Can we grow without harming the Bay?
Can developers and environmentalists find common ground over how this region can grow without adding to the Chesapeake Bay's woes?
It remains to be seen. Feelings are still raw after last winter's donnybrook in Annapolis over tightening state curbs on runoff from new development and redevelopment. And home builders and environmentalists are at odds over legislation hung up in Congress that would strengthen the federal government's hand in the bay restoration effort.
But the Home Builders Association of Maryland and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation have agreed, at least, to meet in a neutral corner and talk about it. The two are sponsoring a forum Wednesday (Nov. 17) entitled: "Where Do We Grow From Here? Bay Friendly Development in the 21st Century."
The subtitle of the forum promises a "civil but frank discourse on development, environment and the Bay." One session will look at whether "nutrient neutral" development is possible. Another talks about how to pay for the pollution controls and public infrastructure needed to encourage "smart" growth.
From the agenda, it looks like this is a session designed to find that common ground and forge agreement on how and where to grow. I imagine the tone of this will be far different from a population "summit" held recently by Johns Hopkins' Center for a Livable Future.
"The big question is can we truly restore the Chesapeake Bay given the population projections for future growth?" asked Environment Maryland's Brad Heavner. He said we have the scientific knowledge to do it, but it would take a lot of money and political will to reduce impacts of new development enough to offset the growing number of people.
Tom Horton, longtime bay writer and former Sun colleague, was even less hopeful. He called it a "tall order" to think people would do what it takes to reduce the environmental impact of 17 million people in the six-state watershed by enough to restore the Chesapeake's water quality to what it was in the 1950s or '60s and to maintain it while the region grows.
Tough questions those, that lack easy answers. At least folks are talking about them, while the real estate slump eases development pressure some.
Wednesday's growth forum is from 8:15 a.m .to 3 p.m. at Martin's West, 6817 Dogwood Road. Registration is $95, though discounts are available. For more, go here or call 410-265-7400.
(Development along South Branch of the Patapsco River, 200 Baltimore Sun photo by David Hobby)
Comments
Continued growth seems to be a cornerstone of our society, but a question to developers who are looking for ways to promote it is: how long do you think that growth can continue? Anyone who still remembers algebra class understands that multiplication carried out forever produces an infinitely large result. Is it rational to believe that this planet can support an infinitely large economy? The only person I’m aware of who tried to promote this physically impossible idea was Julian Simon who was one of the most enthusiastic of the cornucopists. In one of his later books, he ridiculed scientists as being “finitists” and cited literary allusions about the “infinite imagination of man” and such to argue that this planet could support an infinitely large economy.
Simon’s naiveness aside, if the US were to attain the population density of Japan, we would have about 3.3 billion people, which would force us into a very different style of life. Because they feel too crowded, the Japanese people have resisted their government’s (and developer’s?) efforts to get them to increase their population. Is that what the developers have in mind for the US: keep growing until we’re so crowded that many become unhappy, while the very rich are still able to afford their private islands?
So again: Where do you propose that the growth end? I think that it won’t even be mentioned at the forum.
Posted by: NDMSouth | November 16, 2010 11:52 PM