More News

Faced with a study that found a major piece of the state's smart growth policy is not working, Parris N. Glendening this week defended the landmark land-use legislation that he pushed into practice as governor a dozen years ago.

The study focuses on priority funding areas, or PFAs, calling them "the centerpiece" of Maryland's smart growth policies.

In theory, counties are to designate the areas for growth and for state spending on transportation, housing and economic development projects, as well as for infrastructure such as water and sewer.

But the study concludes that "it is clear that PFAs have not produced the intended effects over the last 10 years."

PFAs are only part of the picture, said Gerrit Knaap, one of the authors of the study, which appears in the latest edition of the Journal of the American Planning Association.

"We looked at a single policy instrument and found that it didn't have an effect on development patterns," said Knaap, the executive director of the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education at the University of Maryland, College Park. "Smart Growth was about much more than that."

Glendening (D) questioned some of the methodology of the study, which examined how the development of single-family homes outside of the PFAs has contributed to sprawl.

He cited smart growth successes such as downtown Hyattsville and Silver Spring. More than half of the states in the union have adopted some kind of smart growth initiative, he said.

But that doesn't mean the model is perfect.

"Could it be strengthened? Absolutely," said Glendening, whose legacy has been built on the planning principles for which he advocates as head of the Smart Growth Leadership Institute in Washington, D.C.

The study "wasn't an evaluation of smart growth writ large," Knaap said.

"There is a need for the state interest to be expressed in land-use planning and regulations," he said. "And there is a need for state and local governments to get on the same page in land-use planning."

As Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of 1000 Friends of Maryland, sees it, the problem is that counties call for smart growth in their comprehensive plans but don't adopt the zoning to match.

"Too many jurisdictions are asking for [planning] rights and shirking on the responsibility," she said.

Jurisdictions with a smaller tax base often must rely on developers to pay for the infrastructure needed to build more high-density communities.

The results often are growth areas with "gaps" in development and water and sewer lines, roads and transit routes that are disconnected between communities, said Sue Veith, an environmental planner with St. Mary's County, which commonly relies on developers to finance infrastructure.

"There needs to be some recognition that rural smart growth areas are not going to look like — and shouldn't look like — urban smart growth areas," Veith said, adding that the topic is one of debate among planners and that her view is not necessarily that of the county. "That doesn't exist at the state level."