The cove, in many ways, is the heart and soul of this close-knit, active and affluent neighborhood.
It is home to the beach with its pavilion and grills, two community piers, a swimming area, kayak and canoe storage racks and a mooring field for larger boats. It's the site of parties, crab feasts and craft camps for youngsters.
"This is the heart of Severna Park," said Roy Higgs, whose nearly 100-year-old home looks out over a steep hill that runs down to the cove.
But the cove that is beloved by Olde Severna Park residents is the source of much contention in the neighborhood.
A long-contested effort to put private piers at three homes on one side of the cove is moving forward after years of divisive court battles. One of those homeowners is seeking special approval for a renovation that would disturb hilly slopes that are environmentally sensitive. And across the cove, a proposal to build a home near a fragile bog is also tied up in court.
These repeated fights over zoning and development have caused rifts in the neighborhood, led to six-figure legal bills and worn out community leaders.
The leaders of the Olde Severna Park Improvement Association said they are fighting to preserve the unique nature of Sullivan Cove.
Meanwhile, the homeowners seeking the zoning approvals assert they are just exercising their legal rights, and they wouldn't do anything to harm the cove that they love so much. But ultimately, it's been up to judges and state officials to determine the fate of Sullivan Cove.
Dispute over piers
The longest-running dispute in the community is over private piers, and whether they should be allowed at private homes. That issue has been raging for at least four years.
The Olde Severna Park Improvement Association owns much of the land immediately bordering the cove. Association leaders also said that even where the waterfront land wasn't in their hands, they held what's called "riparian rights" - essentially the legal right to build into the water, such as with a pier or a dock.
So when a couple on Old County Road sought in 2004 to build a long walkway and pier stretching from their land, over a tidal pond and into a cove, association leaders thought it didn't have a chance.
Several years, countless court hearings and thousands of dollars later, the property owners established their right to apply for pier permits, even though they had sold the property by then. With the court victory in hand late last year, the new homeowner sought a wetlands permit for the pier. Two other homeowners on Old County sought approvals for piers, too.
Officials at the Maryland Department of the Environment and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are reviewing the plans. Permission is needed from those agencies because the homeowners will be disturbing wetlands when they build their walkways and piers.
The initial applications called for walkways and piers that would be several hundred feet long, though MDE is working with the property owners on reducing the dimensions, said Gary Setzer, MDE's administrator for wetlands and waterways. For example, two of the property owners might build one joint walkway and pier instead of two separate structures.
Mr. Setzer's staff has plenty of information to consider.
In addition to the usual reports and documents, MDE held a public meeting last month where more than 100 people crowded into a room at the Severn School, nearly all of them opposed to the piers.
That's a lot more public opposition than Mr. Setzer usually hears for piers.
"Generally the concerns for construction of piers comes from basically the (adjacent) neighbors ... For the most part, piers aren't usually controversial," he said.
In addition to scores of comments from the meeting, Mr. Setzer has fielded about 50 e-mails expressing opposition to the Sullivan Cove piers.
Opponents of the piers worry that the construction will forever ruin a tidal pond and marshlands that are teeming with fish, birds and other wildlife. They point to rare spotted turtles that live there and large carp that spawn in the pond.
These people worry the piers will contribute to a decline in water quality in Sullivan Cove and the Severn River.
They point to a report from the state Department of Natural Resources issued this spring that said the piers could alter the hydrology of the tidal pond and possibly cause it to silt in.
"The quality of the water is pretty good, but it's fragile," said Olde Severna Park resident and pier opponent Austin Bachmann.
But the homeowners who want to build the piers said the last thing they want is to destroy the environment that drew them to their homes in the first place. They said recently they just want to exercise their legal rights to access the water and enjoy the land.
"Just because we want to enjoy the waters of the Severn River does not mean we don't care about the environment and we're not doing everything we can to make sure the environment is protected," said Jamie Schimdt, one of the homeowners.
Another pier applicant, Thomas Jackson, echoed the same concerns.
"This is our land, so it's in our best interest to preserve it," he said.
The third property owners seeking a pier - Dann and Janet Thomasson - couldn't be reached for comment. They bought the original property that was at the center of the court cases.
Disappointed
Residents involved on both sides of the pier dispute said they've been let down by the process.
Ms. Schmidt and Mr. Jackson said that, in a way, they've become outcasts in the community.
"Just because we want a pier does not make us anti-environment," Ms. Schmidt said. "We feel like we've been black-sheeped."
Mr. Jackson said he doesn't mind facing opponents at community meetings and explaining his case.
"I have a pretty thick skin," he said, but he added it's not always as easy for his wife and kids. "You're known as 'those people.' "
The process of getting the pier approvals has been taxing. And although Mr. Setzer from MDE said a decision could be coming in the next several weeks, Mr. Jackson, for one, isn't getting his hopes up.
"I've gotten my hopes up like five times and there's always been another hurdle," he said.
Even if Mr. Jackson and the others win approval from MDE, they're likely to encounter more legal challenges from the Olde Severna Park Improvement Association.
The association could protest the permits in court and argue that MDE made a faulty decision. Or they could try to get the state Board of Public Works to hear the case.
Comprised of the governor, comptroller and treasurer, the Board of Public Works spends most of its time approving state contracts. But the board also has authority over wetlands permit approvals. Though most of that duty has been delegated to MDE, the Board of Public Works occasionally steps in on high-profile cases, such as the controversial Four Seasons development on Kent Island, which the board killed.
Opponents to the Sullivan Cove pier said they've had to seek such measures because government officials so far haven't done their job in preventing harm to the environment.
In addition to fighting the piers, they're also fighting a proposal from the Schmidts for an addition that would partially cross into steeply sloped land, which has special protections. And the association is trying to block a home that's been proposed for a lot across the cove that's near a bog, a rare type of wetland.
The Schmidts' addition is currently before the county Board of Appeals, while the bog case is in court. The community association has hired two lawyers to handle all their cases.
"You cannot sit back and rely on county and state officials," said Mr. Higgs, CEO of an architecture firm and association board member who has been a leader of the anti-pier movement. His front door sports a bumper sticker: "Keep Sullivan's Cove Pier Free."
Severn Riverkeeper Fred Kelly has been advising those who oppose new construction and said the community has "made an unparalleled commitment to protecting their environment and is a wonderful example for every other community on the Severn, or any other of the county's waterways."
"It's both heartening that citizens care so much, and disheartening that agencies such as the Maryland Department of the Environment and the Board of Public Works aren't committed," he said.
