1 / 16

Transfer of Development Rights

Josh Naramore Shannon Finnegan. Transfer of Development Rights. Introduction. State and local governments are responsible for land use policy Struggle between a want to preserve open space, historic landmarks, farmland and sensitive environmental areas and need to allow growth

sanjiv
Download Presentation

Transfer of Development Rights

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Josh Naramore Shannon Finnegan Transfer of Development Rights

  2. Introduction • State and local governments are responsible for land use policy • Struggle between a want to preserve open space, historic landmarks, farmland and sensitive environmental areas and need to allow growth • High transaction costs associated with traditional command and control style zoning

  3. Define TDR • A market based technique that encourages the voluntary transfer of growth from places where a community would like to see less development to places where a community would like to see more development

  4. What is a Development Right? • “Bundle of Sticks” • Product of # of acres and the number of “sticks” allowed per acre under a community’s land use regulation • Varies from community to community • Deed Restrictions

  5. How does it work? • Sending Areas • Receiving Areas

  6. Why Use TDR? • Landowners: • Continue traditional uses and retain land • Compensated for lost development potential • Local Government: • Preserve open space, historic landmarks, environmental space without paying for it • Allow for controlled growth

  7. Assumptions of MDR Programs • Goal: Maximize PV of Land • Land available to designate as “preserved” is close to the zoning authority’s desired amount of preserved land • C/B distributed equitably • Undeveloped land most appropriate for preservation • Reasonable administrative costs

  8. Determining Land Bid Functions • Assume 2 types of actors • Developer land bid function: • Farmer/Preservationist land bid function:

  9. $ D S A* M Acres Adapted from Thorsnes and Simons, 259 Graphical Illustration • M acres of undeveloped land • S: farmers maximum bid • D: developer’s land bid (assumption) • What happens w/o government intervention? • Is this a market failure?

  10. $ MCS D S E A* M Acres Source: Thorsnes and Simons, 259 Graphical Illustration Cont’d. • MCs : Marginal Social Cost of Developing Land • E: external benefits of preserving farmland/pristine areas • Efficient Level of Conservation: A* through M acres

  11. $ MCS D S E A* M Acres Source: Thosnes and Simons, 259 Graphical Illustration: Zoning • Need for information • Land value decreases for preserved acres • Land value increases for areas that can be developed

  12. $ MCS D S E A* M Acres Source: Thosnes and Simons, 259 Graphical Illustration: MDR • Government decides land to develop • Distributes A* permits to land owners • Market determines permit price (Diff. in dev. Vs. non-dev A*) • W/ external benefits included into value of developable land:

  13. MDR Cont’d • Landowners maximize wealth by selling acres A* through M. • Owners of acres A* through M will receive $E, assuming that development rights are distributed proportionally to owners’ total property holdings. • MDR programs are Pareto superior to programs where trading not allowed • Second Theorem of Welfare Economics

  14. Potential Challenges • Some assumptions for competitive economy may not hold in land markets • Unequal distribution of permits • Without proper regulation, may not important/prime land • Hot spots around areas of high value to developers • May not preserve contiguous land areas

  15. Case Study: Montgomery County, MD • Most successful program in the country • Preserved almost 38,000 acres of farmland • Sending area – one development per 25 acres. If purchased for receiving area this becomes 1 per 5 acres • 5:1 ration = five times more development allowed if rights transferred to receiving area instead of being used at sending area

  16. Suggestions for Successful TDR Program • Incorporation into zoning policy as the only means of increasing development density • Real Estate Market Analysis • Public Participation • TDR Bank • Multi-jurisdictional programs to increase the size of the market • State legislation to authorize adoption of TDR programs to avoid takings issues

More Related