Please note, I am an active member of the Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth.
More evidence that the planning process around Exit 20 in St. Albans Town and Swanton is broken.
In today’s St. Albans Messenger, Michelle Monroe reports that the Conservation Law Foundation will be forced to refuse a $25,000. grant from “Clean and Clear” to develop a comprehensive stormwater management plan for the area surrounding Exit 20 of I-89. The reason: neither the Town of St. Albans nor the Town of Swanton wants their findings to influence public policy. You can’t make this stuff up. According to the article
The project would have included a geographic information system (GIS) overview of current conditions and an evaluation of methods that could be used to protect and improve water conditions in the area..
In refusing the help of the CLF, Swanton town administrator, Dick Thompson, is quoted as writing:
“We fear that the results of any environmental planning efforts by them , or consultants hired by them would only result in negative connotations and impact to our efforts to promote economic development in our community.”
To which St. Albans Town manager, Christine Murphy added her concern that
Any plan for the Exit 20 area had the potential to grow ‘regulatory legs’ because of the likelihood that the town will be required to obtain a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit.
It should be mentioned that Christine Murphy has only recently come on-board the St. Albans Town administration; but Dick Thompson has served in the capacity of Swanton town administrator for a number of years. Mr. Thompson was recorded some years back at a Swanton planning meeting when building caps were under discussion. Referring to the newly designated growth center at Exit 20, he said something to the effect that ” We want them to know that we don’t care how big they build it here; we just want them to build here!”
Murphy takes issue with the fact that the Conservation Law Foundation didn’t ask the Towns’ permission before applying for the grant. One of the factors that may have influenced the two Towns to reject the Federally funded planning project is the fact that, last year, the CLF initiated proceedings to challenge a discharge permit that had been issued to the St. Albans City Wastewater Treatment facility. The CLF challenge asserts that the permit represents a violation of state law with regard to the preservation of prime agricultural soils.
Since large growth centers adjacent to Exit 20 have been designated by both Towns, the area is ripe for the kind of highway-centric sprawl that responsible planning is intended to avoid. Despite repeated requests by the Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth for detailed projections of what full build-out of these growth centers might look like, so far none have been forthcoming. The CLF project would have gone a long way to provide the kind of information Franklin County needs to plan around this target area of intense growth.
By a remarkable coincidence, St. Albans resident Marie Limoges has a letter to the editor in the same issue of the Messenger:
I am really amazed that I seem to be the only person interested in Jeff Davis’ plans for the rest of his property at Exit 20, especialy since I recntly discovred that the 22 acres the Drive-In Theater is on is up for sale and advertised as good property for retail purposes.Also, there have been proposals by Swanton to develop their portion of land at exit 20, and isn’t a hotel/motel on the drawing board near exit 20?
I shudder at the amount of noise, pollution, storm water run-off, traffic conjestion, etc., that these projects will create for the area. Lots of luck to all of us, when and if all this transpires
I’d imagine both towns would like to have a say in what goes into a stormwater study of their properties. I haven’t read the Messenger article, but if CLF wasn’t going to involve the town in the process, then I could see why Swanton and St. Albans would object.
As for development, there already is a permit process in place for private land. All lands with more than one acre of impervious cover need a stormwater permit, and have to design measures that treat runoff before it leaves the property.
I’m not all that concerned for the fate of exit 20; right now it is a light-density commercial area. As far as I’m concerned, Wal-Mart, the hotel on the other side of the interstate and the drive-in property are infill lots. We aren’t going to bulldoze what’s out there now to get it back to ag land, so I’d rather see conservation efforts on the surrounding area with real teeth as opposed to trying to block building on parcels that are adjacent to existing commercial buildings.
and that would clear a lot of my questions up. But why didn’t CLF ask beforehand? If they got funding, then “asked” the Towns, it doesn’t sound like much of a partnership.
As for Wal-Mart, I looked at the google map of the area. It is pretty open right now. What you see driving down the road is different than getting a birds-eye view.
As for the downtown infill idea, I’d love that. There is way too much empty commercial real estate in downtown. However, there would have to be a LOT invested in order to accommodate the huge influx of traffic a big-box store would bring. More lanes added on Rt 7 into town, bigger sewers, etc. I can see how the developer would look at that and say “no way”. The ironic thing is, though, if he partnered with the City on it, he probably could have pulled the right people together and had the building constructed by now, rather than being dragged through the legal process…