- News
If this is your first time visiting this site, click the Smart Growth tab to learn about the important decision that Charles County residents are being asked to make.
Saturday, 31 December 2011
Please comment to retain the progressive elements of the draft plan, and to improve it further. True Smart Growth is within reach! Please help go all the way!
More information is at the Merged Scenario tab.
| Thursday, 08 December 2011
Mark your calendar!
Thursday, December 15, at 7:00 PMCharles County Government Building The meeting will present a “merged” scenario that outlines future land use in Charles County. For those who understand the connection between land-use and the health of our waterways, it is very important to attend to give voice to these concerns. Proper land use decisions are the key to ensuring a high quality of life and preserving rural character -- and to protecting Mattawoman Creek. In fact, Mattawoman is now ill from so much “impervious surface” in its watershed -- the parking lots, rooftops, and roadways that funnel polluted water into streams. Fisheries scientists have linked this urbanization to the recently discovered decline in the health of the fish community in Mattawoman’s estuary. A change from business-as-usual is essential. True “Smart Growth” is the prescription to improve Mattawoman’s prospects. This approach—which aims to maintain forest and farm by curtailing sprawl development—also reduces the cost to taxpayers to provide infrastructure and public services. Additional benefits include less traffic congestion, improved air quality, and housing choices in vibrant, walkable communities that are presently not available. Please attend the Public Meeting. Let officials know you care. | Monday, 07 November 2011
Secretary Rich Hall, MD
Dept. of Planning, confirms this is best for Smart Growth in Charles
County! On November 1, the Maryland Department
of the Environment sent a letter to Charles County denying key
wetland permits for the controversial Cross County Connector, citing
a longstanding incomplete application that has never addressed
numerous environmental issues.
Read more...
| Sunday, 06 November 2011
Charles County’s Comprehensive Plan
revision is rushing ahead. On October 19, an Open House was held
where ERM, the county’s consultant, unveiled their analysis of two
land-use Scenarios. The public was invited to weigh-in until October
28th, which was then extended until November 4.
Read more...
|
|
- Smart Growth
Smart Growth for Charles County
A county's Comprehensive Plan is the key document that guides where growth will occur. As is required every six years, Charles County is now in the process of revising its plan. In a welcome contrast to past policies, there are two remarkable differences in this revision process: (1) the public is being given the chance to participate; (2) an exciting Smart Growth choice is being offered that strongly diverges from a second choice representing virtually "business as usual" (forged from two preliminary scenarios). This website represents the work of a group of citizens from throughout Charles County who have been following the Comprehensive Plan revision from its inception. Please take a look at the site, and return often to learn the latest news. The revision of the Comprehensive Plan is moving quickly! |
What is “Smart Growth”? As population grows, many problems affecting our lives seem to grow too, from traffic congestion, to increased instances of asthma from poor air quality, to crowded schools, to algae blooms and closed fisheries.
Many of these problems trace to a model of growth that encourages spread-out, or “sprawl” development. The problems could be alleviated if we employed Smart Growth to distribute ourselves on the landscape more wisely.
Smart Growth encourages now-missing opportunities for living in vibrant, walkable communities serviced by mass transit. It does not foreclose other living styles, but it does reduce subsidies for far-flung development that clogs roads, disproportionately consumes resources like groundwater, pollutes our air and water, and costs taxpayers extra to service and to mediate its problems.
In addition, true Smart Growth employs judicious zoning to make a “Transfer of Development Rights” program more likely to succeed, thereby using the market to preserve open space and so conserve Charles County’s enviable natural areas. In a TDR program, landowners in designated rural areas sell development rights to developers, who gain in the bargain increased densities in specified receiving areas.
Fortunately, we the public are being given a new choice for how we live, work, and play in Charles County, with two alternate scenarios for the new Comprehensive Plan. Scenario #1 follows many Smart Growth principles. |
How does true Smart Growth differ from “business as usual” in Charles County? Presently in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the amount of hard surfaces like pavement and roof tops is growing five times faster than population. And the Bay watershed is losing 100 acres of forest every day. This demonstrates that growth is spreading out in what is called “sprawl” development.
In the past, Charles County has been a champion for sprawl by encouraging and subsidizing growth in an area larger than the District of Columbia, while allowing high building densities in rural areas. This has led to rising property taxes, congestion, an unstable housing market with depressed property values, and a declining Mattawoman Creek.
Compared to more compact development, sprawl costs taxpayers more to service with roads and road maintenance, water and sewer service, and fire and police personnel, equipment, and buildings. Sprawl is car-dependent, and leads to congestion as roads are overwhelmed with commuters.
Sprawl also draws investment away from improving and renewing places like Waldorf, La Plata, and Indian Head.
In contrast, Smart Growth provides opportunities for living in more compact, walkable and bikable urban centers. Imagine Waldorf with a town center, tree lined shady sidewalks, coffee shops, storefronts, apartments, and a rail link to DC.
Finally, because sprawl produces so much surface impervious to rainwater, it is bad for clean water. In mostly forested Charles County, this is an acute issue! |
Why do our waterways suffer from sprawl development? Remarkably, a forest returns most rainwater back into the air! When a forest is bulldozed, trees no longer intercept rainwater, so more erosive stormwater is aimed at our streams. Making matters worse, the hard surfaces of roads, roofs and parking lots heat the stormwater, add pollutants, and then funnel the mixture into an erosive flow that scours streambanks and muddies the water. To reduce these problems, engineers employ “stormwater management” measures, like stormwater management ponds. While these measures are gradually improving, and are important, they fall short compared to a forest. A concrete example is Mattawoman Creek, whose famous fish nursery is now faltering, because sprawl development has been allowed to gobble up too much of its watershed.
By preserving undeveloped areas, Smart Growth saves forest and helps protect our waterways. |
Can Charles County be a leader in Smart Growth? Yes!
The county is presenting for public comment three preliminary scenarios that outline possible futures for the county. Of the two, Scenario #1 is, by far, the clear winner in preserving the county’s rural character. At the same time, it provides for two parallel sources of positive economic development. In one, re-investment in the existing urban centers of Waldorf and La Plata, and revitalization in Indian Head provides opportunities for construction, renovation, retail, and entertainment. The second source involves the economic development of heritage tourism. By sustaining natural and historical attributes, and keeping them set in an aesthetic and rural the surrounding, Scenario 1 maintains both the resources and their "authenticity” that is so necessary for successful heritage tourism economy. For more information, see: http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/tourism/charles_county.pdf
|
|
- Merged Scenario
True Smart Growth is within reach! Please help go all the way!
 
On December 15, consultants and county planning-staff presented a “merged scenario” for Charles County’s Comprehensive Plan that outlines future land use in Charles County. While the proposed plan contains good progress, it also contains some big problems. And there will be pressure from land speculators to weaken it further.
Here are some needed improvements in the proposed Comp Plan if it is to preserve our rural character while revitalizing our urban centers and enabling mass transit.
- Rural conservation zoning should be 1 housing-unit per 10 acres, not the proposed zoning of 1 per 5.
- 1 in 5 = sprawl. Studies show that 1 in 5 zoning is about the most expensive for taxpayers to service with infrastructure and services.
- The deferred development district should not be upzoned to the sprawl zoning of 1 per 5.
- It should remain at the current level of 1 per 10 acres. This 18,000 acre area is critical to preventing further decline of Mattawoman Creek!
- Do not expand Indian Head up Route 210 and down Route 225!
- The expansion would impact sensitive lands important to Mattawoman, and degrade the Indian Head Trail experience. It would also divert investment from redeveloping the vacant businesses in Indian Head.
- Relocate the Tech Park in Bryans Road to Indian Head, where it will help revitalize the town, or put it on the naval base.
- The present location next to schools and on forestland with deep ravines, important spawning tributaries, and wetlands of Special State Concern could not be a worse location for protecting Mattawoman Creek and our community!
- Do not extend Middletown Road as a four-lane highway to Route 301.
- This would pollute both Old Woman’s Run, a high quality tributary to Mattawoman, and Paiges Swamp, the important headwaters to the Port Tobacco River!
- There is too much emphasis on urbanizing villages in rural areas, expanding La Plata & Indian Head.
- Would detract from needed investment in Waldorf to promote transit-oriented development, while worsening the development imbalance that is degrading water quality and our natural resources.
- The comp plan should meet water pollution goals, plan should be based on adhering to the science of the Water Resources Element
Good things in the merged scenario!- Review massive amount of “grandfathered” projects
- Yes, address safety issues on Billingsley Road
- Good riddance to the Cross County Connector
- Good riddance to the Waldorf Bypass
- Good riddance to the Development District
- Yes, Bryans Road as a village, not a new city.
You can also provide written comments until January 20, 2012.
Please send to Amy Blessinger:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
- Scenario 1
Promotes "Quality Places, Natural Spaces"
  “Quality Places, Natural Spaces”
Only Scenario 1 can fully achieve these goals, for the following reasons.
Natural Spaces that ensure our rural character, clean air, and clean water.
Scenario 1:
-
Replaces the sprawl-inviting development district with enhanced growth in the existing urban centers.
-
Protects the stream valleys, as recommended by the Army Corps of Engineers for Mattawoman Creek, for all major stream systems. Stormwater management for free!
-
Boosts the transfer-development-right (TDR) program, where developers gain extra densities by compensating rural landowners for preserving their farms and forests. Scenario 1 provides by far the best zoning incentives required for a successful TDR program, according to criteria in Dr. Daniels’ report on Charles County TDRs.
-
Fully incorporates a “Priority Preservation Area” aimed at conserving working farm and forestland, a requirement for the county to receive certain state preservation funds.
-
Abandons the ill-conceived attempt to urbanize western Charles County—which disinvests in Waldorf (and dilutes any TDR program).
-
Makes the 18,000-acre deferred development district a permanent rural area.
-
Protects Nanjemoy, the longest undeveloped shoreline along the Mid-Atlantic, for heritage tourism.
-
Removes the sprawl-inducing Cross County Connector in favor of long-overdue fixes for safety problems on Billingsley Road.
-
Removes the sprawl-inducing Western Waldorf Bypass in favor of upgrading U.S. Route 301 to finally address traffic congestion. A bypass would also drain economic activity from Waldorf and harm both Mattawoman and the Port Tobacco River.
-
Changes the ill-conceived attempt to turn Bryans Road into a new city (a plan now on the books) in favor of a mixed-use village.
-
Drops the Tech Park in Bryans Road, in favor of using existing business parks and re-investing in Indian Head. Not only would the Tech Park destroy especially high quality forests, wetlands, and streams, it is not needed to accommodate tech development, according to a county consultant.
-
Limits strip-mall zoning in the Mattawoman watershed.
Quality Spaces for improved quality of life
Scenario 1:
-
Enables investments in making Waldorf, La Plata, and Indian Head better by discouraging investment in sprawl development and unneeded highways like the proposed Cross County Connector and Western Waldorf Bypass.
-
Upgrades U.S. 301 to alleviate congestion.
-
Provides the best chance of getting mass transit to Waldorf by focusing investment in Waldorf for “transit-oriented development.”
-
Treats Bryans Road, which is located within a “Stronghold Watershed” for Mattawoman, as a mixed-use village. This contrasts the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which aimed to convert Bryans Road to a new city that would have clogged Route 210 and nucleated a spoiled landscape in western Charles County.
-
Maintains Indian Head’s potential to be a charming village, rather than spreading all the way to Chapman Forest.
-
Reduces strip-mall zoning in the Mattawoman watershed.
And more: economic prosperity, efficiency, cost-savings, & rural character.
Scenario 1:
-
Provides the best chance for new economic development through heritage tourism by preserving the natural & historical foundation. This approach is required according to a county-funded report that was abandoned by previous county administrations. See the report here: www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/tourism/charles_county.pdf
-
Provides adequate land for development—note that there is already in the “pipeline” sufficient housing units to accommodate over 90% of anticipated growth by 2040 in the entire county. See the table in the document available here: www.charlescountyplan.org/images/document_library/Regional_Visioning_Session_4_Packet.pdf
-
Ensures the best chance of meeting the Bay “pollution diet” at minimum cost to taxpayers.
-
Saves tax dollars by preserving forests for stormwater management and reducing future costs to restore our streams and estuaries.
-
Improves health by maintaining forest as air-filters and reducing air pollution from congestion and long-distance commutes.
|
- Scenario 2
(New version, as of 10/13/11) Promotes Business as Usual
 
Scenario 2 continues costly sprawl development, congested roads and declining natural resources. This new scenario 2 combines the prior scenarios 2 & 3 (see resources). It: - designates Bryans Road as a new city
- retains the Cross County Connector
- retains the unnecessary tech park
All of these would push development into Western Charles County, making arresting the decline of Mattawoman Creek more difficult and expensive. |
- A Great Place
 MAKING CHARLES COUNTY A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE
We support a future for Charles County which protects our farms, forests, and streams from unbridled development; where no child attends school in a trailer; where traffic is not an everyday burden, and our towns and communities are clean, safe and enjoyable places to live, work, and play.
SUPPORT SCENARIO 1 FOR CHARLES COUNTY’S FUTURE!The choices we make in this plan will determine our future for the next decade. We have two options before us. Scenario One will guarantee environmental and economic sustainability for the county. It will protect our forests and rivers, invest in our existing neighborhoods, and prevent sprawl development that we cannot afford. Scenario Two is business as usual. It will support sprawl growth and create lasting economic burdens we cannot afford. Specifically, we support:
- Protecting our natural resources and rural economies by protecting stream valleys and establishing a strong priority preservation area.
- Investing in our existing neighborhoods by eliminating the massive development district and focusing new growth on areas that can support it.
- Creating the development people want to buy – transit-oriented, mixed use projects in urban areas – instead of continuing to glut our market with large-lot subdivisions.
Supporting Scenario 1 supports: - Forest land protection
- Water quality protection
- Impervious surface minimization
- Sea level rise risk management
- Natural open space protection
- Reduction of energy use
- Support for Town growth
- Accommodation of residential growth
- Support for job creation
- Management of infrastructure costs
- Fiscal enhancement
- Agriculture/forest conservation
- Road network adequacy
- Support for transit
- Support for affordable housing
- Encouragement of housing choice
- Maintenance of property values
- Support for TDR system
- Consistency with Plan Maryland
We oppose: - Encouraging sprawl in our western corridor through the cross-county connector and intense development around Bryans Road and Indian Head.
- The massive annexations planned for La Plata.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, SUPPORT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT MAKES CHARLES COUNTY A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE: - 1000 Friends of Maryland
- Audubon Maryland-DC
- Chapman Forest Foundation
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation
- Citizens for a Better Charles County
- Clean Water Action
- Conservancy for Charles County
- Mattawoman Watershed Society
- Nanjemoy-Potomac Environmental Coalition
- Port Tobacco River Conservancy
- Sierra Club, Southern Maryland Group
For more information or to get involved, contact:
Hal Delaplane Conservancy for Charles County 301-934-8175
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Jim Long Mattawoman Watershed Society 301-266-9876
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
- Resources
-
- Contact Us
-
