Glade Valley, 804 acres, Kelly and Staley Properties, 302 acres and Kemp Lane Assemblage, 161 acres.  Read the letter here.

In his May 23 commentary, Thomas Lynch attempts to cast illusions, build straw men and further polarize growth and development issues — the very things he suggests we rise above.

Lynch unfairly characterized the recently adopted comprehensive plan, and Frederick County government in general, as being unfriendly toward the business community. As a business owner who moved to Frederick County specifically to start a business, I can tell you that nothing could be further from the truth.

The hundreds of properties that Lynch refers to as being “downgraded” constitute less than 1 percent of the properties covered under the comprehensive plan. In addition, within that 1 percent, a large number of the properties were reevaluated as a result of new, updated flood-zone maps issued by FEMA. Most reasonable people would agree that properties in a flood zone are not good candidates for development.

Furthermore, the county commissioners specifically acknowledged that some of the rezoned properties could still be developed if annexed by the adjacent municipalities as part of their growth plans. This ensures that new development can be serviced by adjacent municipal infrastructure.

In the end, there were only a handful of property owners out of the approximately 230,000 residents in Frederick County who were adversely affected. Little consolation for those individuals for sure, but not a bad track record for elected officials trying to balance the desire of individuals with the best interests of the community at large.

The business community in Frederick County is diverse and made up of more than just developers. For example, Frederick County has more farms than any other county in Maryland. The number of farms in Frederick County is also up 13 percent from 2002, unlike many other counties.

Those counties that focused on development as the main engine of growth have suffered the most as a result of the bust in the construction industry.

The industry was premised on people continually upgrading to the next most fashionable neighborhood or floor plan. Studies have shown that land zoned agricultural puts money in the bank for local governments. They pay more in taxes than they consume in services. The opposite is true for new development, which costs existing taxpayers more than it brings in.

The county commissioners spent two years and countless public meetings updating the comprehensive plan. The process was fair and open. All voices were heard. The final comprehensive plan does exactly what it is supposed to do. It accommodates the population growth that is projected to occur in Frederick County over the next 20 years. It aligns growth with existing infrastructure, minimizing the cost to existing residents and taxpayers.

If developers are looking for something to do, look no further than the Golden Mile or any other half dozen communities in Frederick County that are in desperate need of redevelopment.

William Morrow

writes from Whitmore Farm, Emmitsburg

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_lte.htm?storyid=106102

“When the area of driveways, parking lots, streets and other impervious cover reaches 10 percent of a watershed area, many types of pollution sensitive aquatic insects decline by as much as one third, compared to streams in undeveloped forested watersheds,” said Tom Cuffney, USGS biologist. “We learned that there is no ‘safezone,’ meaning that even minimal or early stages of development can negatively affect aquatic life in urban streams.”

As a watershed becomes developed, the amount of pavement, sidewalks and other types of urban land cover increases. During storms, water is rapidly transported over these urban surfaces to streams. The rapid rise and fall of stream flow and changes in temperature can be detrimental to fish and aquatic insects. Stormwater from urban development can also contain fertilizers and insecticides used along roads and on lawns, parks and golf courses.

“Stream protection and management is a top priority of state and local officials, and these findings remind us of the unintended consequences that development can have on our aquatic resources,” said Tom Schueler, Chesapeake Stormwater Network coordinator. “The information has been useful in helping us to predict and manage the future impacts of urban development on streams and reinforces the importance of having green infrastructure to control stormwater runoff and protect aquatic life.”

USGS studies examine the effects of urbanization on algae, aquatic insects, fish, habitat and chemistry in urban streams in nine metropolitan areas across the country: Boston, Mass.; Raleigh, N.C.; Atlanta, Ga.; Birmingham, Ala.; Milwaukee-Green Bay, Wis.; Denver, Colo.; Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Portland, Ore.

These USGS studies also show that land cover prior to urbanization can affect how aquatic insects and fish respond to urbanization. For example, aquatic communities in urban streams in Denver, Dallas-Fort Worth and Milwaukee did not decline in response to urbanization because the aquatic communities were already degraded by previous agricultural land-use activities. In contrast, aquatic communities declined in response to urbanization in metropolitan areas where forested land was converted to urban land, areas such as Boston and Atlanta.

Comparisons among the nine areas show that not all urban streams respond exactly the same. This is mostly because stream quality and aquatic health reflect a complex combination of land and chemical use, land and storm-water management, population density and watershed development, and natural features, such as soils, hydrology, and climate.

These USGS studies represent an integrated approach to understanding urban streams that includes physical, chemical and biological characteristics associated with urbanization. This is critical for prioritizing strategies for stream protection and restoration and in evaluating the effectiveness of those strategies over time.

For more information, listen to USGS Corecast Episode 127. The full report and extended video podcasts are available at the National Water Quality Assessment program urban studies website.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2475&from=news_side

Wednesdays, 3pm in the old Carmack Jay’s parking lot, between 3rd and 4th streets on Market St. Cut flowers, berries, vegetables, herbs, fruit, beef, pork, eggs, baked goods, lamb, rabbit, wool, yarn, chocolates, and hand made knits.

All items raised, grown or made within 120 miles of Frederick.

This is a FREE club for kids of all ages who love our planet and want to learn about easy ways to make a difference.

Our next club meeting will be on June 15 at 4 PM at the C. Burr Artz Public Library in Frederick, MD.

Local farmer Bob Black, from the Catoctin Mountain Orchard, will be there to teach the kids about how buying locally-grown produce helps our environment. We will also sample some yummy homegrown treats and do some fun games and activities.

RSVP at EcoHeroes@friendsoffrederickcounty.org or to 240-529-1655 if you are planning to come. Drop-ins welcome too!

All children must be accompanied by an adult.

John Burgeson, Staff Writer

Published: 11:49 p.m., Sunday, June 6, 2010

The forests of southern New England are being chopped down to make room for subdivisions, strip malls and highways, and this loss of natural landscape has been particularly rapid in the last 30 years, according to the report, “Wildlands and Woodlands,” the work of nearly 20 pre-eminent professors from Yale, Harvard, Brandeis, Cornell and other prominent schools in the Northeast.

Released last week, “Wildlands and Woodlands” is intended to be a “vision for the New England landscape,” which advocates that at least 70 percent of New England remain forested, while at the same time, some development would actually be encouraged.

“Sprawl has become even more of a factor than it was even in the 1950s because of our appetite for larger home lots, bigger malls and wider highways,” said Yale professor Lloyd Irland, a senior research scientist with the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. Strip malls, parking lots, big box stores and other features of our motor vehicle-centered society have taken their toll on the landscape, too, he said.

“This is not an anti-development proposal — rather, it’s in favor of rational development,” said Irland, who said that he hopes that the Wildland and Woodlands report will be seen as a “manifesto’ that guides future land use decisions.

He notes that development that has taken place since the 1950s has been mostly in the form of high-cost housing that was built with little regard for mass transit routes and existing infrastructure, resulting in a huge cost to society for many decades to come. “Roads, sewer lines, water lines and other utilities were extended largely to benefit the wealthy,” he notes. “Development has taken big gouges out of the forest. We have huge lots for rich people and slums for poor ones,” Irland said.

The authors said that, unlike the development seen in the mid-1800s, in which thousands of acres were cleared for farms, today’s sprawl is “hard” development, meaning it won’t revert to woodland anytime soon.

“A lot of the pastures in the 1800s were turning back into forest even before the cows left,” notes Brandeis professor Brian Donohue.

Forestry experts note that there is, in fact, more forested lands in the state than there was in mid-19th century. In 1600, when European colonists first began arriving, it’s estimated that about 90 percent of the state was carpeted with trees. By 1860, only about 30 percent of Connecticut had forest cover, as land was cleared for farms, and timber was needed for construction and iron smelting operations.

But by 1950, as agriculture and timber operations moved to the West and Midwest, the forests rebounded — with about 70 percent of the state covered by woodlands in the mid-20th century.

Since then, sprawl and development has taken its toll, and now just about 50 percent of the state is forested.

“We were given a second chance,” said Bill Toomey, director of the Redding woodland preserve Highstead. “But now, it will be a lot harder for forests to recover from the loss that we’re seeing today.”

There’s also been a meteoric rise in the number of people. New England’s population in 1800 was a little more than 1 million; now it’s 14 million.

Experts note that the hardwood and conifer forests of the Northeast are of global importance, as they act as a “sink” for carbon — converting the global-warming gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into cellulose — the long-chain sugar molecule that wood is made out of — and also free oxygen, which is a cooling gas.

“If current trends continue, the effectiveness of that carbon sink will gradually decline,” saidCornell University’s Timothy J. Fahey. “The Northeastern forest is a stronger sink for carbon than most other forests, such as the mature forests of the Northwest.”

The authors note that development can take place without taking down stands of trees. Instead, construction can take place on so-called brownfields — previously developed land that has been abandoned.

“Brownfield development is more costly, but maybe society needs to think about `buying down’ the cost of close-in brownfield development as opposed to extending sewer and water lines for greenfield development,” Irland said. “When you think about it, planning and zoning laws have made efficient use of land illegal.”

Harvard’s Davis Foster, one of the report’s principal authors, said that one solution is to take a second look at New England’s post-industrial landscape. “A lot of old industrial towns are actually very attractive because rivers run through them.”

All of the authors stress that some woodland development is advantageous. Logging, for example, can have some real ecological benefits if it’s done properly.

“When you realize that 95 percent of the lumber we use comes from other parts of the world, and also that it’s harvested in such a way that’s much more destructive than the way we would do it here,” Foster said. “You really have to look at the big picture. And, if people see the forest as a valuable resource, there’ll be a greater incentive to take care of it.”

There are aesthetic considerations, too.

“Another thing that won’t come back is the long tradition of being able to freely walk across undeveloped land,” Irland said. “As Connecticut loses its forest, the opportunity to take that walk in the woods — which is a big part of the quality of life — will disappear. It’s a heritage that we shouldn’t just fritter away.”

06-16-2010 7pm City Hall  City’s Mayor and Aldermen to meet with Board of County Commissioners to discuss costs of 20-year municipal growth plan

What will the planned development cost citizens of this county and city?

The following cost analysis of Frederick City’s Municipal Growth Element was prepared by FoFC for the April 13, 2010 workshop with City and County officials.

Frederick City Officials decided to do a thorough cost analysis of the projected growth and present those costs to the Frederick County Board of Commissioners on June 7th.

Will there be a Big Red Road?

A road that will connect north Rte 15 with I 70 SE of Frederick, and go through over 160 properties – in some cases houses would need to be remove

In September 2009 the City of Frederick’s Mayor and Aldermen[1] voted to annex two farms along Route 15 north of Frederick City for 1200 new homes and approximately 2.3 million ft² of office space. Click to download the Annexation Resolution for the Crum Farm (09-18) and Resolution 09-19 Thatcher Annexation.

During the Fall 2009 citizens made a good faith effort to gather 20% of city voter signatures to put these annexations to referendum but fell short of our target due to the 45 day time allowed. Judging from overwhelming citizen involvement in that effort and interest in signing the petition for referendum it was clear that citizens of Frederick City do not agree that the development plans for the Crum and COPT/Thatcher properties promote the health, safety and welfare of our city nor county.   Read more details on the annexations, organization positions and related issues here and on the Frederick County government website.

This petition effort, to “de annex” these properties, allows unlimited time for signature gathering and when put on the ballot will give citizens the opportunity to vote their preference.

Download the Deannexation Petition for Referendum Here!

Please return the petition as soon as possible:

• mail it to:  Friends of Frederick County,  4 E Church Street, Frederick MD   21701
• call us at:  240 529 1655
• drop off points to be announced

Contact us:  deannexation@friendsoffrederickcounty.org

VENUE CHANGE for THIS Month!

Carlos Fernandez, owner of Potomac Wind Energy located in Dickerson, MD will be here to discuss the potential for wind energy in Frederick County. Dr. Fernandez has sold and installed over 30 SKYSTREAM small wind energy systems.

Also, after Green Drinks there will be a free film about how we grow and develop our community shown at the MET. The film is the final showing of the Spring film series on sustainability. It is part of the OurCommonWEalth film series. For more information go towww.ourcommonwealth.us.
Brewer’s Alley upstairs “Booking Room” (5 to 7p.m.)
124 North Market Street
Frederick, MD 21701

Every month people who work in the sustainability field meet up at informal sessions known as Green Drinks.

These events are very simple and unstructured, but many people have found employment, made friends, developed new ideas, done deals and had moments of serendipity. It can be a force for good in our community.

The spirit of green drinks is that anyone can come, and this makes for interesting interactions. If you are interested in green, ecological, environmental, organic, renewable, and sustainability issues, you are welcome to attend.

RSVP is not required, but it would be helpful to get a head cou