To all who thought the 1990 Howard County General Plan would provide a greenbelt with expanses of undeveloped land buffering and preserving environmentally sensitive areas, I would say take a closer look and see what's really behind all this nice-sounding rhetoric {"Bobo's Blueprint Has Little Alteration; More Moderate-Income Housing Advocated," Metro, June 21}. It's very easy to place a label on something that stirs up all sorts of bucolic images in our minds. However, perception and reality are two different things.

Howard County is divided into a series of statistical districts. Each district has a projected number of dwelling units and planned employment figures at build-out in 2010. Figures obtained from the Howard CountyDepartment of Planning and Zoning -- only after a resident had to sue the county under the Freedom of Information Act to get them released -- reveal that under the 1982 general plan, the statistical areas in the greenbelt were to have 5,375 homes and 2,882 jobs by the year 2010. The 1990 general plan boosts these numbers to 6,927 homes and 4,237 jobs with an ultimate capacity of 9,187 jobs. If this "so called" greenbelt is considered the area of lowest density, least-intensive development in the county, you need only take all of this one step farther and conclude that the Bobo administration envisions, and plans on, cramming and developing every other square inch of available land in the county.

Greenbelts that are truly undeveloped and conservation areas that preserve natural land resources would be laudable. However, under the 1990 general plan all the citizens of Howard County are really getting is a nice-sounding name. The integrity of stream valleys cannot be maintained by allowing development to occur at these increased levels. The people of Howard County should be asking where's the green in this greenbelt? Perhaps Liz Bobo means green office buildings, green homes and green asphalt.