|
A. Land Use and Natural Resources
Statewide Planning Issues and Considerations
On October 1, 1992, the Maryland Economic Growth, Resource Protection and Planning Act of 1992 was enacted to reshape the way citizens, developers, the State, counties and towns addressed planning, growth and resource protection. A premise of the Act is that the comprehensive plans prepared by counties and towns are the best place for local governments to establish priorities for growth and resource conservation, and that once those priorities are established, it is the State's responsibility to back them up.
The Act established the following seven visions geared toward placing all County and Municipal Plans within the broader context of State goals for fostering economic development and environmental quality:
| 1 |
|
Concentrate development in suitable areas; |
| 2 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
In rural areas, direct growth to existing population centers and protect resource areas; |
| 3 |
|
Demonstrate stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay and the land; |
| 4 |
|
Practice conservation of resources, including a reduction in resource consumption; |
| 5 |
|
To assure the achievement of (1) through (5) above, encourage economic growth and streamline regulatory mechanisms; |
| 6 |
|
Address funding mechanisms to achieve these visions. |
Plans prepared by local jurisdictions must contain a series of "plan elements" such as a land use element, a community facilities element and a variety of others. In addition, all comprehensive plans prepared by local jurisdictions are to include a sensitive areas element that contains goals, objectives, principles, and standards designed to protect from the adverse effects of development. These sensitive areas include the following:
| 1 |
|
Streams and their buffers; |
| 2 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
Habitats of threatened and endangered species; and |
| 3 |
|
Steep slopes. |
The sensitive areas element may also include other areas in need of special protection, as determined in the local comprehensive plan. Most local jurisdictions have environmental policies, goals, and objectives in their Comprehensive Plans, and most jurisdictions have environmental laws and regulations. However, the environmental resources subject to local plans and regulations vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The Act, therefore, seeks protection of at least the above-mentioned types of sensitive areas. The Act permits local governments to define sensitive areas and determine the levels of protection.
County Environmental and Land Use Profiles
The three LES counties have individually addressed the seven visions, either through a Comprehensive Plan or Plan Supplement/Update, and have identified sensitive areas. There are some similarities among the areas identified as well as special areas peculiar to each:
1. Worcester County
In defining the natural environment, the 1989 Worcester County Plan identifies and characterizes values for areas, as follows:
| 1 |
|
High Value areas – ocean beaches, salt and fresh water wetlands, tidal bays, Pocomoke River and stream valleys |
| 2 |
|
Moderate value areas – farm and timber lands (majority of county) that would be harmed by intense residential or commercial development
|
| 2 |
|
Low Value areas – existing developed areas that would feel minimal impact by new development. |
Conceptually, the Plan notes the need for a proper balance between development and environmental resources, and specifically recommends a development buffer along Pocomoke River. The 1997 Plan Supplement refines the above, noting several sensitive areas in relation to developmental planning:
| 1 |
|
Pocomoke River area, the green “spine” of the Bay and a designated Scenic River |
| 2 |
|
The 3,30-acre Nassawango Creek Preserve maintained by the Nature Conservancy |
| 3 |
|
The forests abutting tributaries to the tidal bays, which in turn provide a habitat for migrant and resident birds |
| 4 |
|
The bays, islands, beaches, woodlands, marshes and streams that help define the character of the County |
| 5 |
|
Natural Heritage Areas (Assateague and 3 in bay) |
| 6 |
|
Several endangered species and 24 significant plant/wildlife areas (most in west and south and barrier island) |
| 7 |
|
Wooded stream corridors, in recognition of economic, floodplain and environmental benefits afforded |
| 8 |
|
Tidal and non-tidal floodplains |
| 9 |
|
Wetlands that total 59,486 acres (19 percent of the total land area of the County) comprised of 49% tidal and 52% non-tidal wetlands |
| 10 |
|
Wooded sections of the County since it is 50% forested and forestry is an important industry |
| 11 |
|
Estuary watershed comprises 40% of the County (important for fishing/tourism). |
Future Land use recommendations first identified in the 1989 Plan and reinforced in the 1997 Supplement, are as follows:
| 1 |
|
More intense development in the north, especially west of Ocean City, comprised of commercial and a mix of moderate density residential and highway commercial in the immediate Ocean City area, with suburban (Low density) residential and estate (very low density) residential elsewhere in the north; |
| 2 |
|
Linear conservation areas along highways and streams;
|
| 3 |
|
Commercial development within Pocomoke City and Snow Hill
|
| 4 |
|
Maintenance and enhancement of villages. |
The Plan encourages land use controls that address the following:
| 1 |
|
Agricultural preservation |
| 2 |
|
Provision of a variety of residential choices depending on infrastructure capacities
|
| 3 |
|
Provision of a variety of commercial activities ranging from neighborhood to regional
|
| 4 |
|
Clustering of industrial development activities
|
| 5 |
|
Conservation of critical natural resources, comprised of floodplains (coastal/riverine), wetlands, drainage-ways, constrained soils, erosion hazards, bays and bay bottoms, beaches, bluffs, and forests, through resource protection measures, measured in percentages, for new development proposals. |
2. Wicomico County
The 1998 Plan notes the following sensitive areas:
| 1 |
|
Streams and stream riparian buffers along surface waters, with surface waters providing commercial and recreational fishing opportunities and eco-tourism |
| 2 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
Threatened species habitats
|
| 3 |
|
Steep slopes |
| 4 |
|
Wetlands, comprised of 37,761 acres or 15.6% of the land area of the County |
| 5 |
|
Forested areas, comprised of 90,000 acres, with a large portion owned by timber companies |
| 6 |
|
The underlying Paleochannel, a groundwater source protected by zoning. |
The Plan recommends certain zoning and related land use recommendations, including:
| 1 |
|
Agricultural preservation and low-impact residential in rural areas, with conservation subdivision setting aside 50% of land as future undeveloped acreage; |
| 2 |
|
Urban Growth (central), Town Growth, Rural Village considerations as appropriate in relation to existing development and infrastructure;
|
| 2 |
|
Corporate Industrial Overlay Zone (CIOZ) for large regional corporate centers overlapping other districts but requiring infrastructure and minimal impacts;
|
| 4 |
|
Reforestation thresholds applying to different types of development; and |
| 4 |
|
Protection of identified sensitive areas (i.e. stream buffers, wetlands, slopes, etc.). |
The County has retained a rural character with numerous town centers, villages and other small settlements, although the Delmar-Salisbury-Fruitland corridor in the central section of the County has been identified a Metro-Core area, capable of sustaining intensive development such as regional commercial activities. Conversely, areas in and around existing villages are recommended to sustain moderate development, while remaining suburban areas are targeted for lower density residential development.
3. Somerset County
The 1996 Plan reviews sensitive areas in terms of an environmental analysis, the introduction of which notes the following:
The environment of Somerset County is governed to a great degree by the ecology of the Chesapeake Bay. The County has over 600 miles of shoreline along the Bay and its tributaries, and almost half of the County’s area is water. Much of the coastal area is marsh or wetlands, and the high water table underlying the remaining land area places severe restraints on development.
In this regard, water resources and constraints dominate discussion of sensitive areas within Somerset County. The Plan notes the following issues related to the sensitive areas:
| 1 |
|
Much of western Somerset County is within the 100-year floodplain, the vast majority of which is a tidal floodplain along tidal waters. There are also areas within the 100-year floodplain to the south and east of Hopewell and Marion. |
| 2 |
|
The County is relatively flat, generally free of any steep slopes except along streams.
|
| 2 |
|
The Nanticoke and Pocomoke watersheds/tributaries are subject to buffer areas ranging from 25-feet to 100-feet, depending on the type of development and/or location in reference to the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. The latter comprises 35% of the land area of the County generally along the shoreline.
|
| 3 |
|
The Plan notes that there are 17 rare/threatened/endangered species of animals and 24 rare/threatened/endangered of plants located in Somerset County, although only 3 animal and one plant species are Federally listed as threatened or endangered. Development reviews within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area are aided by mapping. Generally, the Plan suggests that most endangered species habitat is either in the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area or in non-tidal wetlands.
|
| 4 |
|
29,592 acres, or approximately 17% of the total land area of the County is within the Resource Conservation land use management area. |
| 5 |
|
The County contains 81,563 acres of wetlands, accounting for 38% of the total land area of the County. Of this total, 76% are estuarine or tidal wetlands, mostly in the west and south, and the islands in Tangier Sound. |
| 6 |
|
Agricultural land preservation is advanced by Agricultural Zoning and the Agricultural Easement program, with much of it to the east of Route 413 in central and southern sections of the County. |
| 7 |
|
Forestland covers 87,336 acres or approximately 42% of the total land area of the County. |
The 1998 Land Preservation and Recreation Plan refines and localizes land use recommendations, reflecting the sensitive area discussion and the capacity/availability of infrastructure:
| 1 |
|
The corridor along Route 13 between Princess Anne and Westover is designated as a Primary Growth Area for mixed uses (residential/commercial/industrial); |
| 2 |
|
Pocomoke City, Kingston, Hopewell and the Westover areas are also designated as Primary Growth Areas for mixed uses;
|
| 3 |
|
Residential Primary Growth areas in Marion and northeast of Princess Anne; and
|
| 4 |
|
Secondary Growth areas in the form of in-fill residential in various small villages and islands to the west. |
Water Resources Summary
The LES counties gained their character and economy from the ocean, bays and shoreline. It is no surprise that water resources have been identified as critical sensitive areas by the State and by the respective counties. These resources have aided the region’s agriculture, seafood and tourist industries in the past. They also can frame the location and type of development in the future. The following table presents a comparative analysis of select water resources within the LES by County.
County |
Wetland
Acreage
|
Wetland
Acreage as % of County Land |
Wetland
Acreage as % of State Total |
% of County Landing Special Flood Hazard Areas
|
Somerset
|
81,563
|
37.7%
|
13.6%
|
44.6%
|
Wicomico
|
37,761
|
15.6%
|
6.3%
|
13.5%
|
Worcester
|
59,486
|
19.3%
|
9.9%
|
24.8%
|
Source: Maryland Department of the Environment
The above wetlands information is based on United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s classification system to inventory the nation’s wetlands. Development proposals may include a detailed delineation of wetlands.
Even with the above constraint in mind, several factors emerge in relation to water resources and future development in the LES:
| 1 |
|
The LES accounts for nearly 30% of all similarly identified wetlands in the State of Maryland. |
| 2 |
|
A large percentage of the land area of the Counties of Somerset and Worcester are within Special Flood Hazard Areas. Only Wicomico exhibits percentages similar to the statewide average of 12.4%.
|
| 3 |
|
Depending on the location of new development, wetland impacts would appear to be most commonly faced in Somerset County where nearly 38% of the land area has been identified as wetlands. As the following map notes, statewide only in neighboring Dorchester County is a greater percentage of land classified as wetlands (i.e. 44%).
|
Source: Maryland Department of the Environment
| 4 |
|
Nearly one-fifth of the land area of Worcester County is similarly classified as wetlands. Even in the case of Wicomico where 15.6% of the land area is classified as wetlands, this percentage is higher than that for any other County in the State with the exception of Dorchester, Somerset and Worcester. |
The above water resource issues and impacts further reinforce the concepts associated with concentrating development at certain built-up nodes and communities. In this way, not only are the costs associated with resource mitigation avoided, but also the very resources supportive of tourism (i.e. eco-tourism, heritage tourism and ocean-oriented) are retained.
B. Environmental Issues and Constraints
State Planning Issues Affecting Development
The State of Maryland has been at the forefront of the “Smart Growth” approach to planning and development, as best reflected in the 1992 Economic Growth, Resource Protection and Planning Act and the Priority Funding Areas (PFA) approach for allocation of State funds. The Seven Visions intrinsic in planning in Maryland were discussed earlier and the PFA concept formalizes central-place development to specific areas identified by respective counties. Taken together, the State initiatives serve to accomplish the following:
| 1 |
|
Encourage development in or around existing communities, existing appropriately zoned land, and in areas with existing or planned necessary infrastructure to support it; |
| 2 |
|
Identify and preserve critical sensitive areas where development would not occur or be minimized; and |
| 3 |
|
Avoid linear sprawl in any form while encouraging clustering of homes, businesses and industries.
|
The Counties’ planning efforts appear to follow this concept and theory, identifying concentrated development areas in and around existing communities and/or development. In Worcester County, it is generally in the north in and around Ocean City and developed areas to the west. In Wicomico County it is the central corridor including Delmar, Salisbury and Fruitland. In Somerset County, it is the Princess Anne area and sub-areas along the Route 13/413 corridor.
Priority Funding Area Summary
For developmental planning purposes a comparative description of the PFA’s within each County is helpful. These include areas meeting the various criteria for designation as promulgated by the Maryland Department of Planning. These areas are more numerous and more encompassing than the concentrated development regions noted above, and provide a framework for channeling State funding for various public projects and purposes.
The PFA’s in Worcester County include Pocomoke City and area to the south, Snow Hill, Berlin, Ocean City and the area to the west.
The PFA’s are varied in Wicomico County, including the rather large central urban core comprised of Delmar, Salisbury and Fruitland, as well as the smaller built-up communities of Mardela, Pittsville, Willards, Hebron and Sharptown.
Finally, in Somerset County the PFA’s include Princess Anne and area to the south, Crisfield and adjacent area, and several small rural villages in the west.
|
