Pressure from the farm community has forced a Baltimore County lawmaker to withdraw a proposal to limit nonresidential development on rural land — affecting about two thirds of the county.
Baltimore County Councilman Bryan McIntire said he will instead ask the local planning board to study nonresidential development on land zoned for “resource conservation.” Under his legislation, new buildings, parking lots and sidewalks could not cover more than 5 percent of a parcel.
“The farm community was concerned,” said McIntire, a Republican whose large district encompasses the county’s northern half. “If they put a barn on one of their smaller parcels, that alone would exceed the 5 percent rule.”
McIntire said the bill was originally intended to limit runoff into trout streams and the region’s drinking water supply and was requested by area preservationists concerned about development incompatible with the rural conservation designation.
Anti-sprawl activist Richard Klein said the bill would have reduced water quality degradation and traffic on narrow country roads as well as preserved scenic views. He said, however, he “reluctantly” agrees with McIntire’s decision.
“There was no way we would get a majority of council votes,” Klein said.
Development on land zoned for rural designation has been a controversial issue in north Baltimore County. Some residents in Long Green Valley have been fighting one dairy farmer’s plans to open a creamery on his land, which is zoned for rural conservation and is subject to a state easement. Robert Prigel, who owns the county’s only organic dairy operation, says the creamery is the only way his farm can remain profitable.
Wayne McGinnis, a farmer and member of the county’s planning board, said the debate highlights the need for additional study.
“It’s been 25 years since we reviewed it and I think it needs a thorough airing,” McGinnis said. “We expect uses that are agricultural and compatible with a rural area.”
