1974 Land Use Legislation Fights Still Echo Today

Areas of State Critical Concern (1974) = Designated Places (Now)

Under statute, the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) is required to “prepare and from time to time revise a plan or plans for the development of the State.  The plan or plans collectively shall be known as the State Development Plan.”  [1]  This requirement was not acted upon for several decades, until recently MDP released the draft of PlanMaryland.  One of the key aspects of PlanMaryland is the use of “designated places” – areas  designated for growth, agricultural preservation, natural resource conservation, water recharge, etc.  A previous Conduit Street blog post examined those places designated for growth (ie “Growthprint”) in detail.

The concept of designated places is built upon on older concept called “areas of critical state concern.”  These “critical areas” (not to be confused with the critical areas related to the proximity of the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays that were created in 1984) were the subject of controversial legislation in 1974 that sought to redefine land use in the State.  Many of the same concerns that were raised over the critical areas legislation are echoed today in the concerns of PlanMaryland and designated places.

The 1974 Legislation

The 1974 legislation [2] started as House Bill 807 that was introduced by then Governor Marvin Mandel.  A similar piece of 1973 legislation, supported but not sponsored by the Governor, passed the House by 2 votes but failed on a 21-21 vote in Senate.  Both the 1973 and 1974 legislation was based on the recommendations of a commission formed by the Governor and chaired by then Senate President William S. James.

As introduced, the bill established a State Land Use Board that formulated land use policies and recommendations, assisted in the resolution of conflicts among the land use practices of both State agencies and local governments, and reviewed the State Development Plan.  The  legislation also  gave the Board the ability to designate critical areas based on set criteria.  A critical area would automatically become of the State Development Plan.

Critical areas were subject to guidelines and criteria adopted by the Board after a public hearing.  A local govenrment then had to submit to the Board development and land use regulations for the critical area that were “substantially consistent and comply with” the guidelines and criteria previously adopted by the Board.  Until the Board approved the local government regulations, the regulations did not take effect.  If the local government did not cooperate, the Board could prepare and adopt its own regulations in lieu of the local regulations and award construction permits in lieu of the local government.  The Board also needed to approve any subsequent local regulatory land use changes  to a critical area.

More