COSTS OF GROWTH: Study finds residential development a money loser for governments
By Katherine Crowell
Staff Writer

SALISBURY -- Growth doesn't pay for growth.

Residential growth alone typically does not offset its costs to county and city services, unless it is very upscale, planning experts say.

"Residential growth requires more in services than it pays for in taxes," said Richard Hall, director of land use, planning and analysis for the Maryland Department of Planning.

The most recent study conducted by the American Farmland Trust -- a nonprofit dedicated to protecting agricultural resources -- about costs to community services in Wicomico County claims that while commercial, agricultural and open space land uses have a positive net fiscal impact by generating a surplus in revenues, residential land use has a negative net fiscal impact.

For every $1 of revenue generated by residential property in Wicomico County in 2001, $1.21 was spent in providing services to residential developments, the study found. On the other hand, for every $1 in revenue from commercial and business properties, 33 cents was spent for services. Ninety-six cents in services were spent for agricultural and open space lands.

The report states that residential property does not generate enough tax revenue to offset the expenditures it accumulates. Residential development only generated $66,823,696 in revenues to cover expenditures of $81,083,924 in 2001. Commercial and industrial development as well as farm and open space generate more than enough to cover expenditures. Commercial businesses generated $24,102,665 to cover $8,071,722 and agricultural and open land generated $1,702,698 while expenditures were $1,628,312.

The most detrimental form of residential growth comes in the form of low-density development, or in other words, sprawl.

Sprawl

Much of the land prior to 1998 that was lost to residential development was lost in the form of sprawl. A development with lot sizes that are .5 acres or larger constitute a low-density project.

The Maryland State Depart-ment of Planning provided The Daily Times with land use change numbers from 1973 to 2002 for the Lower Eastern Shore counties. The amount of low-density residential acres has steadily increased during the 29-year span. Wicomico County has increased by more than 13,000 acres of low-density sprawl in that time period, while Worcester County has increased by more than 4,000 acres and Somerset by almost 6,000 acres.

Low-density development increased from 47 percent of the developed land in Wicomico County in 1973 to 58 percent in 1997 and is expected to reach 62 percent by 2020, the state planning department reports. The planning department estimates that Wicomico County will lose 1.6 acres with each new household built.

The rate of low-density residential developments slowed after 1998 because the county's planning department took proactive steps to stop the trend of losing agricultural land and open space by establishing new zoning ordinances that protect those land uses and apply Smart Growth policies.

In 1998, Wicomico made a significant amendment to agricultural zoning. Before that year, the ordinance allowed property owners to develop at a density rate of two units per acre. The ordinance changed to only allow one unit per 15 acres, unless the developer plans a cluster development. If the development is clustered and 50 percent is set aside as open space, then the density allowed is one unit per three acres.

The effect of the change restricts the number and size of residential subdivisions in the agricultural district, which was most vulnerable to low-density residential growth, said Salis-bury-Wicomico County planning department director Jack Lenox.

"The changes in the Compre-hensive Plan imposed zoning in two-thirds of the rural county and clearly directed growth in the cities and towns," Lenox said. "I believe the changes that occurred in 1998 have been helpful in preserving farmland because it directed investors to go to other areas of the county like the Metro Core, the cities and towns because they can better support growth."

The Metro Core is a high density growth area designated by the county's comprehensive plan. The Metro Core runs through Delmar, Salisbury, Fruitland and their immediate suburbs. The comprehensive plan also designates rural areas, which are within or next to agricultural and conservation zones where growth should be constrained and no water and sewer services are planned. The agricultural district is intended to prevent developments that require such services and preserve the farming base and rural characteristics of the county, the plan states.

The result of the zoning amendments was that only 11 new subdivisions have been proposed in the agricultural district from June 1998 to this past December, Lenox said. The proposed projects total 164 lots on 1,200 acres, he said.

Growth

After the zoning amendment and adoption of the county's comprehensive plan in 1998, development became more focused in and around the Metro Core.

However, the pressure for development outside the core is expected to increase as developable land within the Metro Core becomes more and more scarce, according to the 2006 Wicomico County Land Preser-vation, Parks and Recreation Plan.

Of the 377 square miles of Wicomico County, just under 14 percent is developed and 86 percent is undeveloped.

Despite the fact that a relatively small portion of the land is developed, the public generally perceives growth as happening at a very fast pace. Lenox said that for 20 or 30 years before the zoning changes in 1998, growth was steadily occurring throughout the county, but was diluted because the developments were scattered.

"I wasn't here, but I'd venture to say that no one lived next door, so no one came to the hearings," Lenox said.

When the zoning changes took effect and redirected growth to where services already existed -- in the cities and towns -- development began happening in people's backyards, Lenox said.

"Take a ride up north Route 13 on any Saturday morning or a Sunday, drive out to the rural areas of the county or visit a local school during lunchtime and tell me we're not growing quickly," Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt said. "It's true that in large measure we have an abundance of county land that remains undeveloped, quite a bit of which cannot be developed anyway. However, those of us that have been here for any length of time have a sense of before and after and we do feel that if we are not careful we could lose the special rural charm that has made us fall in love with our county."

Of the undeveloped land, 46 percent has the potential for development and 40 percent is considered unsuitable for development. However, approval of alternative private water and sewer facilities could give these areas potential for development.

"Technology has a lot to do with the way development occurs," Lenox said.

He said one of the assumptions made in the writing of the county water and sewer plan was based on the technology available -- individual septic systems -- and assumptions about the type of density that could be supported with that technology.

"Allowing those systems (private packaged plants), it could lead to densities inconsistent with what planning anticipated," Lenox said. "Personally, I think we need further restrictions because they are inconsistent with the county's goals."

Pollitt said private package plants -- water and wastewater treatment facilities paid for by developers and used to support individual subdivisions -- can be a valuable resource to bring water and sewer service to an area where the comprehensive plan indicates development is appropriate, but the town government cannot provide the needed services. But he said he would oppose package plants proposed for the sole purpose of crowding more homes on a rural tract of land.

"That violates the spirit of the comprehensive plan," Pollitt said. "The County Council has decided, and I agree with them, to not consider new proposals for package plants until we can update the county water and sewer plan to include a policy on the best use and regulation of these facilities."

Importance of preservation

Wicomico County has lost about 20,000 acres of farmland since 1980, the plan states. Of that, 15,000 acres were lost between 1982 and 1987. Only 25 percent of the total amount that has been lost has happened since the new ordinances took effect. There's been an overall decline of more than 17 percent of farming acres over the past 24 years.

"We're losing too much farmland," Lenox said. "We'd like to do what we can to preserve as much as possible."

The four major land preservation programs used in the county have preserved more than 7,700 acres since 1987. The county and state programs have financed easements on 5,442 acres, or 6.2 percent of the county's total among agriculture land identified in the 2002 Census of Agriculture. In addition to land preservation through programs, the county is also preserving land with the 1998 zoning regulations.

Agricultural land has been and will continue to be critical to Wicomico County's economy, said Lewis Riley, Maryland Secretary of Agriculture.

Wicomico County is first in the state in gross agricultural products sold. The market value of the county's agricultural products is estimated at $198 million annually and farms make up 36 percent of the county, or more than 88,470 acres. Wicomico County is the number one poultry-producing county in the state.

While zoning laws have helped slow down the process of losing agricultural land, the county needs to do more to continue preserving farmland, Lenox said.

"We continue to lose ag land at an unacceptable rate," Lenox said. "We're working against ourselves if we simply implement larger lot sizes. We risk losing the farm."

Riley said zoning changes have worsened land values in many cases. Instead of just subdividing an acre or two of their land, farmers who are in need of money and want to sell some to developers are forced to sell chunks of land, he said.

"We have to be very cautious of how we devalue a farmer's equity, which is in most cases his land," Riley said. "The larger the area zoning law requires, it's really taking up that much more land. A two-acre lot doesn't take as much property as a 15-acre lot. Sure, it may reduce density, but doesn't do a lot to preserve the land."

Riley said the best method of land preservation is a profitable farm.

"If a farmer makes a profit, he's going to stay in business," Riley said. "I think our governmental officials, our planning folks, environmental community have to recognize the plight of the farmer. I don't know any farmer that wants to see their land developed. Sometimes they have to sell a lot here and there to stay in business. That's the bottom line. It's not an easy solution."

kcrowell@dmg.gannett.com

410-845-4655