THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, June 24, 1994 TAG: 9406240525
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DEBBIE MESSINA, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: 940624 LENGTH: VIRGINIA BEACH
But if a developer comes to the door of his 19th-century farmhouse with a check that's more than he could ever make off strawberries, corn and tomatoes, Barnes' 240-acre homestead is history.
{REST} ``It would not only be tempting, it would be stupid not to do it,'' he said, admitting he's been approached to sell but the dollars weren't there.
But as development pressures continue to push into rural Virginia Beach, the offers will increase and farmers like Barnes won't be farmers for long.
To help the farmers hold onto their livelihoods and at the same time preserve a part of the city's heritage, environment and economic base, an ad hoc committee has proposed the Agricultural Reserve Program.
The proposal calls for the city to pay farmers for the development value of their land, allowing them to continue to own and farm the property. Participation would be voluntary.
``That would be great if I could get that money without having to leave the farm,'' said Barnes, a committee member. ``And it would enable my boys to be farmers.''
Because of escalating land prices in the southern part of the city, it's difficult for a young farmer to start a farming operation or for an established farmer to expand.
The only way to get into farming here, local farmers say, is by ``womb, tomb or you're the groom.''
``If you want to actively farm in Virginia Beach, you need a large capital outlay,'' Barnes said. ``And if you had that, you wouldn't be working for a living.''
The Agricultural Reserve Pro gram is the result of an unlikely marriage between farmers and conservationists.
``Agriculture is an essential component in protecting natural resources and economic resources,'' said Michael Lipford, director of the Virginia chapter of the Nature Conservancy and one of the architects of the proposal.
About 40 percent of the city's land is in the rural southern section of the city. Since 1939, cropland has shrunk from 60,000 acres to 32,000 acres.
Agricultural lands, in addition to enhancing the quality of life in the area, help stabilize the economy. Farming is the best use of land adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas, said Mary M. Heinricht, an environmental consultant who helped draft the plan.
The southern region hosts some of the most environmentally diverse and sensitive areas in the state. It is one of the most important areas in Virginia for rare, threatened and endangered species of plants and animals.
The committee advocating the purchase of development rights has worked since last fall. Committee members include representatives from the city staff, the Planning Commission, the City Council, the Virginia Beach Farm Bureau, the Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Southeastern Association for Virginia's Environment and the Sierra Club.
Committee members are making presentations to citizens groups to gauge public opinion, since taxpayers would fund the program.
This is how purchase of development rights would work:
The city would pay the land owner the development value of his acreage, which is the difference between its use value as a farm and its market value as residential or commercial land.
The city would then retire those development rights, which means the land must be used for agriculture.
The landowner continues to own the property and can continue farming, retire and use the land as open space, lease the land to another farmer or sell it at anytime for its agricultural value.
Participation would be voluntary, and land owners would apply to a board for inclusion in the program.
``This would definitely enhance agriculture,'' said Louis Cullipher, city agriculture director, who helped write the plan. It would take the speculative value off the land.''
The most appealing element of the program, said Eddie Vaughan, a farmer and president of the Virginia Beach Farm Bureau, is that it's voluntary. ``As an option for people who want to stay in farming, I don't see anything wrong with it,'' Vaughan said.
Program architects do not have figures yet, but admit it will be costly. The city assessor's office indicates that the difference between the city assessment and market values of all land below the green line, the fictional boundary separating the developed northern half of the city from the rural south, is $138.5 million.
The committee is now looking at possible funding sources for the program, including bonds, general revenues and earmarking certain tax money. Heinricht said they hope to raise 25 percent of the funds from outside sources, like nonprofit donations and government grants.
``Somebody's going to have to pay for it, and it's the taxpayer who is going to end up paying for it,'' said builder/Realtor Herbert Culpepper, president of the Back Bay-Pungo Civic League. ``I'm trying to keep an open mind, but the more government gets involved in something, the worse it gets.''
Others, too, are concerned about the costs of the program. Council members received the plan last month, but have not publicly discussed it.
Both Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf and Vice Mayor W.D. ``Will'' Sessoms Jr. said they are intrigued by the concept but wonder how its cost compares to providing city services like roads and schools if the area was developed. Oberndorf has asked city staff to prepare a cost comparison.
American Farmland Trust, a non-profit organization based in Washington, has conducted several studies that indicate that farming gives more to the community in tax dollars than it takes out in services, whereas residential development takes more than it gives.
For every $1 paid in taxes, farm land uses 30 cents of municipal services whereas residential development uses from $1.03 to $1.35, said Bob Wagner, of American Farmland Trust.
The farming association monitors purchase of development rights programs throughout the nation. Nine Northeastern states and 70 municipalities throughout the country have such programs. Together they have protected more than 200,000 acres of top quality farmland.
The program is so popular in Pennsylvania that voters twice approved tax increases to pay for it.
In Howard County, Md., development from both Baltimore and Washington, D.C., was pushing into the largely rural county so the Agricultural Land Preservation Program was started. In 12 years, development rights for 16,000 acres in Howard County have been purchased.
Recent payouts are between $3,000 and $6,600 an acre. It is funded by a portion of the real estate transfer tax.
``We didn't do it for sentimental or nostalgic reasons,'' said program administrator Donna Mennitto. ``It's a real cost savings to the government.
``It's a means of trying to control the sprawl of suburban development and preserve a critical mass of farmland.''
But advocates emphasize that purchasing development rights in itself does not halt development or preserve farming. Other planning tools must be used to control development on properties that are not part of the program.
``Saving farmland is not saving agriculture,'' said Mennitto. ``But you can't save agriculture unless the land base is protected.''
{KEYWORDS} VIRGINIA BEACH AGRICULTURAL RESERVE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
by CNB