Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1962-08-09
Five-Acre Zoning

/
Leading off for the zones adj
vocates was George Allen, chief
of research for the planning
commission, who told the Coun-
Gil that most of the opposition
to the open-space coming would
be voiced by land spectators
and the landowners who hope
to make a profit from sales to
developers.
Planning Commission plan
ming director Arthur Stellhorn
outlined the role of the upper
county in future land planning,
while Lewis Elston, planning
engineer, stressed the need for
proper coming tools" to pre-
serve the open wedges between
radial corridors of development
envisioned under future land
use plans.
Elston said the coming
would protect the soil, water,
forests, streams and wildlife of
the county and provide extern
sive areas for recreational pur-
poses.
He maintained the O-S zon-
ing would mean additional
sources of income to rural
areas" rather than losses in
land values which opponents
argue would result from its
five-acre residential provision.
On the heels of the commits
sion's speakers came no
holds-barred blast from the
lone dissenter in its approval
of the zone, Donald E. Gingery,
who said he favors county pur-
chase of open spaces, ease
ments and development rights
over the proposed coming, which
he termed totally illegal and
totally unfair, with the least
chance of survival of any zone
l know"
He said acceptance of a 'rea-
sonable" up-county tax by
county residents would provide
enough funds to buy the land
the planners hope to protect
from development with the
zone.
1--WE accept taxes to pay for
schools, highways, recreation
and dams. There's no reason
why people won't accept one to
buy open spaces" he declared.
Next up at bat was Harold
Knapp, whose critiques of coun-
ty planning have won him no.
tice in planning circles. He
urged adoption of the zone but
recommended it be used with
discrimination"
ut is not the general answer
to open space. 1t should not
blanket the Upper County. 1t
is not appropriate as a holding
zone" he said.
ut belongs only in those
places where good planning
calls for permanent low-density
residential development. TIL e
areas for which it is applicable
must wait the general plan"
Knapp added, stressing that
nobody, in fact, knows how
this zone, used discriminatory
in connection with the general
plan, will work out"
He criticized farmers for
accepting preferential tax as
sessments for keeping their
lands in open spaces while
arguing that land use con.
trolls such as the O-S zone
which assure preservation of
the open spaces are "arbi.
trary, unlawful or capri.
cious."
Also urging the zones adop-
ton was Ramsey Wood, presi-
dent of the Citizens Planning
Association, who said it would
add strength and flexibility to
the tools available for guiding
development in the county"
He said his association favors
the coming as "a step in the
right direction, but with the
understanding that it is only a
STEP"
when a true open space zone
and a high density residential
zone have been presented in
the long-forthcoming general
PLAN Wood added, "revisions
of the O-S zone will be re-
quired."
at would be a fraud, both on
the public as a whole and on
the owners who might be en-
couraged to develop estates and
other permissible uses, to apply
the proposed O-S zone, or other
low-density residential zones, to
land that will later be planned
for intensive development"
Landowners attack on the
open-space zone was led off by
Glenn GoldbuTn of the Mont
gomery County Farm Bureau,
who said farmers would like
nothing better than coming for
rural benefit, but it's economi-
cally unfeasible.
Ho cfYaScod a nana,.t,,,o,,, 80