Fight Erupts Over Housing Density On Maryland's Eastern Shore

An explosive debate over sprawl has erupted on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, where Wicomico County is proposing to change the zoning laws to allow fewer homes to be built per acre in rural areas.

The Salisbury/Wicomico County Planning and Zoning Commission, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Wicomico Young Farmers and Ranchers, and others are pushing for the new standard of one house per 10 or 15 acres. That would replace a current standard of allowing clusters of one home per three acres in some areas, according to an article in this morning’s (Salisbury, MD) Daily Times. 

Fewer new homes popping up out of farm fields would mean less runoff pollution into the Chesapeake Bay, less burden on the county’s schools and roads, and more protection for the Eastern Shore’s beautiful landscape of farms and forests. 

Opponents of the bill, including many landowners, are protesting loudly that the zoning change will decrease their property values, in case they want to sell their properties to developers.  They claim this will hurt rural families and farmers.

Just a week ago, critics of Bill 2009-5 took to the streets on tractors, according to a story on WMDT.

This opposition is short-sighted.  In the long run, property values in Wicomico County and elsewhere will be higher if the local governments preserve the quality of life and attractiveness of their communities. This means avoiding the jam-packed, generic-looking development that is swallowing up so much of the landscape in the Eastern Shore. This means preserving the fields, streams and wooded areas that are so attractive to people who want to live in the area.  It requires having enough restraint to look at the long term.

A half century from now, land in Wicomico County will be much more treasured – not only valuable in terms of sales value, but also valuable as a natural filtration system for the Chesapeake Bay – if current landowners forego the quick-fix of allowing dense development now.

The amount of countryside used for housing development in Wicomico County has spiraled out of control and needs restraint. In 2002, just 23 acres of rural land were proposed for development.  In 2007, almost 1,024 acres of farms, forests, and/or fields were subject to approved development plans.  That's an almost 2000% increase in rural acres going toward new homes in only five years.

One cause of the problem is a density bonus provision in the county’s zoning laws today. Under the current rules, developers who build on only half a farm are rewarded with a dramatic increase in density. ted.  To learn more, click here.

This loophole must be closed to save Wicomico County and to save the Bay.  If you want to write a letter, click here for tips.

The groups that stand with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation in supporting the zoning change include: the Salisbury/Wicomico Planning & Zoning Commission; Greater Salisbury Committee; the Wicomico Visioning Committee; Wicomico County Young Farmers & Ranchers; Wicomico Environmental Trust; Friends of the Nanticoke River; and the Lower Shore Land Trust; Audubon MD-DC; the Nature Conservancy; and the Sierra Club.

Comments

[Olivia]

Decreasing housing density to farmette size does not help slow sprawl growth... it actually encourages it, and this is not the way to create more sustainable communities. I hope folks are advocating for other options..like limiting 90 % of new development (all types) to existing / designated growth areas / town centers and eliminating density limitations in those areas.

[Adaptor]

"Opponents of the bill, including many landowners, are protesting loudly that the zoning change will decrease their property values, in case they want to sell their properties to developers. They claim this will hurt rural families and farmers."

This comment is misleading, inflamitory and does nothing to further a reasonable discussion about growth and density. Not all farmers are planning to cash out for development. It can hurt rural business owners to eliminate their main source of equity. Nothing will be accomplished by polarizing the issue this way.

[Lee Weldon]

I agree with Olivia. To me, expanding the maximum to 1 for 10/15 acres makes the sprawl worse. It may not be as dense, but 10-15 acres won't make the land viable economically for agriculture, so you'll end up with giant lots being consumed by a single dwelling. And a big old Kubota out there every Saturday cutting the grass and spewing exhaust into the air.
It would be better to focus higher density developments into the center city areas, or at least into designated growth areas, where existing infrastructure can be utilized to its best advantage. 1 house every 10 acres is not sustainable development!