Sustainable Communities Network Case Studies

Two Chesapeake Bay Counties Fight to Save their Space

Contact: Rob Etgen
Executive Director
Eastern Shore Land Conservancy
P.O. Box 169
Queenstown, MD 21658
Tel: (410) 827-8056
Fax: (410) 827-9039


Scope: Rural & Urban

Project type: Community planning around urban encroachment

The Chesapeake Bay stretches over 64,000 miles, flows through parts of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Washington DC, and boasts of wetlands, coastal streams, and inland rivers. Another reality of the Chesapeake Bay, however, is that it is faces one the of the common threats to any beautiful, natural environment - rapid, unchecked development. Such development seriously threatens the quality of life in the region - the very reason many residents have chosen to live in the Chesapeake Bay area. Poorly planned and managed development adversely affects the fragile natural environment of the Chesapeake Bay. Toxic sediments blanket the bottom of many of the Chesapeake's prime industrial and shipping zones and pose serious health threats for all living creatures. Groundwater withdrawal has caused regional subsidence of coastal marshes and saltwater contamination of some local drinking water supplies. And thousands of acres of once-productive farms and forests are rapidly being overtaken by sprawling housing developments, roads, and shopping areas.

With suburbanization, came a host of problems: commuting (60% of the working adults commute to jobs outside the county), unbridled highway construction, rapidly-growing and low paying retail and service industries, increased difficulty in land preservation, and difficulty in creating economic viability for family farms. The region's rural character was quickly being lost, and careful land use planning was essential to reverse this trend.

One of the key manifestations of the impending development projects was the proposal from both the WalMart and K-Mart companies to establish stores in the region. Though these stores would have provided employment opportunities for the community, the negative effect of having two large chain stores in the area is that they would gravely destruct the character of the region and would undoubtedly pave the way for an onslaught of chain establishments in the unique, small-town atmosphere. In the opinion of many, WalMart and K-Mart were the very symbols of "developed" areas, and area residents strongly opposed their "invasion" of the community.

Residents and community planners realized that they needed to re-examine their approach to solving the quality of life inhibitors that were facing their community in order for their actions to be effective for the long-term as well as for facing future issues that would threaten the integrity of the community. During the summer of 1993, representatives of two of Maryland's counties that were particularly threatened by this impending development, Queen Anne's and Kent County, joined government agencies and local, regional and international community organizers to plan the future of their region.

These diverse interests came together to answer the request for a proposal issued by the Vermont-based Countryside Institute to develop a professional exchange among people in various regions for analyzing effective ways to deal with change. Organizations from both Queen Anne's and Kent counties united in developing a project proposal, as members from various community groups, city planning organizations, and environmental groups in the region realized that they had all received the same request. Rather than compete against each other, the groups decided to unite forces and develop a project plan that would efficiently and effectively capitalize on their diverse strengths and areas of expertise.

Furthermore, the two counties shared the same watershed, the Chester River watershed, a fact which is of paramount importance to their union in addressing development. This watershed impacts both communities, and there was an abundance of interest groups that worked to monitor and protect the watershed. Through a small amount of direct mail and word of mouth, the diverse groups came together, which included the Chester River Association and the Queen Anne's County Visitor Service and the East Shore Land Conservancy, whose offices served as the common meeting area.

The initial discussion of the groups centered around the threat of change to both the scope and landscape of the community, and the need to collectively take control of the destiny of the area. In planning an itinerary for the professionals who would come to the counties and assess their options for regional planning, the participants prioritized what they believed the consultants should see in their week's visit. The exchange team identified seven interrelated issues that were fundamental for sustainable future planning: recognize the interdependence of communities, economics, and the environment; raise public awareness; create a shared vision; improve the ability to control destiny; create a framework to support the shared vision; identify communication and cooperative approaches; and present land as a resource, not only a marketable commodity. Each of these aspects was analyzed by the exchange team with the community assistance.

The exchange left the communities with the concept of a formula for thinking through problems in a more holistic and sustainable way, though it left the real work of community planning up to the community members, themselves. The professionals who were called in to assess the situation in Queen Anne's and Kent counties provided them with an understanding of the valuable resources for developing a participatory, sustainable plan.

The first step of action was to complete a case study of the counties' key environmental, social and economic issues. A bi-county committee was then formed and charged with the task of creating a common vision and consensus for planned land use, economic growth and the conservation of natural resources. Such a plan was urgently needed to control the rapidly developing areas.

There was much discussion about diversifying the region's existing agriculture, water and seafood industries. Several bay fisheries, as well as the oyster industry, had collapsed and employees needed new options for earning a living. Community members recognized that attention needed to be given to both the large number of resident white-collar commuters as well as the blue-collar service providers in order to address the economic needs of the entire community.

The environment of the region was seen as directly tied to its economic and social viability. Economic options such as co-op markets for selling local produce, tourism, and community supported agriculture were proposed to encourage industries that benefit from and require open space, therefore working towards protection of the remaining open space and discouraging further urban sprawl.
One of the primary constraints to action, which still remains to be solved, is the lack of organization and communication. A host of diverse organizations and community members from two counties united in this analysis and planning process, yet problems such as a lack of a central organizing force, overworked staff from the involved groups, and no efficient communication and monitoring strategies have continuously affected real progress toward set goals. However, as long as semirural and suburban areas are perceived to provide a higher quality of life, Queen Anne's and Kent Counties will outcompete urban areas for residents, and residents of these counties are fighting hard to preserve the quality and character of their communities.


Special thanks to the Carrying Capacity Project of the Izaak Walton League, Cathy Magruder of the Queen Anne's County Office of Tourism, and Rob Etgen of the East Shore Land Conservancy for providing information and text for this case study.


Case Study Source: Sustainability in Action: Profiles of Community Initiatives Across the United States-- American Forum for Global Education. 1995

Back to Top

URL: http://www.sustainable.org/