Talbot County Council’s long-held mission statement “is to provide high-quality services while preserving the area’s rural/ agricultural character… .”
Some legislators in Annapolis and the governor apparently believe that local goal must yield to uniform, state-driven, rules that allow much denser growth on any lot zoned residential if it has sewer service.
If enacted, two bills in the Maryland House (House Bills 546 and 239) and a companion, Senate Bill 36, would require the same relaxed requirements for residential developers in Easton and Talbot County as in Silver Spring and throughout already densely populated Montgomery County.
Indeed, the rules would be the same for all Maryland counties, large and small, urban and rural.
These bills would override the fundamentals rooted in state-approved, past, present, and pending revisions of Talbot County and Easton comprehensive plans. They would eliminate the authority of local governments to preserve the rural character of Talbot County and its towns. Developers would be free to create dense development that looks just like “Anyplace, USA” in open areas and even on developed lots.
For example, first, under House Bill 239, an owner of an existing residential lot in a neighborhood of single-family homes could subdivide their lot into as many as three lots, without any regulatory approval, and build “3 or more” townhouses on each of these lots if they fit within the reduced setbacks in the bill. These new rights appear independent of whether public water and sewer service are available.
Second, for most new development in Easton, the bills’ provisions would allow the developer to cut the size of a lot in half, allowing many more dwellings (necessarily smaller or taller) in the same area. The bills would also reduce the setbacks of dwellings from property lines by a third or more and eliminate the building design principles in use since 2005 — “community character” be damned.
Third, once a housing development project has received all required approvals, the developer would have a “vested right” to complete the project over at least five years (almost twice what is currently permitted). This hardly assures quick action in residential housing.
Fourth, if a local government imposes an “impact fee” to finance construction of public works, and roads, necessary for a new residential development, the fee cannot be collected until “a reasonable time” after completion of the project, and all final approvals, including a certificate of occupancy, are obtained. This could leave the local government (and ultimately, taxpayers) shouldering the costs of improvements, especially if it is not even started for 5 years. If this scheme looks like a gift to developers, it is.
We do need more residential housing at a lower price point, but these bills are not linked to affordable housing. Developers are not required to commit to any affordable housing, a term missing from these bills altogether.
The worst aspect of these bills is the “one size fits all” approach to land use planning for residential areas. These bills treat rural villages and towns the same as Silver Spring and other urban areas. We in Talbot County view the character of our neighborhoods as central to our identity and quality of life. If enacted, these laws should apply only to large, urban counties based upon population. Let rural Maryland solve its own problems.
Annapolis should think carefully before forcing rural local governments to abandon their long-held, stated mission of preserving our area’s rural/agricultural character.
Residents who agree that these bills would be very harmful to self-governance in Talbot County should contact their representatives in Annapolis and tell them to vote NO on all three bills.
The views expressed in this column are solely those of the author. Statements are the author’s opinions and interpretations.
Julie Susman
President of the Talbot Preservation Alliance
When I renovated my historic house on Goldsborough I was required to summit each step before the Historic committee, including all wood doors and windows with authentic wood mullions, (the wood strips that divide panes of glass )at a greater expense. The result is a beautiful historic house . Now, sadly there is a piece of junk being thrown up at the end of the block with plastic everything. It seems sadly, that we have already stopped preserving the lovely historic character of our town. Motivated by short-term financial gain, it also seems so short-sighted as the history and charm of our town plays an important part in why it continues to be an attractive venue for the Wild Fowl Festival and the Art events. We may well lose serious artists, collectors and tourists if we do not limit poorly planned growth.
What is good about this legislation?
Maryland is so unique in so many ways: Mountains to Sea, Chesapeake Bay, Agriculture to Industry, Big City to Towns & Villages, etc. Diversity! Diversity in Maryland that we celebrate. Diversity that can’t be treated with a “one fits all” in any area of existence.
The Shore sees farm land being eaten up by Development. Seeing a For Sale Sign on any piece of property, but especially on Farm land, makes a person cringe.
Some limited Development can be good when the less fortunate are taken into consideration rather than the well to do.
As presented here, when these bills come to a vote, there is only one way to cast and that is NO!
What is your position on the “value per acre” argument promoted by the Eastern Shore Land Conservancy? That idea gets cited constantly to justify concentrating development in towns, yet TPA oppose new growth while offering no clear alternatives. Everything is framed as something to stop. There is almost nothing said about where jobs, businesses, trades, services, or housing for the people who already live here should realistically go.
Your silence about the local economy is noticeable. No one wants Talbot to become like the western shore. But people in Talbot cannot survive from just tourism, conservation, culture, and scenery. If towns are expected to absorb everything, say so and why. If growth should occur elsewhere, identify where it makes sense. Right now the message sounds like permanent opposition without any alternatives.
Get used to Annapolis stepping in. This happened in other states and will only get worse because states are reacting to unreasonable county-level restrictions that block equitable housing, economic growth, and more voters.
Other non-profits dominate local policy. TPA has very smart and energetic members. Talbot needs that energy directed toward real policy leadership. If you want to stop state preemption, come up with some local policy solutions that address what the state is reacting to.
Mary Smith, did you read this article carefully? Would you really like all of our town and county options taken away by this mammoth bill under consideration by the legislature ? I doubt that many people would agree with you. Those who don’t should contact our legislators and say no to this proposed bill.
Mary Smith- thank you for your input. I would like to invite you to a TPA steering committee meeting in which we could have an in depth conversation about the issues you raised.
Julie Susman
The damage that this ill conceived legislation would do to the character of our towns and county cannot be overstated.
That Wes Moore would support it demonstrates that he harbors the same disdain for the Eastern Shore as did the erstwhile Governor Schaefer.
Passage of these bills would gut the central provisions of Easton’s new Comprehensive Plan, and would render pointless much of the effort the Planning Commission has devoted to that plan over the past two plus years. There would be little reason for the Town Council to spend much time on the final draft of the plan now before it, as planning for the location, density and character of Easton’s future growth would be determined by developers acting under color of state law, entirely free from local oversight or control.
All who appreciate our fragile environment and historic small towns should let our governor and legislators know where we stand on this.