evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Montgomery County's Agricultural Reserve — Four Decades of Transferable Development Rights to Save Maryland Farmland

United States of America · Poolesville · See the United States of America profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 41% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

In 1980 Montgomery County, Maryland downzoned 93,000 acres to create its Agricultural Reserve, letting farmers sell Transferable Development Rights to builders elsewhere; the county has preserved 71,594 acres of farmland, ~48,000 via TDR sales alone.

93,000 acres
Agricultural Reserve area designated (1980) (1980)
71,594 acres
Total farmland preserved
47,903–48,516 acres
Farmland preserved via TDR
Montgomery County's Agricultural Reserve — Four Decades of Transferable Development Rights to Save Maryland Farmland

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Montgomery County Planning Department (Montgomery County Government)
Period
1980–present
Keywords
land-use planning, agriculture, conservation finance, watershed protection

Context

In 1980, Montgomery County, Maryland downzoned roughly 93,000 acres in its north into an Agricultural Reserve, cutting allowed density from one housing unit per five acres to one per twenty-five.

Objectives

The county's Transferable Development Rights (TDR) system was designed to compensate landowners for that lost property value while steering growth into designated Receiving Zones elsewhere, and to protect farmland and stream valleys feeding reservoirs that supply the Washington, D.C. area.

Activities

A landowner may build one unit on the sending property but sell the remaining development rights to developers building at higher density in the Receiving Zones, a market mechanism the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy calls the most successful TDR programme in the country by acreage preserved.

Results

The county has preserved 71,594 acres for agricultural use overall, the highest share of county farmland under preservation easement in the United States, with 47,903–48,516 acres protected specifically through TDR easements.

Conclusions

A Resources for the Future evaluation cautions that even in this well-regarded scheme, landowners exercising their one retained right on a sending-area parcel can still produce scattered, low-density residential patterns, so acreage totals alone do not guarantee compact farmland conservation.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k) — County planning department administration of the TDR market; no aggregate public budget figure given.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Continuously operating since 1980 (45 years to date).
Staffing & skills
Montgomery County Planning Department (TDR programme administration)

Conditions for success

  • Downzoning of the sending area paired with designated higher-density Receiving Zones elsewhere in the county
  • A functioning private market for development rights between sending and receiving landowners

Common failure modes

  • Landowners exercising their one retained right on a sending-area parcel can still produce scattered, low-density residential patterns (Walls & McConnell, RFF 2007)

Where it fits

Governance type
county government
Scale
county-wide (93,000-acre reserve)
Income level
high-income

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes Own resources / municipal budget

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful