A state-imposed growth plan that could affect the pace of development in Howard County's agricultural areas is raising concerns among county farmers and their neighbors.

The county has been working on a system required by a 2012 state law intended to preserve farmland and the Chesapeake Bay. Under the system, counties must carve land into tiers that guide development patterns, from Tier I, allowing for the most developed areas with public services, to Tier IV, denoting zoned for agriculture and conservation.

In a 4-1 vote Thursday night, Howard County's Planning Board rejected a plan suggested by County Executive Allan Kittleman to open for development 2,181 acres of land generally set aside for agricultural conservation.

Kittleman's proposal seeks to amend the county's current tier map, which he says strips some farmers of their development rights by robbing them of what should be a voluntary choice to enter their land into the agriculture preservation program, which significantly devalues the land.

“We have forced people by the rule of law to be a farmer for the rest of their lives,” Kittleman said. His plan would shift 49 properties from Tier IV to Tier III, allowing up to 293 subdivision units to be built on those properties.

Opponents said the change would create sprawl that could unsettle wide expanses of farmland in an effort to restore development rights that are already compensated through the county's agriculture preservation program and other options.

The county has struggled with the tier system for years. Former County Executive Ken Ulman vetoed the council's first tier plan in 2012, which strictly defined tiers based on whether land was zoned rural-conservation or rural-residential. Ulman followed with a compromise that allowed some farmers — who would have been forced to develop their land — a designation of Tier III.

After months of debate, the council approved that map with a 4-1 vote.

“We passed the tiers to ensure that anyone who was impacted in Tier IV had access to the agricultural preservation program and could realize the pre-tier development value of their land,” said County Councilwoman Mary Kay Sigaty,.

Sigaty said agriculture preservation ensures that farming is preserved as a “viable economic opportunity.” Participation does not require the farmer to do the farming, she said: “They can sell their farm for farming.”

Councilman Greg Fox, who represents the western county, said the county's current plan has already pushed many farmers to develop farmland quickly or push themselves into agriculture preservation.

“The genie is already out of the bottle,” Fox said.

Cathy Hudson, the owner of Myrtle Woods Farm, in Elkridge, said sprinkling pockets of subdivisions on farmland will result in an inevitable “clash of cultures” between neighbors and farmers.

“Farming doesn't always smell good and look good,” said Hudson, 62. “The more neighbors you have, the harder it is to do agriculture.”

Portions of the county have struggled to address residents' complaints about mulch processing on farms and other agriculture-related tasks.

“We don't need more neighbors against us,” said Howie Feaga, of Ellicott City, who opposes the amendment.

However, Feaga, who is president of the Howard County Farm Bureau, said the bureau supports the proposal because it addresses property values.

Development, even if limited to 293 units, could fragment farming in the western county, said Brenda Stewart, of Woodbine, who has lived on a farm for 42 years.

“As soon as agricultural land is fragmented, it never comes back,” Stewart said.

“We have 30,000 acres already preserved. This idea about putting a few thousand acres in develop is a drop in the bucket. It won't affect anything,” said Ted Mariani, owner of Oakdale, in Woodbine.

Critics said the plan conflicts with the state law's commitment to protect the Chesapeake Bay, and would result in harmful runoff to streams that feed the bay.

“We should be moving forward, not moving back … our rivers can't take that anymore,” said Erik Fisher, speaking on behalf of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

Kittleman disagreed. “Anyone who comes and tells you this is going to be a terrible thing for the environment just does not make sense,” he said.

The proposal is expected to go to the County Council next for review and consideration.