Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
June, 2007Kirby Date, Countryside Program Coordinator
Balancing Conservation and Development
• Up front community vision and planning
• Landowner planning and assistance
• Effective zoning implementation
• High quality development projects
Transfer of Development Rights
A technique for guiding growth away from sensitive resources and toward
development centers through the transfer of development rights from
one area to another
What are “Development Rights”?• The right to develop a piece of property as determined by
zoning • Severable from other rights of property ownership• Also known as development credits• In residential areas, one credit = one unit of development
permitted• In commercial areas, credits are in Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
or square footage of development permitted• Also can be based on square footage of land coverage• It is possible to transform one type to another via formula?
How does TDR work?
• Comprehensive plan identifies sending and receiving zones
• Zoning determines number of credits for sending and receiving properties
• Sending Landowner sells development credits to Receiving Landowner or to TDR bank
• Sending Landowner places conservation easement on property
• Receiving landowner receives zoning permit for project with additional credits applied
Options for TDR Administration
• Individual “swap” between two landowners, with community granting variance
• Two clipboards on the planning desk: interested buyers/sellers
• TDR bank at local financial institution – community wide – timing less critical
• TDR bank – cross-jurisdictional, or countywide
Possible Roles for the Land Trust
• Help with identification/prioritizing of lands to be preserved
• Help with community motivation/education
• Work with landowners considering TDR
• Hold conservation easements resulting from TDR
• Serve as TDR bank
Sending Areas
• Requires strong landowner support• Education, education, education• Carefully consider density in zoning• Work to conserve big blocks of contiguous
land• Minimize “edge” of farmland and
development• Use in conjunction with other tools
Receiving Areas
• Require adjacent landowner/community support
• Education, education, education• Carefully consider density in zoning• Work for more compact development in
areas with infrastructure• Should be accompanied by design
guidelines
A Comparison of Approaches:Large Lot Zoning
• Expands land conversion with extreme low density
• Requires extensive/expensive new infrastructure
• Increases traffic on roads, pressures on services
• Uniform growth pattern replaces rural character with suburban character
• Resulting open space is in fragments on private lots
• Serves mostly high end housing due to high land and infrastructure costs per unit
Comparison: Conservation Development• Condenses development on one
portion of a parcel to protect resources on the site
• Reduces impact on storm water, habitat, riparian areas, rural views (at low densities)
• Does not reduce overall usage of land and spreading out of population
• Infrastructure use is reduced for the developer, but not for the community
• Resulting open space conserved is in smaller blocks, often not useable for agriculture and conservation purposes
• Often serves high end housing only due to low densities overall
Comparison: TDR• Condenses development
community-wide• Reduces infrastructure
needs community-wide• Allows for preservation
of large blocks of rural land
• Allows for transportation and housing options
TDR across the U.S.
• 180 current programs ranging from local community to region to state
• 69 environmental • 44 environment & farmland• 32 farmland• 15 historic preservation• 12 other (housing, infrastructure, urban design,
revitalization)
• 8 unspecified
Why TDR for Ohio?
• Works as a voluntary program• Operates on the private market• Accommodates incentives• Suits “village-township” relationship• Works at the township, county or regional level• Requires little local regulation• Can be coupled with a number of funding
mechanisms for receiving areas
Challenges to implementation of TDR
• Public/official reluctance to adopt new programs• Lack of enabling legislation to streamline process• Need for methods to prevent tax base reduction via
sending development credits• Public reluctance to increase intensity of development in
receiving areas• Potential for inappropriate program design• Lack of public education on the benefits of compact
development in receiving areas• Developer assumption of increased density without TDRs
Community Success Factors
• Voluntary, with incentives for both sending and receiving landowners
• Tied to comprehensive planning• Receiving areas with infrastructure• Provides for tax base stability in sending zones• Allows transfer across jurisdictions• Good education program• Provides streamlined implementation/approvals• Uses a TDR bank to facilitate transfer
Market Success Factors
• Market Potential: monetary incentive “match” for landowners to sell easements and developers to buy them
• Landowner motivations (harder to sell land than credits)
• Developer desire for additional density in receiving zones
• Consistent application of TDR requirements to all future upzonings
• Community commitment for the long term
Legal Issues
• Government regulation
• Contractual relationships
• Local authority
• Consistency with Zoning/Planning Laws
• Property Rights
• Taxation
• Documentation
Next Steps to TDR in Ohio
• Research successful example projects and programs
• Develop an understanding of TDR and Ohio real estate markets
• Education!
• Enabling legislation
• Develop model codes/programs
Initial Ohio TDR Projects
• Hiram Township and Village, Portage County
• Madison Township/Village demonstration project
• Orange Village, Cuyahoga County
• Hinckley Township, Medina County
Resources
• Rick Preutz, www.beyondtakingsandgivings.com• Brandywine Conservancy Environmental
Management Center, Transfer of Development Rights, www.brandywineconservancy.org
• Cleveland State University, Levin College Forum on TDR, www.urban.csuohio.edu/forum/events
• Ohio Lake Erie Commission Balanced Growth Program, toolkit http://www.epa.state.oh.us/oleo/bg1/toolkit.html
HB 69
• Sponsored by Rep. Larry Wolpert, R-Hilliard• 3-part legislation for townships, counties, and
inter-jurisdictional programs• Requires community planning to designate
sending and receiving zones• Permissive: Programs are optional• Allows for incentives and TDR credit transfers
(right now the two are confused)
