II.         AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT PETITIONS

 

No Items.

 

 

III.        DISTRICT/EASEMENT AMENDMENTS

 

A.         CECIL COUNTY

 

1.         07-04-88-05e     MACKIE, Joseph & Beverly                      223.0000 acres

Request for approval to exclude a 1.0 acre child’s lot from easement property for daughter, Heather H. Lukk, to construct a dwelling for her personal use.

 

Mr. & Mrs. Mackie are the original owners of the 223.0 acre easement property.  Their current request is for the exclusion of a 1.0 acre child’s lot for their daughter, Heather H. Lukk, to construct a dwelling for her personal use.

 

According to Cecil County, the proposed 1.0 acre lot will have fee simple access onto Rock Church Road, will be located in an area currently used for pasture, and will cause minimal impact to the overall farm operation.  The landowners state that a perc test has not yet been performed at this location.

 

There are two pre-existing dwellings on the property.  This proposed lot adjoining a 1.0 acre child’s lot which has been approved for the landowners’ son, Sean.  Sean’s lot is in the process of being released from the easement.  Mr. & Mrs. Mackie do not own any other district or easement property.

 

If this request is approved, the required payback for the 1.0 acre of easement property will be $2,564.00.

 

Foundation staff recommended approval based on the landowner’s rights contained in the deed of easement’s covenants, conditions, limitations, and restrictions, Section A(1)(b) A.  The Grantee, on written application from the Grantor, shall release free of easement restrictions only for the Grantor who originally sold this easement, 1.0 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a dwelling for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child.

 

Motion #2:         To approve the request of Joseph & Beverly Mackie to exclude a 1.0 acre child’s lot from easement property for daughter, Heather H. Lukk, to construct a dwelling for her personal use.

 

Motion:             Maurice Wiles                                             Second:  Lewis Logan

Status:              Approved

 

 

2.         07-09-86-02e     MILLER, Jr., Francis G., et al                   110.0330 acres

Request for approval of a 50.0 acre agricultural subdivision of easement property.

 

The 110.033 acre easement property is owned jointly by Francis & Arlene Miller and John & Barbara Miller.  Their current request is for a 50.0 acre agricultural subdivision to be conveyed to a third party at a later date.

 

According to Cecil County, the Millers plan to continue to use the remaining 60.0 acres as part of a large dairy operation which they operate on this easement and an adjoining 193.0 acre easement property.  There is no known buyer of the proposed 50.0 acre parcel at this time.

 

Also according to Cecil County, the proposed 50.0 acre agricultural subdivision contains 85% U.S.D.A. Soils Classes II and III with 32.0 acres of cropland, 6.0 acres of woodland, and 9.0 acres of pasture.  The 60.0 acres to be retained by the Millers contains 95% U.S.D.A. Soils Classes II and III and U.S.D.A. Woodland Group I soils, with 38.0 acres of cropland and 12.0 acres of woodland.

 

The Cecil County Department of Assessments and Taxation states that while both parcels are of adequate size to qualify for agricultural use assessment, the new owner of the 50.0 acre parcel will have to apply separately and actively farm the parcel for a minimum of 5 years.

 

There are no pre-existing dwellings on this property.  A 1.0 acre child’s lot for John & Barbara’s son, John was approved on April 25, 2000.  A 1.0 acre owner’s lot for John & Barbara’s use was approved on June 28, 2001.  Neither lot has been released from the easement.  On the adjoining 193.0 acre easement property, a 1.0 acre child’s lot has been approved and released for Francis & Arlene’s daughter, Diane Miller Russell.  There have been no previous requests for agricultural subdivisions on either easement property.

 

Foundation staff recommended approval as the proposed agricultural subdivision meets the criteria set forth in the Foundation’s Policy on Agricultural Subdivisions.

 

Mildred Darcey, Board member, asked about the development rights on the remaining property.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that the only request that could be made would be for a tenant house.  There are no pre-existing dwellings on the remaining parcel and a request for a child’s lot has been made.

 

Doug Wilson, representing Secretary Maryland Department of Agriculture, stated that the subsequent landowner would not be entitled to building lots.

 

Dan Rosen, representing the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Planning, asked if the Foundation knew what farming activity would be performed on this agricultural subdivision.  He suggested that action on this parcel be tabled until the Foundation was able to ascertain the new landowner’s intended use.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that the current landowner is requesting the agricultural subdivision for farm, estate planning, and health reasons.  He further stated that this request has met all of the criteria for agricultural subdivision.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that with the passing of the new laws, this parcel could come in as a separate district and apply for an easement.  Based on the fact that it is in a very desirable area and contingent to an existing easement, this property would rank very highly on the prioritization list.

 

Carol Council, Foundation staff, stated that the potential buyer of the agricultural subdivision may in the future wish to purchase an additional 20.0 acres.  Mr. Miller would then incorporate the 30.0 residual acres into the190.0 acre easement which would make a 210.0 acre easement.  The landowner is not asking for the Board to approve this request today, rather he is requesting the Board’s opinion on this proposal.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that the size of the agricultural subdivision has changed from 20.0 acres to 50.0 acres by law.  Some landowners are of the impression that because they put their property in while the old law was in place, that the new policy does not pertain to them.  It is the Foundation’s longstanding policy that landowners can request an agricultural subdivision but they must adhere to policies, laws, and regulations of both the State and County that govern these requests at the time the request is made.  The current regulations require 50.0 acres of a minimum size with a remaining balance of 50.0 acres.  If the remainder is less than 50, then the subdivision cannot be approved.  In this case there are 110.0 acres which leaves a remainder of 60.0 acres.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that all the Board would be doing is approving the 50.0 acre subdivision, the remaining 50.0 acres would be joined with the other easement property owned by the Millers.

 

Mr. Wilson further stated that since this is a 50.0 acre agricultural subdivision with no residual property, the new landowner could not subdivide the parcel further.  This is beneficial to the program.

 

Tammy Scheidt, Caroline County Program Administrator asked if the new policy indicated that the minimum size is 50.0 acres, would this be an “add-on” parcel.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that this may technically be an agricultural subdivision, but from the Foundation’s perspective the parcel no longer is since it has been transferred to another owner.  It would be beneficial to allow the addition of the 20.0 acres because it could not be subdivided.

 

Ms. Scheidt stated that she did not agree with this acreage being cut out of the center of the farm, leaving the residue for a farming operation, knowing that the 50.0 acre subdivision is going to be sold as a separate farming operation.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that the owner’s lot is in the corner of the property.

 

L. C. Jones, Acting Chairman, stated that there is a creek running through the property creating a natural boundary.

 

Ms. Darcey asked if there could be another agricultural subdivision on the remaining Miller property.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that it could be possible on the adjoining easement.

 

Ms. Darcey asked if they added on the residual property from the other parcel, would they be entitled to two 50.0 acre subdivisions.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that they are entitled to one per full 50.0 acres.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that even though the Board may make a decision today, in the future when the landowners applied for another agricultural subdivision this Board may not be the ones that make the determination.  This would depend on when the landowner makes his request.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that the subsequent owner will have to comply with local zoning laws and with the regulations of the Foundation.

 

Motion #3:         To approve the request of Francis G. Miller, et al of a 50.0 acre agricultural subdivision of easement property.

 

Motion:             Mildred Darcey                                            Second:  Doug Wilson

Status:              Approved

 

 

B.         FREDERICK COUNTY

 

1.         10-11-86-02e     WILT, Sr., Marvin D. & Elsie N.                 134.5000 acres

Request for approval to increase an approved owner’s lot from 1.0 acre to 1.2719 acre.

 

Mr. & Mrs. Wilt are the original owners of the 134.5 acre easement property.  Their current request is to increase an approved owner’s lot from 1.0 acre to 1.2719 acre in order to accommodate the requirements of the Frederick County Health Department.

 

On March 26, 1991, the Foundation’s Board of Trustees approved a 1.0 acre owner’s lot for Marvin & Elsie Wilt’s personal use.  This lot has not been released from the easement.

 

The preliminary release was recorded on May 13, 1999.  Since that time, the Wilts have proceeded with the recordation of the lot under the Frederick County Subdivision Regulations.  However, in order to obtain a satisfactory percolation under the County Health Department’s requirements, there has been a minor reconfiguration of the lot, including an enlargement from 1.0 acre to 1.2719 acre.

 

There are two pre-existing dwellings on the property.  A 1.0 acre child’s lot for son, Marvin, was approved on June 28, 1989 and has been released from the easement.  A 1.0 acre child’s lot for son, Leroy, was approved on January 24, 1989 and has not yet been released.

 

Foundation staff recommended approval based on Agricultural Article, Section 2-513, Annotated Code of Maryland, which allows a minimum lot size of up to 2.0 acres to be released, if the purpose for excluding the lot is to construct a dwelling house intended for the owner or the owner’s child(ren) and the regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment requires a minimum lot size of not less than 2.0 acres or the regulations adopted by the county require the lot to be larger than 1.0 acre but not to exceed 2.0 acres.

 

Motion #4:         To approve the request of Marvin D. & Elsie N. Wilt, Sr. to increase an approved owner’s lot from 1.0 acre to 1.2719 acre.

 

Motion:             Doug Wilson                                                Second:  Allen Cohey

Status:              Approved

 

 

C.         QUEEN ANNE’S COUNTY

 

1.         17-04-86-26e     SCHULZ, Jody                                          99.1000 acres

Request for approval to swap 7.0 acres of easement property for 14.0 acres of non-easement property.

 

Mr. Schulz is the subsequent owner of the 99.1 acre easement property.  His current request is for a swap of 7.0 acres of easement property for 14.0 acres of non-easement property.

 

According to Queen Anne’s County, if this request is approved, the 7.0 acres to be removed from the easement will be developed with 5 to 7 dwellings as a part of the existing Kirwan’s Landing community.  As you can see on the attached plat, several lots of Kirwan’s Landing already exist and approval of this request would fill in an open space which exists along Kirwan’s Landing Lane.

 

According to McCrone, Inc., the 7.0 acre parcel is tillable land which consists of 100% U.S.D.A. Soils Class II and III soils.  The 14.0 acre parcel is 100% U.S.D.A. Soils Class II and III soils consisting of 5.47 tillable acres and 8.53 acres of woodland.

 

The majority of the members of the Queen Anne’s County Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Board do not favor this proposal.  In addition, the Queen Anne’s Planning & Zoning Office does not give their concurrence for the request as they have several issues which are not favorable for the development of the 7.0 acre parcel.  They include:

 

·                     an unresolved issue as to whether the proposed 5 to 7 lots would have public sewer access;

·                     the 7.0 acre area is outside of the Chester growth area;

·                     the majority of the 7.0 acre area is within the Critical Area;

·                     in order to develop 5 to 7 lots, the parcel would have to be re-zoned as current zoning is for agriculture, with density of 1 dwelling per 8.0 acres, with 85% becoming deed restricted open space.

 

This property has no pre-existing dwellings.  A 1.0 acre owner’s lot was approved and released for the original owner’s use.  A tenant house was approved in 1990 but has not yet been constructed.  In 1999 Mr. Schulz received approval to relocate an existing utility easement which runs across the property.  Also in 1999 a swap of 0.5 acre of easement property for 1.0 acre of non-easement property was approved to allow conveyance to adjoining county-owned land.  This conveyance was never completed and the easement boundaries were not changed.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that it appears that the Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Board for Queen Anne’s County and the Queen Anne’s County Department of Planning and Zoning are not in favor of this land swap.

 

Joy Levy, Queen Anne’s County Program Administrator, stated that if the Board approves this there are many issues at the county level that would need to be resolved.  At this point in the juncture, Ms. Levy reiterated that the County is not in favor of this land swap.

 

Motion #5:         To deny the request of Jody Schultz to swap 7.0 acres of easement property for 14.0 acres of non-easement property.

 

Motion:             Doug Wilson                                                Second:  Maurice Wiles

Status:              Approved

 

 

D.         BALTIMORE COUNTY

 

1.         03-08-94-02e     VOSS, Katherine (Merryman)                   109.1050 acres

Request for approval to swap 4.636 acres of easement property for 6.8 acres of non-easement property.

 

Ms. Voss is the original owner of the 109.105 acre easement property.  Her current request is for approval to swap 4.636 acres of easement property for 6.8 acres of adjoining non-easement property.

 

According to Baltimore County, the 4.636 acre easement parcel contains the pre-existing right-of-way to an adjoining 16.722 acre parcel owned by Mr. J. Watson.  The remainder of the 4.636 acre parcel is wooded and separated from the rest of Ms. Voss’ easement property by the right-of-way.  As Mr. Watson also owns a separately deeded 6.8 acre wooded parcel which adjoins Ms. Voss’s easement, he would like to swap this 6.8 acre parcel for the 4.636 acres currently covered by the easement.

 

Both of the proposed parcels are completely wooded and consist of 100% U.S.D.A. Soils Classes II and III soils.

 

The easement property contains 1 pre-existing dwelling.  There have been no requests for owner’s or children’s lot exclusions.  Ms. Voss owns 1 other easement and 2 district properties, all located in Baltimore County.

 

Mr. Wilson asked if there are any development rights on the 16.0 acres.

 

Ms. Council stated that she had spoken to Wally Lippincott, Baltimore County Program Administrator, and he indicated that there are no development rights on the 16.0 acres.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that one of the concerns of the Foundation is the question about whether or not the easement is permanent.  If there is a 25 year clause, in cases where farming is no longer viable after 25 years, there is the option to repay the monies for the easement.  If there are going to be land exchanges of non-easement for easement property, this is going to further complicate the situation.

 

Mr. Wilson stated that this issue is not a boundary line issue, but a matter of  access.  This is not a normal access request.

 

Ms. Council stated that because some of the easement property is on the other side of the access driveway the landowner is asking for the entire area.

 

Allen Cohey, Board member, asked about the value of the 4.0 acre wooded area.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that at this time the Foundation is not aware of the quality of trees in this area.  In addition, the 16.0 acres is not in the program.

 

Ms. Council stated that the 6.0 acre parcel is not owned by Mr. Watkins, Ms. Voss is the landowner.

 

Mr. Cohey asked if the parties involved are involved in a real estate venture.

 

Mr. Scheidt stated Orebanks LLC is the name on the records.

 

Mr. Cohey stated that he is of the opinion that this is land swap is part of a real estate enhancement.

 

Motion #6:         To table the request of Katherine (Merryman) Voss  for approval to swap 4.636 acres of easement property for 6.8 acres of non-easement property until the next Board of Trustees meeting so that the program administrator can address the Board.

 

Motion:             Lewis Logan                                                Second:  Mildred Darcey

Status:              Approved

 

 

IV.        PROGRAM POLICY/EASEMENT OFFERS

 

A.         Update on Projects and Committees

 

1.         Sand and Gravel

 

Ms. Council stated that there is nothing to report at this time.

 

 

2.         Greenprint

 

Mr. Scheidt stated that in addition to the Federal funds made available to MALPF, there is $8,750,000.00 Greenprint money available to MALPF.  The Foundation is looking into utilizing this money as quickly as possible.  There is a deadline to encumber these funds by January, 2002.  Therefore, the Foundation is looking to apply this money to the applicants of the FY=2001 easement acquisition program. The Foundation has supplied Department of Natural Resources (DNR) with a list of the applicants for the FY=2001 easement offers to determine whether or not they are in Greenprint areas.  DNR has identified and classified these properties as excellent, good, fair or poor. MDA/DNR have agreed that if there is only a small amount of Greenprint area in a district, the whole district is  eligible for the money and it appears the Foundation can utilize the full $875 million when available on properties which are good.  It is hoped that the Foundation would make Greenprint easement offers at the September Board of Trustees meeting.

 

Mr. Scheidt passed out the Memorandum of Agreement  between DNR and MDA. He further stated that DNR=s easement will be less restrictive and they are mainly concerned with environmental issues.  A letter will be drafted to the landowners indicating that along with the MALPF regulations, the DNR restrictions will also be placed on properties receiving these funds. 

 

Mr. Wilson stated that properties located in the Greenprint areas have already been identified by DNR.  The landowners need to apply for an easement in order to receive this money.

 

 

V.                  INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION

 

No Items on the Agenda.

 

 

Motion # 7:        There being no further business to discuss, the regular session meeting should be adjourned.

 

Motion:             Maurice Wiles                                             Second:  Lewis Logan

Status:              Approved

 

The regular session Board meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

 

 

Respectfully Submitted:

 

 

_______________________________________

Paul W. Scheidt, Executive Director

 

 

_______________________________________

Darlene M. Athey, Foundation Secretary