MINUTES
TRUSTEES PRESENT:
Vera Mae Schultz, Vice Chairman
Howard S.
Freedlander, representing Treasurer Kopp
Pat Langenfelder
Judith C. Lynch
Shirley W. Pilchard
Robert F. Stahl, Jr.
Joe Tassone, representing Secretary
Scott, Department of Planning
Christopher H. Wilson
Doug Wilson, representing Secretary
Riley, Department of Agriculture
TRUSTEES ABSENT:
Daniel Colhoun, Chairman
Jerry Klasmeier, representing
Comptroller Schaefer
Dr. James Pelura
OTHERS PRESENT:
Anne Bradley,
Yates Clagett,
Tammy Buckle,
James A. Conrad, MALPF Executive
Director
Carol Council, MALPF Administrative
Officer
Rama Dilip, MALPF Secretary
Will Doane, Jr,
Althea Dulin, Landowner,
Bob Ensor, Landowner,
Nancy Forrester, Assistant Attorney
General, Department of General Services
Ned Halle, Land Preservation Trust,
David Hemphill, Landowner,
Ann Jones, Land Preservation Trust,
Tom Lawton,
Joy Levy,
Wally Lippincott,
Carla Martin,
Jay McGinnis, Landowner,
Katherine Munson,
Lois M. O'Neill,
Landowner,
Craig Nielsen, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Agriculture
Barbara Polito,
Larry & Sue Porter,
Landowners,
Ralph Robertson,
John E. Rino, Attorney,
Faith Rossing, Director,
Planning & Zoning, Queen Anne's County
Charles Rice,
Daniel Rosen, Planner, Maryland
Department of Planning
Donna Sasscer, St. Mary's County,
Program Administrator
Eric Shertz,
Paul Shoffeit, Landowner,
Dan Smyth, MALPF Intern
Martin Sokolich,
Donna K. Landis-Smith, Queen Anne's
County, Program Administrator
Gloria Smith,
Norman H. Tarr, Landowner,
Jenny Plummer-Welker,
Elizabeth Weaver, MALPF
Administrative Officer
John Zawitoski,
Daniel Colhoun, Chairman, was not able to attend the
Board meeting due to prior commitments.
In his absence, Vera Mae Schultz, Vice Chairman, chaired the meeting.
Ms. Schultz called the meeting to order at approximately
The Chair asked the guests to introduce themselves.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES/ADDITION OR DELETION OF AGENDA ITEMS:
A.
APPROVAL
OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
Motion #1: To approve the minutes of May 23, 2006 with amendments.
Motion: Pat Langenfelder Second: Howard Freedlander
Status: Approved
B. ADDITIONS
OR DELETIONS OF AGENDA ITEMS:
The agenda outline with few
revisions was circulated to the Board members. Mr. James Conrad, Executive
Director of the Foundation, informed the Board members that the Board would
take up the informational session first before proceeding with other agenda
items.
08-93-02A Bridgett, Dennis L. Added
Request to amend the District
Agreement
to correct and increase the acreage.
The following district petitions
were withdrawn
Mr. Conrad distributed a financial statement for the
benefit of Board members. The statement is
similar to a modified balance sheet intended to provide the Board members an
idea about the financial situation and the availability of the capital funds
and the operating funds. Mr. Conrad
requested the Board members to provide comments and suggestions about this
proposed monthly statement and whether it would be useful to distribute each
month.
Mr. Conrad updated the Board members about the FRPP
situation. Senator Leahy is seeking to
put a requirement in the appropriations bill that any new grants from FY 2006
forward would be held to 2003 rule and new rules cannot be implemented. The intention is eventually to have
legislation that would turn the program into a grants program so that the
federal government will no longer have a material interest in the easements
purchased.
Elizabeth Weaver, MALPF staff introduced Mr. Dan
Smyth, a graduate student at UMBC. He is
currently doing an internship with MALPF.
V. A.
1. 23-95-07 Norman Tarr 123.36 acres
Informational item on a request for
an aquaculture operation
Mr. Tarr notified MALPF in 2004 that he intended to expand
an existing aquaculture operation on his property. At that time, the intention was to deepen an
existing aquaculture pond on his adjacent MALPF easement property. Mr. Tarr was notified that this is an
acceptable agricultural use of the property and would not require formal Board
review and approval.
In February, 2006, Mr. Tarr contacted Katherine Munson,
Worcester County Program Administrator, and the Foundation and said he wanted
to construct additional ponds on the subject property. Ms. Munson and the Foundation verified that
aquaculture is an acceptable agricultural use of easement property; however,
neither the County nor MALPF was aware at the time of the scale of this
construction. In May, 2006, Ms. Munson
met with local zoning staff who notified her that a borrow pit operation had
been approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals, but that adjacent landowners had
opposed the approval. At that time, the
County recognized that the scale of the operation had expanded from
On Thursday, June 22, 2006, MALPF staff; Bob Stahl, MALPF
Board member; the Chair of the Worcester County Advisory Board; Katherine
Munson; representatives of the Worcester County Soil Conservation District; and
Tom Filbert, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Agriculture, met with
Norman Tarr on his farm in Worcester County. The concerns that the Foundation and the
County wanted specifically to address were:
(1) the impact of the removal of this amount of soil on the continued
eligibility of the property for the MALPF Program; (2) the relationship between
the soil removal which involves payment for the soil being removed as a mining
operation (an unacceptable, though temporary, industrial use) and the
aquaculture operation that will result (an acceptable agricultural use under
statute); (3) the scale of the operation and its likely impact on the future of
non-aquaculture agricultural operations on the property; and (4) the policy
precedence for allowing this activity on Mr. Tarr's property for other grantors
who may be more interested in the benefits of mining a property, where
aquaculture becomes the result of reclamation.
Despite the removal of a large amount of soil, the property
will continue to be eligible for MALPF based on the soils on the property. The Soil Conservation District has reported to
the Foundation that, of the 123.36-acre total, 75 acres or 60% will be soils
class I, II, and III. When this property
came into the program, it had 90% qualifying soils. There is some discrepancy in acreage totals
on which these percentage calculations are based, but this provides an idea of
the impact of the soil being excavated and removed from the property. The primary use of the soils being removed
will be for the expansion of the existing County landfill because of the
substantial clay content of the soil.
The consensus of those visiting the property was that mining
is not being justified by the creation of an aquaculture operation, but enables
Mr. Tarr to undertake an aquaculture operation he otherwise might have
difficulty financing. Mr. Tarr has a
good track record with aquaculture and substantial credibility in this
field. It is clear that the aquaculture
plans preceded any plans for such a mining operation and are only intended to
facilitate the expansion of an existing aquaculture operation. Given the volume of soil being excavated,
keeping the removed soil on the property would likely have much more of an
impact on the remaining farm operation than its removal off-site.
This area of the farm, if the aquaculture operation fails,
could not be reclaimed for traditional agriculture. However, it should be noted that this area is
currently in a CREP grasslands rental contract for 15 years that Mr. Tarr is
paying to have removed. The consensus of
those visiting the property was that this area was low-lying and susceptible to
standing water because of the high water table, and would probably be less
productive in traditional agriculture than other areas of the farm. It should be recognized, however, that this
change in agricultural use is non-reversible.
Foundation recommendation is that aquaculture as an
allowable agricultural use on easement property raises important questions that
the Foundation should consider more systematically because of the precedent
that this change in agricultural use poses statewide for other properties. This could encourage mining operations on
easement properties where aquaculture becomes simply justification for
mining. However, because Mr. Tarr's
request is within the legal requirements of MALPF, the Foundation should not
interfere with his operation, but discuss these issues independent of what he
is doing on his property.
Mr. Tarr now has his surface mining permit from the Maryland
Department of the Environment. Mr.
Tarr, Mr. John Rino, his attorney, and
Ms. Katherine Munson were available at the meeting to answer any questions that
Board members may have on his aquaculture operation and the excavation that
will allow it to be expanded.
Mr. Tarr briefed the Board members about the operation on
his farm. Robert Stahl, Board member,
stated that Mr. Tarr is removing clay and using it
for County's land fill. Though the
material is being purchased, it is helping to eliminate high berms around the ponds.
Mr. Stahl stated that he believes that the operation on Mr. Tarr's farm is a viable aquaculture operation.
The operation clearly requires a mining permit and may pose
some policy issues for the Foundation in the future. However, in this
particular situation, Mr. Stahl suggested going ahead with the recommendation
and believed that the sale of the material helped the operation. In the future, the Board has to make some
determination as to how the Foundation should ascertain whether or not mining
is driving the aquaculture or the aquaculture is driving the mining and whether
or not the remainder of what's left is still a viable preserved farm. Mr. Stahl reiterated that all those who
visited the farm felt very comfortable in the fact that the operation is
considered a viable aquaculture operation.
Shirley Pilchard, Board member,
wanted to know if the mining permits can be renewed. Mr. Stahl remarked that they can be renewed
on filling out the required application forms.
Doug Wilson, representing Secretary
Riley, Department of Agriculture, commented that the Foundation buys easements
on land to protect its agricultural production potential. In this case there is a clearly identifiable
commodity change that changes the profile of the land. If a farmer tries to grow corn and it fails,
he has an option to try something else and there is no effect on the
easement. In this case if the proposed
operation fails the ability of the land to be used for other agricultural
activities is compromised.
In the present situation, Mr. Tarr
has an aquaculture operation of fairly limited size on the farm and, even if
the aquaculture operation failed, the remaining property would still be a
viable farm.
Ms. Schultz informed thanked Mr.
Tarr for coming to the meeting. The item
was to inform the Board members and did not need an approval. This is a
permitted use under the easement and State law.
II. DISTRICT
/EASEMENT AMENDMENTS
A.
1. 06-85-02e Ensor, Jr., William N. & Truth 40.701 acres
Request for the exclusion of one
acre for a child's lot on district property
The Ensors are the original owners
of the easement property. Below is a
history of activity on the property to date.
History:
·
The
property originally consisted of 189.56 acres.
·
·
·
·
·
The current request is for the relocation of up to 2.0 acres
for the owner's lot. According to
The landowners presented two possible alternate locations
(on one of the 73.93 acre parcels), but the Carroll County Advisory Board has
approved the site designated as "Choice #2" for the location of the
dwelling. This location is in close
proximity to the existing dwelling and farm buildings. It is adjacent to a crop field and will have
right-of-way access to an existing farm lane.
The local agricultural advisory board has approved this
request. The request conforms to local
zoning regulations. If approved, there
will be a required payback of $295.94 per acre.
Foundation staff recommends approval because this relocated
site meets the Foundation's Guidelines for Lot Exclusions. Foundation staff recommends approval of the
release of one acre plus such minimum additional acreage if required by the
County Health Department, not to exceed 2.0 acres total in accordance with
Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b), Annotated Code of Maryland, which
grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of up to 2.0 acres if required by
regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment or the county.
Mr. Bob Ensor, son of William and Truth Ensor, and Mr. Ralph
Robertson, Program Administrator, were present at the meeting to respond to any
questions.
Mr. Robertson stated that the local Agricultural Advisory
Board recommended that option 2 be considered.
Option 2 is the location along the border of the farm that has the least
amount of impact on the agricultural operations of the farm, but it may have a
perc problem. The Board continued to
recommend the location and felt compelled to recommend that option 2 on the
edge of the farm be the first choice and option 1 be the second choice.
Mr. Conrad wanted clarification: will access require an easement right-of-way
or fee simple access? Mr. Robertson
confirmed that the property will have a right-of-way easement.
Motion # 2: To approve the request of William N. and Truth Ensor to
relocate an approved 1.0 acre Owner's lot.
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
2. 06-03-14e Hemphill, David B. 54.3651 acres
Request
to exclude a 1.25 acre unrestricted lot from a co-held easement property
Mr. Hemphill is the original owner of the easement. There are no pre-existing dwellings on the
property. The current request is for the
release of a 1.25 acre unrestricted lot.
According to
The request has been approved by the Carroll County
Agricultural Advisory Board, but staff has not yet received a letter from the
Health Department that requires the lot to exceed 1.0 acre in size. If the request is approved, payback for the
lot will be $5,500 at $4,400 per acre.
Foundation staff recommends approval as the proposed site
meets the Foundation's Guidelines for Lot Exclusions. Foundation staff also recommends approval of
the release of one acre plus such minimum additional acreage if required by the
County Health Department, not to exceed 2.0 acres total in accordance with
Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b), Annotated Code of Maryland, which
grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of up to 2.0 acres if required by
regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment or the county.
Mr. Conrad informed the Board members that the County
Advisory Board recommended that the lines of the lot be straightened. Mr. Conrad also stated that this particular
easement is a co-held easement. Under
the terms of the MOU, the Commissioner of Carroll County or an explicitly
designated representative of the Advisory Board needs to approve the request
before MALPF reviews it. Mr. Conrad
commented that at this point there is no official approval or delegation of
authority from the
Mr. Hemphill and Mr. Robertson were present at the meeting
to answer any questions from the Board.
Mr. Robertson informed the Board members that Mr. Hemphill put his farm
under easement under the Carroll County Critical Farms program. The farm carried 14 lot rights on 56 acres
and the County allowed one unrestricted lot.
Motion # 3: To approve the request of David Hemphill to exclude a 1.25
acre unrestricted lot from easement property conditional on it being approved
by the
Motion: Judith Lynch Second: Joe
Tassone
Status: Approved
3. 06-83-19e Rinehart, John W. & Sharon L. 143.3 acres
Request to 1) agriculturally
subdivide the property into a 60.0 acre and an 83.3 acre parcel; 2) relocate a
pre-existing dwelling
The Rineharts are the original
owners of the easement. The property has
three (3) pre-existing dwellings. No lot
exclusions have been requested. The
current request is to 1) agriculturally subdivide the property into a 60.0 and
an 83.3 acre parcel and 2) relocate one of the pre-existing dwellings.
1) The
owners would like to convey the 60.0 acre parcel separately. Currently the three pre-existing dwellings and
all of the farm buildings are located on what will become the 83.3 acre
parcel. The two tracts are separated by
2) The
owners would also like to remove one of the three pre-existing dwellings
(identified as the 'Mobile Dwelling' on the attached map) from the proposed
83.3 acre parcel and relocate it to the proposed 60.0 acre parcel (which
currently has no structures). The
current location is wooded. According to
1) Foundation
staff recommends approval of the agricultural subdivision as the request meets
the Foundation's Policy on Agricultural Subdivision.
2) Foundation
staff recommends approval of the relocation of a pre-existing dwelling as the
proposed relocation site meets the Foundation's Guidelines for Lot Exclusions.
Mr. Conrad wanted to know if the
landowners are only moving the trailer or they are going to construct a
home. Mr. Robertson responded that the
intention is to construct a home in the corner. The idea is to agriculturally
split this farm and use the mobile dwelling as the dwelling rights on the
60-acre farm that would be subdivided.
The right-of-way to get to that property will be the only access because
it would be difficult to locate a lot anywhere along that road and that is the
reason for the re-location request. The Rineharts own the property where the right–of-way is
located. The entire farm is for sale
under some very difficult circumstances.
Responding to a question, Mr.
Robertson stated that the owners have a right to move their trailer and can,
but they will not be doing it because the trailer is in poor shape.
Joe Tassone, representing Secretary
Scott, Department of Planning, wanted to confirm that the mobile home is not a
tenant dwelling. Mr. Robertson confirmed
that it is not and stated that it is a pre-existing dwelling.
Mr. Doug Wilson commented that the
family has the right to move a pre-existing dwelling and they needed to
relocate to a place where there is minimum impact on the farm. Access seems to be the only issue. The Board members can use their judgment to
decide whether it is advisable to agriculturally subdivide the two
parcels. If the Board uses a different
approach, the Board will not be approving the subdivision and the relocation of
the house.
Mr. Tassone
stated that agricultural subdivision policy requires that the subdivision be
approved only if there is an agricultural purpose for the subdivision.
Mr. Conrad stated that the intention
of the policy is that both parcels should be capable of sustaining independent
operations. Mr. Conrad felt that this
criterion has not been explicitly addressed by the local advisory board.
Motion # 4: To approve the request of John W. and Sharon L. Rinehart to
(1) agriculturally subdivide the property into a 60.0 acre and an 83.3 acre
parcel; (2) relocate a pre-existing dwelling.
Motion: Howard Freedlander Second: Chris
Wilson
Opposed: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
Mr. Stahl was
concerned that the State is receiving many such subdivision requests to
generate cash. One of the reasons may be
the skyrocketing values of farmland. In
many instances, properties with easements sold years ago have much more value
today than what they were valued at originally, even with the easement on them.
Mr. Tassone stated that his opposition is because he felt
subdivision requests are viewed as automatic approvals when that should not be
the case. Mr. Tassone
recommended recognizing the issue as a policy development issue and the Board
should discuss how to deal with such issues.
There is a need to devise sound ways to approve or disapprove such
requests.
Motion # 5: To have a policy decision on agricultural subdivision as a
policy development issue of the Foundation.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Doug Wilson
Status: Approved
B.
1. 20-91-08 PCN Farms, LLP 91.47 acres
Request for the exclusion of up to 2
acres for a child's lot on easement property
PCN Farms, LLP, is the original grantor of the
easement. PCN Farms is a general
partnership made up of family members. The
current request is for the release of up to two acres for a child's lot for the
personal use of Norman F. Swann, Jr., son of Norman F. Swann, Sr. Mr. Swann, Sr., is named in the deed of
easement as one of the partners whose children are eligible to receive child's
lots.
There is one pre-existing dwelling on the property. No other lots have been requested for this
property.
According to
The request was approved by the local advisory board. The request conforms to local zoning
regulations. If approved, there will be
a required payback to the Foundation of $1,500.00 per acre. The exact amount will be determined once the
Foundation receives a letter from the Health Department stating the exact
required size of the lot.
Staff recommends approval of the release of one acre plus
such minimum additional acreage if required by the County Health Department,
not to exceed 2 acres total based on the provisions of the deed of easement and
in accordance with Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b), Annotated Code of
Maryland, which grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of up to 2 acres if
required by regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment or the
county.
Martin Sokolich, Program Administrator was available at the
meeting to answer any questions from the Board members.
Motion # 6: To approve the request by PCN Farms, LLP, for the exclusion
of up to 2 acres for a child's lot on easement property.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Pat Langenfelder
Status: Approved
C.
1. 12-92-07 Bowers, Lillian (Estate) 81.78 acres
Request for a
partial termination of district property.
Ms. Bowers (deceased) was the original owner of the district
property. The current request by the
representatives of the estate is for a partial termination of district
property.
The estate is requesting a partial termination of a
1.184-acre area of the district. The
area is an existing separately described lot.
The area is wooded and will have a minimal effect on the agricultural
use of the property. The request is
being made as part of the settlement of the estate.
According to
The request was approved by the local advisory board and
conforms to local zoning regulations.
Staff recommends approval. The request falls within one of the allowable
criteria for partial termination of land from districts under the Foundation's
partial termination policy.
Specifically, the land requested to be terminated from the district will
allow less than three lots (the maximum allowed under the partial termination
policy). The district continues to meet
the minimum size and soils criteria.
Motion # 7: To approve the request by Estate of Lillian Bowers for a
partial termination of district property.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Pat Langenfelder
Status: Approved
2. 12-83-02 O'Neill, Lois M. 102.77 acres
Request for up to two acres for a
child's lot from easement property
Mrs. O'Neill is the original grantor of the easement. The current request is for the exclusion of
up to two acres from the easement for the purpose of constructing a dwelling
for the personal use of her daughter, Bettina.
Three child's lots have been excluded from the property for
Mrs. O'Neill's other children, Harry, Mary Louise, and Carolyn. Mrs. O'Neill does not own any other district
or easement property.
According to
The request was approved by the local agricultural advisory
board and conforms to local zoning regulations.
If the request is approved, there will be a required payback amount of
$1,486.83 per acre. The exact amount
will be determined once the Foundation receives a letter from the Health
Department stating the exact required size of the lot.
Staff recommends approval of the release of one acre plus
such minimum additional acreage if required by the County Health Department,
not to exceed 2 acres total based on the provisions of the deed of easement and
in accordance with Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b), Annotated Code of
Maryland, which grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of up to 2 acres if
required by regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment or the
county.
Will Doane, Planner, and Mrs. Lois O'Neill were present at the Board meeting to answer any questions
from the Board.
Mr. Conrad pointed out that the proposed lot location does
not exactly follow the lot location guidelines.
Also he wanted to know about the nature of the right-of-way.
Mr. Doane responded that the
right-of-way would be fee simple and the plan is currently to use an existing
road. Mr. Conrad stated that in the case
of a fee simple right-of-way, the Foundation often requests the owners of the right-of-way
to grant a right-of-way easement to the owners of the farm so that they can
maintain access to both sides of the property.
Mrs. O'Neill stated that currently there is an existing road
and that has always been used for an access.
Mr. Doane stated that the farming
operation occurs all around the edge of the property. The proposed lot location is currently in the
pasture and will have the least impact on the farming operations. The proposed location is also in close
proximity to several other buildings on the farm.
Motion # 8: To approve the request by Mrs. Lois M. O'Neill for up to two
acres for a child's lot from easement property conditional to a right-of-way
easement being granted to the farm property.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
D. QUEEN
ANNE'S COUNTY
1. 17-91-07A McFarland, Donald W. & Barbara 84.90 acres
17-91-08
Request for a partial termination of
district properties
The McFarlands are original owners
of the district properties. The current request
is for a partial termination of three acres on both district properties.
The McFarlands are requesting
approval to terminate a three-acre area on both district properties. They
intend to provide two lots for grandchildren on each area to be withheld to
construct dwellings for their use. The
grandchildren help with the dairy and grain operation.
The areas to be terminated are cropland. According to Queen Anne's County, both areas
are located along the road and will have minimal impact on the agricultural
operation. Both districts continue to
meet minimum soils criteria. According
to Queen Anne's County, current zoning allows a maximum of two lots on each
withheld area. The request was approved
by the local advisory board and conforms to local zoning regulations.
Staff recommends approval. The request falls within one of the allowable
criteria for partial termination of land from districts under the Foundation's
partial termination policy.
Specifically, the land requested to be terminated from the district will
allow less than three lots on each district (the maximum allowed under the
partial termination policy). The
districts continue to meet the minimum size and soils criteria.
Note: The small area in the woods outlined in
yellow in the aerial for 17-91-08 was a partial termination approved in 2001
for a cell tower.
Donna Landis-Smith, Program Administrator was present at the
meeting to answer any questions from the Board.
Motion # 9: To approve the request of Mr. and Mrs. Donald W. McFarland for
a partial termination of district properties.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Judith Lynch
Status: Approved
2. 17-82-04 Sheubrooks, Larry A. & Judith
Sheubrooks 218.00 acres
Request for a partial termination of
district property.
Mr. and Mrs. Sheubrooks are the original owners of the
district property. The current request
is for a partial termination of district property.
The Sheubrooks are requesting a
partial termination of five acres around an existing dwelling and barns. According to Queen Anne's County, the partial
termination will have minimal effect on the agricultural use of the
property. Only two of the five acres are
tillable.
The Sheubrooks plan to convey the
five acres to a grandchild (or another family member) at some point in the
future. They want to retain the
flexibility to operate a business on the five acres that may not be allowed
under the terms of the easement. (The Sheubrooks plan to apply for the FY 07 easement acquisition
cycle.) According to Queen Anne's
County, there is no development potential remaining on the 5-acre withheld area.
The request was approved by the local advisory board and
conforms to local zoning regulations.
Staff recommends approval. The request falls within one of the allowable
criteria for partial termination of land from districts under the Foundation's
partial termination policy.
Specifically, the land requested to be terminated from the district will
allow less than three lots (the maximum allowed under the partial termination
policy). The district continues to meet
the minimum size and soils criteria.
Motion #10: To approve the request of Mr. and Mrs. Larry A. Sheubrooks for
a partial termination of district property.
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
E. ST. MARY'S COUNTY
1. 18-99-16A Beaven, George, et al. 86.00 acres
Request to amend the District Agreement to reflect a change
in acres due to a survey
Mr. Beavan is one of the original
owners of the easement property. There
are no pre-existing dwellings. No lot
exclusions have been requested. The
current request is for approval to amend the District Agreement to reflect a
change in district acres due to a survey.
Mr. Beavan is applying to sell an easement in
FY 2007.
In 1999 Mr. Beavan sold a MALPF easement on his adjoining
134.5 acre property. During the easement
settlement process, a survey was done.
The survey revealed that the remaining district property contains 103.7
acres, instead of 86.0 as the recorded District Agreement states. According to St. Mary's County, the proposed
amended district contains 67.7 acres cropland, 32.0 acres of woodland, and 4.0
acres other; as well as 54% class II and III soils.
This request has been approved by the St. Mary's
Agricultural Advisory Board.
Foundation staff recommends approval based on meeting
minimum size and soils criteria. Mr. Conrad pointed out that the Foundation
staff has not seen the survey and, therefore, cannot guarantee the quality of
the survey.
Donna Sasscer, Program Administrator,
was available to answer any questions from the Board.
Motion #11: To approve the request of George Beaven to amend the District
Agreement to reflect a change in acres due to a survey, subject to review of
the survey by the Department of General Services.
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Robert Stahl
Status: Approved
F.
1. 13-80-04Ae Shoffeit, Paul 70.08 acres
Request for approval of a tenant house on easement property
Mr. Shoffeitt is the original
owner of the easement. There have been
two 1.0 acre child's lots and a 1.0 acre owner's lot approved for the
property. The current request is for
approval of a tenant house.
This request is being made to correct a violation. In 1987 Mr. Shoffeitt placed a mobile trailer
on the property, without the Foundation's permission, for the use of an active
tenant on the farm. About a year ago he
contacted Joy Levy, Program Administrator, to request relocation of the tenant
house and was told that he had not received approval from the Foundation. Mr. Shoffeitt has identified three possible
locations for the tenant dwelling. The
preferred location is the conversion of an existing barn. However, this location may be costly and time
consuming. If this does not work, he
wishes to locate the tenant house in an area contiguous to the other farm
buildings.
According to Mr. Shoffeitt, the tenants (Kevin Harrison and
Denise Porter) operate and maintain the farm, including: assisting with horse
training, conducting the hay operation, and personally assisting Mr. Shoffeitt,
who is disabled. Their duties would not
change.
This request has been approved by the Howard County
Agricultural Advisory Board, based on Mr. Shoffeitt's
demonstrated need for a tenant.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for
tenant house as it meets the Foundation's requirements as found in COMAR 15.15.03.03.B(2) which states "not more than one tenant
house per full 100 acres may be considered by the Foundation for a farm, for
example, one house for 100-199.99 acres, two houses for 200-299.99 acres",
etc., or demonstration of a compelling need for a tenant on less than 100
acres.
Mr. Shoffeitt and Joy Levy, Program Administrator, were
available at the meeting to answer any questions from the Board members.
Motion #12: To approve the request of Paul Shoffeitt for the approval for
the use of a converted barn as an alternative tenant house location.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe
Tassone
Status: Approved
Mr. Doug Wilson stated that if for
some reason barn conversion does not work Mr. Shoffeitt can use the second
option. Mr. Conrad informed Mr.
Shoffeitt that a tenant house cannot be subdivided.
Mr. Doug Wilson emphasized the need
to have periodic and quality inspections by MALPF staff and local program
administrators to prevent such violations.
Mr. Doug Wilson encouraged all to revisit the issue of inspections to
avoid probable legal issues at a later date.
G.
1.
Request to exchange equal area of easement property for
non-easement property.
Mr. Maust is the original grantor of the easement. The current request is for approval to exchange 6.47 acre of easement property for
6.47 acres of non-easement property.
Mr. Maust's property was divided
during a realignment of Route 495, also known as
Mr. Maust proposes to exchange the 6.47 acres located on the
Yoder side of the road for 6.47 acres on the Maust side. The 6.47 acres on the Yoder side would be
released from the easement and added to the Yoder property. Mr. Maust proposes to acquire from the Yoders
the 4.986-acre area located on his side of the road and add it to the easement
property. To make up the additional
acreage required for an even swap, Mr. Maust proposes to add to the easement a
1.484-acre contiguous area (owned by Mr. Maust) originally withheld from the
district/easement.
According to
The acreage exchange was approved by the local advisory
board and is consistent with local zoning regulations.
Staff recommends approval as the exchange will have a
positive impact on the agricultural operation of the easement property. Foundation approval should be contingent on a
satisfactory review by the Office of Real Estate, Department of General
Services, for a determination of the impact of the proposed exchange on the
value of the easement.
Mr. Doug Wilson wanted to know if
the Foundation needs a letter from Mr. Yoder for its records. Board members discussed and commented that once
the MALPF Board approves the exchange the landowners cannot move forward unless
Mr. Yoder agrees.
Motion # 13: To approve the request of David E. Maust to exchange equal area
of easement property for non-easement property subject to satisfactory review
by the Office of Real Estate, Department of General Services.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Robert
Stahl
Status: Approved
H.
1. 19-91-01e Porter, Lawrence W. & Sue Ellen 161.749 acres
Request for approval of a tenant
house on easement property.
The Porters are the original owners of easement
property. There are two pre-existing
dwellings. No lot exclusions have been
requested. A 35.37 acre agricultural
subdivision was approved on
According to
The request has been approved by the Somerset County
Advisory Board and meets the county zoning and building codes requirements.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for
tenant house as it meets the Foundation's requirements as found in COMAR
15.15.03.03.B(2) which states "not more than one tenant house per full 100
acres may be considered by the Foundation for a farm, for example, one house
for 100-199.99 acres, two houses for 200-299.99 acres", etc.
Mr. and Mrs. Porter, and Tom Lawton,
Program Administrator, were available to answer any questions from the
Board. Mr. Porter informed the Board
that dwelling labelled as a tenant house on the agenda material was existing
before the easement sale.
Motion #14: To approve the request of Mr. and Mrs.
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
Mr. Tassone
wanted a clarification regarding the regulation mentioned in the staff memo
"not more than one tenant house per full 100 acres may be considered by
the Foundation for a farm…" Mr. Conrad commented that the other house is
considered a pre-existing house by the Foundation and not considered as a
tenant house.
I.
1. 08-93-02A Bridgett, Dennis L. 130.957 acres
Request to amend the District Agreement to correct and
increase the acreage
Mr. Bridgett is the original district owner. On
If this request is approved, the amended District Agreement
will contain 130.957 acres consisting of 71% class II and III soils. The request has been approved by the Charles
County Advisory Board.
Motion #15: To approve the request of Dennis L. Bridgett to amend the
District Agreement to correct and increase the acreage.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Shirley Pilchard
Status: Approved
III. AGRICULTURAL
PRESERVATION DISTRICT PETITIONS
Mr. Conrad presented the district petitions.
F.
1.
2.
JoAnne Doody
Leatherman & John R. Doody, Trustees
3.
Richard A. Biggs Trust & Nancy S. Biggs
Trust
Staff recommends
approval contingent upon the approval of the Montgomery County Commissioners
(meeting scheduled in the afternoon of
Motion #16: To approve the items 1 to 3 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
John Zawitoski, Program Administrator
was present to answer any questions from the Board. Mr. Zawitoski informed the
Board members that all three properties are potential easement properties and
all the applicants have the intention to apply for easement sale on
A.
1.
2.
3.
Charles Hess Revocable Trust) and Irleene
Hess (Trustee of the Irleene Hess
Revocable Trust)
4.
The Barnes and Chapman property has
nine withheld acres. The acreage being withheld from the district falls within
the guidelines of the Foundation's approved withheld acreage policy.
Staff recommends the
landowner acquire a forest stewardship plan on the property.
5.
6.
Charles Rice, Program Administrator,
was available to answer any questions from the Board.
Motion #17: To approve the items 1 to 6 of
Motion: Howard Freedlander Second: Shirley
Pilchard
Status: Approved
B.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Staff recommends the landowner Ms. Thomas, acquire a forest stewardship plan on the property.
5.
Staff recommends the
landowners Steven and Celia Palmer acquire a forest stewardship plan on the
property.
Motion #18: To approve the items 1 to 5 of
Motion: Pat Langenfelder Second: Howard Freedlander
Status: Approved
C.
1.
Barbara Polito, Program Administrator, was available to
answer questions from the Board. Chris
Wilson, Board member stated that, of the two dwellings, one is a manor house
and one is a tenant house.
Motion #19: To approve item 1 of
Motion: Pat Langenfelder Second: Joe Tassone
Abstained: Chris Wilson
Status: Approved
D.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The McCreary property has ten withheld acres with two (2)
development rights. The acreage being
withheld from the district falls within the guidelines of the Foundation's
approved withheld acreage policy.
8.
Staff recommends the
landowners Paul and Barbara Raech, acquire a forest
stewardship plan on the property.
9.
10.
11.
Eric Shertz, Program Administrator
was available to answer questions from the Board.
Responding to a question from Mr.
Tassone, Mr. Shertz stated that the Garren Family had five different parcels
that did not have an easement on them.
The 100-acre parcel that was withdrawn (
In the case of Reynolds and Rector's
district applications (
Motion #20: To approve the items 1 to 11 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
E.
1.
2.
The Nuse property has 10 withheld
acres to meet the minimum soils requirement.
The area being withheld falls within the guidelines of the Foundation's
withheld acreage policy.
3.
The property has 75 withheld acres to meet the minimum soils
requirement. The landowners intend to
place the withheld acreage in the Wetlands Reserves Program. If not, two development rights will be
associated with the parcel. The area
being withheld falls within the guidelines of the Foundation's withheld acreage
policy.
Board members discussed the landowner's intention to place
the withheld acreage in the Wetlands Reserves Program and the issues DGS may
have while appraising the property. Mr.
Doug Wilson stated that there is no issue when a district is created. When the landowners apply for an easement,
they may need some advice in setting an asking price. There might be certain assumptions being made
by the landowner, and the asking price may be either too high or too low;
therefore, there is a need to have a conversation with the landowners when they
apply for an easement.
Mr. Tassone commented that,
because of
Mr. Tassone stated the issue of
where the lot rights go depends on good faith between the County and the MALPF
Board and follow through in the County administrative process.
4.
The property has 218.26 withheld acres to meet the minimum
soils requirement. The landowner intends
to donate an easement on the withheld acreage if MALPF purchases an easement on
this parcel. If not, two development
rights may be associated with the withheld acreage. The area being withheld falls within the
guidelines of the Foundation's withheld acreage policy.
5.
The
6.
This
7.
Staff recommends the
landowner, Mr. Holland, acquire a forest stewardship plan on this property.
All district applications
contingent upon approval of the Worcester County Commissioners. Katherine
Munson, Program Administrator, was available to answer any questions from the
Board.
Motion #21: To approve the items 1 to 7 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
Ms. Munson stated that Glad Mar
Dairy Land, Inc, had originally withheld 19.7 acres
and wanted to develop that area. When
Ms. Munson explained the Foundation's guideline on development rights, the
applicants changed their minds and now have given a letter stating their
intention to place the remaining acreage of the parcel which will not be in the
MALPF proposal, into a donated easement.
Mr. Holland has agreed to donate 3
of the 4 development rights, retaining one development right. A copy of the letter has been given to MALPF
staff.
Motion #22: To approve item 5 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Robert
Stahl
Status: Approved
G.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. 19-06-08 Brummitt, Jr., James R. & Linda O. 108.864 acres
Carol Council, MALPF staff,
stated that the acreage on the Brummitt property has been corrected to 104.554
acres. 4.08 acre has been out-conveyed
from the title deed. There is a withheld
acreage of .23 acre with a cell tower.
The .23 acre is assessed as commercial.
There is an existing right-of-way access through the property.
8.
9.
Staff recommends the Kings acquire a forest stewardship
plan.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Tom Lawton, Program Administrator, was available
to answer any questions from the Board and confirmed that the district
applications have been approved by the Somerset County Commissioners.
Mr. Tassone wanted to know if there are any
small parcels under the same ownership and if the parcels have contiguous
boundaries. Ms. Council stated that when
she was setting up the district, she did check, but did not find them
contiguous to each other.
Mr. Lawton stated that when he discussed this
with the owners, the owners confirmed that they need the land protected and
were aware that they will not be having any lot rights under the MALPF
program. Mr. Lawton also conveyed his
appreciation to Mr. Conrad and Ms. Council for visiting
Ms. Council commented that Mr. Lawton did an
outstanding job considering that he had never had this volume of work.
Motion #23: To approve the items 1 to 21 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
H. ST. MARY'S COUNTY
1.
2. 18-06-02 Lyon,
Sr., William V., et al 72.00
acres
3.
4.
Staff recommends John and Annie Hall acquire a forest
stewardship plan.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Staff recommends the D'Wynters
acquire a forest stewardship plan.
12. 18-06-12 Siebert,
Arlie B. & Carolyn W. 57.60
acres
13.
14.
15.
16.
Staff recommends the Wilts acquire a forest stewardship
plan.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Mr. Stahl informed the Board members that he was the
previous owner of the Wolfe property and currently does not have any financial
interests in the property.
21.
22.
Motion #24: To approve the items 1 to 22 of St. Mary's County to establish
agricultural land preservation districts with appropriate recommendations.
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Robert
Stahl
Status: Approved
Donna Sasscer, Program Administrator, was
available to answer any questions from the Board. Mr. Chris Wilson wanted to know about item 5, where
the two 5-acre parcels are being withheld surrounding the two existing
dwellings. Ms. Sasscer stated that there
were two existing houses on the property.
The county zoning allows 1 dwelling per 5-acre density.
I.
1.
2.
Staff recommends the Owings acquire a forest stewardship
plan.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Staff recommends the Hills acquire a forest stewardship
plan.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Carla Martin,
Program Administrator, was available to answer questions from the Board.
Motion #25: To approve the items 1 to 15 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
J.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The Smith property
has 19 acres withheld for family lots (zoning allows 3 lots).
7.
-
8.
9.
10.
Staff recommends the Bartons acquire a forest stewardship
plan on this property.
11.
Anne Bradley,
Agricultural Preservation Planner, was available to answer questions from the
Board.
Motion #26: To approve the items 1 to 11 of
Motion: Howard Freedlander Second: Pat
Langenfelder
Status: Approved
K. PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY
1.
One acre is being withheld around an existing dwelling. Staff recommends Ms. Pirner acquire a forest stewardship
plan. The farming operation will not be
impacted by its location adjacent to the WS Schmidt Environmental Education
Center because it is buffered from the farm by several acres of woods.
2.
Staff recommends Ms.
Pirner acquire a forest stewardship plan on this property as well.
3.
One acre is being
withheld around an existing dwelling.
Yates Clagget, Program
Administrator, was available to answer any questions from the Board and
confirmed that the district applications have been approved by the
Motion #27: To approve items 1 to 3 from
Motion: Chris Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
L.
1.
Motion #28: To approve item 1 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Pat Langenfelder
Status: Approved
M.
QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY
1.
The property has
2.216 acres withheld for the pending subdivision of an existing dwelling – no
further subdivision of the withheld area is allowed under current zoning.
2.
Staff recommends Ms.
Morris acquire a forest stewardship plan.
3.
Motion #29: To approve the item 1 to 3 of Queen Anne's County to establish
agricultural land preservation districts with appropriate recommendations.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Pat
Langenfelder
Status: Approved
N.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Staff recommends Mr.
Spies acquire a forest stewardship plan.
5.
Staff recommends
Monaths acquire a forest stewardship plan.
6.
The
7.
8.
Staff recommends
Rholetters acquire a forest stewardship plan.
9.
The Hetrick property has 4 withheld acres. Withheld acreage is consistent with withheld
acreage policy: no more than three lots are associated with the withheld
area. Staff recommends the landowner
acquire a forest stewardship plan.
10.
Staff recommends
Glandens acquire a forest stewardship plan.
11.
The property has 2
withheld acres.
Tammy Buckle, Program
Administrator, was available to answer questions from the Board. Responding to a question, Ms. Buckle
clarified that item 2 has withheld acreage of approximately 10 acres. As per county zoning, at least two
development rights are associated with the withheld acreage.
Motion #30: To approve the item 1 to 11 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
Motion #31: To approve the item 2 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
O.
1.
The Evans property is part of a larger 867-acre tract. The
Foundation's withheld acreage policy allows a landowner to establish a district
on a portion of a parcel when it is clear that sufficient funding may not be
available to purchase an easement on the entire parcel.
2.
3.
4.
Gloria Smith, Program
Administrator, was available to answer questions from the Board.
Motion #32: To approve the item 1 to 4 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
P.
1.
The George property
has 5 withheld acres for family lots.
The withheld acreage falls within the Foundation's withheld acreage
policy because only two development rights are associated with the area
withheld. Staff recommends the landowner
acquire a forest stewardship plan.
2.
Staff recommends the
Dulins acquire a forest stewardship plan.
3.
Staff recommends the
Dulins acquire a forest stewardship plan.
The property has
withheld 14 acres. (Four
acres around existing dwelling for future home-based business. Ten Acres are withheld for family lots.) The 14 acres can accommodate five dwellings
and is therefore not consistent with the Foundation's withheld acreage
policy. The landowners have agreed to
place a deed restriction on the area to be withheld restricting the area to no
more than three dwellings/lots.
4.
Staff recommends the
Higgins acquire a forest stewardship plan.
5.
6.
Martin Sokolich,
Program Administrator was available to answer questions from the Board.
Motion #33: To approve the item 1 to 6 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
Motion #34: To approve the item 3 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Judith
Lynch
Status: Approved
Q.
1.
2.
The applicant has
withheld 5.3 acres (zoned commercial) from the district. The withheld acreage meets an exception criterion
under the withheld acreage policy:
commercially zoned property may be excluded.
3.
(Contract Purchaser)
Wally Lippincott,
Program Administrator and Mr. Jay McGinnis were present at the meeting.
Mr. Conrad stated
staff recommends approval subject to the receipt of a signed contract of
sale. The district application of a
contract purchaser follows a different procedure. The approval is given with the condition that
the district be signed when the sales contract is received. The district agreement would not be recorded
until the sales contract is signed and received.
4.
5.
Staff recommends Mr.
Tracey acquire a forest stewardship plan.
6.
7.
The Martin property has withheld
2.5 acres (2.0 acres for a cell tower and 0.5 acres for a day care
centre). The acreage withheld is
consistent with the Foundation's withheld acreage policy. Land may be excluded from the district if it
contains existing commercial or residential development.
Responding to a question, Mr.
Lippincott stated that there is not a cell tower on the property at this
time. The owner was ready to go for a
special exception, but the company put it on hold for now. The tower would need only 78' x 78'. However, for the zoning setbacks and
standards they will be looking at 2.0 acres, up to 5.0 acres. Probably 2 acres will be adequate. The question is, can
that be used for residential subdivision?
There is little density left on the property. He has two parcels there already and two lot
rights remaining. If he chose to use one
on the withheld acreage then he would have one fewer to sell through the
easement process. Mr. Conrad asked how
that can be established for appraisals; whether the County will provide a final
accounting. Mr. Lippincott
said that he would have to work on that.
8.
Staff recommends the
Land Preservation Trust acquire a forest stewardship plan.
Ned Halle, Land
Preservation Trust,
9.
10.
Mr. Conrad asked Mr.
Lippincott about the information on County Zoning/Density. Mr. Lippincott believed
it to be RC 2. The soil MtC3 mentioned
in the staff report is referring to Class IV soil that is acceptable to meet
soil productivity requirements.
11.
Mr. Lippincott
stated that on this property there is no density remaining on the property.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Motion #35: To approve items 1 to 17 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Chris
Wilson
Status: Approved
Motion #36: To approve with conditions item 3 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
Mr. Doug Wilson stated that he would
like the Board to approve item 3 to enable Mr. Jay McGinnis to apply for an
easement. When Mr. McGinnis's
application moves forward for settlement, he can sign the district agreement
and it can be recorded. Mr. McGinnis
clearly cannot sign the district agreement on a property he does not own, but
the Board's action would allow him to be in the queue for ranking, appraisal,
etc. He asked Mr. McGinnis when he
expected to purchase the property. Mr.
McGinnis stated that he expected to purchase it in April, 2007. Mr. Doug Wilson stated that he will then have
purchased the property prior to receiving an offer from the Foundation. Therefore he will not be using the money
associated with the sale of the easement to purchase the property.
Mr. Doug Wilson stated that, as soon
as Mr. McGinnis owns the property, the Foundation should be notified that
settlement has occurred and the Foundation will automatically record the
district. Mr. McGinnis as an applicant
will have the authority to withdraw the easement application, but will not be
able to withdraw the district petition.
Amended Motion #37: To approve item 3 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe
Tassone
Status: Approved
Motion #38: To approve with conditions item 8 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
For item 8, Mr. Wilson asked Mr.
Halle about the number of horse shows he was planning. Mr. Halle stated
there to be a maximum of eight shows a year.
He plans to have two racing events; one in fall and one in spring. Mr. Halle commented that, as per the
agreement, he has no plans to have more than eight major events on the
property. There are nice old barns,
sheds, landscapers, equipment, tree, mulch, etc., on the property.
Mr. Halle briefed Board members
about the property and its operations.
The 238.494-acre property is owned by the Land Preservation Trust, Inc,
a local land trust in
The property is located at
Craig Nielsen, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Agriculture,
wanted to know about the non-agricultural commercial activities undertaken in
the farm.
Mr. Halle stated that
there are one-day race events. The Land
Preservation Trust had organized kids fairs with pony rides for kids, vendors,
etc., but nothing has been organized on a regular basis. Thousands of people come on these days, and there
are lots of activities on the property.
The Trust has areas set aside for parking. The activities are manned by volunteers, and
the money earned is used in support of agriculture. There is no development, and there will be
one density which the Trust will be giving up if it sells an easement to MALPF.
Mr. Nielsen wanted to
know if the Trust has any documents indicating the non-agricultural uses on the
property. r. Halle
said he did not have any.
Mr. Conrad asked Mr. Lippincott if the property was entering into the local
county program, would he have recommended the property for approval. Mr. Lippincott stated that he had not thought of it and would
like to review the standards for uses.
In terms of the size of the land, location, soil, etc., he would be
eager to take it, but on the issues related to uses, he may have the same
issues as MALPF.
Mr. Conrad asked Mr.
Halle to brief the Board about the farming operations on the property. Mr. Halle stated
that the whole property is in grass except for the buildings. 75% of the acreage is devoted to hay
operations. There is a one mile race
track that may take 25 or 30% of the acreage, and the rest is all filled with
grass.
Amended Motion #38a: To approve item 8 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
Mr. Freedlander wanted to know how to relate this action to
the Uses Committee and how long will Shawan Downs have
to wait for a resolution. Mr. Doug
Wilson commented that the Uses Committee on Horse Farms is a sub committee of
the Board's Uses Committee.
Mr. Doug Wilson believed that Land Preservation Trust has to
wait till the Uses Committee can outline an overall policy. Mr. Freedlander
felt that the Uses Committee can take a long time, and we should give a time
estimate to the Land Preservation Trust.
Mr. Doug Wilson stated that in such a situation his view would be to say
`No' to them because he did not feel it is an appropriate project for the MALPF
program as it is now.
Mr. Doug Wilson stated that he would prefer to wait until
all the details are worked out concerning the use policy. The Committee can propose a use policy and
ask the MALPF Board to approve it. If
the approved policy coincides with the existing use of this property we already
have the district approval, and the application will be in the 2007 application
pool (just as with Mr. McGinnis). If the
policy and the existing uses do not match, the approval is not valid and the
Land Preservation Trust comes back to the Foundation at a future date with an
application and, perhaps, the unacceptable uses will be ended.
Normally the Foundation would have said no to all
these. With the approval of the motion,
the Land Preservation Trust becomes eligible to apply in FY 07 easement
cycle. The eligibility could be
terminated at some point if resolution could not be achieved. Mr. Doug Wilson stated that the Foundation
could not make an easement offer next year unless these issues have been
resolved, because at that point the district would have to be recorded. Technically the district has to be recorded
before it goes for settlement. He stated
that he is not going to be pushing for an agenda item for easement offers until
the Foundation knows about the final agreement on all the pending issues. There is no need to tie up the easements
unless the issues are clearly resolved and it is also not fair to others
waiting for an easement.
Mr. Tassone wanted to know when the district would be
recorded. Mr. Doug Wilson stated that it
should be at the point when the Uses Committee has established policy for the
Board's approval. MALPF staff will seek
the Board's approval that the uses are acceptable, and there are no
violations. This would ensure that there
is meeting of minds.
Mr. Halle stated that the arrangement was agreeable to him.
Mr. Conrad wanted to clarify the motion. The Foundation has already informed Mr.
McGinnis that, when he goes for sale of the property, his district will be
recorded.
In the case of the Land Preservation Trust, the Board has
conveyed that, if the issue of uses is resolved, the district is going to be
recorded. If there is a meeting of the
minds and the Foundation feels that it can work, does Mr. Halle have the option
to refuse since the Foundation has already approved?
Mr. Doug Wilson believed that the situation is exactly the
same as Mr. McGinnis's situation. If the
Land Preservation Trust's uses do not match with the Uses Committee's views,
there can be a discussion between the two.
Mr. Doug Wilson believed that, if there is a meeting of the minds, the
Foundation can record the district.
Mr. Halle stated that he will provide a detailed list of the
ongoing uses on the property. He stated
that he wanted to get input from the person who runs the events on a day-to-day
basis. The Uses Committee can look at
that, and there can a discussion between the two parties. He believed his situation is a little
different than that of Mr. McGinnis. In
Mr. McGinnis's situation, when he owns the property, his district can be
recorded. In the case of the Land
Preservation Trust district, it may not be recorded; so, there is a difference.
Board members wanted to know about the money earned from the
activities and the area being used for parking.
Mr. Halle stated that in the case of big events, volunteers
come from Greater Baltimore Medical Center.
A portion of the money goes to Greater Baltimore Medical Center and a
portion goes to Land Preservation Trust.
The cars are parked on top of the hill.
He believed approximately 90 or 100 acres will potentially have cars on
it for a major event. A big event draws
between five and ten thousand people.
Board members agreed on the need to have a meeting of the
minds before proceeding.
Mr. Tassone commented that as per the motion, if there is a
meeting of the minds between the Foundation and the Trust, the district
agreement will be recorded.
Amended Motion #38b: To approve item 8 of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
Ms. Weaver stated that the regular Uses Committee is not working
on equine issues because a committee already exists which focuses specifically
on the equine industry. She wanted to
point this out so there was no misunderstanding about which committee will
handle the issues associated with the Land Preservation Trust application. Mr. Conrad stated that the Equine Committee
will address the uses on the Land Preservation Trust property.
R.
1.
2.
3.
The Barnes property has 40.84 acres withheld; 3.7 acres
platted for development (3 development rights); 2.44 acres are reserved for a
future bypass road; 16.8 acres required to be a donated easement; and 17.9
acres are reclaimed landfill. The area
being withheld falls within the guidelines of the Foundation's withheld acreage
policy.
Staff recommends Mr. Barnes acquire
a forest stewardship plan.
4.
The Roop property has 3.0 acres
withheld for an abandoned quarry with 1 development right. The area being withheld falls within the
guidelines of the Foundation's withheld acreage policy.
5.
Staff recommends Tastos acquire a
forest stewardship plan.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Norman E. Sellers, President
10.
11.
12.
The Wilhide property has 2.0 acres
withheld for a dwelling under construction.
No additional development rights are associated with this withheld
acreage. The area being withheld falls
within the guidelines of the Foundation's withheld acreage policy.
13.
Motion #39: To approve the item 1 to 15 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Judith
Lynch
Abstained: Howard Freedlander
(Item # 7 only)
Status: Approved
Mr. Robertson was present to answer questions from the
Board.
Mr. Freedlander abstained from voting for the Krome (
S.
1.
Will Doane,
Motion #40: To approve item 1 of
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
Ms. Schultz thanked everyone for their participation in the
day long meeting. There being no further
business, Ms. Schultz asked for a motion for adjournment of the meeting.
Motion #41: To adjourn regular session.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
The regular
session of the Board meeting was adjourned at approximately
Respectfully
Submitted:
_____________________________________
Rama Dilip,
MALPF Secretary
_____________________________________
James A. Conrad,
Executive Director