Return to Blackwater
I returned to the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge today for the first time since time an epic battle between conservationists and a developer over plans for a billion-dollar golf resort.
In the end, the environmentalists declared victory. But my visit raised questions about whether this cheer was just more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Soon after taking office earlier this year, Gov. Martin O’Malley agreed to buy and preserve 700 of the roughly 1,000 acres of wetlands, forests and farms that developer Duane Zentgraf wanted to build on near the entrance to the wildlife preserve. The preservation deal meant that Zentgraf could build only 700 homes instead of the 3,200 he originally wanted. And no golf resort, hotel, shopping complex or parking lot on the banks of the Little Blackwater River, a shady creek that flows into a wildlife sanctuary that the Nature Conservancy has called one of America’s "last great places."
But Zentgraf still gets to build 700 houses. And that will undoubtedly change the character of an area that is now golden fields and stands of trees.
Driving through the landscape, I was surprised to see that no construction had started. It made me wonder whether the real estate downturn had slowed the project. The road wound gently past wide-open soybean fields and scattered farmhouses. A bald eagle took flight from a drought-singed cornfield. Beams of sunlight blazed through the clouds.
But then, just around the corner from the preserved farmland, on Route 16, the picture changed. Bulldozers scraped acres of land down to bare dirt. Backhoes dug ditches for mammoth pipe segments. A sign proclaimed: "Gemcraft Homes at Blackwater Crossing." This is also near the banks of the Little Blackwater River. But it’s on the east side of the stream, out of the spotlight of public attention that hit the west side.
Down the road a little farther, a beige boxville called "Amber Meadows" has sprouted from the cornfields. Another sign proclaims: "75 acres for sale." There’s an explosion of blacktop in the whole area south of Cambridge.
Most of this construction is technically inside Cambridge’s city limits. In fact, the long-depressed city, to encourage growth, extended its boundaries. But the annexation of this strip of farmland, far outside the town’s center on the Choptank River, raises questions about whether the city is shooting itself in the foot.
Downtown Cambridge, long dogged by vacant storefronts and racial tension, is showing signs of life and hope. Antique stores and a new restaurant have opened on Race Street. Condos are flourishing along the city’s waterfront. Why would the city want to drain investment and people out of this core area, which has such beautiful architecture and interesting history?
Whatever the mass-produced cul-de-sacs offer the city – tax dollars to build a firehouse, cash to widen roads – can hardly compare to the soul of the town. Why not make it hard on developers who want to build outside of the city’s center? And instead, encourage them to invest along the downtown waterfront, among the cracked sidewalks and spreading oaks and old woodframe houses with broad porches. Yes, the plots of land there are smaller. It’s unlikely anyone could build 700 houses. But it’s more likely someone could build a home.
READER Mike Donoho, who lives in Cambridge, responds:
"Thank you for your wonderful article. I am a Cambridge native and long asked the same question. Like a pretty girl who thinks she is ugly because she is different, Cambridge has never appreciated itself for what it is and aspired to be ordinary. The "long-depressed" label has always been a pointless drag. Cambridge is in Maryland a place that is never "longed depressed." You can't grow up in Maryland and not have access to opportunity.
Cambridge's opportunity to develop as a delightful town, particularly appealing to retirees should always have been seen as separate from our larger commitment to see that every Marylander has opportunity to build his, or her, life. On that street with antique stores is also a satellite campus of Chesapeake College -- a stepping stone to opportunity within walking distance of the homes of many poor or low income Dorchester County families.
The developments you observed are not likely to provide opportunity to enhance life in Cambridge or the lives of the people who might live in them. There are not jobs nearby to support this housing. If people who lives in these developments need to work to support themselves, they may well have to commute across the Bay Bridge. If they have families their kids can well become latch-key kids left behind in what I would think would be a dreary setting.
These developments may seem like opportunity for the current city government to raise bucks for current projects by the lives that might be lived in them may be peculiarly low in opportunity.
Thanks again for your article.
MY RESPONSE: Mike is probably right about his "latch key" kids observation. Long commutes, all the way over the Bay Bridge, means less time with the family.
And another problem with living in a mass-produced pod of housing disconnected from the world -- except by car -- is the harm it causes to public health. Obesity rates increase, when people can't walk anywhere except to the end of their driveway. And of couse, greenhouse gas emissions go up when people have to drive an hour or more each way to work.
Why not take some of the billions of dollars our country spends every year on interstate construction and spent it, instead, on financial incentives for developers to build single family homes in wonderful places like downtown Cambridge? Maryland and our country would benefit if this jewel is polished instead of replaced.
Let's build up around Cambridge's cool old victorian houses and spreading trees beside the Choptank River -- not drain the life out of the area.
