Staff presents proposed growth-tier maps to implement state septic bill; few rural parcels lose development potential

Planning staff presented the county’s draft growth-tier maps required by the Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012 and explained how various local mapping choices interact with state guidance. The mapping determines where major subdivisions are allowed and where local jurisdictions will restrict or permit development in the absence of public sewer.

Staff walked through criteria the state suggested—existing and proposed sewer service, locally designated growth areas, zoning districts, priority funding areas, rural legacy and priority preservation areas, and lands subject to conservation easements—and described how the county applied those factors. The draft mapping generally aligns with the county’s adopted 2010 comprehensive plan: growth areas (tiers 1 and 2) mirror the plan’s red growth-designation map, and most agricultural/forest/resource lands and protected parcels were mapped as tier 4 (rural protection).

Staff noted a subcategory to distinguish rural subdivisions that already have sewer service; these appear as a separate “tier 1A” in the draft. The county also proposed mapping areas where the watershed-implementation-plan (WIP) recommended sewer expansion as possible tier 3 candidates, although staff expected the state might not accept all such suggestions.

Staff quantified the impact: most rural parcels will not be affected; approximately 1,152 parcels would lose any new development potential under the mapped tiers, and county-wide development potential reductions were modest in staff’s analysis (several thousand lots only under extreme TDR scenarios). The presentation included recommendations for a few specific cases (scenic-corridor parcels along Routes 5 and 235 to remain tier 4 for character protection; limited infill exceptions were discussed but staff noted state guidance discourages mapping infill surrounded by ag/forest as tier 3).

Commissioners asked about practical effects: staff said the mapping primarily affects the ability to create major subdivisions outside growth areas and will not change existing zoning density; zoning remains the controlling code for density. Staff also explained the mapping can be adopted administratively by the county commissioners before the end-of-year state deadline, and later incorporated into the comprehensive plan update.

The presentation concluded with staff stating they had transmitted the draft to the Maryland Department of Planning for review and would negotiate any comments; the county commissioners had reviewed and made clarifying direction before the staff sent the draft to state reviewers.