GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE FACT SHEET

By League of Woman Voters of Montgomery County, MD

What is the Concept of Green Infrastructure?

Infrastructure means the underlying foundation or basic framework (such as of a system or organization).   We usually think of it in terms of the gray infrastructure that supports communities: such as the schools, transportation, utilities, sewage treatment, water facilities.  Only recently have we started to recognize the Green Infrastructure and its importance to communities.   

The concept of Green Infrastructure recognizes the value of land to maintain the ecological and natural life support systems of communities, and the nation.  It is an interconnected network of protected land and water that supports native species, maintains biodiversity and natural ecological processes, sustains air quality and water resources and contributes to the health and quality of life on our planet in a manner that balances human and ecological needs.  In the Green Infrastructure concept, it is just as important to plan for and upgrade plans for Green Infrastructure as it is to upgrade plans for gray infrastructure, as we continually do with new sewer, transportation, traffic and other facility plans.  Previously, we only thought about preserving lands for parks, considered an amenity and an “extra.”  These were here and there in site-specific plans but not ecologically integrated.  In fact, many people have assumed that open space is simply land that is still undeveloped because no subdivision plan has been filed for it.  Our legal system and our land use system assume that land is a commodity to be consumed.  

Most environmental land and water conservation initiatives are reactive (in response to problems).  A plan for multi-purpose green space networks could be made in a proactive manner, with advance design and coordination following the same principles and approaches that are used for built infrastructure.  The Green Infrastructure network encompasses a wide range of landscape elements, including natural areas – such as wetlands, woodlands, waterways, and wildlife habitat; public and private conservation lands – such as nature preserves, wildlife corridors, greenways, and parks; and public and private lands of conservation value, such as forests, farms and ranches.  It also incorporates outdoor recreation and trail networks. It takes into consideration the protection of our water supplies and the need for biodiversity.  Each is important in itself but the maximum benefit to natural and human communities occurs when they are connected as a system of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent elements forming a collective whole.  The interconnectivity and distribution of elements is an important factor contributing to their overall, long-term value.  

Researching the Value of Green Infrastructure  

Biological and Ecological Theory  

Scientists are becoming more aware of the need for biodiversity, and habitat fragmentation is considered the single greatest threat.  Isolated “islands” of green space do not maintain biodiversity; this requires hubs and corridors.  Hubs are large tracts of suitable habitat, ranging from 250 to 5,000 acres depending on species.  The largest game, black bear, requires 5,000.  Corridors are areas of suitable habitat, usually undeveloped and pristine, that connect hubs and make migration of species possible.  Corridors can require up to1,600 yds/4,800 ft width (almost a mile) for large species.  Corridors should not be pinched or blocked by roads (e.g., I-270 is a virtual wall with only one good crossing, the underpass at Seneca Creek State Park in Gaithersburg ).  To support a full complement of a region’s native species would require 2,000 to 7,500 acres.    

The biodiversity of plants is threatened as well.  A 1997 report on rare, threatened, and endangered plant populations and significant habitats, prepared for The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC), shows that many such plants and habitats exist only in county parks now--and in the parks, only in areas suffering less from unnatural disturbance.   

Biological and Ecological Facts and Assumptions

The Maryland GreenPrint Program (MD Department of Natural Resources (DNR) “Green Infrastructure”; see http://www.dnr.state.md.us/greenways/greenprint/) suggests that the hubs of contiguous forest habitat be linked by forested greenway corridors that are at least 1,100 feet.  Research suggests that this width is sufficient to protect the core area of the linked forest from exotic species encroachment and to allow movement by animals from one place to another.  Such connections are important because, as habitat area shrinks and populations are cut off from one another, they are more likely to disappear (ref., Bay Journal, March 2001, http://www.bayjournal.com/01-03/wild.htm ).  The larger the block of protected land, the more biodiversity exists.  The first animals to become extinct in an area are the large species; however, animals (e.g., deer) that like “edge” habitat (areas on the edge of forests in transition to pastoral areas) will proliferate when the forest habitat shrinks.  

Bird species have varying minimum acreage requirements.  Some are very sensitive to forest fragmentation while a few tolerate small patch sizes.  In Montgomery County , we do not have any tracts of forest remaining that are capable of supporting a full complement of native forest interior dwelling birds.  The Hoyles Mill Diabase Area, newly acquired by The Legacy Open Space Program (LOS) (see p.7), is one of about ten tracts that are large enough to support about one-half of the forest bird species historically present.  We do have an abundance of edge species.  

Deforestation can cause climate change.  Mature forest is needed; new planting is no substitute.  Forests need buffers around them.  We can help by reconnecting fragments.  In small tracts, we also lose biodiversity of herbaceous plants.  Under current conditions, wind-dispersed plants are favored. Next to bulldozers, non-native invasive species are the greatest threat to native plants.  The invaders thrive on disturbed soils.   

Forest is valuable as a storm water management tool to prevent runoff and sedimentation.  Trees and plant cover also improve water quality, acting as purifying filters.  According to the National Tree Trust, one large tree can provide a day’s supply of oxygen for up to four people and can lift up to 100 gallons of water out of the ground and discharge it into the air in one day.  An acre of growing trees removes carbon dioxide equivalent to that produced by a car driven 26,000 miles.  The trees also act as a carbon sink by removing the carbon from carbon dioxide and storing it as cellulose in the trunk while releasing oxygen into the air.  Sound waves are absorbed by tree leaves and branches.  Studies suggest that belts of trees 100 feet wide and 45 feet high can cut highway noises in half.   

Natural Economics  

As a result of having to spend billions of dollars correcting past mistakes in land use, we have begun to recognize the monetary value of land to our future.  A recent study shows that the tree canopy of the Willamette/Lower Columbia Region of Oregon provides hundreds of millions of dollars in environmental and economic benefits, such as reducing storm water runoff, energy usage, and air pollution.  The “Regional Ecosystem Analysis for the Willamette/Lower Columbia Region of Northwestern Oregon and Southwestern Washington State,” conducted by the conservation group American Forests, found that the region’s trees are removing 178 million pounds of pollutants each year, a savings valued at $419 million.  Sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and particulate matter are among the pollutants that trees can absorb.  This same tree cover is saving communities an estimated $20.2 billion in storm water management costs (the amount it would cost to build a facility to handle that same quantity of storm water runoff).   

In a recent sale of some 12,000 acres of Canaan Valley , WV , land to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by Allegheny Energy Inc., the power company used a new approach that calculated the conservation value of the property.  While the Fish and Wildlife Service paid the conventional fair market value, the power company will submit the additional conservation value to the IRS as a deductible donation.  By including the worth of the land’s ecosystems, it came up with a figure that more than doubled traditional estimates.  An independent appraiser calculated the “extra” value by researching what has been paid in recent years to mitigate various kinds of environmental damage.  Included in the estimate was the value of some of the land as wetland banks and open space to mitigate destruction of habitat for rare species.  But the estimate of the property’s value in terms of climate control, was the largest figure.  At $14 a ton for the carbon dioxide reductions (the gas causing greenhouse global warming) that could be gained by planting trees on the property and disposing of dead and dying trees that would release carbon dioxide as they rotted, the appraisal added $7 million to the property’s value solely for carbon sequestration.  It is doubtful that the appraiser’s values will be fully accepted by the IRS, but there is a valuable lesson here in the value of land.  An economist with the nonprofit Environmental Defense organization said, “The reason ecosystems have been lost is because the services they provide really haven’t been valued in the marketplace.”  

Tools Needed to Achieve and Maintain Green Infrastructure  

Tools for Developing Green Infrastructure

How can the County’s Green Infrastructure be preserved? The most obvious idea, zoning private property as open space, wildlife corridor, or natural area, on which development would be prohibited, is not available. Under the Federal Constitution “private property [shall not] be taken for public use without just compensation.”  “Taking” can include severe limitations on development as well as physical occupation by public activities like roads or bombing ranges. Zoning and other regulations can reduce the value of private property somewhat, but cannot destroy the development value (the value over and above the value for farming or forestry). In a growing, populous County like Montgomery , all land has some development value.  So no-use zoning is not possible. To the extent that corridors and hubs are consistent with some development, the County can zone the property for just that much construction even though it might bring a higher price if the zoning were more liberal.  If the only workable method of preservation is public ownership, as parkland or nature preserves, the land must be paid for.  

The Agricultural Preserve, 93,000 acres in northern and western Montgomery County , is already zoned for extremely low density – one house per 25 acres. The purpose was to maintain open space for farming.  Landowners received some compensation in the form of Transferable Development Rights (TDR’s).  Each TDR consists of the right to build one residential unit. They can be sold to developers in designated  “receiving areas” in developing parts of the County to increase the allowable number of houses on a given tract of land. For the developer a TDR is like buying an extra lot, since he can build one more house than the zoning would have permitted. In addition, the County acquires an easement over the farmland that forever limits it to one house per 25 acres, even if it were later re-zoned.  The costs of this program to the county are only about 10% of the cost of purchasing the easements. If completely undeveloped space is required, however, the easements are insufficient. The land must be paid for to keep it empty.   

Several state, County, and private programs also exist to procure easements over private lands in the County.  Some are directed towards preserving agriculture, others to open space in general.  Private easement programs exist and are held by private land trusts, sometimes in partnership with the Maryland Environmental Trust (http://www.dnr.state.md.us/met/aboutmet.html).  These are charitable 501 C 3 organizations whose function is to accept and manage private gifts of land or easements. The givers, in turn, receive an income tax deduction for the value of the easements they donate.  The Land Trusts must monitor the area on which the easement is held, to ensure there are no violations.    

Many states tax farmland and forest at “use value” rather than the fair market value for development.  This can be a valuable tool for dealing with owners who would prefer to leave their property untouched but cannot afford to pay development-based property taxes.  Maryland requires that use value lands be actually used for agricultural operations or tree farms.  Should Green Infrastructure be added?  

Landowners are not forced to develop their property, of course. Wealthy owners may create hubs or contribute to corridors by leaving their land untouched. There is no economic or tax benefit to doing so, and the next owner or generation may bring in the bulldozers.     

Enforcement of Regulations

Though of limited use in this County, there are Federal laws intended to assist in preserving specific environments. Some examples: the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Federal Power Act, the National Trails Act, the Coastal Zone Act, and numerous provisions of laws relating to agriculture. These are not self-executing.  Someone has to agitate for their application and for their observance after a piece of property has been brought within their purview.  These laws don’t provide for Federal land acquisition, but for designation of unique lands and some modest funding for planning their use.  They encourage state action to preserve land within their purview, but are not regulatory laws themselves.  The Monocacy River in Frederick is a Scenic River , and the Appalachian Trail in Washington County is the preeminent national trail. In that case Congress has funded land acquisition for the trail right-of-way, under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service. The Monocacy designation, however, only encourages Frederick County to plan uses near it wisely.  The Endangered Species Act does impose limits on private development when Federal (not state) endangered species are found on the land. The act supposedly requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to produce recovery plans that include land purchases, but only a few have been created and fewer funded.  

Every form of preservation has its underlying political controversy. Tax benefits for wealthy people raise issues of the extent to which the wealthy should be allowed to avoid taxation at the expense of the middle class, in order to create economic and environmental benefits from which they may be the real beneficiaries. However, acquiring easements and giving tax benefits represent only about 10% of the cost to the government of purchasing the easements.   Purchasing land for public use as parks, wilderness areas, or public forests raises issues about the priorities for public spending. The desires of private landowners who may not wish to sell must be taken into account.   Preservation may mean that a community could have its employment base radically changed, and it will definitely lose tax collections.  When an easement limits the use of land below its economically best use, the land value and the related property tax assessment also drop.    

The heavy development – existing and planned for the immediate future – in Montgomery ’s southern two thirds makes it difficult to create Green Infrastructure where it does not already exist. Stream valley parks and regional parks might serve as hubs and corridors, but existing recreational development might have to be removed to make them suitable.  Tearing down large tracts of existing housing is obviously expensive and politically unlikely. The tools available do not allow ideal preservation of Montgomery ’s Green Infrastructure. At least in the Up-County Ag Preserve, however, there is a starting point that many of our neighboring jurisdictions, planned for 100% development, do not have.   

Montgomery County ’s Green Infrastructure  

Development and Land Use

The Montgomery County Council is authorized by the state to make all land use decisions and is advised by the bi-county Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) which, in turn, has authority for approving subdivisions based on the County’s General Plan guidelines and the Master Plan for the area where the subdivision is.  Guidelines for conservation development and gray infrastructure are included in the General Plan.  However, they are not binding.  

The county has an Annual Growth Policy (AGP) that contains an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO).  These affect only gray infrastructure.  The controls do not apply to cities such as Rockville and Gaithersburg and the County cannot declare a moratorium for development in these cities as it can in the rest of the county when development exceeds available facilities such as transportation and schools.   

Wedges and Corridors

The 1968 General Plan for Montgomery County , “On Wedges and Corridors,” was based on the concept of concentrating development along major transportation corridors while preserving lower-density, semi-open

space wedges between them.  This concept derived from the “Year 2000 Plan for the Washington , DC Area” developed by its Council of Governments in 1964.  The Year 2000 plan assumed that most jobs would continue to be in DC. It provided for six radial corridors to bring workers into the city from “bedroom” suburbs in the neighboring counties.  It appeared as a wheel with six spokes.  The spokes were to be the urban growth corridors extending from downtown Washington , DC .  Only one of the six corridors is in Montgomery County ,

I-270, though parts of the County were on the fringes of the I-95 corridor in Prince Georges County .  The corridors were to be served by high-speed, high-volume rapid transit lines and freeways running through the centers of the corridors.  Only Montgomery County actually adopted a version of the plan, with I-270 as the single corridor.  The wedge concept of the plan has been blurred to allow dense single family and townhouse development in areas originally conceived as low-density semi-open space.  The plan did not anticipate development of the suburbs as employment centers or the evolution of US 29, Georgia Avenue , and Great Seneca Highway/Route 28 as major transportation corridors. Only I-270 and Georgia Avenue have effective public transportation, i.e., Metro, but the Metro line is too far from I-270 employment centers to serve them effectively.  Since the corridors are not served with public transportation, they contribute to the problems of sprawl.   

Stream valley parks encompass all of our major streams (all north/south) and there are a number of large regional parks, state parks, and the C&O Canal National Park .  While better than unrelieved development, they are operated with human recreation as the priority and biological content protection as a secondary purpose.  

Cluster Housing

The County tried to maintain some farmland and open land by developing Cluster Zones.  Rural clustering, or grouping, retained open space by allowing residences to be grouped on a portion of the site, which also fostered a more cost-effective development pattern than linear or scattered residential.  If a 200-acre tract is being developed and the base zone is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres, the number of permitted dwellings would be 40 units.  The cluster zone allowed the 40 units to be grouped on lots smaller than 5 acres and the remainder of the tract would be preserved as open space or as a farm.  Only the individual lot size, not overall density, would change.  This also simplified getting water and sewer to the clustered units.  

Currently, most of Montgomery County ’s single-family zones include a cluster option.  One exception is the RE-2 zone, which allows homes at a density of up to one unit per 2 acres, non-clustered, with a 2-acre lot minimum.  But clustering is allowed in a separate zone, RE-2C, which was created to allow clustering with a 25,000 square foot minimum lot size at the 2-acre density.  For all other single-family zones (except Rural Neighborhood Cluster (RNC)), a cluster option may be used to achieve the same density as the base zone, but with smaller lots.  In this way the developer gets the full yield on the property but still protects sensitive areas, provides open space, and reduces the amount of roads needed by concentrating them in one area.  The RNC Zone was developed to promote very tight clustering with a minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet, with an open space requirement of 65 to 85%. This was specifically designed to protect rural character and environmental features around rural centers such as Sandy Spring and Ashton.  Development pressures are so intense in the Sandy Spring area that developable property value has doubled in the last 3 years.  

Goals of the 1993 General Plan Refinement

Some of the environmental goals and objectives of the 1993 General Plan Refinement were to ”preserve natural areas and features that are ecologically unusual, environmentally sensitive, or possess outstanding natural beauty; protect and improve water quality; conserve county waterways, wetlands, and sensitive parts of stream valleys to minimize flooding, pollution, sedimentation, and damage to the ecology and to preserve natural beauty and open space; and preserve and enhance a diversity of plant and animal species in self sustaining concentrations.” 

The strategies to achieve diversity included “determine and protect the land and water masses and linkages necessary to support a diversity of species in self-sustaining concentrations; identify areas that have the most species needing protection; plan a system of parks, conservation areas, subdivision open space, and easements to support a diversity of species in self-sustaining concentrations; ensure protection of environmentally sensitive habitats and unbuildable land through the master plan and development process;  minimize forest fragmentation to protect habitat continuity.”  Following through on these objectives came up short; however, a new plan was devised to try to remedy that.  

Legacy Open Space

In the year 2000, a new Legacy Open Space Plan (LOS) was envisioned to conserve Montgomery County ’s most significant open space as a means of protecting the County’s environment, quality of life, and economic vitality.  It was to protect the County’s “Green Infrastructure.”  The need to protect and conserve our open space heritage for our children and grandchildren was recognized.  A Functional Master Plan was produced in 2001 and adopted by the County Council.  It identified six resource categories for acquisition for the County or protection by easements. It identifies properties to meet open space criteria and uses a variety of legal and financial means to protect the resources on these properties, including outright purchase of sites, placing easements on sites, public/private partnerships, and joint management of properties.  The Open Space Resource Categories are:  1. Environmentally sensitive natural resources,  2. Water supply protection,

3. Heritage/historical sites, 4. Greenway connections described as “natural and hard surface trails,” 5. Farmland and rural open space areas, 6. Urban open space sites.  Category #6 also includes “Green Boulevards,” focusing on several major boulevards and a series of other key sites along major roads, and the search for a new regional park site.  

In the spring of every odd numbered year, the LOS program accepts nominations for new properties to be considered for acquisition in these categories.  The nominations are screened by M-NCPPC, then evaluated in cooperation with the Citizens’ Advisory Committee. 

Montgomery County was planned to be about two-thirds developed at varying densities and one-third Agricultural Preserve. 80% of the housing units that could be built under existing zoning are already in place, putting great development pressure on the remaining developable tracts. Some acreage is being saved through LOS and a wide variety of other programs.  The 93,000-acre Agricultural Preserve is largely protected from dense development, but agricultural activities and very low density housing prevent much of it from serving wildlife effectively.  

The LOS Draft Master Plan says “The green infrastructure of Montgomery County consists of our stream valleys, important forest, field and stream habitats, productive farmland, historic and rural vistas, our urban green spaces and access “corridors” for people and wildlife.  The green infrastructure benefits water and air quality, provides habitat for many species of plants and animals, provides visual relief, and recreational opportunities for communities and individuals while allowing visual and physical access to our cultural and natural resources.”  

Many sites have been identified and prioritized for acquisition under the previously mentioned category designations through the plan.  Initial funding of the purchases came from the $6 million allocated in the Capital Improvement Program Budget in 2001, sources for which were bonds of various types, County and Commission current receipts, municipal funding sources, grants and donations.  Significant other sources are state GreenPrint funds and Federal sources.  Financing of acquisition, operation and maintenance is a continued pressing need. There was a budget crunch for the fiscal 2003 budget, and the County Executive ’s office recommended postponing funding until FY2008.  The year’s allocation would have been $4.2 million.  The County Council’s Planning, Housing & Economic Development (PHED) committee voted unanimously to restore $3.7 million and the budget finally passed with $3.7 million allocated to LOS.  Given the escalating price of land in Montgomery County , we need to acquire what is needed as soon as possible.  

Maryland Green Infrastructure

Maryland has enacted several programs such as the Chesapeake Bay Commission, the Open Space Program and the Rural Legacy Program, to preserve farmlands, protect wetlands and shorelines and encourage private conservation.  The Maryland Environmental Trust (MET) has about 70,000 acres in conservation easements.  MET accepts donated easements, often co-holding them with local Land Trusts (of which there are 52 in the state).  These are perpetual easements that were purchased through the Rural Legacy Program or as a result of acquisition using transportation (Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st Century (TEA-21)) funds that provides some additional amounts of money for land protection, usually on historic properties near intersections or for animal crossings on highways). Typically, an easement accepted by MET restricts the number of subdivisions that may occur, protects scenic or historic vistas, the size of additions or reconstructions, and protects significant environmental features, such as woodlands and wetlands or shorelines.  State Parks are well maintained as recreation areas but much criticism is directed at the Forest Service of MD DNR for permitting logging.  Maryland also has a Smart Growth policy where it will not assist in funding public facilities such as schools, roads, water and sewer in sprawl areas.  

Maryland ’s GreenPrint Program (Green Infrastructure) intends to identify the most important unprotected natural lands in the state, and link or connect these with a system of natural corridors.  The areas will be saved through targeted acquisition and easements.  The Maryland Department of Natural Resources has developed a database and a series of maps showing the Green Infrastructure strictly from a natural resources perspective.  This information, along with local environmental inventories, state and local historical and archeological records, and information on farmland preservation, were used to identify areas Montgomery County recognizes as its own “Green Infrastructure.”  As the state defines it, Green Infrastructure consists of natural resource hubs containing ecological communities or key resources connected by corridors.  

Using this information for Montgomery County shows that some of the hubs and corridors are partially protected already; however, some corridors have already been compromised by approved development.  To protect the remaining areas, quick action would be needed.  

Open Space Acquisitions  

Natural Resource Sites

Bucklodge Forest was the first property acquired under the LOS program and a management plan is being completed for the new Bucklodge Forest Conservation Park .  

Serpentine Barrens is being negotiated.  The draft of the new Potomac Master Plan recommends acquisition for County parkland.  A contract for purchase has been completed.  

South Serpentine Area – Tipton property – has development plans submitted for 41 residential lots with septic systems.  The draft Potomac Master Plan recommends cluster and sewer for the entire South Serpentine/Lower Greenbrier area, which would result in retaining 70% Open Space with stream buffers with a maximum of 62 units.  This would preserve 44 acres, which will become Greenbrier Stream Valley Park .  

Hoyles Mill Diabase Area is one of the success stories for LOS.  The permanent protection of 800 acres of forest habitat and rural resource lands for the establishment of a new County park was celebrated on March 2, 2002 .  Financing of this purchase was achieved by the nonprofit Trust for Public Land and Washington-area landowner Michael Rubin who purchased it from Bardon, Inc. (a quarrying company).  Using $7.2 million of State of Maryland GreenPrint funds, the transaction was completed and the property transferred to the M-NCPPC, which will manage it as the Hoyles Mill Conservation Park .  In conjunction with this acquisition, Mr. Rubin also purchased another 900 acres, on which he plans, with the help of the Trust for Public Lands, to place a conservation easement when future funding becomes available.  

Within the River Road Shale Barrens is a 30-acre site known as the Radl Property.  LOS recently purchased the property for $184,000.  This is one of four parcels that make up the roughly 161-acre River Road Shale Barrens located at the intersection of River Road and Mount Nebo Road .  The acquired property will be added to the County’s park system as conservation parkland.  LOS staff has met with the owners of the 3 remaining parcels and appraisals are being prepared for roughly 54 acres that comprise 2 of the remaining parcels.  

Urban Open Space Sites

As stated previously, the easiest place to start with Green Infrastructure Design is before development takes place.  However, given the already developed nature of the down-county area, Green infrastructure Design should attempt to redesign to get the proper balance in developed areas.  LOS is vigilant for opportunities.   

The Sligo Mill Property located at the corner of Sligo Mill Road and Sheridan Street in Takoma Park was purchased in partnership with the City of Takoma Park .  The City will reimburse M-NCCPC up to 25% of the purchase price over the next four years, using Program Open Space funds from the State of Maryland .  Management of the property will be mostly done by the City of Takoma Park .  

The Wohlfarth Property in Chevy Chase Village is under negotiation for a partnership with the Chevy Chase Village .  The Wohlfarths gave the property to the Scottish Rite Free Masons with the stipulation that they can reside in the house until their death.  Mr. Wohlfarth is in his 90s and his wife is in her 80s.  The 2 acres would become Urban Open Space with passive recreation allowed.  The fate of the house is in question:  the Village of Chevy Chase wants to tear it down after it is no longer occupied but Park and Planning might want a public use for it.  LOS is negotiating with the Scottish Rite Masons and the Village of Chevy Chase for the joint acquisition of this property.  

A non-development easement on private property on Carroll Place in the center of Kensington is being negotiated.  

Green boulevards have been put at the bottom of the LOS priorities at this time.  As the LOS Master Plan points out, boulevards provide both linear green space and gateways to Montgomery County .  Undeveloped open spaces along these major boulevards contribute to the character of both the boulevards and the adjacent neighborhoods, and they also serve to provide a welcome relief to the development along the boulevards while providing an important buffer between commercial areas and adjacent neighborhoods.  Tree-lined boulevards would also help to mitigate the pollution effects of the traffic and would contribute to noise abatement.  

Water Supply Protection Sites

Maiden’s Fancy Farm is an historic property that is located adjacent to the Rocky Gorge Reservoir, east of Route 29.  The owner, Mrs. Crook, sold the property to the University of Maryland while retaining a life estate in the house.  The University of Maryland will soon sign a contract to sell the property at market value, except for the historic house and five acres surrounding it, to M-NCCPC for water quality protection.  M-NCCPC Staff will be working with WSSC to develop a management plan for water protection, which will include reforestation of portions of the site.  

The Counts Property east of Ridge Road in the Patuxent River watershed has received an offer from LOS for purchase in fee simple of this 50+ acre property.  

Heritage/Historical Sites

The Red Door Store and Holland House site in Sandy Spring is now under contract for purchase with LOS funds.  The site will be the first heritage site to be protected in the Legacy program.  The Red Door Store will continue to be operated as a country store under contract and the rest of the 78 acres will be maintained as rural open space to preserve the entrance to the historic community of Sandy Spring and protect the “viewshed” from the Woodlawn Mansion , already a protected park site.  

Legacy Open Space Program as Green Infrastructure Monitor

Although very slow moving, the LOS Program is struggling through the layers of legal requirements and frustrations to begin to acquire some important elements of Green Infrastructure except in connecting corridor development.  Greenways, which are trail corridors, are the closest they have come to identifying the needs for connections.  However, Brenda Sandberg, Legacy Open Space Program Manager, says that Greenways are specifically designed to be more than trail corridors.  As LOS moves closer to finalizing negotiations on some of these sites, they will be attempting to purchase wide swaths to complete forested wildlife corridor connections wherever possible..

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE THANKS – The LWVMC Land Use Committee acknowledges and thanks the experts we interviewed during our study, including Brenda Sandberg, Legacy Open Space Program Manager; Neal Fitzpatrick, Executive Director, Audubon Naturalist Society; Bob DeGroot, President, Maryland Alliance for Greenway Improvement and Conservation (MAGIC); John Parrish, Rare and Endangered Plant Specialist and co-author of inventories of rare, threatened, and endangered plant populations in Montgomery County, Maryland; Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources; Jorge Valladares P.E., Chief, Environmental Planning Dept. of Park and Planning, M-NCPPC; The Hon. Blair Ewing, County Council Member; and Royce Hanson, Co-Chair, Legacy Open Space Citizens Advisory Committee and former Chair, Montgomery County Planning Board.  We also thank John Turgeon, Legacy Open Space Senior Planner, for producing the Green Infrastructure Montgomery County maps with Maryland Green Print Program overlays for use in our presentations.  LWVMC Committee members who co-authored the Fact Sheet are Kathy McGuire, Mary Noonan, Jean Lowder, Grant Reynolds, Linda Silversmith, and Aleen Starkweather, Chair.