Restrictions Causing Sprawl, Study Says

Builders Sponsored Analysis of Laws

A recent University of Maryland study casts doubt on local laws that require developers to demonstrate that there are enough roads, sewers, classrooms and other infrastructure in place before a project can be built.

The study, conducted by the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education, was sponsored by two builders groups and was made public last month. It examined adequate public facilities ordinances, or APFOs, which are meant to discourage urban sprawl, and found that heavy reliance on them can create more sprawl.

The laws, which are on the books in 13 counties and 12 municipalities in Maryland, allow governments to deny or delay new projects if their communities do not have enough infrastructure and services to support development.

All of the Maryland laws, for example, require developers to show that there are enough classrooms and roads to serve new housing before such projects are approved. Some laws also cover water and sewage access. Others require that there be enough police and firefighters to respond quickly to emergencies, and some have requirements for open space and parkland.

Used properly as one tool among many in the complex planning process, such laws can shape growth in a community so that the strains -- such as traffic jams, crowded classrooms and inadequate open space -- are minimized.

But if the laws are used too rigidly, they can deflect growth from an area deemed a priority for more development -- because of its existing roads, schools and utilities -- to areas farther away from urban establishments, the study found.

"This was a tool that was designed with the hope that development would not get out ahead of the infrastructure needed to support it. It was designed as sort of a test," said Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of 1000 Friends of Maryland, a group that supports managed growth.

"But the problem in my mind is that this test has ended up being the tail that wags the dog."

Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said his group has worked with Montgomery County officials to relax APFOs on transportation in some areas of the county that were already urbanized so that the additional growth would not go elsewhere.

Their thinking was that urbanized areas should be expected to be more congested and that housing developers should not be given an incentive to tear up more open land because the road network had not caught up with the area.

APFOs "should not be the primary tool," Schwartz said.

The recent study, which was sponsored by the Home Builders Association of Maryland and the Maryland-National Capital Building Industry Association, focused on Howard, Montgomery and Harford counties, examining the laws' effects on new housing in a three-year period.

It concluded that APFOs sometimes have been inappropriately used and are in conflict with the state's "smart growth" land-use policies.

As much as 10 percent of new housing contemplated in high-priority growth areas in those counties simply moved elsewhere because of the APFOs. As a result, the available housing stock was reduced and home prices were pushed up.

"In short, APFOs appear to be fueling the same pattern of development the state's Smart Growth policy is intended to curtail," the study says.

The study also found that the standards used to gauge the capacities of schools and roads vary greatly across jurisdictions.

Schmidt-Perkins said the study's findings match similar research; she said she was not bothered that it was sponsored by builders.

"That's how studies are funded at universities. It doesn't bother me," Schmidt-Perkins said, adding that she would be bothered if the source of the funding were not disclosed.

Stewart Schwartz, however, said he was somewhat troubled by the study's sponsorship. "I'd certainly feel more comfortable if it were sponsored by an array of groups," he said.