Shore rural land preservation bid fails
An effort to slow the loss of forest and farmland in Wicomico County fell short yesterday as the Eastern Shore county's council narrowly defeated a measure that would have tightened rural development rules.
By a 4-3 vote, the council rejected a hotly debated proposal to delete the county's so-called "clustering" rule, which allowed builders to put homes on three-acre lots as long as half the farm is spared from development. If approved, the measure would have scaled back the number of homes that could be built in rural areas.
The move, which was unanimously recommended by the county's planning commission, was supported by environmental and conservation groups, by residents upset with sprawl and even by some farmers. But other farmers and real estate interests vehemently opposed the change, saying it would deprive rural landowners of income they could make by selling to developers.
Development of rural land fragments wildlife habitat and increases pollution of streams and the bay. Wicomico, in the heart of the Shore, has been losing farmland at a rapid clip. According to an analysis by environmental groups, more home lots were approved outside of the county's designated growth area in 2007 than at any time since the mid-1990s. USA Today reported that six out of 10 homes in the county are beyond the reach of fire hydrants.
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation, which had backed the downzoning, issued a statement calling the vote disappointing. The environmental group noted that the downzoning had been proposed by a group the county council had appointed to study how to preserve more rural land.
"Our current policies put the future of the county's rural lands at risk," said Alan Girard, head of CBF's "Heart of the Chesapeake" office in Salisbury.
The Salisbury Daily Times reported that after the vote, Wicomico County Executive Richard M. Pollitt Jr. said he would form a commission to try again at drafting the "nuts and bolts" of a land preservation scheme.
in growth/land use
| Permalink
| Comments (2)
I report on the environment and Chesapeake Bay. A native of West Virginia, I have focused mainly on Maryland's environment since moving here in 1983. Along the way, I've crewed aboard a skipjack in the bay, canoed under city streets up the Jones Fall from the Inner Harbor, and gone deep underground in a western Maryland coal mine. Recently, I have been covering the growth and development transforming the landscape. I love seafood, rambles in the country and good stories. I hope to share some here.
Comments
It is unfortunate that proposals such as this do not pass. Measures like these are needed to follow smart growth guidelines and to curb growth.
It seems to me that the public always appears to be on the side of smart growth, but when it comes down to initiating polices, support is lacking. Maybe we still don’t care enough. Maybe someday – hopefully before it is too late.
On the other hand, I do see the side of landowners and developers feeling that regulations lessen their opportunities.
Posted by: bdc | May 6, 2009 9:58 AM
This is yet another example that demonstrates the need for stronger smart growth legislation.
Posted by: Dale Sams | May 6, 2009 11:20 AM