PCSR INFO 6-14-2005
38 Planning June 2005
.
By Rodney E. Engelen, AICP
PLANNING PiRAC;:FICiE ,
e Heart of
In the fight against sprawl, it's
.
mixed-use cores to the rescue.
.
.
lanners work hard to make great communities
happen. But would great communities:
· Relentlessly destroy farms, wetlands, and
natural resources?
· Wantonly waste energy and water?
· Stick with expensive and inadequate trans-
portation systems?
· Make second-class citizens of the poor,
elderly, and disadvantaged?
· Do little to elevate the human spirit through
beauty, amenity, culture, and history?
Many of us are trying to re-energize plan-
ning at the project scale. Consider the many
recent initiatives to deal with sprawl, manage
growth, and market "new urbanism" prin-
ciples. But we must do much more, more
boldly, on a larger scale, and do it better.
To start, we must define what we mean by
"greatness." Here are four possible elements
of such a definition: Allow everyone to live in
well-planned communities and neighborhoods.
Save natural areas and open space and protect
cultural and historic features. Provide adequate
infrastructure. Locate all intense, "attraction"
activities in well-planned, mixed-use areas-
downtowns and cores.
While we need more success in all of these
areas, the most important would be building
good downtowns and cores. Intense commer-
cial, governmental, institutional, and cultural
functions are the key generators of employ-
ment, focal points of society, and basic shapers
of our cities. We should require them to be
part of healthy, mixed-use cores.
A familiar tune
It is discouraging to realize that this conclu-
sion was reached more than 40 years ago in
dozens of research projects, books, and re-
gional plans. Some of the early work in this
area was undertaken in cities seeking to over-
come years of neglect during the Depression
and World War II-and to cope with compe-
tition from newly energized suburbs.
The Chicago Central Area Committee did
excellent work in the 1950s, when Ted
Aschman, the city's former planning director,
served as the committee's consultant. He drew
on experiences in Cincinnati and Seattle as
well as Chicago. Aschman assembled a set of
development principles and convinced a re-
ceptive business community and the first Mayor
Daley of their value. They guide development
in downtown Chicago to this day. In 1958,
Minneapolis became the first city to adopt
these principles for its downtown. Others
followed suit.
Briefly stated, the principles say that to be
successful a downtown or core must have the
following: good access, mixed uses, compact-
ness, ease of internal movement, amenities
and images, strong environmental support
,
10
OJ
-0
01
~
,
"'
.0
,
'"
0.
~
"'
~
~
"'
-0
o
'"
!
3
40 Planning June 2005
and good management. These principles pro-
vide the basic guidance needed to produce a
plan for good downtowns, cores, or centers.
. Many people assumed that the suburban
hopping centers being built during the 1960s
would provide these qualities. But often they
did not. Victor Gruen saw this as early as
1973 and said so in his book, Centers for the
Urban Environment. He gave a scathing cri-
tique of how shopping centers were being
built (he called them uni-functional centers),
urged that regions be organized around a
system of multi-functional centers, and said
that these centers should be anchored by a
wide range of functions (not just shopping).
Several research studies came to the same
conclusion. The first, compiled in 1968 for the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban De-
velopment by Banon-Aschman Associates of
Evanston, Illinois, recommended that land uses
be organized into mixed-use clusters designed
to meet the needs of neighborhoods, communi-
ties, and regions (even super regions). The sec-
ond, done in 1981 for the U.S. Depanment of
Transponation, recommended that metropoli-
tan regions be developed into a series of centers
(at the subregional level) to provide focal
points for regional and subregional transit ser-
.vice. Jerry Schneider, the author of the second
repon, called this concept "polycentric."
About a dozen metro areas prepared plans
following the polycentric concept. They in-
cluded Minneapolis, Toronto, Vancouver,
Chicago, Los Angeles, and Baltimore. Several
of these areas developed principles and pro-
grams for their development, and a few con-
ducted major studies to measure benefits and
esrablish implementing policies. Locations were
proposed, and a few pro-core policies and
p'i!ms were adopted.
However, no one recognized just how strong
such policies and programs would have to be to
produce the desired results. And almost no one
applied the principles emerging from down-
town planning to the design of suburban cores.
Very little was done to put new commercial,
institutional, or public functions into these
centers to make them truly mixed-use. Even
fewer were compact. And far more develop-
mentwas located outside of centers than within.
Some hope
The result is the condition we have today: the
widespread, single-use, unplanned, wasteful,
. vulnerable-to-obsolescence,and often con-
flicting development that we call sprawl-with
all its attendant problems.
According to the Urban Land Institute, one
in five of the country's major suburban shop-
'J? E ~ N iN I N G 'e II iA ,~,'Jl) fl B J~} ." . /. .
"", ~0"A" "k i@:
ping centers is obsolete or in danger of becoming
so. Five of the first six such centers in Phoenix
have had to be totally rebuilt. The International
Downtown Executives Association recognizes
47,000 shopping centers in the U. S. Most of
these could be targeted for improvement, as
could tens of thousands of individual office
and institutional complexes. The deficiencies of
such areas are a major source of blight, conges-
tion, traffic, environmental degradation, and
neighborhood abandonment.
A few organizations-including the Ameri-
can Planning Association, the National Trust
for Historic Preservation, and the Regional
Plan Association in New York Ciry-have
suggested ways to deal with these problems.
But these programs reach only a tiny fraction
of existing cores, and very few, if any, aim to
get development in--or become the centers
of-new mixed-use centers.
Public and eorporate support?
The potential value of mixed-use centers sug-
gests that we should give them wide national,
regional, and state support in the same way
that we support our goals in education, health,
housing, security, transportation, and the en-
vironment. We should recognize that such
centers may be one of the best tools we have to
achieve planning goals.
One who makes this point strongly is
Donovan Rypkema, an economic develop-
ment consultant and principal of the firm
Place Economics. Writing in the Winter 2003
issue of the Journal of the American Planning
Association, he noted that downtowns are im-
portant for effective environmental, transpor-
tation, preservation, and smart growth poli-
cies. He also noted that downtowns are essential
for community economic health, diversity,
and public expression.
The same points apply if you substitute the
word "cores" for the word "downtowns."
Other aqnunenls for eores
Victor Gruen suggested that mixed-use cen-
ters have the following traits:
.. Consistency with market trends. Cities have
always grown around markets. But in the 20th
century, extensive automobile use created more
potential sites than markets can support, mak-
ing it hard to focus demand in good cores and
encouraging sprawl. In this century, however,
continued population growth, combined with
increased congestion, will make cores more at-
tractive as the way to handle growth.
.. Reduced travel. A major argument for
establishing strong cores is that they will
reduce travel requirements and thus also re-
"
l
o
"
~
1!
o
".
~
~
..,
"
~
"
l
0:
1
:~
o
~
:E
duce consumption of space, time, and en-
ergy. By putting more people within a rela-
tively short distance of work, school, and
shopping, cores will increase the feasibility
of transit and encourage walking and bicy-
cling. They will also be a focus for transit,
taxis, and car pooling.
American Planning Association 41
f
~
-c
=
;;;
"-
~
1-
f
-c
=
.. Housing opportunity, urbanity, and self
sufficiency. In Schneider's study, the argu-
.ts for the polycentric urban form fall into
e categories: providing places other than
the central city for low-income people to live,
making the suburbs more urbane, and mak-
ing the outlying parts of the city more self-
sufficient. These three objectives appear in
nearly all regional development plans.
Ho\\ ("an we
('enters?
Considering our obvious need for mixed-use
centers, there are not nearly as many of them
heuer mixed-use
as one would expect. What makes us think we
will be more successful in creating them to-
day?
For starters, the failure and obsolescence of
so many shopping centers has increased our
awareness of the shortcomings of single-use
centers. Further, many experienced consult-
42 Planning June 2005
PLANNING PRACliqC.LE
.
c
}
'"
1
'"
.
c
~
"'
."
o
'"
ants and organizations are now available to
assist in project planning and management.
. Second, true mixed-use developments re-
quire public (including transportation) and
institutional involvement. In the past, how-
ever, there were numerous legal and financial
b;l.friers to cooperation between government
and private entities. Recent changes in local
and state laws now make it more feasible to
accommodate multiple and mixed uses.
Public acceptance is also higher. Enough
good projects have been built in recent years
to make it easier to gain acceptance and sup-
port for mixed-use developments and the higher
densities they typically imply.
Finally, there has been pressure on land costs.
In the past, with abundant land and low land
costs, communities and developers faced little
pressure to cooperate. This is no longer the case,
which means that developers are looking for
partners to help save money or share costs.
What to do now?
Today, there are many more relatively small,
self-contained, mixed-use projects, usually with
a single developer. And many existing cores
are benefitting from efforts to nourish the
depth and variety of their activity.
Meriter Hospital in Madison, Wisconsin,
has added a retirement center to its down-
town location, enriching the city's center.
In Glendale, Arizona, the new Cardinals
Stadium and the adjacent, 223-acre master
planned development have the potential of
becoming a whole new downtown competi-
tive with Phoenix and Scottsdale.
Further, old military bases are being con-
verted to urban villages. (See "Extreine
Makeovers," April 2005.) However, their re-
building needs to follow sound core prin-
ciples more closely.
In all these cases, there has been a deliberate
attempt to make the cores more mixed-use-
and to include housing. This is an important
first step.
Who's impnning eenters and ('ores
Dozens of older centers in Chicago and its
su,burbs are adding hundreds of housing units
along with theaters, restaurants, health clubs,
book stores, and coffee shops to create a much
stronger draw for shopping and work. In Chi-
cago, anchors such as the University of Illinois
and the West Side Medical Center have joined
developers to create neighborhoods with a healthy
mix of activities and cores.
Arlington Heights is a commuter rail suburb
northwest of Chicago whose dominant feature
is a race track located about a mile from its
downtown. In 1987, the community began a
systematic retrofit of its 16-block, 46-acre down-
town. Since then, the number of downtown
housing units has grown from 150 to 1,230
and the downtown population from 350 to
2,200. By 200 1, downtown's assessed value had
jumped from $10.7 million to $43.7 million.
Downtown Arlington Heights now includes
a new performing arts center, offices, retail,
and. a commuter station. Dedicated leader-
ship, clear goals, and an experienced and dedi-
cated staff-plus a building boom-have com-
bined to make the project a success.
Mayo Clinic Hospital in Phoenix takes up
a 21 O-acre site-an area larger than the hearts
of downtown Minneapolis or Denver. On the
campus are new clinics, a hospital and re-
Mrch center, education and administrative
~ctions, housing for medical staff and stu-
oents, and a hotel. Development of the Phoe-
nix campus is just beginning. This could be a
majot center with much of the convenience,
urbanity, and amenity of a downtown.
With such strong demand, the Mayo Clinic
is obviously in a position to lead-and the
local market is able to support-almost any
plan that can be imagined. The degree to
which this can be a true mixed-use project is
limited only by the clinic's understanding of
what is possible and of how its needs can be
best met in the context of a mixed-use core.
Next steps
Douglas Porter has identified two types of
mixed-use areas and some new centers that
match them. (See "Business-Oriented Neigh-
borhoods: Their Time Has Come," Januaty
2004). He sees these as evolving from office
parks and similar clusters of non-residential
What the Expert Said
_tor Gruen, once a successful shopping
center designer, later became a severe critic.
In his 1973 book, Centers for the Urban
Environment, he wrote that shopping centers
had become a bad model for almost every
kind of development. What he especially dis-
liked was its "uni-functional" composition.
Below are four examples of uni-functional
centers that Gruen said would operate better as
mixed-use centers. Others might include medical,
sports, research, and back office functions.
· Civic centers. "These are huge conglom-
erations of governmental office structures in
which bureaucrats meet only bureaucrats and
are estranged from those whom they are sup-
posed to serve. Like all un i-functional centers,
they create traffic peaks. . . . They become
deserted and sometimes unsafe in the evening
and during holidays."
· Centers for the performing arts. "They repre-
sent the ingenious idea of concentrating a number
of theaters, an opera house, and concert halls
on one isolated land area. . . The only effects
are that they flatter the ego of their sponsors
. create chaotic traffic congestion during the
rt time spans when all the show places begin
or end their performances."
· Educational centers. "Whether high school
or university campuses, these constitute ghet-
use to mixed-use with both civic and residen-
tial components. He identifies emerging cen-
ters near Dallas, Charlotte, West Palm Beach,
and Washington, D. C. Once this trend takes
hold, he says, it opens the way to creating
thousands of mixed-cores through retrofit-
ting of existing office and industrial parks,
and medical, university, corporate, recreational,
and other campuses.
What must we do to make successful mixed-
use development the norm?
First, we should give formal endorsement,
perhaps in the policy structure of our profes-
sional groups, to the concept of mixed-use cores.
Second, we should also provide guidelines
and principles for development. Hundreds of
mixed-use developments fall far short of their
potential because they fail to follow one or more
of the seven basic elements explained above.
Understanding and commitment are needed.
Third, major educational and research cen-
ters should be established around the U.S. to
assess the value and potential of mixed-use cores.
These could be connected with appropriate plan-
ning, professional, or university organizations,
tos for the young."
· Office centers: "Here offices of private
corporations are concentrated in heaps of sky-
scrapers, traffic-logged at office opening and
closing times and deserted" at other times.
Gruen pointed to particular problems of
uni-functional developments: needlessly costly
and complicated travel patterns, sterile envi-
ronments with limited services, and unneces-
sary public and private financial burdens.
As a foomote, it should be said that Vienna,
Austria, Gruen's hometown, offers an example
of how not to build a core. The United Nations
has developed a complex of offices there that
employ more than 4,000 people. The area has
good access to highways and transit, and it
attracts thousands of visitors each year for meet-
ings and conferences.
But in almost every other regard it fails to
conform to sound principles for core develop-
ment. It is almost completely unifunctional
and is separated from most of the uses that
would be mutually beneficial, including housing
and businesses that would help to meet the
needs of visitors and employees.
The need to avoid this kind of project and
replace it with good mixed-use development
as envisioned by Gruen and many others is
very great.
American Planning Association 43
such as the Regional Plan Association and AP A.
Finally, states should become much more
involved in promoting mixed-use core devel-
opment. Such involvement and cooperation
is needed to mediate, support, and span the
interests of individual communities and to
provide an umbrella of policies, programs,
and laws to encourage and support core devel-
opment. A few states are involved in small but
useful ways in Main Street programs spon-
sored by the National Trust for Historic Pres-
ervation. This approach should be broadened
and expanded.
The problems limiting mixed-use areas
are fewer and easier to overcome than they
have been in past decades. However, these
places are not going to happen without the
support and work of the planning commu-
nity. Much needs to be done.
Rodney Engelen, now retired, was a cofounder and
senior partner of Barron-Aschman Associates in
Evanston, Illinois, where he assisted 50 communities
in planning their downtowns. He later was assistant
to the mayor of Phoenix and an adjunct professor in .
planning at Arizona State University.
!
c
c
~
Ci:
c
~
'"
1
K
'"
~
g
N I \X' S \ N D DIP A RIM I N r S
44 Planning June 2005
around Moosehead Lake, the state's largest
water body.
Plum Creek would grant permanent ease-
ments that protect 55 miles of hiking trails
and 71 miles of snowmobile routes. A 30-year
plan bans development from 180 miles of
environmentally sensitive shoreline and around
55 pristine ponds. The vast majority of the
426,340-acre land area would remain a work-
ing forest for timber harvesting.
Plum Creek general manager Jim Lehner says
that there is a lot of support for the plan, but
that support is not universal. Among those ques-
tioning the Plum Creek proposal is the Natural
Resources Council of Maine, which says "this
scale of development could change the charac-
ter of the Moosehead region forever."
true wilderness, though-it's primarily a working
forest where paper companies and other major
landowners have long supported a tradition of
public access for recreation.
That's changing now. Cash-strapped pa-
per companies have been selling their hold-
ings to institutional investors. Meanwhile,
New England's hot housing market has sparked
a vacation home boom around remote lakes.
These and other factors are putting new pres-
sure on planners to balance 21st century de-
velopment with 19th century traditions.
Plum Creek's proposal will test the resources
of LURC, which has a 22-person staff with
four professional planners. They handle just
1,200 permits in a typical year. Carroll says
she's not sure how long the agency's review of
the plan will take. But more than time, the
LURC staff will be feeling the weight of his-
tory. The process will be watched closely by
other landowners, and the outcome may shape
land use in the North Woods for generations.
Tux Turkel
pany had in mind for 426,340 acres of the
North Woods. Carroll directs Maine's Land
Use Regulation Commission, which oversees
planning and zoning for the 10.5-million-acre
area, made up of sparsely populated towns and
unorganized territories. She knew immedi-
ately that this plan, which was officially filed in
early April, would be the largest one consid-
ered by the agency in its 34-year history.
Done right, this plan could serve as a model
for how other major landowners might bal-
ance development, conservation, and public
benefits in this legendary part of the state. "I
think this will be precedent-setting," Carroll
.says. "The stakes are high here."
What's at stake
Plum Creek, a Seattle~based timber, land man-
agement, and real estate company, is propos-
ing a master plan that would include 975
houses, four sporting camps, and two resorts
spread across 10,000 acres. The plan centers
Maine is 90 percent
forest, and the state's
North Woods is the
largest contiguous
stretch of
undeveloped land in
the Northeast.
Turkel is a reporter for the Portland Press Herald.
Changing a way of life
The plan's scope is matched only by its poten-
tial impact on the identity of the N orth Woods.
Maine is 90 percent forest, and the state's
N orth Woods is the largest contiguous stretch
of undeveloped land in the Northeast. It isn't
other floors, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled
in March. The case is Patton v. City of Gal ax.
When Ralph Patton bought a building on
South Main Street in Galax in 1967, the city
had no zoning ordinance. At that time, the
building's second floor was used for apart-
ments. The first floor housed a drugstore, a
woodworking shop, and a beauty shop, al-
though parts of that floor had previously
been used for rental apartments.
The city's zoning ordinance placed the
property in the Business General (B-2) dis-
trict, which requires a conditional use permit
for apartments. The ordinance also forbids
first-floor apartments in any structure that
fronts designated streets.
In 1997, Patton began converting the ground
floor to apartments. In 2001, the city ordered
him to stop, and sued for an injunction against
II' P\lImCretkT~
II Nrtw Pkrm~ AoQuidion
II PriVrl1IJ and Salt land ill. ConlMIfvation
~~.~-OOUllfly$tliingT"
(4S~onPkntlcr.kbnC:l1
_ ~~ti~TnlliOflPit.imClMkIaN3t
t'.,Smi!etj
:::::::::==:=ExiotinOIT~T~
_~Tm
.
American Planning Association 45
further renovations. Patton applied for a con-
ditional use permit, but the planning com-
mission denied it, ruling that Main Street was
a designated street where first-floor apart-
ments were prohibited.
The board of zoning appeals upheld the
commission. On appeal, the trial court up-
held the board of appeals and also ruled that
use of the first floor for apartments was not a
legal pre-existing nonconforming use. Patton
.ealed to the supreme court.
No basis to extend
The court noted that it had never before
addressed the question of whether a use estab-
lished in part of a building before the enact-
ment of a zoning ordinance gives a grand-
fathered right to extend that nonconforming
use throughout the building.
However, other jurisdictions have held that
the right to continue a nonconforming use does
not extend to other areas unless, at the time the
ordinance was enacted, the building's design
clearly indicated such a use was intended. Fur-
ther, it said, the local government can establish
how extension of a use will be permitted, if at all.
That principle is in accordance with the spirit
underlying wning regulations-to restrict rather
than expand nonconforming uses.
It was not clear from the record how the
interior of the first floor was laid out, the court
said, but there was no doubt that it had been
used mostly for commetcial purposes. Thus,
the supreme court held that the trial court's
finding that the first floor was not grandfathered
.use as apartments was appropriate.
es Lawlor
Lawlor is a lawyer in Silver Spring, Maryland, and a
regular conrriburor ro Planning.
Despite decades of debate and an investment
of more than $45 million, there is still little to
show. Now, the Intercounty Connector-a
road designed to link 1-270 in central Mont-
gomety County with 1-95 in northern Prince
George's County and ease congestion on the
Beltway-is on the fast track.
Last March, the Montgomety County Coun-
cil voted to support the ICC, following recom-
mendations of its planning board. (Although
the council's approval is not required, its po-
litical support may make it easier for the state
to go forward.) In Annapolis and on Capitol
Hill, financing packages for the $2.4 billion
road were headed for legislative approval.
One of two options
Just over three years ago, the ICC seemed
destined to remain a line on a map. Then-
governor Parris N. Glendening supported a
different east-west option: light rail. The
so-called Purple Line would run through
Bethesda, Silver Spring, and New Carrollton,
just a dozen miles south of the proposed
highway path. Glendening terminated an
environmental impact study on the ICe,
claiming the road would be environmen-
tally damaging.
In November 2002, however, voters elected
a county executive, council members, and a
governor who endorsed the road. Surveys by .
AM Mid-Atlantic in the past several years
show that citizen support for the ICC hovers
around 70 percent.
Although opposed to the ICe, county plan-
ning board chairman Derick Berlage voted to
endorse it. "There is no question that the ICC
will provide measurable improvement for people
making trips," says Berlage. Still, he adds, "the
Purple Line would better serve commuters by
opening up a whole new constellation of tran-
sit trips within Montgomery County." Cur-
rent transit lines radiate from Washington,
D.C.; no suburban line connects the spokes.
If the ICC gets built, Berlage predicts the
Purple Line will languish as the county waits
for its next turn to receive major funding.
"Montgomery County is not likely to get any
other expensive transportation plum until other
counties get their plums," he says.
Environmental concerns
The Maryland State Highway Administration
expects to decide by late spring when the I CC will
be built and which of two routes it will follow,
says State Highway Administrator Neil Pedersen.
The council prefers the Corridor 1 alignment
because it requires less land, displaces fewer
homes, crosses fewer streams, and costs less. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, com-
menting on the draft environmental impact
statement, suggests that a more northerly path
would inflict less environmental damage.
The EPA's comments do not discourage
Pedersen, who notes that the agency has not
found the ICC environmentally unaccept~ble.
46 Planning June 2005
But unacceptable is how many environ-
mental groups characterize it. What most
people seem to agree upon, however, is that
_~~ road's future will be decided in the courts.
w:,;ether legal action would simply knock the
ICC off its fast track or derail it completely
remains to be seen.
Karen Finucan Clarkson
Clarkson is a writer in Bethesda, Maryland.
"The dramatic nature of this agreement is
exceeded only by the vision for the state's
future and the value for the people it will
provide." The head of a local conservation
aganization called it "the best conservation
eal in the country over the last 100 years."
Yet enthusiasm is far from unanimous for
the Hearst Ranch agreement, which transferred
control of 13 miles of privately owned Califor-
nia coastline to the state and imposed develop-
ment restrictions on 82,000 acres ofland over-
looking the Pacific Ocean. Some of the toughest
criticism comes from those working hardest to
limit development along the California coast.
"We were very disappointed that the deal was
made because we thought it was a raw deal for
the public," Peter Douglas, executive director of
the California Coastal Commission, told re-
porters after escrow closed on February 18.
In coming months, as new fences and gates
block access to beachfront property long en-
joyed informally (and illegally) by the public,
even supporters of the deal may find that they
didn't get as much out of the agreement as
they thought they would.
"The community at large is going to be
rather rudely awakened," says Susan Jordan,
the director of the California Coastal Protec-
tion Network.
.ot the first Hearst plan
The conservation deal, which took six years to
negotiate, involves the largest privately owned
working cattle ranch (128 square miles) on
NEWS AND DEPARTMENTS
the 1,1 DO-mile California coast. Purchased in
1865 by the father of newspaper publisher
William Randolph Hearst, the ranch sits mid-
way between Los Angeles and San Francisco
and is home to Hearst's unfinished dream
home, now known as Hearst Castle.
The Hearst Corporation has put forward
plans to build on the land several times, all of
them denied. Most recently, the company
sought permission to build a luxury golf resort
on the property, but that proposal was re-
jected by the Coastal Commission in 1998.
The commission wields tremendous power
in California. Established by voter initiative
in 1972, it plans and regulates the use ofland
and water in the coastal zone. Development
activities-broadly defined to include con-
struction of buildings, divisions of land, and
activities that change the intensity ofland use
or public access to coastal waters-generally
require a commission permit.
Too high a price
Given the commission's rejection of all other
development proposals on the property, crit-
ics of the recent deal believe the state paid too
much to "protect" beachfront land that was
already being protected from development.
Under the agreement, the state agreed to
give Hearst Corporation $80 million in cash
and $15 million in tax credits for the land and
the easements, which will be held by the
American Land Conservancy and the Califor-
nia Rangeland Trust. Hearst retained the right
to build a 1 DO-room hotel, 27 houses, and 15
employee housing units.
The state appraised the property at $230
million, which critics suggest was too high,
given the low development potential of most
~
.,
-.
,
1
of the land. Critics also said the deal does too
little to guarantee public access to the prop-
erty under easement, and actually decreases
public access to a pair of scenic beachfront
locations that will remain in Hearst hands.
The public will be allowed to visit those par-
cels, but a quota system will be established
and visitors will be locked out at night.
"We felt they should have held out for a
better deal," says Jordan, a former member of
the Santa Barbara County Planning Commis-
sion. "What the state of California accomplished
here is what the Hearst Corporation never would
have been able to accomplish on its own."
John Krist
Krist is a senior reporter fat the Ventura County Star
and a contributing editor for California Planning &
Development Report.
ernments to hold a re eren um on new com-
prehensive land-use plans and amendments to
existing plans. The problem, the court said, was
that the proposed amendment violated Florida
law governing the wording of ballot measures.
The summary of "Referenda Required for
Adoption and Amendment of Local Govern-
ment Comprehensive Land Use Plans," spon-
ted by a political action committee, Florida
metown Democracy, begins this way: "Pub-
IC participation in local government compre-
hensive land-use planning benefits Florida's
natural resources, scenic beaury and citizens."
The state attorney general asked the court for
an advisory opinion on whether the proposed
ballot tide and summary-particularly the first
sentence, referred to above--conformed to state
law. The court noted that Florida law requires
that they state in "clear and unambiguous lan-
guage the chief purpose of the measure." It
pointed out that voters only see the title and the
summary, not the actual text of a proposed
amendment. Therefore, an accurate, objective,
and neutral summary is essential.
Inaccurate and misleading
Opponents objected to the first sentence-
which declared that public participation ben-
efits natural resources and scenic beaury-as a
misstatement of the substance of the amend-
ment. They also noted that comprehensive
land-use plans involve much more than envi-
ronmental and aesthetic components.
The court agreed that it was inaccurate,
Ang that the summary should advise voters
~he legal effect of the proposed amend-
ment, not make "editorial comment."
The first sentence was also misleading, the
court continued. If the proposed amendment
were adopted, there would be a substantial number
of referendums every year involving issues other
than "scenic beauty" or "natural resources."
James Lawlor
U.S. The decision encouraged many neigh-
. that long postponed improvements to
community would finally move forward.
A firm commitment from the team has been
a long time coming. More than a decade ago,
the team's former owners indicated that they
might leave the 1912 Boston icon. Support for
that move came in 1999 from the state, which
backed a $312.5 million aid package to build a
new park in the same neighborhood.
A firm conHnitnH~IJJt
has been a lon~!: time
coming. A decade .1gO~
the team~s fornJcr own-
ersindieated thelt thev
might leave the1912
Boston ieon.
But a grassroots campaign to keep the team
at the historic park eventually swayed public
opinion. Key to the movement was a design
charette, led by Chicago architect and urban
baseball stadium expert Philip Bess, that gen-
erated innovative ideas for modernizing the
ballpark and increasing capacity while pre-
serving the existing footprint. Then in early
2002, new Red Sox owners hired Janet Marie
Smith, an architect and planner who had
worked on Camden Yards in Baltimore and
Turner Field in Atlanta, to lead a design team
charged with saving the park.
Bright future
Neighbors and city officials are opnmlStlc
that the Red Sox decision will trigger neigh-
borhood improvements. Government, com-
munity groups, the Red Sox, and a variety of
institutional neighbors seem committed to
cooperating on traffic, parking, and transit
issues, and interested parties are privately dis-
cussing potentially controversial development
above the nearby Massachusetts Turnpike.
While stakeholders bring sometimes com-
peting interests to the table, community
planning exercises have established a para-
digm for improving the neighborhood, par-
ticularly along the rundown Boylston Street
corridor. Working with residents and ur-
ban designers, the Fenway Community De-
velopment Corporation designed a mixed-
use urban village with rental and for-sale
housing, businesses, and improved land-
scaping. A four-year, city-run community
planning process resulted in zoning changes,
including new height, bulk, and use guide-
lines, that support the urban village vision.
"We have an incredible opportunity," says
Randi Lathrop, the Boston Redevelopment
Authority's deputy director for community
planning. Developers recognize that, too; a
American Planning Association 47
576-unit housing project with ground-floor
retail is under construction and a condo-
minium project has been proposed, she says.
Having new zoning in place makes it more
attractive for business, Lathrop adds. "We're
looking at cafes and restaurants, not just sou-
venir shops."
An urban village is something that the Red
Sox can support as well. "We're a neighbor-
hood ballpark," Smith says, "and we'd hate to
spend time renovating Fenway only to find
we don't live in a neighborhood anymore."
James B. Goodno
Contributing ediror Jim Goodno is a third-genera-
tion Red Sox fan.
Based on the principles of English Garden
City planning, both communities were de-
signed by Clarence S. Stein and Henry Wright
in the late 1920s. Their goal was to promote
social reform and better housing for middle-
income Americans.
Twenty-four sites were named in all. The
full list of National Historic Landmarks is at
www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/.
48 Planning June 2005
NEWS AND DEPARTMEN'IS
.
Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams, the court held
that a party cannot collect damages and
attorney's fees aftet successfully challenging a
denied permit to locate personal communica-
tions facilities,
Mark Abrams's house on Rancho Palos
Verdes Peninsula, south of Los Angeles, is
ideally located for radio transmission because
of its elevation and unobstructed views. In
1989, the city issued Abrams a permit for a
52.5-foot-tall amateur radio antenna for his
personal use. He sought no permits for smaller
antennas that he erected later and used to
provide two-way radio communications and
signal repeater service to customers.
In 1998, Abrams sought a permit to build a
second antenna tower. The city discovered
that Abrams had been using his antennas
commercially, which requires a conditional
use permit. The city determined Abrams had
.late~ th.e zoning ordinance and got an
W-lllCtlOn In state court.
Abrams applied for the conditional use
permit. The planning commission denied it,
claiming that approval would continue "ad-
verse visual impacts" from the existing anten-
nas-a chief concern of neighbors-and es-
tablish a precedent for similar projects in
residential areas. The city council upheld the
ruling.
Abrams sued in federal court, arguing that
the city's action violated the federal Tele-
communications Act of 1996. He claimed
that the permit denial discriminated against
the provision of mobile relay services and was
not supported by substantial evidence in the
record.
In addition to an injunction, Abrams sought
damages and attorney's fees under Section
1983 of the 1988 Civil Rights Act. The trial
court agreed with the permit denial, but re-
jected Abrams's damages claim. The 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals reversed on the
damages issue.
Limited remedy
Section 1983 of the 1988 Civil Rights Act
permits parties to bring suits against govern-
ments and other entities in order to enforce
individual rights under federal statutes and
the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court
observed. However, that does not mean that a
person has a right to relief every time a state
actor or local government violates a federal
law. A claimant must show that the federal
statute creates "an individually enforceable
right in the class of the beneficiaries to which
he belongs." Even then, "there is only a rebut-
table presumption that the right is enforce-
able under Section 1983."
A defendant may defeat that presumption
by showing that Congress did not intend to
provide that remedy for a newly created statu-
tory right. Evidence of congressional intent,
the Court noted, may be found within the
statute itself or may be inferred if the law's
comprehensive enforcement scheme is incom-
patible with ~ 1983, the Court said.
Ordinarily, the Court continued, the pro-
vision of a private remedy within the statut~
indicates that Congress did not intend to
leave open the broader remedy under ~ 1983.
The city and the U.S. government (in an
amicus curiae brief) advocated for that inter-
pretation, arguing that the availability of a
private judicial remedy conclusively est~b-
lishes congressional intent to preclude ~ 1983
relief.
The Court declined to adopt that posi-
tion, however. It noted that the ordinary
inference that the statutory remedy is ex-
clusive can be overcome by textual implica-
tion to the contrary.
In this case, however, there is no such
contraty indication in the text of the TCA,
the Court said. It adds no remedies to those
available under ~ 1983 and limits relief in
ways that ~1983 does not. Moreover, the
TCA remedies available may not include com-
pensatory damages and certainly do not in-
clude attorney's fees and costs.
The crux ofits decision, the Supreme Court
said, was that the TCA's enforcement provi-
sions had no effect whatsoever on the opera-
tion of ~ 1983, and Abrams, therefore, was
not entitled to damages.
AP A' s amicus committee joined several other
organizations, including the National League
of Cities, the Council of State Governments,
the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the Interna-
tional City/County Management Association
and the National Association ofTelecommu-
nications Officers and Advisors, in filing a
friend-of-the-court brief supporting the city.
James Lawlor
I. (' f j (' (' 1"'
A first. We were pleased with Phil Langdon's
f.r treatment of the subject of the Kelo case
ril). He is the first journalist to examine
ow this whole process unfolded, rather than
simply focusing on the human interest story
as the rest of the press has done.
Doug Schwartz
Photographer
New London, Connecticut
Conflict? According to AP A's development
plan, the goal of the association is to encour-
age planning that leads to communities and
environments that meet the needs of all our
citizens. Our slogan is "making great commu-
nities happen."
With such a goal in mind, I cannot under-
stand why AP A filed an amicus brief support-
ing the ciry of New London in the Kelo vs.
City of New London case. The brief argues
"that the state courts long ago abandoned as
unworkable and unduly restrictive the notion
that eminent domain should be limited to
projects used by the public." This statement
seems to be in conflict with our organization's
principles.
In the early 1980s, the city I work for used
eminent domain to raze most of the historic
structures and businesses in the downtown
area in order to build a mall and strip retail
center. Now the mall is failing, and we are
trying to create a downtown like the one we
had in the past. AP A should be looking to-
ward the future and not be taken in by poten-
tial short-term economic gains.
The U.S. Constitution states very clearly
that private property shall "not be taken for
public use without just compensation." In the
New London case, the government wants to
take properties and homes for more tax rev-
enue. But does tax revenue equal public use? I
am disappointed that AP A as an organization
thinks so.
Marc P. Bierdzinski, AICP
Planning Division Manager
Santa Maria, Califtrnia
Correction. The caption on page 20 of "Complete the Streets" (May) refers to a photo
simulation showing how a typical arterial can be converted into a complete street. But only
the "before" image is shown. Here are the "before" (above) and the "after" views.
American Planning Association 49
f
f
THE
CORRADINO
GROUP
50 Planning June 2005
Glorious experience. For a few short weeks in
February, New York's Central Park was glori-
ously transformed by Christo and Jeanne-
Claude Javacheffs "Gates" project (News,
April).
My experience with this unique couple
dates back 30 years, when I was an under-
graduate at the University of Illinois and saw a
film documenting "Running Fence," an early
Christo project in California. I was awestruck
both by its beauty and by its creators'
commitment.
Only recently did I realize how many simi-
larities there are between the creators of
"Gates" and planners. Some of them:
· Engaging the public. Christo and Jeanne"
Claude see each artwork as a process through
which they engage the community and de"
mocratize conversations about the public realm.
.. Navigating the approval process. The two
spend more time securing the approvals nec-
essary to implement their projects than they
do on the art itself. In the same way, planners
often spend far more time on winning ap-
proval for their plans than on writing them.
· Building support. Both a provocative art
installation and the adoption of a plan chal-
lenge the status quo. It's not easy to orches-
trate the political and technical support needed
to refute opponents.
.. Ephemeral nature. The "Gates" is meant
a moment in time. Similarly, some of
most successful plans define watershed mo-
ments in an area's development.
I hope that other planners enjoyed
"Gates" as much as I did and that they
nize in their own craft many of the
that make this work so magnificent.
Bradley H. Winick, AICP
Senior Urban Designer
JJR
Chicago
Good issue. Just wanted you to know
found the March issue very interesting.
wide range of short subjects will be
C. Bickley Foster, AICP
Foster 6- Associates
Wichita, Kansas
Add maps. "Racing Toward Diversity"
ruary) would have been easier to
had included a map showing New
Newark, the interstate
Maplewood.
Matthew S. Balling, AICP
Senior Planner
Genesee County Department of Planni
Batavia, New York
.
.
.
April Home Sales Statistics
Page 1 of 1
Mcpherson, Michele
From: Julia Parenteau [julia@northmetro.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24,20059:38 AM
To: Mcpherson, Michele
Subject: April Home Sales Statistics
Attachments: 2005-04 13 County.xls; 2005-04 Sherburne County.xls
Dear Ms. McPherson,
Attached please find the most recent home sales statistics for Sherburne County and the 13-County metro area.
After a moderate first quarter, home sales in the Twin Cities once again crept back up to record-setting levels in
April of 2005. Closed sales across the metro came in at historical highs, with a total of 4,645 closed sales for the
13-County area, up 2.3% over last year. Anoka County closed sales increased 5.5% to 463, and Sherburne
County sales went up 3.6% to 175. Median sale prices also continued to climb, up 6.7% to $224,000 in the metro
area. Median sale prices in Anoka County were recorded at $226,000, up 10.3% from April 2004. Sherburne
County median sale prices were $207,142 last month, an 11.4% increase over last year.
Please contact me if you have questions or would like more information on home sales statistics in the real estate
industry.
Sincerely,
Julia Parenteau
Director of Public Policy
North Metro REAL TORS@ Association
763-757-7230 (office)
763-442-0925 (cell)
jlJli~@nQrthl11E:ll[Q,GQm
<<2005-04 13 County.xls>> <<2005-04 Sherburne County.xls>>
5/2412005
.
.
.
.?;>
C
::l
o
()
Ctl
~
c
Q)
:2
en
Q)
e::::
o
o
o
N
0>1lO1lO
O>NllO
~CO
OW
N'<t
1'--~
~~
;;;
..-
o
o
N
LOM~O
O>O..-LO
LOC'l'<t
cri'wN
1lO CO LO
0> ~ ~
ori~~
;;;
N
o
o
N
'<tC'l'<tN
1'--C01'--O
COllOC'l
WcOW
l101'--LO
o ..- ..-
ri~~
;;;
M
o
o
N
C;;~~g
CO LO 0
cOOO
LO..-O>
~N..-
cri'~~
;;;
G>
C)
C
C'Cl
.c
U
;;e.
'#.cfl.'#.*,
llONNLO
C'l1lOC'l..-
N~LriLri
'<t
o
o
N
'<t1lO'<tC'l
CO.,...Q)('t')
O>LOllO
ri cO 1'---
LOOllO
C'lN..-
1'---~~
;;;
LO
o
o
N
CO'<tO>O
1lO CO 1'--0
1'--LOLO
.,...- ,...: ,...:
~ ..- 0>
1'--N..-
W~~
;;;
...
C'Cl
G>
>-
III
G>
m
en
III "0
G> (])
- III
~.Q
IIl"OU
"*5l'O
en.Q~G>
"0 U'C 0
5l'O 0.. it
.Q G> l(l III
UEm.!!!
'0 .2 en ,~
o G> v,
(])>OlC
~ m e! .!!!
:J'5~al
ZO<t::E
~
C'Cl
::::J
C
C'Cl
...,
O~N
LOO>'<t
0..-
t-:O
O'<t
o ..-
t-:~
~
CO""""T'""CX)
LOLOCOO
O>C'lLO
<<i~cD
C'l1'--LO
0> ~ ~
cri'~~
~
O>OLOO
1'--~1'--0
COC'lO
ricO 0
'<tCOCO
..- ~ ..-
ri~~
;;;
CO'<t'<tO
1'--NLOO
~LOO
Nori
1lO0>1'--
'<t~~
~~~
;;;
?ft.cf!.?ft.?fi.
C'l'<tOCO
0> '<t 0>0>
cO~Lri~
I ,
o2~g
~COCOLO
cO"":~
CO 0 0>
OlNT"'"
O~~
N
~
'<t1'--LOO
O>..-COLO
C'lllON
1'---cri'ori
CO ~ 0>
CON..-
O~~
N
~
III
G>
m
en
III "0
(]) (])
~.Q
IIl"OU
"*5l'O
enO(])
"0 U .g ~
5l'Oo..it
o G> III
UE"*~
'O.gen~
Qj>~c
~~e!~
:J(5~G>
zo<t::E
~
C'Cl
::::J
...
..c
G>
u..
0>0>1'--
'<to>LO
~LOO>
1'---ori
CON
1'--~
W~
..-
~
1lO01lO'<t
1lO1lON..-
NCOO
orioriori
1'--COLO
10 ~ ..-
'<t- ~ ~
;;;
'<to>'<t0
O>NCOO
0100>
T"'"-C\i(t)
COllOCO
;:- t; E;;
~
~
~LOC'lO
T"""NT'""O
~1lO'<t0
"':cOO
0>1lO1'--
CO..-~
O~~
N
~
,*,*-'#.?ft.
COCO~O
COCO'<tN
cxi~LriN
C'\IT"""T"'"C'\I
I I
'<t..-NO
CO C'lCO 10
T"""T'""LOO>
~ricri'
1lO01'--
C'lN~
ri~~
C'l
~
1'--'<tCOO
T"""""""('i)O
~'<t0>0>
t-:~cri'
1lOC'l~
'<tNN
1'---~~
N
~
III
(])
m
en
III "0
(]) G>
~.Q
IIl"OU
"*5l'O
en.Q~
"0 U'C ~
5l'Oo..it
o (]) III
UE"*~
'0 .2 en enC'Cl
..... 0 (])
(])> OlC
~ m e! .!!!
:J'5~al
ZO<t::E
.c
~
C'Cl
:E
~
..-0 CO
O~O
..-NCO
T"""- ci
O'<t
N~
~~
;;;
'<t1OL01O
1lOC'l1lO1'--
O>NN
oririori
101'--10
10 ~ ..-
'<t-~~
;;;
LO 1'--0 0
O>llONO
llOC01O
ricri'ori
C01'--CO
O..-~
1'---~~
;;;
CON 1'--10
~1lO1'--1'--
~COllOO>
oricri't-:
1lO0>1'--
;;;- ~ ;;
N
~
,*,'#.?ft.'#.
1OO>'<t1'--
1OC'l'<tC'l
Mlri~~
~..-~
0>C'l CO 0
COCO 1lO 0
T"""C\I('l')O
Wt-:cO
'<t01lO
ON~
ori~~
C'l
~
1OllO~N
1'--100'<t
T"""<OT'""T"'"
N-~"""'-
'<tC'l0
'<tNN
O~~
'<t
~
III
(])
m
en
III "0
(]) (])
~.Q
IIl"OU
"*5l'O
enO(])
"0 U .g ~
5l '00.. it
.Q(])l(llll
UEm.!!!
'O.2en~
Qj~ ~C
~~e!~
:J (5 ~ (])
ZO<t::E
".:
C-
<t:
NOlL VII\IH():lN
HOMESTEAD TO HOMES
PART FIVE IN A SERIES
CRAIG BORCK, PIONEER PRESS
Working in a lowland area, biologist Ryan Hughes recently checkE:d soil
type and hydrology with a soil auger at a lakeville site. Hughes also notes
plant species to determine the wetland's exact boundary. In Minnesota, any
builder who destroys a wetland has to create another one twice as big.
Editor's note:
This is the fifth
part of an extended
series about the
transformation of
the storied
.an.dtjen Farm into
n1que
ubdivision.
Today: The
tangle of
environmental
regulations.
Next: Will city
officials allow
housing that breaks
the rules?
For previous
stori~~,go tG---~,
/wWw.twincities.com.:)
(.- , . ... --- ,-- ,'-
pn Page$A:
_Developers see a
need for more
uniformity among
environmental
agencies.
_ The 24
government
units that
examined the
Brandtjen Farm's
environmental
plans.
.
BY BOB SHA~
Pioneer Press
On a cool day in April, Ryan Hughes draws the
line between man and nature.
He slogs along a marshy area, inhaling the
earth's aromas, and pauses to kick aside the reed
canary grass. He twists an auger into the ground
and gingerly lifts out a foot-long chunk of soil.
He squats like a shaman, studying the dirt for
signs. With one finger, he picks at the faint red
stripes that tell him the soil is chemically active,
kept moist by the rise and fall of underground
water.
He checks the color in his Munsell Soil Color
Chart book, holding the dirt against a series of
paint chips. The color is l0YR34, a chocolate brown.
"This is wetland," he says, planting a small pink
flag nearby. Builders could put what they wanted
on one side, but not on the other.
A year ago and a few miles away, another wet-
lands expert drew similar lines for the Brandtjen
Farm project in Lakeville. .
Developers of Brandtjen Farm envisioned an
environmentally friendly housing project, where
rain would be recycled to water lawns, fertilizer
runoff would be filtered through a chain of man-
made and natural lakes, and water spilled into
rivers would be kept cool for trout.
Yet to do this, builders had
to wade through environ-
mental rules as tangled
,as the grass beneath
Hughes' feet.
RED TAPE, SA
SA P
SUNDAY, JUNE 5, 2005
CONTINUED FROM PAGE lA
.
.
.
SA P
SUNDAY, JUNE 5,2005
CONTINUED FROM PAGE lA
CRAIG BORCK, PIONEER PRESS
Flags mark the boundary of a wetland area'in Lakeville. Eleven regulatory agencies have a hand in managing wetlands.
SHERRI LAROSE, PIONEER PRESS
The Club West development in Blaine has a water-recycling system similarto one that
will be installed at BrandjtenFarm by Irrigation by Design. In mid-May, worker Ocotavio
Valeni_a put together an irrigation control from the connection point to the sprinklers at
Club West.
.
uilders.
nfusing regulations ,increasingly
at only huge companies can afford
ouses, said Phil Muessig of the
Office of Environmental Assis-
the regulations can sometimes
'!lay of ~oing things right," he
,......... .,' ", "',,
eral government says redundant
ntal rules cripple efforts to build
. g~ A 2004 report by the
of Housing and Urban
cited, regulation - mostly
as boosting housing costs
to 17 percent .
iltal planning began on the
perty three years ago. '
. 'onmental damage would be
2,100 homes and 45 miles of
~ays~ Until the research
plete, no one knew.
the answer was surprising.
SHORTCUT FOUND
bothersome are the regulations?'
ough, said Bassert; so that homes
,gIy are built where builders can
aVOid . nmental hassles.
.', Indeed, it was an exemption from some
regulati(jns that jump-started. the entire
Brandtj,enproject. ,
, 2oo2~ EdfiIa-based Tradition Develop-
Co. had partnered with the owner of a
, I quarry in Lakeville. The mine would
ed in 10 years, and the owners
it into' a multi-use develop-
'. " " ,~...,
ut an obstacle loomed. Such i project
would require an Environmental Impact
Statement - the Mount Everest of environ-
mental hurdles. It's a document that can be
as thick as a phone book and take as long as
two years to complete.
In 2003, Tradition project manager Rob
Wachholz found a letter in a dusty file cabi-
net at Lakeville City Hall. It cited a 29-year-
old ruling that when it was time to redevel-
op the quarry, the site wouldn't require the
full-fledged study, only a much 'shorter
worksheet.
It was Wachholz's "eureka" moment.
The shortcut likely made no environ-
mental difference - Wachholz's plans
would have passed any set of rules. But that
shortcut saved Tradition time and money,
so ,Wachholz could begin a thoroughly
planned development with pocket parks,
roundabouts, garages away from main
streets, sidewalks and a restored dairy barn
for a clubhouse.
If he had to complete the Environmental
Impact Statement, Wachholz said, "Those
things could have been casualties. We'd
probably be tinkering with the EIS right
now."
WETLAND OR LOW SPOT?'
Tn 2003, Wachholz turned to Westwood
J.Frofessional Services of Eden Prairie. Its
mission was to cut the red tape and com-
plete the environmental worksheet
Westwood immediately . tackled the
biggest problem- wetlands.
Wetlands are Mother Nature's naughty
children. They come and go as they please,
never with clear boundaries like rivers or
l~es. They can be moved, destroyed or
recreated by changing soil or water levels.
Their ephemeral nature can drive plan-
ners crazy.
"The value of a wetland is sometimes
defended with crocodile tears. 'Oh my gosh,
you are destroying a wetland,' " said Marc
Putman, designer of the Brandtjen project
He said legitimate habitat for wildlife
should be protected, but the law doesn't dis-
cern between those places and "low spots in
a field." .
In Minnesota, any builder who destroys a
wetland has to create another one twice as
big. .
This makes it essential, to map them
precisely. So, foot by foot, Westwood sur-
veyed three wetlands on the Brandtjen
site.
They studied plant life. Reed canary
grass, currant and stinging nettle were
signs of wetland. Smooth brome, yarrow,
aster or red cedar showed more dry condi-
tions. The wetland boundary was always
somewhere between the two zones of
plants.
They studied the water tables. They
examined the soil itself to make sure it
could support habitat
Without the right combination of water,
plants and soil, said Dwight Jelle, a princi-
pal at Westwood, "It can look like a wetland
and smell like a wetland, but it isn't a wet-
land."
The company submitted. iP,ee '''Wetlands
Delineation Report" to LaIlivrue' in May
2003.
PRE-EMPTIVE RESEARCH
Environmental groups say that although
many agencies might oversee a certain
site, only a handful usually are involved.
That's because officials at some agencies
might choose totake a pass on certain proj-
ects, but also because people like Jelle antic-
ipate their questions.
Take the issue of traffic. Jelle knew traf-
fic congestion is a pet issue for the Metro-
politan Council and the city of Lakeville.
So Jelle's projections of future traffic
growth were meticulously detailed. They
looked at 13 intersections in the neighbor-
hood, studying the likely number of vehi-
cles, where they would drive, even where
and how they would turn.
Jelle projected, for example, a 26 percent
increase in traffic at Pilot Knob Road and
160th Street from 2004 to 2011.
Or take erosion control.
Jelle knew that was a key issue with the
federal Environmental Protection Agency
and the Dakota: County Soil and Water Dis-
trict
Westwood's wetland experts walked the
site in July 2004. They split the land use into
14 types, reporting that there were 126 acres
of farm crops, 5 acres of shrub-land and 12
other varieties of land covers.
They analyzed the soil types, finding
varieties of soil that would just be dirt to
most people - such as 26.5 acres of Ken-
nebec silt loam and 4.8 acres of Palms Muck.
They did the same with runoff pollution.
using thorough pre-emptive research to
anticipate the questions.
Jelle knew the Department of Natural
Resources and Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency would worry that rainstorms could
wash lawn chemicals or' hazardous dust
into storm sewers, polluting the rivers.
He predicted that in rainfalls of 2.4 inch-
es or less, no water would flow from the
site. The water would be caught in a sys-
tem of retaining ponds and a centralized
lake. Compared with the original farm, this
, made the project a pollution sponge, sop-
ping up chemicals instead of passing them
along.
In all, Westwood answered 39 questions.
It analyzed the history of the land. It out-
lined 22 "groundwater protection strate-
gies." It listed the 18 permits it would
acquire before work began.
The draft was complete. It was published
in the state Environmental Quality Board's
Monitor for comments.
RED FLAG POPS UP
None of the 14 agencies commented
about Wetland A, which covered 7
acres. Same with Wetland B, 8 acres.
But Wetland No. 19-349W was a red flag.
Water from that wetland could flow one
mile to a small creek. That creek flowed
four miles into the Vermillion River, which
flowed more than 60 miles into (hello, Army
Corps of Engineers!) the Mississippi River.
The Corps is charged with protecting
navigable waters and tributaries, so it
claimed jurisdiction oveI:-. the wetland. The
~.
RRO TAPR QA
Conflicts between
agencies an issue,'
Developers see need for more uniformity:
. BYBOBSHAW
Pioneer Press
His housing development
was nearly done, and Larry.
Thompson just wanted to
plant some grass.
One environmental official
recommended rye grass. No,
said a city official, it should be
oat grass.
Thompson and his engi-
neers mediated between the
two sides for two weeks until
they reached agreement - oat
grass it would be. But the
developer had learned a lesson
about environmental rules.
"We need regulations. We
know there are bad apples out
there, but we just need to
know what the rules are," said
Thompson, . project manager
with the developer Sienna
Corp. and former city adminis-
, trator ofBelle Plaine, Farming-
. ton and River Falls, Wis.
Na~ may be wild and free.
But protecting nature is not
In Minnesota, more than 20
.ts of government can
eview or respond to .every
housmg project'senvironmen-
tal documents.Differentagen-
cies act independently. Their
rules change often.
"It is not the people; they
are good people," Thompson
said. "But they are not on the
same page,"
''Nothing stops a water-
shed district from asking for
something slightly different
than what the city wants," said
Remi Stone, public 'policy
director of the Builders Asso-
ciation of the Twin'. Cities.
"There is no uniformity."
The experiences ()fThomp-
son and the developers of the
Brandtjen Farm project in
Lakeville raise a question that
is echoing across wetlands
and lakes nationwide: Is this
the best way to care for natu-
ral resources?
It probably is, say govern-
ment officials and members of
environmental groups. The
system isn't perfect, but it
slows development and gives
the public a chance to react.
The overlapping regula-
tions are a necessary evil
because one agency can
change its rules quickly, said
Jane Prohaska, director of the
Minnesota Land Trust. The
nonprofit group sets' up "con-
servation easements" that per-
manently prevent develop-
ment of certain properties.
"Regulations can turn on a
dime," she said. As counCils and
administrations are voted out of
office, other agencies make sure
some rules will be enforced.
Karen Harder, a member of
both the Sierra Club and the
Minnesota Board of Water and
Soil Resources, acknowledges
that environmental regula-
tions are tricky.
But fish don't vote and
birds can't. be interviewed, so
regulators sometimes over-
protect animals. "When you
look into a biological syStem, it
doesn't fit easily into a calcula-
tion," Harder said. ''It is the
nature of the beast that the
permitting and regulatory uni-
verse is so complicated."
However, builders ask, why
not retain the laudable goals of
the current SyStem but consoli-
date the process? Otherwise,
they say, homebuyers will con-
tinue paying more for an inef-
ficient SyStem.
Generally, those costs are
hidden. For example, develop-
ers pay consultants to complete
Environmental protectiOI1:
expenses boost the cost of lotS;,
which are magnified four-folp;
in the price of the house, saitt
Rick Packer, project manager:
for Arcon Development and ah
official with the Builders AssOt
ciation.
That's because local lenders
like to see a house worth about:
three times the value of the lodt
sits on. If a $400,000 house wete
destroyed and insurance didn't'
pay for it, the thinking goes, at:
least the lenders would be guai'"'
anteed a lot worth $100,000. '
In Minnesota, environmen,
tal rules that cost an average
$2,000 a lot actually add abotit
$8,000 to the cost of the home::
There's an obvious solution' . ~
build on smaller lots. But
that's illegal in most suburb~:
which regulate lot sizes.
It's the delayS, though, that
can . cost the most. Builders
make plans based on interest
rates, tastes of potential home-
buyers and the actions of their
competitors -'- allofwbieb. can
change quickly; . They ..s(}me-
times 'borrow'mi11ions 'from
]endel'swhO\reqUiPeaeti~ri..~
certainde~llllmeSl;9'(', )"li?!;):$r:J
';'Whenenv\itdrlHientatt~
cause. . delayS, . ''y.ou::<eatrobltl'W'
through a market,":Packers;mu
For buyers in the 'I'WiI!
Cities suburbs, each' housmg
cost increase means a few
more people are pricedout}Qf
the market -'- 3,400 faIililies(er
each $1,000 climb, Packersaid'.':'
"That is whatissoinsmi:'
ous," Packer said. ''When'yOti
see these dl'amaticincreases
in home prices, it's not due to
the wood:',-
Curiously, both SideS"'s~
trends conspiI'ingagainSt then(
"The red tape is abs(}lu~\
getting worse," . said Debbie,
Bassertofthe National Asso~
ation of Home Builders. When'
she started in thebusinessi'20
years ago, the pel'mitappr~
process for a housing devel<tf'
ment took. three., .toinme'
months.NoW,shesaid,tne
average acrossthecountrY~'i&
two to four years. . 'i"
EnviroDlIlentalists. . nater
however, that manY ofthepeb:"
pIe complaining are also those
pushing hardest for taX cuts.2'P
"The no~tax people don!t
want taxes or fees. Wel1;how
in the heck are you gomgto
fund environmental'. review
programs?:' Harder asked1:
"Environmental programs
have been slashedandburnetl'
for years nQw." . ,]liS
The present SyStemfav<ftls
public input, Harder Said. Tile:
system is allowed to give aU
levelsofg()vE!rn:rn~n.t.. "::,
Shill' watershed ,dis
Metropolitan CounCil, co,
state and federal-'- a <Jhance
toletconsti~en.ts>'sp
development iSsues; ......... /.i
That muchinputisOV'~r~
Packer said. ''Ev~~'n tiler .
. agreement with illl
cies,'with . everyone
'KuInbaya,' anyone 'C.~l s~
the process. a.fterVV~lu~ve
spent hundl'eds ofthousanCfs
of dollar$ on studies," he said.
But Scott Elkins.dire9tOf' ~
the Minnesota branch of the,
Sierra Club, equates theCUlll-
bersome rules With nature itself::
He recently canoed '.doWnthe'
NamekagonRiver.in WISconsm.
and loved the experience. '..'
The clean water, the trees;'
the wildlife "are there because'
of the bureauoracies that;
developers like to rail againSt;1"
he said. 'Y'
ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS WWW.TWINCITIES.COM
SUNDAY, JUNE 5, 2005 P
CONTINUED FROM PAGE BA
A crew member fills in
around a sprinkler head
at the development in
Blaine. Irrigation by
Design owner Tim
Malooly says a central
computer monitors
weather conditiqns to
decide how much water
to spray on the lawns.
'~This will keep everything
green," said Garcia, rain
dripping from his helmet
onto the stocking cap
underneath. "No one
here has to worry about
that every-third-day
stuff." Next fall, Malooly
will tackle a project three
times bigger - Brandtjen
Farm. The $3 million
system will be the biggest
such system in the state.
GREEN GOALS, RED TAPE
The Spirit of Brandtjen Farm development in Lakeville required
an environmental assessment worksheet. The worksheet was
reviewed and regulated by these 24 units of government:
.y Corps of Engineers.,
. ronmentalProtection
Agency
. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
. Federal Council on
Environmental Quality
. Minnesota Department of
Agriculture
. Minnesota Environmental
Quality Board
. Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources
. Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency
. Minnesota Board of Water
and Soil Resources
. Minnesota Office of
Environmental Assistance
. Minnesota Center for
Environmental Advocacy
. Metropolitan Council
. Dakota County
. Dakota County Soil and Water'
Conservation District
. Lakeville City Council ,
. Lakeville Planning Commission:
. Lakeville Engineering
Department
. Lakeville Planning
Department
. Lakeville Parks and Recreation';
Department
. Lakeville Community and
Economic Development
Department
. City of Apple Valley
. City of Farmington
. Vermillion River Watershed
Management Organization
. Empire Township
.;:<i'
..R.ed tape- ,~'
(cg~tirp,t~ct)d .
Tlf "
(11((" '.,if J.nt H',,' i<' ".V--
OflfQ~ JYrot~l~,J~j;t~n Q~J,ltiQ.lling
tIle developer- )lot to put. 'ri\llY'
'ttWedg~ Qr fill1l1~teri~1',w.t9the
w.~~d without a "Seqtiop.404
7~.I)epartpleP.tJ~f 'rJ~~~
JiWsource~hlJ<l~ warpiP-g., ,
;;'bSarah ijol'flllan,wh9 traclts \
l}g.<l~gered , . ! ~Pecje~ for., the
DMfl" fQund, JhaLjp 1993 ~d
1!}~, two endangered logger-
n~ad shrikes ---,- birds the size of
rrQbins ---,- were spotted one mile
'~~>>t of the project.
"n No one knew if they were.
nesting or just passing through.
H9ffmann wrote a letter, includ.
e(~L in the worksheet, alerting
Q~cials.
, ;, Hoffmann said she doesn't
have the power to stopa devel.
Qpment, but her letter would be
w'eighed with other considera.
tiQns when' the local city ---,- in
this case, Lakeville - evaluated
the worksheet.
What if the birds had been
~een on the project site, instead
of a mile away? Or had been
Seen more recently than nine
years ago?
. Hoffmann wasn't sure. "We
try to be conservative," leaning
in..' favor of protecting the
.ies, she said.
he state Historic Preserva-
'. Office also responded to the
<}Faft worksheet.
The definition of environ-
mental impact has been broad.
ened to protect "archeological,
historical or architectural
l'E\sources" near a potential site.
In a letter, the office alerted offi-
cials to two such sites nearby ----
the Jerome Travis House and
St. Joseph's Graveyard.
, : The worksheet was complet-
ed in September 2004.
It was then given to the city
of' Lakeville. and the heads of
environmeptal. .' as
boosting housing, costs
. by 10 percent to
17 percent.
The original Brandtjen Farm,
like almost all farms, h~d been a
polluter. Farm chemicals
leeched into the water table,
and runoff carried poisons into
rivers. Soil. erosion was con.
stant. .
Yet in spite of all the new
streets, rooftops and driveways,
the new development would
produce only two-thirds the
runoff.
The man-made lake would
hold storm water as a giant set-
tling pond, allowing pollutants
to drift to the bottom. The water
recycling system would cut
household water use in half.
And the builders would even
install a pump deep in the new
lake, sucking cool water into the
Vermillion instead of the nor.
mal summer rain runoff that is
too warm for the trout.
It was the kind of' environ-
mental triumph that would have
been impossible in Brandtjen's
day - the marriage of govern-
ment regulation and private ini-
tiative.
Said Wayne Barstad, a DNR
ecologist, "It's a net gain for
Mother Nature."
GOING FOR THE GREEN
The weather had turned
nasty two weeks ago when
es into home costs-? . . - , _
!}>;. ~:':-:;}-:-.'-'<;Y-t;\:'-;,:-5_- ", - - - ,;"f;~~:,'F::', -::{';!-;,<{:fT'~);'\":/-;';i - ;;';i:tt, ;(.r';-:'::: ;,,';';,_<, ,":'(,'1
cost :ota typical Americ~n $ingle-falT\ily horni ,
.of ',' i1dingitself is just 9yer half of the.. .
final ~llle Rr!c~. nvironme J expenses a.r~ blended into fin~nc;ing.
. permitting; site pr~~arationand other CQsts." .' '.
.'N!arketing cost'
$3~1'O
Other costs
Source: National Association of Home Builders
Tim Malooly provided a glimpse
of the future.
Malooly, owner of Irrigation
by Design, watched his rain-
drenched crew install the water-
recycling system to new homes
at Tradition Development's
Club West in Blaine - the same
kind of system planned. for
Brandtjen Farms.
He described how a central
computer monitors weather
conditions to decide how much
water to spray on the lawns.
From spring to fall, in dry
weather or wet, the grass would
be greener, he said, and so
would the environment.
He watched as worker Alfre-
do Garcia popped the end of a
blue, 1 ~-inch plastic tube into a
metal gripper, similar to a toy
Chinese finger trap.
Garcia hooked it to the blade
of his vibrating plow, pushed a
button, and the rattling blade
dragged the pipe underground.
In 30 seconds, it laid 40 feet of
pipe.
"This will keep everything
green," said Garcia, rain drip-
ping from his helmet onto the
stocking cap underneath. "No
one here has to worry about
that every-third-day stuff."
Next fall, Malooly will tackle
a project three times bigger -
Brandtjen Farm. The $3 million
system will be the biggest such
system in the state.
"It's good for the environ-
ment," said Malooly, who could
see his breath as he spoke. "It is
the right thing to do."
Bob Shaw can be reached
at bshaw@pioneerpress.com
or 651-228-5433.