• 
• CLASS
• JOBS
• AUTO
• HOMES

Limiting growth not so simple

Photo

Photo by Kyle Bursaw

Paul Bobolz empties his combine into a truck on his son's farmland south of Janesville.

Photo

Photo by Kyle Bursaw

Paul Bobolz harvests corn on his son’s land south of Janesville. As the city develops a plan for future growth, it will have to consider the needs of developers, landowners, city officials, builders and realtors.

Janesville City Council member Russ Steeber's decision in March to approve Janesville's 20-year comprehensive plan partly centered on landowners' rights.

Janesville's sustainability committee had asked the council to "draw a line" past which development could not occur to protect fertile farmland.

But three landowners beyond the suggested line—the Silhas, Metcalfs and Arthur Donaldson—contacted council members, saying such a border would discriminate against them and take away their development rights without just compensation.

The council did not create such a line. It also retained a controversial "urban reserve" designation indicating possible future development, a third of it on the fertile Rock Prairie.

The county committee working to design the criteria for the county's purchase development rights program—or PACE—will have to consider concerns from many different interests, including developers, landowners, city officials, builders and realtors.

Members of the committee include Brad Cantrell, community development director for Janesville, and Doug Marklein, representing the South Central Wisconsin Builders Association.

"Anyone who says they don't support farmland should be drummed right out of the meetings," Marklein said. "We all support it. Or we should."

The challenge is how to balance growth around cities, villages and towns with farmland protection, he said.

The eventual details of the plan will determine whether it is fair for all, he said.

The planning that is under way is a good step that has never been taken before, Marklein said.

A decision to enter into a conservation easement is voluntary. But one landowner's decision will affect others living nearby.

It will also affect municipalities because extending sewer across undeveloped properties is costly and impractical, especially if they are large tracts set aside for agriculture, Cantrell said.

Conservation easements could also complicate annexations.

Cantrell said the city recognizes that agriculture is a critical to Rock County's economy.

"We have to embrace that," he said. "We can't shoot ourselves in the foot.

"Obviously, the farmland in Janesville is very, very good," Cantrell said.

It's an asset that few places have, "and we should be using it very wisely when we develop and not squander it."

Members of interest groups were represented at the state level as the state crafted its recently adopted Working Lands Initiative legislation.

They continue to raise several concerns.

Property owners' rights

Marklein, who has been in the building business since 1959, said he has never strong-armed a farmer into selling his land.

"It's always the farmer's right," he said.

"The perception is the city goes out and solicits development," Cantrell said. "We don't. We react to development. The council reviews it. But we don't go out as a city and say, ‘We want your property developed.' We don't say, ‘Try on the west side.'"

Steeber said he doesn't believe the city is in a position to tell developers or landowners who want to build where they should do it.

If a developer wants to locate on the busy commercial side of town but the city says no, "If I'm that developer, I'll go on down the road," he said, referring to another city. "That's my biggest fear."

An owner who has five acres that he wants to sell for whatever reason should be allowed to sell, he said.

"They know what they have," he said. "I trust the farmers (and) the property owners to decide how to use their property."

The urban reserve won't necessarily be developed, Steeber said.

"It's just a projected area that could be developed in the future. It's up to the property owners and developers to determine where it is."

PDRs are forever

Developers, builders and real estate agents don't believe that conservation easements should be forever.

"The concern with ‘forever' is that it's a long time," said Tom Larson, an attorney for the Wisconsin Realtors Association.

His group has been involved in writing the Working Lands Initiative and supported most of the provisions.

"Things may change in five or 10 years," he said. " We may learn or discover that land should be developed … Now they've tied their hands because they have this perpetual easement."

He advocates a release mechanism so land could be converted if the change is in a community's best interest.

Marklein hopes that a review panel would be part of the criteria created by the PACE committee.

"If you're going to lock something up for eternity—past your lifetime and your children's and that's going to bind all of Rock County—you might want to get a second opinion on that."

Conservation easements are just one tool available to protect farmland, Marklein said.

"I hope it's a tool used sparingly," he added. "There are other tools that can be used for short-term."

Potential land cost

Some people say taking land out of development with conservation easements will increase housing and development costs and limit people's choices.

Cantrell said agricultural boundaries could potentially increase the cost of land outside the boundaries.

"When land gets tight, big money interests are going to get into it," Marklein said.

That will hurt smaller, local developers, he said.

Marklein doesn't favor erecting barriers around areas of logical city growth. If a city draws a boundary, pressure builds to leapfrog the line, and that could result in farms within the city.

Even now, areas available to develop around Janesville are limited, he said.

"The area south is history," Marklein said, referring to La Prairie Township and its adherence to agricultural zoning.

"No one in their right minds would even investigate them. It's been that way from the beginning of time. That's just a given."

To the south and southwest, Rock Township has a boundary agreement with the city that was created when the Highway 11 bypass went through.

Density

If an agricultural boundary was created, Cantrell fears development would occur in rural areas. Some towns around Janesville have shown they are less interested in preserving farmland than others, he said.

City development actually preserves farmland because the city can build up to three houses on an acre while the typical rural lot is three to five acres, Cantrell said.

Cities encourage higher density so their services are less expensive, said Larson, the attorney with the real estate association. Towns don't have that same need.

Town officials, though, complain that cities do not work with towns to plan development because cities have more legal power. That includes a three-mile "extraterritorial" jurisdiction outside a city's limits that gives it authority over land divisions.

"The towns are probably correct (in that) the city does hold lots of the cards," Cantrell said. "We can entertain annexations; we can provide utilities. But on the other hand, we've seen the townships promote rural subdivision … and … on some lands, that's not responsible, either."

Purchase development rights could shift the power.

In other places, for example, the possibility of conservation easements forced municipalities to negotiate with towns to set boundaries that would not conflict with city plans.

Cantrell doesn't view a PACE program as threatening city development.

"Working together for a joint decision is a good thing," Cantrell said.

Patrick Stevens of the Wisconsin Builders Association said his group was disappointed when the initiative did not include recommendations to increase density in growth areas. That could mean smaller lots and more multi-family housing.

That's one of the best ways to preserve farmland, Stevens said, noting that a 20 percent increase in density in the state each year saves about 3,300 acres of farmland.

He hopes local communities will consider density goals or even requirements when they put together farmland preservation plans.

Growth

Cities must have room to grow and increase their tax bases, Cantrell said.

He hopes that the PACE committee, when it buys development rights, buys land on the far edge of the county and works toward Janesville rather than working from Janesville to the county's edge.

The cost would be a lot less, and the money would stretch further, he said. He believes that land is just as good.

"From my standpoint, these purchases should be fairly far away so that we don't interfere with the market in the long-term future," he said.

That thought is opposite, though, of the stated goals of many conservation easement advocates, who would aim to protect land more directly in danger of development. That land is usually found closer to a city.

Funding source

The real estate and builders groups disagree with the funding source that will be used to help support the state's Working Lands Initiative.

Money will come from penalties levied on those who rezone property that had been zoned exclusive agriculture. That penalty is set at three times the assessed value, Larson said.

If the average statewide cost is $271 per acre, that's about $800 per acre, he said. A local government can also levy a fine, Larson said.

"The concern is that a lot of property owners were not told when they zoned their land exclusive agriculture that that they would have to pay a penalty to rezone it," Larson said. "They changed the rules in the middle."

Many land-use plans haven't been updated for 20 years, he added.

Owners shouldn't be penalized if all parties involved agree that the land should be used for another purpose, Larson said.

Balance

"Our approach on the Working Lands Initiative (was) trying to make sure that agriculture didn't trump every other use to the detriment of the citizen of the state," said Stevens of the builders association.

"From our perspective, we need to have economic growth in other areas, as well. We also want to meet the housing needs of the citizens of Wisconsin," Stevens said.

"If we allow development rights to be bought up around the urban ring, where does the next needed development come in?"

That could encourage hopscotch development and sprawl, Stevens said.

The initiative wisely included language that says a preservation program could not include areas that are likely to have growth within the next 15 years, Stevens said.

"There's all the different types of land uses that go into protecting our quality of life," Larson said. "Whenever we singularly focus on one issue, we sometimes lose track of other needs."