Knapp seeks restrictions on size of multi-use septic

If approved, Derwood Bible would be shut out

Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006

The agricultural community came out en mass last week to testify at a County Council hearing in support of restricting the size of multi-use septic systems in the Agricultural Reserve.

Derwood Bible Church is seeking to build a large-scale facility in the reserve with a multi-use system on 226 acres at the intersection of Laytonsville and Griffith roads in Laytonsville.

Last fall, several other churches applying to build large campuses in the reserve were denied when the council banned the extension of public water and sewer into the reserve.

Since it was not seeking an extension, Derwood’s application wasn’t affected. The council deferred making a decision on Derwood pending further discussion of how multi-use systems in the Agricultural Reserve should be addressed.

The county Planning Board has recommended approval of a zoning text amendment proposed by Councilmember Michael J. Knapp (D-Dist. 2) of Germantown that restricts multi-use systems in the reserve. The amendment ties the capacity of such systems to the number of homes that would be allowed on the property under current zoning and then multiplying that number by 600 gallons per day — the capacity for a four-bedroom house. In the RDT, or ag reserve zone, one house per 25-acres is allowed.

On a 225-acre property, nine homes would be allowed for a daily capacity of 5,400 gallons.

Derwood’s application seeks a daily capacity of 19,500 gallons.

More than 20 people testified during a hearing Thursday on Knapp’s amendment, and nearly all of them said they would like the council to deny Derwood Bible Church’s application.

Representatives of the church testified that restricting multi-use systems would not protect farmland, only encourage more of it to be purchased.

Dolores Milmoe, a conservation advocate for the Naturalist Audubon Society, said multi-use systems should be denied until more research is conducted on the environmental impact these systems could have on the ground water.

In an interview after the hearing, she said that the staggering 22 testimonies supporting the amendment sent a strong message to the council.

‘‘There is overwhelming support by the residents that live in the ag reserve to limit the scale of mega-institutions because they negatively impact agriculture and the community at large,” Milmoe said.

Jane Evans, the president of Citizens to Preserve the Reserve, also supports the amendment.

‘‘Park and Planning recommended limits on multi-use systems by PIFs (public institutional facilities),” Evans testified, ‘‘and it specifically recommended denial of the Derwood Church proposal because of the precedent it would set — and its threat to agriculture.”

Members of the agricultural community said that allowing multi-use septic systems — a combination of on-site systems — would take water away from neighboring wells and could contribute to drought.

Todd Hieshman, the ministry operations pastor of Derwood Bible, was one of only three who spoke in support of allowing larger multi-use systems in the reserve. The church needs approval for septic to accommodate a 1,500-seat church and other facilities.

‘‘We are calling on you to welcome this new era of change, and embrace the realization that the faith, farming and family communities can live in harmony with one another,” Hieshman testified. ‘‘Work with us, the faith community, and enable us to build ministries in our local communities.”

Hieshman also went on to say that the proposed water and sewer restrictions would not preserve or protect farmland, but rather manage the scale of development. He said that restricting multi-use systems would only force churches to end up buying more land.

‘‘This amendment ... would place a real and substantial burden on ministries such as ours, whose only recourse would be to purchase even larger blocks of land to earn enough water and sewer credits to build their ministry,” Hieshman said. ‘‘And at the end of that day, all that will have been accomplished is the removal of even more land from active agricultural use.”