Impervious Surfaces

Anne Arundel County's chief executive is seeking to create a storm-water management fund that would generate at least $5 million a year to repair waterways damaged by future construction. County Executive John R. Leopold, a Republican, said yesterday that he will introduce legislation to the County Council on Monday to create a fee paid by property owners based on the amount of impervious surfaces, such as driveways, parking lots and home additions, they create. It would raise at least five times the amount of the current storm drainage fee, which would be eliminated, but far less than a fee that environmentalists wanted imposed on all property owners.

Anne Arundel County's stormwater fee hasn't been collected yet, but the County Council has already changed it. By a 7-0 vote Monday night, council members agreed to reduce the maximum fee that commercial property owners would pay and to phase in the fee for some property owners. The changes were made to make the stormwater fee more palatable to County Executive Laura Neuman, who vetoed the stormwater fee that the council passed earlier this spring. Owners of nonresidential properties still must pay based on the percentage of their lot that's covered by impervious surfaces such as parking lots and rooftops.

THERE'S A MESSAGE for the future of Maryland's 9,000 miles of freshwater streams in Montgomery County's decision a couple of years ago to limit development along some 20 miles of the upper Paint Branch, where trout thrive not far from the Capital Beltway. The suburban county allocated $13.5 million, its whole parks acquisition budget for six years, to preserve open space in the little stream's watershed. Only then could they ensure that "impervious surfaces" would never amount to more than 10 percent of the lands draining runoff from rainfall to Paint Branch, a local icon of environmental quality.

The compromise Del. Maggie McIntosh brokered among environmentalists, the O'Malley administration and builders over storm water regulations that are set to go into effect this spring will mean more pollution flowing into the Chesapeake Bay, more erosion, less clean drinking water and assorted other environmental damage. But it could have been much, much worse. Powerful political figures, including Baltimore County Executive James T. Smith Jr., were arguing that the storm water regulations would set back smart growth efforts, promote sprawl and hurt the environment -- an overblown concern but one that created an opening for developers and their allies to gut the new regulations altogether.

Anne Arundel County's stormwater fee hasn't been collected yet, but the County Council has already changed it. By a 7-0 vote Monday night, council members agreed to reduce the maximum fee that commercial property owners would pay and to phase in the fee for some property owners. The changes were made to make the stormwater fee more palatable to County Executive Laura Neuman, who vetoed the stormwater fee that the council passed earlier this spring. Owners of nonresidential properties still must pay based on the percentage of their lot that's covered by impervious surfaces such as parking lots and rooftops.

THE GOALS were put forth 39 years ago: reduce the nation's water-polluting discharges to zero and make waterways clean enough for swimming and fishing. We haven't come close to meeting those ambitious targets, contained in the Clean Water Act of 1972. But the debate taking place among members of the Anne Arundel County Council right now provides one example of the progress since the days when little attention was paid to the harm that development can do to streams, rivers and oceans - and estuaries like our Chesapeake Bay. The Arundel council is debating the degree to which commercial property owners must reduce storm runoff - especially from asphalt parking lots and rooftops - if they decide to redevelop their property.

Hoping to reduce storm water runoff into Chesapeake Bay tributaries, Annapolis Mayor Ellen O. Moyer has proposed one of the state's toughest limits for impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and roofs, on redeveloped properties. Under the ordinance introduced at Monday's City Council meeting, those redeveloping property, with some exceptions, would be required to cut by 50 percent the amount of existing surface area that does not absorb or filter water. State law and city code now require a 20 percent reduction for redeveloped properties.

Seeking to avoid a complicated fight in an election year, county officials have decided to set aside efforts to reform the "critical areas" environmental protection law until voters select a successor for outgoing County Executive Janet S. Owens. County leaders reached their decision after a series of recent public meetings on proposed revisions to critical area laws, which regulate development within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. While the county said it has significantly revised the bill based on forum input, residents said they need more time to study the changes.

The Anne Arundel County Council will debate legislation that would charge most homeowners $30 a year to pay for repairs to damaged local waterways, after its proponents found an unlikely ally: a councilman who fiercely opposes the bill. C. Edward Middlebrooks cast the crucial fourth vote Monday night, amending County Executive John R. Leopold's so-called SMART fund. While Leopold's plan would levy a fee only on property owners who built new impervious surfaces, such as patios, homes and parking lots, the new legislation calls for an "all-payer" system that would also include a sliding-scale charge on most commercial and industrial properties.

The delegate sponsoring a proposed fee on development to help clean up the Chesapeake Bay has offered to give millions of dollars to local governments in an effort to win their support. In addition, Del. Maggie L. McIntosh, chairwoman of the House Environmental Matters Committee, proposed amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Green Fund bill that would allow exemptions for developers who limit runoff. The fee on construction projects -- backed by environmentalists, the O'Malley administration and House Speaker Michael E. Busch -- would raise about $130 million a year for programs to reduce farm runoff and storm-water pollution.

The Anne Arundel County Council will debate legislation that would charge most homeowners $30 a year to pay for repairs to damaged local waterways, after its proponents found an unlikely ally: a councilman who fiercely opposes the bill. C. Edward Middlebrooks cast the crucial fourth vote Monday night, amending County Executive John R. Leopold's so-called SMART fund. While Leopold's plan would levy a fee only on property owners who built new impervious surfaces, such as patios, homes and parking lots, the new legislation calls for an "all-payer" system that would also include a sliding-scale charge on most commercial and industrial properties.

Anne Arundel County's chief executive is seeking to create a storm-water management fund that would generate at least $5 million a year to repair waterways damaged by future construction. County Executive John R. Leopold, a Republican, said yesterday that he will introduce legislation to the County Council on Monday to create a fee paid by property owners based on the amount of impervious surfaces, such as driveways, parking lots and home additions, they create. It would raise at least five times the amount of the current storm drainage fee, which would be eliminated, but far less than a fee that environmentalists wanted imposed on all property owners.

Recent reports on the health of the Chesapeake Bay paint a dismal picture. An Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program report noted that water quality has shown little progress since 1985, and levels of nitrogen and phosphorus - the nutrient pollutants that are the focus of cleanup efforts - show no real long-term improvement. Evidence of these excessive nutrients showed up in recent large fish kills in Baltimore's harbor and in Annapolis' Weems Creek. Bay grasses, essential for crabs and fish, are far short of the goal of 185,000 acres set in 2000 by the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, which drives bay restoration.

The delegate sponsoring a proposed fee on development to help clean up the Chesapeake Bay has offered to give millions of dollars to local governments in an effort to win their support. In addition, Del. Maggie L. McIntosh, chairwoman of the House Environmental Matters Committee, proposed amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Green Fund bill that would allow exemptions for developers who limit runoff. The fee on construction projects -- backed by environmentalists, the O'Malley administration and House Speaker Michael E. Busch -- would raise about $130 million a year for programs to reduce farm runoff and storm-water pollution.

Hoping to reduce storm water runoff into Chesapeake Bay tributaries, Annapolis Mayor Ellen O. Moyer has proposed one of the state's toughest limits for impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and roofs, on redeveloped properties. Under the ordinance introduced at Monday's City Council meeting, those redeveloping property, with some exceptions, would be required to cut by 50 percent the amount of existing surface area that does not absorb or filter water. State law and city code now require a 20 percent reduction for redeveloped properties.

Seeking to avoid a complicated fight in an election year, county officials have decided to set aside efforts to reform the "critical areas" environmental protection law until voters select a successor for outgoing County Executive Janet S. Owens. County leaders reached their decision after a series of recent public meetings on proposed revisions to critical area laws, which regulate development within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. While the county said it has significantly revised the bill based on forum input, residents said they need more time to study the changes.

The compromise Del. Maggie McIntosh brokered among environmentalists, the O'Malley administration and builders over storm water regulations that are set to go into effect this spring will mean more pollution flowing into the Chesapeake Bay, more erosion, less clean drinking water and assorted other environmental damage. But it could have been much, much worse. Powerful political figures, including Baltimore County Executive James T. Smith Jr., were arguing that the storm water regulations would set back smart growth efforts, promote sprawl and hurt the environment -- an overblown concern but one that created an opening for developers and their allies to gut the new regulations altogether.

`Woods' project could damage area watersheds In his column "On the Bay," Tom Horton wrote eloquently and effectively about the impact of development on our streams and ultimately the Chesapeake Bay ("Death for streams lies in the pavement," Oct. 6). How I wish he could have testified against the proposed "Woods at Park Place" development at the recent Howard County Planning Board hearings ("Board divided on Pfau development," Sept. 22). The points that Mr. Horton made were the same ones that opponents of the project spoke to. The Woods at Park Place would be built in a historic and environmentally fragile area.

Population strains most basic resource The Sun's thorough coverage of the outlook for Maryland's water needs gave readers an extremely serious warning about the prospect that we could run out of our most important natural resource because of the sheer number of people here ("Running dry?" Feb. 5). State Sen. Roy P. Dyson showed his awareness of the approaching disaster when he said, "The way we're going now is not working. Some day we'll wake up and say, `Oh, my God, where are we going to get our water?

On a sunny summer afternoon, the Western Run lazes around a U-shaped bend behind Ashland Presbyterian Church, ripples from dancing water bugs making the only disturbance in its slow slide to the Loch Raven Reservoir. But in a heavy rain, that peaceful bend in the stream became an erosion nightmare. When runoff from the church met the surging waters of the stream, they combined to chew away at the steep slope. Church officials worried they were one bad storm away from seeing their parking lot crumble into the embankment.