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.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 7:14 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

After decades of ambiguity and controversy, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson thinks it may be time for Congress to review and strengthen federal wetlands protections.

Speaking last week in Washington at a preview of a documentary about pollution in the Chesapeake Bay and Puget Sound, Jackson said because of Supreme Court decisions "there is murkiness" now about whether the EPA or states have any say over filling or draining many wetlands, which filter out pollution naturally.

"I do believe we need a legislative fix to clarify the jurisdiction issue," she said.  The nation is losing wetlands "at an alarming rate" to development, which next to agricultural pollution is one of the biggest threats to the nation's waters, including the Chesapeake, she added.

Jackson made her remarks at the National Press Club, where she and others got a sneak preview of "Poisoned Waters," a two-hour documentary that looks at the Chesapeake and at Puget Sound as examples of how the Clean Water Act has failed after more than 30 years to restore the nation's waters.  The film, by veteran journalist Hedrick Smith, airs on PBS on Frontline April 21.  I'll be reviewing it before it's shown, but you can see a trailer for it now here, and watch a Webcast of the preview last week by going here.

At last week's event, the new EPA chief assured the audience that "EPA is back on the job."  And she defended her agency's recent move to make hundreds of poultry growers on the Delmarva Peninsula apply for federal water-polllution permits.  She said the crackdown, which I wrote about a few weeks ago in The Baltimore Sun, should lead to significant changes in how farmers manage their chicken manure, not just more paperwork.  

"We don't take these lightly," she said, adding that "regulation without enforcement is fairly meaningless."

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

The state Senate passed a slightly modified version of the O'Malley administration's growth "indicators" bill today - after yanking the lone tooth the House had inserted into it.

The bill (SB276/HB295) approved by a vote of 45-2 requires counties and municipalities to report every year on various indicators of where and how development is occurring in their communities.  Gone was the House provision requiring counties to concentrate 80 percent of new construction inside designated growth areas or risk having state permits denied.  That had been stripped out late last week by the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee.

The Senate version requires localities to set goals for curbing sprawl, but doesn't specify what they should be and doesn't  spell out any consequences if they fail to meet them.  The state Department of Planning, in consultation with the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education, must also report annually to the governor on what the localities' reports show.

The de-fanged Senate version, which is only slightly more specific than the original O'Malley administration bill, was worked out in negotiations with administration officials and with the Maryland Association of Counties, said Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of 1000 Friends of Maryland.  MACO had opposed the original bill as demanding too much too fast of local officials, but liked the tougher House bill even less.

Schmidt-Perkins, who along with other activists had successfully lobbied the House to put "accountability" in the administration's bill, indicated she was throwing in the towel - at least for this year.  The "tooth" inserted by the House was so minimal, she said, that it was unlikely to survive intact if delegates had to negotiate a compromise with the Senate.

"It is a disappointment, but I think we knew all along that this wasn't a one-year effort," she said. "We'll be back ... We are in desperate need of more efficient growth patterns in this state, and we need to look ahead to how we're going to get them."

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:15 PM in growth/land use, legislation | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

Environment Maryland released a report today arguing that it isn't just Allegany County where residents are fighting developments that conflict with their counties' long-range growth plans.

The report, "Contrary to Plan," describes eight development disputes on the Eastern Shore and in Howard and Prince George's counties, from housing projects in rural areas to a trash transfer station that seem to fly in face of plans for how those communities should grow.  The group released its report in Salisbury, highlighting cases on the Shore from Cecil to Wicomico counties.  "This is happening throughout Maryland," says Mike Sherling, one of the report's authors.

One project in the report -- the proposed 114-home "Highlands" near Chestertown in Queen Anne's County -- is slated to be argued before the Maryland Court of Special Appeals tomorrow.  Read what I've blogged about this before here.  It's a case that revisits some of the same legal issues that came up in the long-running debate over Allegany's approval of Terrapin Run, a proposal to build 4,300 homes near Green Ridge State Forest - though the county has approved only 900 for now.

The report comes as the General Assembly nears final approval of an O'Malley administration bill that would seek to "clarify" or reverse the Court of Appeals ruling last year on Terrapin Run.  The state's highest court in effect said that local officials need not stick to their communities' long-range growth plans when a seemingly attractive project comes along.  Both House and Senate have approved similar versions of the bill; it won't go to the governor's desk until the two bodies get together.

Local officials have argued that in making decisions about growth, they shouldn't be handcuffed by plans that get reviewed only every six years or so.  But activists have questioned the value of participating in local government planning forums if the growth blueprints worked out with community input are so easily ignored.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 2:09 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

The House of Delegates today passed a growth-management bill that would spur local governments to corral suburban sprawl - or risk having development projects blocked by the state.

By a 95 to 42 vote, delegates approved an amended O'Malley administration measure, HB295, that would require localities to concentrate 80 percent of new development in designated growth zones - aka "Priority Funding Areas." If a county fails to meet that goal - and fails to show any real progress toward the target - then the Maryland Department of the Environment could deny permits for new development projects in rural areas.

This is a stronger version of a bill that Gov. Martin O'Malley introduced that originally required local officials only to track and report how growth is occurring in their communities.  Even the milder bill - one of four growth-management measures in the administration's package - upset county and municipal officials, who complained of unfunded mandates and creeping state control of land use.

But environmentalists, disappointed by the failure of Maryland's 12-year-old Smart Growth laws to halt sprawl, got friendly legislators to sponsor a bill with teeth, tying state funding and permits to local performance.  The House Environmental Matters Committee opted to graft at least one of the teeth onto the administration bill, upsetting county officials even more.   The original opposition of municipal officials was muted, however, by a change that exempted them, and the morphed measure survived full House debate without its tooth being pulled.

"The bill is smart, fair and flexible," Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of 1000 Friends of Maryland, said in a statement released after the vote. "Only if a county makes no progress toward goals can sanctions be applied."

"This bill gives us a means to make actual progress," said Kim Coble, Maryland director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

The bill heads to the Senate now, where it remains to be seen if the tooth will stay or get yanked. Will the O'Malley administration fight for a bill that developed an unintended bite? 

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:03 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (4)
                       

Environmental activists continue their quest to stop the bulldozers clearing a path for the Intercounty Connector, the east-west highway across the Washington suburbs that has been fought over for years.  They'll probably need the luck of the Irish on this one, though.

Green lobbyists took advantage of this week's St. Patrick's Day spirit to urge lawmakers in Annapolis to drop the $4 billion project, and suggested that doing so would help them find some of the millions in spending cuts they need to close the gaping hole in the state's budget.  Activists plied legislators with gold-foil-wrapped chocolate coins while seeking votes for HB27, a bill put in by Del. Barbara Frush of Anne Arundel and Prince George's, that would eliminate funding for the project.  (Photos here supplied by Sierra.)

Stopping the ICC remains a priority of the state's environmental groups.  They contend that despite state efforts to mitigate the environmental impact of building the highway, erosion and pollution runoff will degrade DC area streams such as Paint Branch and Rock Creek, and will foster more sprawling suburban development.  Opponents also argue that the high cost is draining funds from other needed programs and projects. 

After years of protests and futile court actions, activists are waging an uphill battle to stop the ICC now.  Pushed through by Republican Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., the project enjoys strong backing from business interests, and Gov. Martin O'Malley has vowed to see it through. With construction already under way, lawmakers have shown little willingness to pull the plug.  Activists hope the budget crisis might change their minds. 

But even the amount the state could save at this late date by halting construction is an issue.  Legislative analysts have said canceling the highway contracts would net only about $68 million this year, according to Alana Wase of the Sierra Club.  That's not chicken feed, but just a fraction of what's needed to erase the looming deficit.  As with everything else about this road, activists dispute the official cost-saving estimates and contend the bonanza would be much larger.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 7:29 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (3)
                       

The owner of a home built illegally on an island in the Magothy River can keep it, an Anne Arundel County judge has ruled.

The Annapolis Capital reports that Circuit Court Judge Paul F. Harris Jr. upheld a decision by the county's board of appeals saying that Daryl Wagner does not have to tear down his home on Little Island, even though it violated the state's Critical Area law.

Wagner demolished a modest cottage on the island and in its place built a large home, a little lighthouse, a swimming pool and gazebo.  He did the work without getting all the approvals and permits needed.

The county board of appeals, after a contentious hearing, granted Wagner after-the-fact permits for most of the work he did on the island.

The case, which has been dragging on for five years, was viewed as a test of reforms made last year to the 1984 Critical Area law, which is supposed to protect the Chesapeake Bay by restricting building close to the water.   The General Assembly last year overhauled the law, curtailing after-the-fact approvals of illegal waterfront construction.  But the Capital reports the judge decided the new law did not apply retroactively to pending disputes like this one.

Environmental groups who had appealed the board of appeals decision are reported to be considering appealing the judge's ruling as well.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 1:24 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

The Environmental Protection Agency sees signs that "smart growth" is catching on nationwide in the tea leaves of building trends in the nation's 50 largest metropolitan areas. 

The agency tallied a surge in residential building permits in the urban cores of more than half the big metro areas from 1990 to 2007.  Indeed, 15 metro regions (including Baltimore) more than doubled the share of permits issued for their central cities.  The growth was especially marked in the most recent five years, the EPA report says, and the trend even survived the beginning of the real estate market bust in 2007.

On closer inspection, though, it's clear suburban and rural sprawl still rules most of the land.  Only in New York did urban redevelopment account for the majority of housing construction. In just seven others did the urban cores get a quarter or more of all new home building.  

In the Baltimore area, the EPA report found that the central city's share of residential construction more than tripled -- from 2 percent in the early 1990s to 7 percent in the years after 2002.  It fell back to 5 percent in 2007.   You can read more about the report here.

(Photo at right, taken in 2007, is of condos under construction at 414 Water Street, as reflected off a nearby building.  Picture Jerry Jackson of The Baltimore Sun.)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 7:40 AM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

If you can't wait for the Academy Awards presentation, tune in to MPT Saturday evening for a noteworthy documentary, "Sprawl: A Tipping Point," on the choices Marylanders face in dealing with growth while trying to maintain their quality of life.

MPT's Jeff Salkin takes viewers on a 30-minute ramble through the building issues across the state, from the disputed Terrapin Run community proposed in rural western Maryland to a brownfields redevelopment under way on Baltimore's waterfront and the growth surging around suburban military bases like Aberdeen Proving Ground.

Between the development snapshots, Salkin points out that Maryland's population is expected to increase by more than 1 million over the next generation.  Where they choose to live and work could have a major impact on the state's natural resources and everyone's quality of life.  It's a balanced exploration, featuring interviews with developers, environmentalists, government officials and business folk, including a farmer.

Too bad Salkin didn't have more time, or get a chance to make the video shot last year more topical.  Perhaps he might have been able to explain then why Maryland's pioneering 12-year-old "Smart Growth" policy hasn't curbed suburban sprawl as it was supposed to, and what remedies are being put forward now. 

The show does touch on some of the proposed fixes, including Gov. Martin O'Malley's "smart, green and growing" concept. But the MPT special doesn't firmly connect the dots between the varied development "snapshots" it presents and the legislative proposals now being debated in Annapolis.

Still, it's a useful primer for those trying to understand the background behind Maryland's growing dilemma.  How can we accommodate more people without sacrificing the Chesapeake Bay and our quality of life?  And how do we protect those cherished things without depriving Marylanders of the freedom to choose where they want to live?

"Sprawl: A Tipping Point" airs at 6:30 p.m. on Saturday.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:05 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (3)
                       

I spent a long afternoon in Annapolis earlier this week listening to folks debate how much growth should be guided by plans, and who should decide what the public ought to know about the growth occurring around them.

As I reported in The Baltimore Sun, the House Environmental Matters Committee held a hearing on three growth-planning bills sought by the O'Malley administration.  There were supporters and critics aplenty. 

One of the chief points of debate seemed to be over whether local governments should be required to track various "indicators" of growth, such as how much development is concentrated in designated growth areas.  Local officials said having to collect and report such information would be an "unfunded mandate" at a time when they lack the money or staff to take on new tasks.  And they didn't want the state planning department telling them what information to track, as the administration bill would do.

But community activists said it's tough to get good information now about the impacts of growth.  "Having good data will help everyone," argued Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of 1000 Friends of Maryland.  She and other activists actually favor going even further, supporting a bill that would spell out what growth data local governments must track and authorizing the state to use the information in deciding which communities get priority for state funding.

While environmentalists have pushed to put teeth in O'Malley's growth legislation, a planning expert sounded a note of caution.  "Planning by formula is really hard,'' said Gerrit Knaap, director of the National Center for Smart Growth Research at the University of Maryland.  His center has developed a set of indicators for measuring growth that communities could use.

Continue reading "Growth plans: Roadmap or Handcuffs?" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:23 AM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

 Disappointed that Gov. Martin O'Malley didn't propose more ambitious reforms of Maryland's flawed Smart Growth program, activists hope to put some teeth in the governor's legislation that would require local officials to track various indicators of growth.

O'Malley announced recently that he plans to introduce five bills based on recommendations made by a task force that has been studying the state's growth laws and policy for the past year.  You can read about them and the rest of his legislative agenda here.

But environmental and smart-growth activists think the governor didn't go far enough.   Kaid Benfield with the Natural Resources Defense Council  says in a recent blog post that what O'Malley has proposed is a start but much more is needed.

Unwilling to wait for future reforms that may never come, environmental and smart-growth groups are drawing up their own bill that would set "performance standards" for localities in planning their development.  That's similar to the governor's planned legislation, but the activists would go a step further by tying state funding to how well counties, cities and towns meet those standards.

"It’s time to hold our public officials accountable for decisions about development," according to 1000 Friends of Maryland.  When asked if activists are looking to one-up the administration's growth proposals, 1000 Friends' Dru Schmidt-Perkins said they just want to "complete" the governor's ideas. 

Of course, greens and growth activists will have to contend with some significant pushback from the Maryland Association of Counties and Maryland Municipal League, who are already antsy about the governor's proposal to make them even collect and report data on development trends - never mind being held accountable for it by losing out in the jockeying for limited state funding.  Administration officials, for their part, say the information by itself will lead to better decision making.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:27 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (5)
                       

This may be the year when Marylanders learn whether the development plans their leaders must appove every six years are worth the paper they're printed on.

As I reported in The Baltimore Sun today, Gov. Martin O'Malley is expected to seek legislation spelling out that counties and municipalities must follow the comprehensive plans they adopt. It's a move to reverse - or at the very least clear up - a decision last year by the Maryland Court of Appeals that cast doubt on the plans' importance.

Ruling in a dispute over the 4,300-home Terrapin Run development proposed next to a state forest in mountainous western Maryland, the state's highest court said local governments were not required to follow their comprehensive plans in deciding on individual projects.  A group of Allegany County residents had challenged a special exception granted to the developer to build in a rural area far from public water and sewer.  The O'Malley administration and environmentalists joined the opponents in their appeal.

In its opinion, the court's majority sided with the county government, saying it need not follow its plan.  The majority also brushed aside a 1992 state planning law that says local zoning and land use laws and regulations shall be "consistent" with the plans, and that the plans themselves must adhere to eight "visions" of good growth, including building in existing population centers and protecting sensitive and resource areas. 

Though at least some local officials saw the ruling as a narrow, technical one, critics - including many planners, environmentalists and growth management advocates - said the court's ruling cast doubt on the value of the development plans, which are revised every six years after extensive input from the public.  "Why bother to have a plan at all?" asked one.

"Correcting" the court's ruling is one of the recommendations of a task force on future growth in Maryland appointed by O'Malley, which is due to formally report to the governor today.  State planning secretary Richard E. Hall said the administration wants to clarify and reaffirm the requirements in state law for local zoning and land-use rules to follow the plans.

Continue reading "Terrapin Run redux" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:26 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

It appears that controversial Charles County highway is getting a little more than routine scrutiny by regulators as they take more time to decide if it can go forward.

The county did ask the state Department of the Environment and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to take up to six more months to review its bid for permission to bulldoze seven acres of wetlands to build a multi-lane highway linking Waldorf with the burgeoning Bryans Road area nearer to Washington, D.C. 

County officials say the road is needed to reduce traffic accidents and ease congestion between two growth areas, but opponents have protested that the highway will spur more sprawl development and harm Mattawoman Creek, one of the state's prime spawning streams for yellow perch and other fish.

A few weeks back, MDE advised the county to ask for a delay because it needed more information to decide.  At the time, an MDE spokesman had said the information needed was routine and technical in nature.

Questions contained in a Nov. 19 letter from the Baltimore District office of the Army Corps seem anything but routine or technical, however.

William P. Seib, a chief of the Corps' permits section, asked for "clarification" of the east-west road's purpose and need.   Pointing to opponents' claims that the project has already prompted some development just by being proposed, Seib asked the county to address the shifting rationales it has given for the highway over the past 12 years, from accommodating growth to safety and efficiency.

The Army regulator also asked county officials to explain why another east-west highway is needed about four miles north of Route 228, which he noted the State Highway Administration has said will provide an effective link for traffic between Bryans Road and Waldorf. 

And he asked the county to take another look at potential "cumulative" impacts of building the road on Mattawoman Creek.  He pointed to a finding by another Corps office that water quality and habitat in the Mattawoman are already being harmed by development in its watershed.

"The county's efforts to protect the Mattawoman watershed lacks solid tangible commitments in the forms of new regulations or zoning ordnances" he wrote in part. 

Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the state Department of Natural Resources have formally expressed concern about the impacts of the highway project on the Mattawoman.

To read the full text of the letter, go here.

County officials were quoted in the Southern Maryland Newspapers saying they didn't think the Corps' information demands were a negative thing.  County Commissioner Gary Hodge called the list of concerns "very positive and helpful," according to a story you can read here.

Opponents, though, hope that the concerns raised by them and federal and state environmental officials will be troubling enough that the Army Corp and MDE decide to require a thorough Environmental Impact Statement be prepared on the project.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:00 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (3)
                       

State officials have decided not to decide - for now, at least - whether to let a four-lane highway  be built across Mattawoman Creek (at right) in Charles County.

Facing a legal deadline today on whether to issue a wetlands permit for the Cross County Connector project, the Maryland Department of the Environment chose instead to extend its review period to Nov. 17, while suggesting it likely will need even more time to make a decision.

MDE spokesman Robert Ballinger said officials were still reviewing issues raised by more than 100 comments received on the $60 million highway project.  It would destroy seven acres of wetlands, most while crossing the Mattawoman, a tributary of the Potomac River and a prime breeding stream for yellow perch.

County officials are pushing to build the Cross County Connector to handle traffic from some 8,000 new homes planned along its route and to link the county's growth areas.   But opponents have decried the environmental damage such a highway would do - it would clear 74 acres of forest, for instance. They've also argued it would encourage more sprawling development in a county where projected growth is predicted to tax existing sources of water. 

Ballinger said state officials are likely to request more information from Charles County about the project, and would probably need more time beyond Nov. 17 to decide the county's request.  The state would ask the county to apply for a six-month extension of the permit review, he said. 

What the agency spokesman didn't say was that if the county didn't go along, then the state would in all likelihood deny the request, citing a lack of information to justify the wetlands losses.  That's just what opponents would like to see happen.  They've been pushing for an Environmental Impact Statement, arguing that a highway this large needs thorough review.  Such a study probably would take even longer than six months;  environmentalists also hope it would support their objections and effectively kill the project. 

But for now, at least, the curtain has yet to come down on this particular road opera.  Get ready for another act.

(Aerial photo courtesy of Charles County resident David Bick.)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 3:23 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (4)
                       

The push to reform Smart Growth seems to be gaining volume, if not momentum.   Just last week, Environment Maryland announced it had secured the pledges of 24 state legislators to back the environmental group's agenda for next year's General Assembly session. 

Among its goals:  getting state legislation to require local zoning to match comprehensive plans, effectively reversing the Maryland Court of Appeals ruling authorizing the massive Terrapin Run development in Allegany County.  When last I checked, there were 47 senators (four in Environment Maryland's camp) and 141 delegates (with 20 backing the group's stance).

This week, another group, 1000 Friends of Maryland, hopes to rally its supporters to push for transportation policies that encourage compact development.  The group holds its gala on Thursday at Silo Point, a former grain elevator in Locust Point that's been converted to a 228-unit condominium.  Its developer, Patrick Turner, is one of 1000 Friends.

The state Department of Planning, meanwhile, plans another in a statewide series of "listening sessions" on growth in Maryland, this time on Oct. 28 in Aberdeen.  The session, held in conjunction with the state Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development in Maryland, will run from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Aberdeen High School.  For more info, go here.

State planners aren't content to draw lines on a map, either.  They're asking for the public's views on growth, with an online survey you can take here.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:50 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

If you've wanted to give someone in authority a piece of your mind about growth in the Baltimore area, here's your chance.  The Maryland Department of Planning and a state task force on growth and development will be having a "listening session" Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. at Woodlawn High School, 1801 Woodlawn Drive. 

This is the fourth of six "listening sessions" being held around the state.  There'll be another Thursday night for Washington area residents at James Blake High School in Silver Spring.  The final forum will be Thursday, Sept. 25, at Bridge of Life Church in Hagerstown.  For more information or maps showing locations, go here.

The task force, formed by the legislature, is expected to report its findings and recommendation by the end of the year.  Growth issues are expected to be on the agenda at next year's General Assembly.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 9:14 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

There's more time to weigh in on a proposed new highway through Charles County that highlights the tensions between growth and environmental protection in Maryland.

The Army Corps of Engineers and Maryland Department of the Environment have announced they are extending the public comment period until Sept. 15 on the county's request for a permit to destroy the wetlands as they build the four-lane highway across the creek.  The public hearing July 31 in LaPlata reportedly was standing-room-only.

In case you missed the Sun story last April about the dispute, local officials say the Cross County Connector is needed to handle the traffic from 8,000 new homes planned along its route and to link the county's growth areas.   If the highway is not built, other roads will have to be widened or built, they say.

But opponents point out the highyway would clear 74 acres of forest in addition to destroying wetlands. They contend the $60 million project would threaten the Mattawoman, an important tributary of the Potomac River and one of the best remaining breeding streams in Maryland for yellow perch, a tasty little fish once plentiful in Chesapeake Bay.

Maybe it's just coincidence, but yesterday came word of a blue-green algae bloom on the Mattawoman.  Though naturally occurring, such algae blooms "may occur in nutrient rich environments", according to the the county health department.  Such blooms can be harmful if the microscopic plants are thick enough or if they produce toxins.

To make written comments on the highway project, go here.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 5:36 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

Driving can be dangerous, we all know that.  Now comes Men's Health magazine suggesting that cars are bad for our long-term personal health as well as the planet's.

In its Metrogrades feature, the self-styled "guide to men's health, fitness, weight loss, nutrition, sex, style and guy wisdom" has ranked America's cities by which has the "greenest drivers," aka the most environmentally conscious motorists. 

It breaks the grading down by categories, with ratings of which cities' denizens drive the most fuel-guzzling vehicles, which ride transit the most and so on.  Baltimore makes only one of the top 10 listings, with our residents driving the 10th fewest miles per capita of any city in the country. Overall, B'more ranks 42nd, two spots behind Washington. 

The five greenest cities in the magazine's estimation, are: Seattle, Burlington, Vt., Portland, Ore., Madison, Wisc., and Fargo, N.D.  The first three I follow, and Madison is kind of understandable, as home to the University of Wisconsin and a lot of students without cars. But what's up with Fargo?

The rankings, available online, are accompanied by articles raising concerns about motorists' exposure to toxic chemicals ("Is the Reaper Riding Shotgun in Your Car?) and the health impacts of air pollution, plus tips on being more fuel-efficient.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 5:46 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

With all the wet stuff we've been getting in May, I've been watching a lot of murky water running down the street lately past my house.  At the end of the block, it drops into a storm drain that empties into a concrete-lined "stream," which makes its way to the Patapsco River - and ultimately to the Chesapeake Bay.

There aren't any construction sites up the hill from our house in Catonsville.  But even in established, older neighborhoods like mine, heavy rain has a way of scooping up silt and loose dirt, especially when it washes off homeowners' driveways and lawns. 

Growth and development have made stormwater runoff the fastest growing source of pollution degrading the bay and its tributaries.  State and local governments are working to get a better handle on the problem with tighter regulations on new construction.  Meanwhile the good news is there are relatively inexpensive things existing homeowners can do to minimize their contribution to the bay's woes.  One is to create a "rain garden." 

A rain garden is just a natural or man-made shallow depression that can collect stormwater runoff from a roof, walk or driveway - or even from a compacted lawn.  They're planted with trees, shrubs and plants to soak up the moisture.  Besides being good for the bay, they can be pretty to look at, as they tend to be the best-watered spots in the yard. 

For those who'd like to see what one looks like, you're in luck - the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay and the Chesapeake Conservation Landscaping Council have created a demonstration garden at the U.S. Botanic Garden in Washington, D.C.  The photo at left shows volunteers putting the finishing touches on it recently.  It's part of the Botanic Garden's exhibition, entitled, One Planet - Ours!  It opens this Memorial Day weekend and runs through Columbus Day, Oct. 12.

The landscaping council's portion of the exhibit is actually a series of rain gardens linked by a dry stream bed, featuring rain barrels, native plants and porous pavement to show what can be done in the typical residential yard.  The U.S. Botanic Garden's at 100 Maryland Ave. SW in Washington., and you can find the council's Rainscaping exhibit by the Conservatory, facing the U.S. Capitol.

If you'd like to know more about rain gardens, the Bay Journal has published some simple guidelines and links for more info.  You can also find more detailed advice about landscaping to curb runoff at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation's Web site.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:18 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (3)
                       

Amid commencement frenzy this week at Maryland's colleges and universities, five young men and a woman are collecting master's degrees in real estate development - the first products of a new University of Maryland curriculum aiming to teach sustainable design and land use.

Now all they need are jobs, to put the "smart growth" principles they've learned into practice.

"The program's fantastic," says Tyler Abrams, 23, a Bethesda native.  He had worked briefly for a Washington architectural firm designing houses before deciding he wanted to be involved in development on a larger scale.  At UM, he took classes in architecture, urban studies and planning as well as those focused on the business of real estate.

"You get a real exposure to what goes behind the design," Abrams says, "the social implications ... things aside from finance."

Though he and the other master's recipients will have commencement this week, Abrams says he still has a little more work to do on his "capstone" project - a case study of a mixed-use development proposed in College Park.   Once that's finished by the end of the summer, he hopes to find work with a developer.

A couple of the grads already have jobs.  One's with a Washington development firm, and another is a planner in Carroll County.   While the real estate market's in a funk, Abrams says he thinks this is actually a good time for graduates of this program to try to break into the business.

"There are definitely probably more openings for government-type jobs," he says, but he's hoping to find private employers looking for his skillls because more developers are incorporating "green" design and materials into their projects.

"These graduates have an orientation that meshes with changes in the industry,'' Margaret McFarland, director of the program, says in a press release issued about the newly minted masters.  "There's a growing recognition that development needs to get smarter and greener.  As our graduates move up in the field, they will hasten the changes." 

"It's more than just profit, it's the satisfaction of building a physical asset and contributing to a social good," says another grad, Derek Meyers, 24, of Hagerstown.  He says he's begun his career in local planning, first in Boonsboro and now in Carroll, "to understand the political process which shapes our built environment."  

As the first crop sprouts, there are more graduates being nurtured. About 75 students in all have enrolled in the University of Maryland's two-year-old master's program in real estate development, which is housed in the School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 2:34 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

"Weary Shoreline," a documentary about the failure to enforce Maryland's Critical Area law, airs at 9 p.m. Wednesday night.  It's a troubling report for anyone who cares about Chesapeake Bay.  It shows how waterfront homeowners and builders are chewing away at the narrow strip of shore that acts as a buffer and filter for the pollution running off driveways, streets, lawns and roofs.  It also documents how little local officials have done about it.

As the viewer rides along on boats with riverkeepers, or flies with the camera over the bay, you're struck by just how built up the shoreline is, especially in Anne Arundel County.   You see the large house, complete with private lighthouse, that the owner of Little Island erected without first getting permits -- and has been allowed to keep.  You also see neighboring Dobbins Island, which another owner is trying to develop, even though the sliver of land is in the 1,000 foot strip regulated by the 1984 Critical Area law.

Riverkeepers and other activists are the viewers' guides to the "death of a thousand cuts" that waterfront living is causing to the bay.  But the special also gives some property owners their say. In some cases, the damage seems marginal, as homeowners in long-established communities question why they can't clear vines and brush on their land or build a carport or pool near the water, since their neighbors already have done it. Where do you draw the line, they ask?

In other places, where the shore is still relatively untouched, the issue is clearer, and the stakes higher.  Dennis Whigham, a scientist with the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center in Edgewater, explains that studies have found it doesn't take much development to degrade the water and the plants and critters in it.  Disturb as little as 3 or 4 percent of the land draining into a particular creek or cove, he says, and you'll start to see declines.

If I have one criticism of the documentary, I wish it had spent more time walking viewers through the harm done by development.  The cumulative impact of many small individual insults is a hard concept for the general public to grasp.

Still, it's a valuable and timely report.  Gov. Martin O'Malley has asked the General Assembly to strengthen state oversight under the Critical Area law.  The governor's bill comes up for a hearing Thursday in the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee.

Among other things, it would tighten up on the "variances" that local officials often grant to property owners seeking approval - after the fact, in some cases - to build in the 100-foot strip closest to the water, which is supposed to be left untouched.  It would also expand that no-disturbance buffer zone from 100 feet to 300 feet, and subject builders to possible loss of their license if they knowingly violate the law.  

You can read more about the problems with the law, in this piece in The Sun that Rona Kobell and I did.  Or this story in The Washington Post.   Then tune in to MPT Wednesday night to see what the case is for reform.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:22 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (7)
                       

The new state "Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development" held its first meeting in Annapolis yesterday, and got a taste of what they're up against.

The 21-member panel (a few members seemed to be absent) got briefings from Maryland Planning Secretary Richard E. Hall and his staff on how growth is currently managed, how sprawl continues despite Smart Growth, and how the state's population is greying and becoming more diverse, even as housing becomes less affordable throughout much of the state.

"We often grow now differently than we used to," Hall said, showing the task force how the compact urban neighborhoods of the 1940s and '50s have given way to ever-spreading suburbia.  He gave them the familiar statistics about how three-fourths of the new homes built since Smart Growth took effect in 1997 have been inside designated growth areas, but the other fourth are consuming three-fourths of all the land devoted to housing. 

More troubling, he projected that if current land use patterns persist, the state will lose another 650,00 acres to development. He pointed out that a recent report from the Environmental Protection Agency's inspector general warned that poorly managed growth was undermining efforts to restore Chesapeake Bay.

As if that's not enough to worry about, the task force heard that more people are coming this way, while those that are here are getting older. Maryland's overall population growth has slowed, but the state still should add 1.1 million more people by 2030 - driven in part by immigrants moving here and more babies getting born, explained MDP's Mark Goldstein. 

Though Maryland's in no danger of becoming Florida, by 2030, nearly one in five people here will be 65 or older.   While they're getting older, many people also seem to be moving out of state, or from county to county, Goldstein explained.  He suggested that the migration was linked to rising home prices, flashing a map showing how sales of $300,000-plus homes has spread across much of the state in recent years.

Del. Virginia P. Clagett, an Anne Arundel County Democrat on the task force, later called the three-hour skull session "fascinating," particularly the info on movements of families around and out of the state. She said she's worried about the impact of military base growth on her county, where some boosters predict Fort Meade could add upwards of 22,000 jobs over the next several years.

Doing something smart about all this won't be easy, she acknowledged. 

"It's one thing to know what's happening. It's another to correct it," Clagett said.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:00 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

Maryland's planning department has formed yet another task force to study the impacts of growth on the state, and recommend changes to the state's once-pioneering Smart Growth laws.

"Maryland is at a crossroads concerning future growth,'' state Planning Secretary Richard E. Hall said in a statement announcing the 21-member panel's formation.  "We cannot continue to grow the way we have for the past 40 years without dire consequences.  The declining health of the Chesapeake Bay, the loss of forests and wetlands and the encroachment of development into our rural lands are signs that we must grow smarter."

The task force, originally authorized by a 2006 law and given expanded duties by the 2007 legislature, will hold its first meeting Jan. 28 in Annapolis.  It's expected to submit a report and recommendations by Dec. 1, but will continue to advise the governor's Smart Growth "subcabinet" through 2010.

Gov. Martin O'Malley has said he'd like to enhance the state's 11-year-old Smart Growth laws, which rely on state funding to encourage development in and around existing communities.   Launched in 1997 by Gov. Parris N. Glendening, Smart Growth has had mixed success to date, and has generally failed to halt the spread of low-density suburban development farther into the state's rural reaches.

But Smart Growth is expected to take a back seat this year, as the governor and legislature continue to wrestle with a fiscal crisis, and environmental priorities focus on reforming the state's 24-year-old Critical Area law regulatilng development along the Chesapeake Bay's edge. 

The chairman of the task force is Jon Laria, a Baltimore real estate lawyer who served on O'Malley's transition committee, where he chaired a group focused on housing and community development.

Task forces can help pave the way for major reform efforts, but they also frequently serve as delaying tactics.   It remains to be seen which this is.   Stay tuned.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:34 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

Maryland's longstanding Smart Growth policy aims to focus development in and around existing towns and cities, but efforts by municipal officials to expand their borders to allow for new  homes and businesses have been controversial in recent years.  

Voters have said no to annexations in Aberdeen, Mt. Airy and New Market, among other places, while plans to expand Denton have been challenged in court by surrounding Caroline County.  On the largely rural Eastern Shore, where development pressure has been intense, annexations in Cambridge, Trappe and elsewhere also have been contentious.

Most of the objections to annexations stem from residents' fears that their community will grow too large or too fast, clogging roads and crowding classrooms.   One of the big arguments for annexation has been that expanding the community's real estate tax base will generate additional revenue needed to fix roads and sidewalks or upgrade aging water and wastewater systems.

But now, an Owings Mills environmental consultant who is advising some residents challenging annexations has questioned the fiscal case for annexation.  Richard Klein, of Community & Environmental Defense Services, says he's found that the smallest of Maryland's 157 municipalities tend to have the lowest tax rates, and that the cost of government increases as the town expands in acreage.

His analysis shows "a very clear relationship," Klein says, "that the bigger you are, the higher your taxes are." Some annexations do stabilize or even lower taxes, Klein notes.  New stores, restaurants and offices tend to generate more tax revenue than they eat up in government services such as police and fire protection, trash collection and the like.  New homes, though, can cost as much as 20 percent more to serve than their owners pay in taxes, he contends. Those towns that expanded to allow for commercial development tended to have lower taxes, he says.

Amid continuing debate across the state about the scale and pace of development, Klein says he's planning a workshop Saturday in Easton for residents who'd like to know more aobut the pros and cons of annexation as a way to grow smartly.  The session, from 10 a.m. to noon at the Talbot County library, is free, but advance registration is requested.  Click here for more information.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:29 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

Just how walkable are Baltimore and its suburbs?   A new report from the Brookings Institution in Washington rates the nation's top 30 metropolitan areas by the number of walkable places or neighborhoods they have.  Good ol' Charm City comes in 15th, with just two places -- the Inner Harbor and Fells Point -- meeting the think tank's criteria for inclusion.

While we all might be able to think of places around Baltimore that are charming to walk - my own neighborhood of Catonsville springs to mind - the ranking only includes what it considers to be places of regional significance, as focuses of employment, shopping, entertainment or culture.  It also was limited to places that were at or near what the report calls "critical mass," so thriving that they do not need public or private subsidies to attract new development.

"You're in the top 15," points out the report's author, Christopher B. Leinberger, a land-use thinker and teacher with a long history as a developer.  A visiting scholar at Brookings, he lives in Washington and teaches real estate at the University of Michigan.

I did question Leinberger's failure to include downtown Annapolis as a regionally significant walkable place in the Baltimore area.   He acknowledged it certainly would qualify, assuming it's officially counted in the Baltimore metro area, and may even move us up in the rankings.

So, what were the most walkable cities?  Our neighbor, Washington, D.C. is tops.  Though New York City has more walkable places, the DC area has the most walkable places per capita, according to Leinberger. Other highly walkable cities include Boston, San Francisco, Denver, Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Miami and Pittsburgh.  Least walkable were Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla., Cleveland, Cincinnati, Sacramento

Rail transit is often a key to walkability, according to Leinberger.  Two-thirds of the 157 walkable places identified in the top 30 metro areas were served by rail.  And geographically speaking, the most walkable cities tended to be in the Northeast (we're lumped in there) and on the West Coast.

Lastly, Leinberger points out that walkability is something that can be created or improved upon.  He points out that Denver is one city that had no walkable centers 20 years ago, but now has five.

Batimore has lots of potential to boost its walkability, Leinberger thinks.  Towson, the Charles Street corridor and East Baltimore around Johns Hopkins all could develop in ways that make them great places to be afoot sans auto, he says.  Columbia could be another one, depending on how plans for building up the town center shake out.

Continue reading "Baltimore so-so for walkablity?" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:19 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

Watch for Gov. Martin O'Malley to propose tightening state laws regulating shoreline development along Chesapeake Bay and the removal of trees when the General Assembly convenes in January. Those were among the more concrete pledges the governor made when he spoke last night to an enthusiastic crowd of environmentalists and smart-growth advocates at the 10th anniversary gala of 1000 Friends of Maryland.

"Our Critical Area law was the best thing we could do," O'Malley said of the shoreline development regulations pushed through in 1984 by Gov. Harry Hughes.  As with most legislation, O'Malley added, it was "a product of consensus and compromise.  Our people expect a lot more than a law that was the product of the 1970s can provide."   (I think he meant to say 1980s; or maybe I misheard him - a momentary hallucination from hunger, having been obliged to sip water while others dined, for eithical reasons.)

O'Malley also vowed to propose changes to the Forest Conservation Act, a law pushed through by another of his predecessors, William Donald Schaefer.  O'Malley said the law needs tightening "to replace what we've lost through sprawl."
The governor said his administration is working on a "sustainable forestry" initiative, and he signaled his willingness to push for more state actions to combat climate change.

"Things have to change," he said.  "It's not true that all growth generates needed tax revenue .... It's not true we have to grow or die. It's not true that undeveloped land is just a waste."

Such rhetoric was music to the hundreds of activists, officials and developers (yes, some of the 1000 Friends are builders and developers.)

Interestingly, though he was speaking to the converted in decrying the ills of sprawl, one pledge O'Malley didn't make last night was to propose specific revisions to the state's 10-year-old Smart Growth laws.  He's previously said they need tightening.  He even invited Smart Growth's architect, former Gov. Parris N. Glendening, to arrange a two-day, closed-door skull session with his cabinet on how to do a better job of managing growth.

O'Malley did vow last night to "stop making state investments that actually chase bad local decisions." And he suggested that "we need to do a much better job of calculating the true costs of growth," to identify what's economically sustainable and what's not.  

In almost the next breath, he mentioned the "opportunities" presented by military base realignment, which by some projections could bring upwards of 45,000 jobs and 28,000 families to Maryland.  He's expected to propose new funding and legislation to pave the way for that influx, though in this case economists have projected that the new jobs and people will more than refill the state and local tax coffers in years to come.

An O'Malley administration official said later that he is still committed to Smart Growth reform, but intends to put off pushing for it until 2009 - to give officials more time to flesh out proposals.

Continue reading "Spreading green cheer among "Friends"" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:03 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

Maryland's highest court is about to wade into a controversy about large-scale development in rural Allegany County that could have a bearing on Chesapeake Bay and the rest of the state.  The case concerns Terrapin Run, a proposed 4,300 community that would be built on 935 acres off of Scenic U.S. 40 by Green Ridge State Forest.  

It's drawing statewide and even national attention because the heart of the dispute is about the legal weight to be given to comprehensive or master plans, the blueprints for growth that every county and muncipality in the state is required to have.  You can read the story I wrote about it in The Sun here.  As Tom Pelton, the Sun's environmental beat reporter, pointed out to me, controversies have erupted around other large-scale development proposals that did not square with local plans, such as the Blackwater Resort project in Cambridge and Harbor East in Baltimore.

Even as the Terrapin Run dispute was heading to the Court of Appeals in Annapolis, a new one has flared up in Allegany over yet another plan.  This one, two years in the making, seeks to spell out growth in LaVale, an unincorporated area outside Cumberland.  Though parts of LaVale are already heavily developed, with stores, motels and offices along U.S. 40, the new plan drawn up with citizen input over the past year or so originally called for discouraging large-scale residential development.

But local Realtors and at least one large landowner objected to that plan.  The Realtors complained the plan would impose "draconian" restrictions on new housing construction, and worried that the development restrictions imposed in the LaVale plan could become a countywide policy.  They argued that Allegany, struggling to rebuild jobs and hold onto its population, needs to encourage more develpment, not discourage it.  Here's a letter explaining their objections.

After those objections, county planners produced a new version of the plan, calling for more residential and commercial development in the area and nearly doubling the amount of land targeted for new housing, even though state planners project population loss there.  Here's a story about the changes in the Cumberland Times-News.

Smart-growth activists complained that the new language said large-scale residential development was to be encouraged in LaVale. Here's a letter published in the Cumberland Times-News from Dale Sams, a member of the Citizens for Smart Growth in Allegany County, the group that has fought Terrapin Run.

The planning commission's executive director called the revisions "clarifications," which did not require a new public hearing before approving the plan, according to this story in the Times-News. But residents complained the plan's intent had been stood on its head.  The local forestry board objected that the revised plan did not protect lands traditionally used to produce harvestable timber, while the League of Women Voters complained that the changes were made without notice or opportunity for the public to comment. 

The county commissioners have scheduled a public hearing on the plan Dec. 6, after which they could approve the plan or suggest modifications, according to the Times-News. Plan on hearing more about this.

UPDATE: Allegany County commissioners have postponed the hearing on the LaVale plan until January, to give the planning commission a chance to consider amending it.  The planning commission will meet Dec. 19 at 7 p.m., the Cumberland Times-News reports.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 1:53 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

The wildfires that ravaged parts of Southern California so badly a couple weeks ago are nearly all out now. But the threat remains, and it isn't limited to the arid West. 

Maryland, despite its normally abundant rainfall, faces a significant and growing risk of runaway blazes that threaten to burn homes and other structures, according to a two-year-old state study.

A "wildland fire assessment" done by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources points out that the state's forests have become increasingly fragmented over the years, with development spreading out from the cities and suburbs into rural areas.

"You have a lot of wildland-urban interface," said Monte Mitchell, state fire supervisor at DNR's Forest Service, all along the Baltimore-Washington corridor, but also reaching into southern and western Maryland and to the lower Eastern Shore.

Unfortunately, this report is not available online.  But here's a page I scanned in from the study, with a map depicting the state's "wildland-urban interface"  -- those areas where homes and wooded areas mingle.

Interestingly, the report says, the state's conservation laws and Smart Growth are at least partly to blame for increasing the risks of wildfires to homes.  In the old days, developers bulldozed all the trees before building a new housing subdivision; now, builders are required to leave trees and "natural" buffers, and such leafy communities are popular with home buyers.

"The trend shows that the number of incidents involving structures that are damaged or threatened from wildfires has steadily grown each fire season," the report says. 

Continue reading "The fire next time - in Maryland?" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:40 AM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

Looking for a chance to learn more about "green building?" How it can help lower energy bills while also cooling global warming?

Continue reading "Going global on green building" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 5:13 PM in global warming, growth/land use | Permalink
                       

The political pendulum seems to have swung away from pro-growth sentiments here in Maryland, in Northern Virginia and in Oregon, a high-profile battleground over growth controls in recent years.  

Voters in Aberdeen yesterday turned out their mayor, S. Fred Simmons, in a bitter election contest fueled in part by a backlash to the mayor's efforts to promote the town's growth.  As colleagues Mary Gail Hare and Madison Park reported in The Sun today, a citizen's group that first squared off against Simmons over a large annexation last year campaigned against him and figured in the election of his opponent, Michael E. Bennett, a retired state trooper.

Simmons and town officials had approved annexation of a tract called "The Wetlands" for development, but residents petitioned the boundary expansion to a referendum late last year and soundly defeated it.  They argued it would strain town's water supply, crowd schools, worsen traffic congesion and raise taxes.

Slow-growth candidates won eight of nine seats yesterday on the board of supervisors in Loudoun County, Virginia - one of the fastest growing counties in the US, where voters have seesawed in recent years between pro- and slow-growth sentiment.  According to a story today in The Washington Post, slow-growth Democratic candidates defeated four pro-growth Republican incumbnets, while four other slow-growth incumbents won reelection.

"In 2003, a slate of pro-growth Republicans wrested control of the Board of Supervisors." The Post's Sandhya Somashekhar reported. "The previous board, elected in 1999, had angered property rights advocates by trying to institute one of the country's strictest growth-control policies."

In Oregon, meanwhile, voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure rolling back the property development rights they had approved just three years earlier.  Oregonians, who for decades had lived under the the tightest land-use controls in the country, rebelled in 2004.  They passed Measure 37, requiring state and local governments to ease development restrictions or compensate landowners. 

This year, in a heated debate that pitted conservationists against timber interests, and with farmers on both sides, voters decided they'd gone too far, approving Measure 49 by a 61-49 margin.

As the Portland Oregonian reported today, "Under the new law, rural landowners will be allowed to build one to 10 houses under various scenarios. The measure prohibits larger subdivisions and commercial and industrial development, however".

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 1:07 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

As southern Californians sift through the charred debris of 2,000 homes destroyed by the wildfires and mourn the loss of seven lives, some have complained about the inadequacy of fire protection and suppression efforts there.  But few seem to acknowledge their own complicity in this recurring disaster by choosing to live in harm's way, in far-flung suburban and exurban homes built next to or sometimes even within forests. 

A story in The New York Times on Sunday pointed out that the number of homes within a mile of a fire in San Diego County has doubled within the last two decades - from 61,000 homes in 1990 to 125,000 this year, according to an analysis by the University of Wisconsin. 

With wildfires an annual hazard in the West, local and state authorities have taken steps to reduce dangers to residents by requiring new homes be built with fire-resistant materials and techniques. An Arizona State University professor, writing in the Outlook section of The Washington Post, argues that firefighting techniques need to adapt to the ever-growing incursion of people into what experts call the "wildland-urban interface."

Living in harm's way isn't just a western predilection, though.  The wildland-urban interface, where homes mingle with undeveloped wild areas, takes up just 9 percent of the land in the lower 48 United States, but 39 percent of all homes can be found there, according to an analysis by Wisconsin researcher Volker Radeloff and colleagues.  California has the highest number of homes in these areas, but eastern states like Florida, New Jersey and Pennsylvania also rank up there. Read more about it here.

While tougher buliding codes, more clearing of trees and brush around homes and even "controlled burns" may reduce the risks of wildfires to residents, few, apparently, are willing to talk about reining in development in fire-prone areas.  A San Diego County planning official quoted in the Times said authorities were not interested in slowing growth, but in ensuring the safety of people in a wildland fire. 

So expect more dramatic pictures of wildfires forcing people to flee their neighbhorhoods as flames lick at those backyard decks with great views of the nearby forest.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 11:18 AM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

A new poll by 1000 Friends of Maryland suggests Marylanders overwhelmingly support stronger state action to steer development to existing communities.  In a telephone survey in June of 1,000 registered voters, the poll finds most Marylanders believe that development and growth are occurring too rapidly and are affecting their communities negatively.

The Sun reported the poll in a story today by colleague Nick Madigan.

Though the poll was commissioned by an advocacy group for more compact development, it echoes findings of a survey done two years ago by The Sun, which also found most residents unhappy with the pace of growth in their communities.  Respondents asked to list their most serious concerns ranked traffic congestion near the top, trailing crime, drugs and gangs and pollution of Chesapeake Bay.  Lack of affordable housing, loss of farmland and poorly planned growth and development also ranked high on the list of concerns.

This poll, aimed at nudging the O'Malley administration to follow through on its pledge to reinvigorate Smart Growth, finds large majorities favor state government stepping in to coordinate growth decisions by municipalities and counties. The respondents also favored spending more on transit to ease their greatest concern, traffic congestion, even if it meant spending less on upgrading roads.

You can read the summary of the poll here.

What do you think? Is growth a major concern for you? Up there with the budget deficit, as this poll suggests?  What, if anything, do you think should be done?

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 12:06 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

Maryland's Smart Growth effort gets a bad rap, according to a former state planner, who argues that one of the much-maligned effort's successes can be seen in Eastern Shore towns looking to grow by annexing neighboring farmland.

So says James Noonan, a former senior manager with the Maryland Department of Planning, who until several months ago helped handle the state's pioneering approach to promoting more compact development. He delivered an at-times provocative defense of Smart Growth during a three-day conference last week reviewing the effectiveness of the state's pioneering growth-management effort. 

Despite its widely publicized shortcomings in curbing the spread of suburbia, the 10-year-old program did help revitalize the state's sleepy downtowns, points out Noonan, now a senior planner with a Hunt Valley consulting firm.

"It wasn't all about sprawl," Noonan said in a brief interview at the end of last week's conference. "And even when they were passing the (Smart Growth) legislation, they didn't think they would do anything about sprawl in a decade."

More than $679 million was pumped into community revitalization through a variety of state programs, Noonan and co-author Jacquelyn Magness Seneschal point out in a paper presented at the conference.  Cities, small towns and unincorporated communities benefited, from Glen Burnie to Cumberland and from Hyattsville to Vienna. Every dollar "invested" in redevelopment by the state drew out $2 in private and local funding, the authors say.

The state needs to do a better job of publicizing these redevelopment efforts, Noonan and Seneschal argue, because the mere perception of success draws out other private investors who can make the revival self-sustaining.  Small towns and communites need even more help in applying for and taking advantage of the varied grants, loans and tax credits that might help breathe new life into their neighborhoods, they say.

The key to curbing sprawl, suggest Noonan and Seneschal, is not blocking all state spending in spread out suburbia, but in making the designated growth areas more attractive places to live, work and play.

Toward that end, they argue that towns like Trappe on the Eastern Shore don't deserve the grief they've gotten from some for proposing to annex enough land to increase the population seven- or eightfold, from the 1,100 souls who lived there in 2000.

Towns making annexation deals with developers are getting builders to invest private money in their downtowns, as well as badly needed public facilities that they cannot afford otherwise, such as fire stations and town halls.  Muncipal annexations have become a lightning rod in growth debates across the state, especially on the Eastern Shore, where many residents rebelled at the loss of the peninsula's rural small-town character. 

But if the growth is going to happen anyway, Noonan said, better for water quality and the Chesapeake Bay to have it clustered around a town than spreading out into the countryside. 

"Whether or not  you think a town has annexed too much," Noonan said, "any house on water and sewer ... is one less house on sprawl."

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 11:16 AM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (2)
                       

Wicomico County, like the rest of the Eastern Shore, is experiencing growth pressure these days. 

It's apparently gotten ugly there, though, as the Salisbury Daily Times reports that the county's environmental health officer was fired recently after builders and real estate agents complained. They charged that she was holding up permits for septic systems to treat sewage from new homes, requiring extra tests and in some cases costly additional precautions to prevent pollution from contaminating ground water - the source of many residents' drinking water.

Homes built out away from cities and towns often have to rely on wells and septic systems, in which residential sewage is collected in an underground tank and bacteria decompose it, letting the treated water seep into the soil.  Such systems if improperly designed or placed, cannot remove pollution as reliably as municipal wastewater treatment plants, and failing septic systems do contribute to the bay's fouling.  The states's Smart Growth policy seeks to encourage development using public utilties because it takes up less land as well, but cannot mandate it.   

The environmental health officer said she was trying to protect the ground water and the bay. But Wicomico real estate interests complaining of arbitrary and unfair treatment, got the ear of local legislators, the Times reports, and the county's environmental health officer got the boot.

Environmental activists now are raising alarm that relaxed handling of septic systems with her gone will taint ground water for drinking and even allow pollution to seep into Chesapeake Bay.  Read the whole article here.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:48 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

There's a conference going on now looking at Maryland's 10-year-old Smart Growth law and policy and how effective they've been at curtailing suburban sprawl.  (The short answer: Not a lot, but it's hard to tell for sure). You can read here the article I wrote about it in the Sun.

The opening day was devoted to looking back to see how the law turned out as it did.  Former Gov. Parris N. Glendening recounted how legislative leaders held up the Smart Growth bill, at the behest of county officials fearful of losing their control over land use.  Glendening  said he had to threaten to withhold the state supplemental budget - containng funds for projects which many lawmakers desperately wanted - to get them to vote on it.  Glendening explained that he was driven to attack sprawl by his passion for the environment, and for ensuring a healthy Chesapeake Bay.

Former Sun environmental writer Tom Horton also played a role, it seems, in the law's passage.  Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of the anti-sprawl group 1000 Friends of Maryland, recalled that Tom wrote a column urging readers to call the House leadership and tell them to stop sitting on this badly needed legislation.  He included their phone numbers, too, and the telephones in the State House rang off the hook. The legislators were miffed, but they acted. 

I called Tom to tell him how he got credit for helping pass Smart Growth. Too bad it didn't work, he replied.

The track record is mixed.  The conference, organized by the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education at the University of Maryland, includes presentations of studies and reports looking at what, if any, impact the policy Glendening launched in 1997 has had on housing availability and affordability, on farmland preservation and on the Chesapeake Bay, among other things. 

One of the papers even keys in on a story I wrote last year pointing out how state efforts to limit nutrient pollution fouling the bay from wastewater treatment plants may actually work against Smart Growth, which favors more compact development connected to public utilities.

For more on the conference, and to read many of the papers, go here to the Resources for the Future Web site. RFF is a cosponsor.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 3:29 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

Talk about quick reaction!  The Sun published a story today about a plan by Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold to raise funds for repairing waterways fouled by storm-water runoff.

Lack of government funding for maintaining storm-water management facilities is one of the reasons why growth is hindering efforts to restore Chesapeake Bay, according to the EPA Inspector General's report I wrote about here yesterday.  David Fahrenthold also wrote about the report in today's Washington Post .

As colleague Phill McGowan points out in his story, Leopold's move has been in the works for some time.  He had pledged to tackle storm-water pollution along Anne Arundel's 530 miles of shoreline during his successful campaign last fall for county executive. 

The Arundel executive's approach bears some resemblance to the much more ambitious "Green Fund" legislation that would have raised $130 million for bay restoration, which passed the House but died in the state Senate earlier this year.  The county proposal would levy a fee based on the amount of pavement or impervious surface created by new development, and would charge no fee if a new structure is built within the footprint of an existing building.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 12:22 PM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

Runoff from new development is polluting Chesapeake Bay faster than communities in Maryland and the rest of the region are acting to curb it, says a new report by the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Inspector General that you can find here. 

The report, released Wednesday, warns that restoration of the Cheapeake is jeopardized by the failure of all levels of government to keep nutrients and mud from washing off newly developed land.  Though developed land generates less pollution than farm runoff and sewage treatment plants, correcting it could be very costly, the report adds.

The Inspector General, who audits EPA's performance, calls for the agency to push bay states and communities to adopt binding caps, or limits, on nutrient pollution from developed and developing lands.  Curbing runoff could be achieved through stricter stormwater controls and through requiring more concentrated development with environmentally sensitive designs, the report says.   

Stormwater runoff and seepage from septic waste-treatment systems account for about 24 percent of the nitrogen and 30 percent of the phosphorus fouling the bay, by EPA estimates.  But because development continues to sprawl with relatively modest runoff controls across the six-state bay region, the amount of pollution is increasing.  The amount of pavement covering the 64,000 square mile watershed increased by 41 percent during the 1990s, EPA estimates, while population grew by only 8 percent.

Continue reading "EPA: Pollution from New Development Outpacing Bay Cleanup Efforts" »

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 5:43 PM in growth/land use | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

A new study in neighboring Delaware finds that low-density development has gobbled up hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland while costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in road construction, school bus transportation and sewer extensions, the Wilmington News Journal reports.

The paper reports that a state-sponsored study by the American Farmland Trust concludes that Delaware lost 384,000 acres of farmland between 1950 and 2005, much of it to scattered development. Over the past 19 years, the state's per-resident spending on public improvements has soared by 250 percent, the study adds.  State capital spending has increased eight times more than the population over that time and six times more than the growth in housing units, the paper reports.

"It's a confirmation of what we have been saying for the last 15 or 20 years, but mostly in the last seven years," Gov. Ruth Ann Minner was quoted saying. "Sprawl costs taxpayers." 

State officials said they hope to curb sprawl with new legislation allowing farmer to sell development rights.  Such "transfer of development rights" programs are in use on the local level in Delaware, as well as here in some Maryland counties.  The planned Delaware legislation also would provide for a special "assessment" on new residents and businesses to pay for roads, sewers and other infrastructure in designated growth areas. Developers and farmers told the paper they want to see the legislation before deciding if they can support it.

To read more about farmland losses in Delaware and Maryland, check out this report by the American Farmland Trust.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 11:28 AM in growth/land use | Permalink
                       

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 4:45 PM in growth/land use | Permalink