Effective Policies for Land Preservation: Zoning and Conservation Easements in Anne Arundel County, Maryland
By Gwenann Seznec
INTRODUCTION
Land use has always been a controversial subject in American law. Environmental regulations limiting land use pit government interests against the rights of landowners, who rarely give up their property rights without a fight. Governments have much to grapple with: “a near-mythic status has been accorded to property rights . . . they have been seen as both the undergirding of, and conversely an emanation from, our rights of life and liberty.” The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause has become the central constitutional restriction on government power to acquire or restrict private property rights. Through state constitutions or statutes, almost all states have similarly restricted state power to interfere with private property. Nonetheless, governments must continue to regulate the use of private land, balancing increasingly complex environmental mandates with the growing pressures of development and population growth. Despite the tension between government regulation and private property rights, “[g]overnment continues to enjoy ample room to regulate land use responsibly without significant chance of being made to pay.”
State and local governments recognize the importance of protecting the environment, and to some degree ecological regulation is politically popular. Zoning has emerged as one of the most comprehensive and cost-effective ways in which local governments may direct growth and preserve ecologically sensitive areas. Yet significant shortcomings in zoning regulations allow sprawling development and pollution of natural resources to continue unabated. In response to failings of the regulatory framework, market-based mechanisms that seek to preserve land from development have emerged in the last thirty years. For example, private land trusts and government agencies may acquire conservation easements and land in fee simple in an effort to preserve agricultural and forest land through voluntary, compensated means. While thousands of acres have been protected in this way, these mechanisms have their own weaknesses that prevent them from being entirely successful. Their success is partially dependent upon partnership with strict zoning practices. Notwithstanding market-based preservation techniques, consistent and enforced local regulation remains the key to preservation of precious farmland and forest.
This paper explores the elements of land preservation in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, a region at the forefront of conflict between development and environmental health. Anne Arundel County is located east of Washington, D.C. and south of the city of Baltimore. The economy and culture of the county are intimately related to the Chesapeake Bay. The Bay and its sleepy tributaries sustain a rich array of wildlife and fertile land, which in turn have supported generations of watermen and a thriving farming community along the county's 534 miles of shoreline. But due to its ideal location near metropolitan areas and its high quality of life, the county's population has grown exponentially in the past thirty years, straining environmental resources to their breaking point. Under state mandate, Anne Arundel County responded to this environmental crisis with zoning regulations to stem growth in sensitive areas and preserve remaining forest and farmland. However, the overburdened local government is not equipped to implement and enforce the laws as they exist. In addition, the Maryland courts are hostile to environmental legislation that infringes on property rights. While state and local initiatives to purchase land and conservation easements have been somewhat successful, their continued effectiveness relies upon political will and, perhaps counterintuitively, strong zoning regulations. New legislation to strengthen environmental laws in the state may help stem the destruction of natural resources, but the success of new regulation is dependent, as before, on effective enforcement and the support of the courts.
Land use has always been a controversial subject in American law. Environmental regulations limiting land use pit government interests against the rights of landowners, who rarely give up their property rights without a fight. Governments have much to grapple with: “a near-mythic status has been accorded to property rights . . . they have been seen as both the undergirding of, and conversely an emanation from, our rights of life and liberty.” The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause has become the central constitutional restriction on government power to acquire or restrict private property rights. Through state constitutions or statutes, almost all states have similarly restricted state power to interfere with private property. Nonetheless, governments must continue to regulate the use of private land, balancing increasingly complex environmental mandates with the growing pressures of development and population growth. Despite the tension between government regulation and private property rights, “[g]overnment continues to enjoy ample room to regulate land use responsibly without significant chance of being made to pay.”
State and local governments recognize the importance of protecting the environment, and to some degree ecological regulation is politically popular. Zoning has emerged as one of the most comprehensive and cost-effective ways in which local governments may direct growth and preserve ecologically sensitive areas. Yet significant shortcomings in zoning regulations allow sprawling development and pollution of natural resources to continue unabated. In response to failings of the regulatory framework, market-based mechanisms that seek to preserve land from development have emerged in the last thirty years. For example, private land trusts and government agencies may acquire conservation easements and land in fee simple in an effort to preserve agricultural and forest land through voluntary, compensated means. While thousands of acres have been protected in this way, these mechanisms have their own weaknesses that prevent them from being entirely successful. Their success is partially dependent upon partnership with strict zoning practices. Notwithstanding market-based preservation techniques, consistent and enforced local regulation remains the key to preservation of precious farmland and forest.
This paper explores the elements of land preservation in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, a region at the forefront of conflict between development and environmental health. Anne Arundel County is located east of Washington, D.C. and south of the city of Baltimore. The economy and culture of the county are intimately related to the Chesapeake Bay. The Bay and its sleepy tributaries sustain a rich array of wildlife and fertile land, which in turn have supported generations of watermen and a thriving farming community along the county's 534 miles of shoreline. But due to its ideal location near metropolitan areas and its high quality of life, the county's population has grown exponentially in the past thirty years, straining environmental resources to their breaking point. Under state mandate, Anne Arundel County responded to this environmental crisis with zoning regulations to stem growth in sensitive areas and preserve remaining forest and farmland. However, the overburdened local government is not equipped to implement and enforce the laws as they exist. In addition, the Maryland courts are hostile to environmental legislation that infringes on property rights. While state and local initiatives to purchase land and conservation easements have been somewhat successful, their continued effectiveness relies upon political will and, perhaps counterintuitively, strong zoning regulations. New legislation to strengthen environmental laws in the state may help stem the destruction of natural resources, but the success of new regulation is dependent, as before, on effective enforcement and the support of the courts.
