2/18/2009 10:06:00 AM Advisory group wants major changes to city's comp plan
Ryan Dostalek ConnectFitchburg.com
Time to start over? That appears to be one option as members of the Community and Economic Development Authority continue to question major tenets of the city's comprehensive plan, and are considering delaying its implementation to address their concerns.
The policies of concern, which will guide the city's growth, are slated for final approval in a few months.
CEDA questioned a potential commuter rail line, buffers around wetlands and a 75-acre annual growth rate, were approved by various committees and commissions, and were discussed at several public meetings.
Some CEDA members said they were unaware of provisions in the plan that they contend would hamper development.
Dan Hardy, who chairs CEDA, said the group's approval of the wider buffers around some wetlands had been a mistake.
"I don't remember voting on it," he said, adding that the group did not fully appreciate the economic implications of its approval.
"It ain't been studied,"he said.
Jason Schmidt, a resource/project planner, said the wider buffers would apply only to some Class 1wetlands in new areas of development. In response to CEDA's concerns, a process had been developed to determine when narrower buffers were appropriate, and the economic impact of buffers could be determined later, he said.
But Hardy insisted that the policy wouldn't be modified once it had been included in the plan.
Hardy also questioned why buffers couldn't be used to meet a developer's allotment for parkland.
Ald. Jay Allen recommended CEDA draft a letter to the Parks Commission about the using buffers for parkland and said it wasn't appropriate to include these details in the comprehensive plan. Allen said the city's comprehensive plan was much more detailed than in most other municipalities, and was determined by a process dictated by state statutes.
Joyce Frey, economic development specialist, said the comprehensive plans for Middleton and Verona contained more references to the importance of economic development. CEDA hadn't seen the entire plan until recently, she said. Frey said the city should respond to market forces, not attempt to "guide them."
Mike Zimmerman, coordinator of economic development, said he had recently worked with a developer who "quietly went away from Fitchburg" due to the city's unfavorable business policies. Zimmerman said the developer wouldn't publicly discuss the reasons for his decision.
Mayor Tom Clauder continued to attribute the wider buffers to the influence of landscape developer Phil Lewis and said the decision to endorse 300-foot buffers was "just an opinion."
"If we approve the buffers, then we become another Madison," he said.
Ald. Jason Williams, vice-chair of CEDA, said the council had assumed there would be a great deal of flexibility when imposing 300-fot buffers.
But Allen said developers would consider buffers when they purchased land. The wider buffers currently involved only one developer who had purchased land before the city revised its policy, he said.
The issue involved "how far the city goes to protect a developer's speculation," he said. Allen said most of the wetlands in areas slated for future development would not require such wide buffers. Some had recommended 1,000 foot buffers were necessary to maintain ecological diversity, he said.
"Once we destroy our resources, we can't get them back," Allen said.
Allen said the north branch of Swan Creek had become "a muddy hole" due to buffers that were too narrow, thereby allowing excessive runoff and failing to adequately cool water before it entered the stream. He said those mistakes shouldn't be repeated around the south branch of Swan Creek, which is in surprisingly pristine condition.
Allen said Fitchburg could act to adequately protect sensitive resources. Hardy insisted the city couldn't do so until the county or state acted.
Ald. Jason Williams endorsed 300-foot buffers after seeing what had happened to Dunn's Marsh, although he suggested the city consider ways to partially offset the cost to developers. Allen said the city could provide financial support, although the level of support shouldn't be spelled out in the comprehensive plan since it would be difficult to alter if changes were necessary.
Brian Pleva said changes suggested by CEDA were usually denied, while those suggested by Samuel Cooke and the Resource Conservation Commission were approved.
Zimmerman said he was troubled by the process used to evaluate CEDA's recommendations, which he said were made "unilaterally"
Planner Schmidt said many of the comments from CEDA members didn't involve specific policies, but were general statements, such as questioning the economic feasibility of a rail line, which was a major factor in determining the city's growth boundaries. Major changes to the plan at this point could have several legal implications, perhaps requiring resubmission to the various committees and commissions. The plan also had to be sent to neighboring municipalities 30 days after it was approved by the Plan Commission, which reviewed it on Feb. 17.
Zimmerman said he had been criticized for supposedly setting policies and asked why some apparently could "unilaterally" decide what changes in the comprehensive plan were acceptable.
Zimmerman said the city's financial consultant had been asked to examine the economic impact of the city's policy of limiting average annual growth to about 75 acres. The request came when Zimmerman met with Mayor Clauder and city administrator Tony Roach.
