Community Plan Project

Introduction

Building upon the Spring 2000 Community Survey, the purposes of the Fall 2000 – Spring 2001 phase of the Community Plan Project were:

1. Draft a consensus-based statement of overarching goals and objectives for the Community Plan.

2. Agree on issues and questions on which to focus the next steps in the Community Plan process.

The intents of this Spring 2001 report are:

1. Provide a concise summary of the level of community consensus that has been documented during the past year.

2. Recommend next steps to take in the community planning effort.

This report summarizes highlights and implications that have emerged from townspeople’s discussions to date. Appended to the report are much more detailed materials from the Survey and the two forums, and the reader is urged to refer to these throughout the course of Belchertown’s Community Plan process.

Acknowledgements

Townspeople have participated very actively in the planning process. Almost 700 residents completed and returned the Spring 2000 Survey’s very detailed questionnaire. During the 2000 Belchertown Fair approximately 500 stopped at the Community Plan booth to chat with Committee members, make notes regarding their planning concerns, and receive informational materials about the October Forum. Approximately 160 participated in the October 2000 Forum, and more than 75 participated in the February 2001 Forum. A continuation of this broad-based input will yield an effective Community Plan to guide Belchertown toward the future desired by townspeople.

The Community Plan Steering Committee has spearheaded a steady, broad-based, and productive community planning effort, paying constant attention to insuring that documents that emerge from this effort are accurate statements of the level of agreement that has emerged from input received. Their extensive outreach efforts were critical to achieving such good turnouts for the two forums. Committee members are:

Jim Barry, Chair		Elizabeth Chase	Ron Aponte
Rob Rizzo		Joe Gilman	Mark Lindhult
Gail Grammarossa		Dave Loomis	Bill Cary
	Barbara Schaffer-Bacon

Town Planner Doug Albertson provides staff support to the Committee.

Jeanne Armstrong of LandUse, Incorporated, served as consultant to this phase of the Community Plan process.

Implications of Input from the Spring 2000 Survey

The Community Plan Steering Committee and their consultant began this planning phase by reviewing the highlights of input received through the Spring 2000 Survey, so that community deliberations at the two forums could build upon the areas of agreement that emerged through the Survey. Deliberations at the two forums confirmed these highlights and began to wrestle with their implications.

What townspeople generally agree on. Townspeople like the look and feel of a rural New England community, but they also enjoy and desire amenities that are not traditionally rural. Views of working farms and forest are valued, as is the calming sense of peace, quiet, and safety they convey to the hiker or passing motorist. Townspeople wan to conserve open space and scenic views. An unpolluted natural resource base is seen as essential to Belchertown’s quality of life, so the preservation of natural resources is also a high priority. The Town Common is valued as the cornerstone of the town’s historic character and community interactions. Small scale development is desirable; malls, “big box” retailers, large expanses of pavement, large and tall buildings, and large housing developments are all described as being out of character. Another reason for reluctance to see large-scale commerce or industry is that the community is sensitive to being vulnerable when large employers leave. Amenities that are not traditionally rural but which residents would like to see include sidewalks, shopping, services, commercial centers, recreation opportunities, and local employment in addition to agriculture.

There is a general sense that rapid residential development is the force that is most eroding community character, increasing traffic, and placing a strain on the Town budget.

There is also general agreement that traffic is an increasing problem. Congestion at key intersections, dangerous amounts and speed of traffic, and “cut through” traffic along neighborhood streets are listed as symptoms of the problem. In practice, most people’s image of Belchertown’s landscape results from the views they see traveling along roads, so the roadside is a key element in the perception of community character. Consequently, road width and alignment, stone walls and mature trees along the right of way, curb cuts, scenic views, signs, construction’s architecture and site planning are all key elements in residents’ and visitors’ perception of local community character.

There are commonly held concerns regarding aspects of community life that lie within the realm of individual and community choices, rather than municipal regulations. These include the quality of local interactions, with importance given to compassion, trust, involvement in town government, and community-sponsored events such as the Fair and parades. Concerns also include decisions and actions that are up to property owners, such as maintenance and repair, form of ownership, rental vs. owner-occupied homes, and franchise vs. independent business. The often voiced desire for small locally owned businesses can not be achieved through regulations, but rather through decisions by business owners and consistent patronage by the local community.

Where views vary, and how they might be reconciled. There is disagreement on whether industry could play a productive role in the community’s future. Some see light industry as offering the potential for local employment and a stronger tax base, while others regard industry of any kind as a threat. These points of view might be reconciled through discussions that clarify exactly what “industry” is being contemplated, where it might be sited and buffered, and how potential impacts on the environment might be mitigated. Different points of view have also been voiced regarding whether centralized or decentralized business areas would work best to lessen traffic congestion. The planning effort could work for consensus on this by identifying specific types of business that might be clustered together and matching these with potential centralized and/or decentralized locations. Closely related to this issue is the suggestion that mixed use development might lessen residents’ reliance on cars. Consideration of the potential for village-type developments could be incorporated into the deliberations regarding centralized vs. decentralized business areas.

There is a generally shared desire to lessen residential development’s negative impact on Belchertown’s landscape and community life, but views on how to do this vary. Some propose large minimum lot sizes, while others view cluster development as the best tool to lessen the visual impact. Some voice the desire for diversity of housing, including homes affordable to working families, singles, elderly, and others with limited incomes. On the other hand there is concern that multifamily housing deteriorates rural life. A next step in community deliberations regarding residential growth management needs to include information on the visual and financial effects of sprawl. The traditional New England land use pattern of focused development clusters and intervening open spaces may provide a strategy for reconciling community needs and worries relating to housing.

There are differing opinions regarding what should be the Town’s policies relating to road improvement. Some feel that unimproved, rural-type roads maintain visual character and serve to slow vehicles. Others feel that concern for safety means that roads should be paved.

Preliminary Statement of

Growth Management Goals and Objectives

[For Further Review, Discussion, and Refinement by the Community]

At the October Forum townspeople discussed questions that were raised by the outcome of the Survey. Based upon input received during these discussions the Committee and their consultant drafted a statement of goals and objectives for the Community Plan. Participants at the February Forum confirmed that this is a good working draft of what townspeople generally agree should be accomplished through Belchertown’s growth management efforts.

These draft goals and objectives state the level of consensus that the community has established to this point in time. As Belchertown’s planning effort continues, towns-people should expect to refine this list of Community Plan goals and objectives.

Goal I: Maintain Belchertown’s rural New England look and feel.

A. Support the agriculture and forestry industries.

B. Avoid degradation of natural resource systems.

C. Seek a traditional land use pattern of focused construction with intervening open spaces

D. Identify, prioritize, and work to conserve key open space parcels for natural resource protection, continued agriculture and forestry, and/or recreation and enjoyment.

E. Identify, prioritize, and work to conserve key landscape views.

F. Establish standards for the scale and site planning of construction.

G. Maintain the Town Common and its immediate surroundings as the heart of town.

H. Establish standards for architecture in public places.

I. Avoid suburban-style roadsides.

Goal II: Manage residential construction to increase the benefits to the community while lessening the potential negative effects.

A. Evaluate proactive strategies to lessen the amount and impact of residential construction, and choose ones that fit Belchertown.

B. Encourage planned residential development that incorporates open space preservation and other amenities, for example through clustered site plans and/or mixed use.

C. Encourage the development of types of homes that fit the needs, resources, and preferences of groups who are of particular concern, including seniors, retired people, households with modest incomes, and young people who are just starting out.

Goal III: Evaluate and achieve business development that contributes to town life, and mitigate potential negative impacts.

A. Support the agriculture and forestry industries.

B. Identify, prioritize, and work to attract the types of businesses we would like to come to our community.

C. Designate areas for non-polluting industrial activities where they can be adequately served by the infrastructure systems and buffered from surrounding land uses.

D. Designate focal areas for shopping and service centers, and specify site plan and construction standards that support Belchertown’s community character. [Centralized or decentralized?]

E. Allow [designate areas for?] outlying, small scale neighborhood business.

F. Provide the infrastructure necessary to serve the kinds of businesses we wish to attract.

G. Encourage home-based business enterprises, with standards for parking, signs, hours of operation, and other elements that might impact the surrounding neighborhood.

During the next phases of the Community Plan effort, townspeople will gather and consider more detailed information about Belchertown’s current situation, and townspeople will also consider a range of potential actions to achieve Belchertown’s desired future. At each stage new information and potential actions will be considered in light of these draft goals and objectives, and the goals and objectives will be revisited in light of new information and potential actions. The above draft list of goals and objectives might get longer, or it might become shorter and more consolidated. Objectives that are currently stated in the negative (“Avoid. . .”) are likely to be restated in positive terms as we reach more complete agreement regarding what we desire to achieve, and how.

Moving Toward Implementation of Our Goals:

What To Do Next

Discussion groups at the February 2001 Community Forum shared and compared opinions regarding implications of the draft Community Plan goals. Participants were asked to suggest how and where Belchertown might achieve the pattern of open space, residential construction, and business construction that townspeople desire. Because the Community Plan process is a multi-year effort, participants were also asked to consider what was most important to do next. Information gathering and analysis is key to planning, so recorders also listed specific questions that participants would like to see answered. Appended to this report is a full transcription of the questions, discussion points, and responses of the small groups. While participants’ opinions and advice varied, some clear patterns emerged.

Goal 1 is to maintain Belchertown’s rural New England look and feel. Given that changes will occur and growth will happen, how can we work toward this goal?

Forum participants generally supported assertive efforts to conserve open space and community character. Some urged being aggressive and using Town tax dollars to buy open land, although others did not feel that the Town could compete with developers in the purchase of land. Participants leaned toward strong regulations to conserve open space during the development process. Many groups listed specific undeveloped areas and scenic view that should be preserved. It was pointed out that recreation and open space are not the same, and that there is a need to balance conservation and recreation, and also active and passive recreation opportunities. A network of trails was suggested to connect open areas.

Preserving the Town Common was frequently listed as a priority, and some participants urged “more teeth” in regulations regarding construction around the Common. Many participants also favored design standards for business development, although some caution was voiced about the need for community input into the standards, and the need to work with business and industry to create reasonable regulations.

In terms of next planning steps, participants wanted more information about existing open space, for example a full listing that could be used to prioritize preservation efforts. Requests for specific information included clear definition of what we mean by “the heart of the town”, what a scenic easement is, and more about what the Town can do to encourage forestry and agriculture. Some suggested reaching out to the owners of key parcels to talk with them about alternatives to selling their property for standard development. Participants stressed the need to inform the community as a whole about possible growth management strategies and what it would take to implement them.

Goal II is to manage residential growth to increase benefits to the community while lessening the potential negative impacts. Results of the recent town survey and the October 2000 public forum show residents feel that future residential growth and construction should be slowed or even stopped. Given that residential growth and construction will occur, how can Belchertown best manage residential construction?

Participants were asked to identify the one or two most negative impacts of residential construction that Belchertown should try to lessen. The loss of open space was mentioned most frequently. Other common concerns were increased demand for Town services and resulting tax burdens, and also increased traffic.

Participants were asked what might be favored alternatives to standard subdivision. Opinions were mixed. Many favored cluster development, but many opposed it. There was frequent mention of requiring open space as part of subdivisions. There appeared to be little support for including small scale service businesses with housing, although many did not comment one way or another on this.

Participants were asked to list the groups of people they think the community should be especially concerned about because their housing needs and preferences are not met by typical 4 bedroom single family houses on their own lots. Some concern was voiced about lack of opportunity for young couples and others of moderate income, but by far the greatest support was for housing tailored to elderly, seniors, and retired people.

Goal III is to evaluate and achieve business development that contributes to town life, and mitigate potential negative impacts. Results of the recent town survey and the public forum show that residents want businesses and amenities that are not typically part of a small rural town, but there is disagreement over the types and locations of these businesses and amenities. How can Belchertown best evaluate and achieve desired business development and amenities?

When asked where would be the best places to locate retail and service businesses, participants had varied opinions. Many suggested central locations, for example where business already exists near the intersections of Routes 9 and 202, but some liked the idea of smaller services near residential neighborhoods. The State School property was mentioned by a number of people, and others suggested extending businesses from the new Post Office site back down to the State School. Some participants voiced concerns about traffic at the center of town and suggested a bypass, while others stressed the need for architectural and other standards for development in this area. Participants wanted to avoid sprawl and wanted to keep Route 9 in Belchertown from becoming like Route 9 in Hadley.

Participants were asked to suggest areas where non-polluting industrial businesses could be located – places with adequate infrastructure and buffering from surrounding land uses. Many felt that the State School property was a promising possibility. Other suggestions were the old dump off Hamilton Road, Route 9, Route 202, and Bay Road to take advantage of the railroad tracks. The Piper Farm was suggested as a good site for passive energy utilization. Safeguards were suggested, including stronger sewer regulations relating to industrial discharge, careful site plan review, and limits and noise and lighting.

When asked whether the Town should invest in sewer, water, road improvements or other “infrastructure” if it were needed to attract desired business, some supported the idea but many preferred that business “foot the bill”.

In general participants were not able to voice strong consensus on where to locate and how to attract desired businesses. Residents are still pondering the relative costs and benefits of each type of business, and trying to find ways to make sure that each desired type of business fits into its proper place in Belchertown.

What should we do next?

Following their evening’s deliberations, participants closed the February Forum with an exercise that called on each person to choose three tasks that should be given priority in the next phase of the Community Plan effort. Recorders from the small discussion groups compared a list of potential next steps with the suggestions of their groups, and adjustments were made to the “ballot” so as to include ideas and priorities that had come out of the small group discussions. Listed in descending order of the number of “votes” received, here are the next planning steps that were prioritized by participants at the February 2001 Forum. [The number of “votes” for each step is noted in brackets.]

Evaluate ways to control [housing] growth [47]

Study ways to protect open space, including sources of money. Information/education for community and for landowners [36]

Do area plan for Town Center [include preserving Town Common] [23]

Study pros and cons of [business] attraction strategies, plus foster local businesses [19]

Evaluate cluster vs. standard subdivisions. Stop sprawl [16]

Recommendations for Community Plan’s Next Phase

Together, the Community Survey and Public Participation Phase have succeeded in establishing momentum for constructive deliberations regarding important growth management decisions that Belchertown needs to make. The key to success for the next phase will be to demonstrate continued momentum and to add more detailed analyses into on-going deliberations. In order to maintain the high level of participation by townspeople, it will also be important to show a clear link between: (1) their input and guidance, and (2) the next steps taken by the planning process. The planning effort must also “schedule for success” by undertaking a level of effort that can be sustained by citizen volunteers with limited, targeted assistance from staff and outside consultants.

Taking these considerations into account, here are recommended next tasks for Belchertown, keyed to the priority steps that emerged from the February 2001 Forum:

A. Evaluate ways to control [housing] growth [Goal II]

1. Using maps from the buildout conducted for Belchertown by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, examine which parts of town will be the sites of proportionately greater numbers of projected new housing units. Identify the locations and characteristics of areas where the bulk of residential construction is likely to occur over time. [For example, ANR lots along which types of roadways? Conversion of farmland and working forests? Standard subdivisions near and around the Town Center? Parcels on slopes? Parcels in certain watersheds? Parcels on hills and ridges, including key scenic points? Parcels that lie over aquifers? Land currently zoned residential but with potential for desired business development? Parcels with special potential for recreation? Properties of special historic value?] This will help match potential tools for managing residential growth with the areas where they could have the biggest potential impact.

Who: Spearheaded by CPSC with input from Town Planner

When:1 or 2 working meetings following receipt of buildout maps. Spring 2001

Costs: time and effort

2. Begin work on completing and submitting the form required for housing certification according to Executive Order 418. This form gathers together important information about Belchertown’s housing situation, information that provides a base for the housing component of the Community Plan. Belchertown may find that outside assistance is needed in order to gather all the required information. Such assistance could be part of the services requested under #3, below. Currently certification lapses each June, and the State requires that the form be updated and resubmitted at that time.

Who: The Board of Selectmen must sign and submit the form.

A subcommittee of the CPSC could assist in gather needed information.

When: Begin as soon as possible, submit after June 2001.

Costs: time and effort

3. Drawing upon the findings of #1, above, draft a scope of work to be accomplished by the $20,000 worth of services that may be contracted for by communities who have received their buildout analysis and met other criteria. Be sure to include tasks that will help further the community’s effort to identify and meet the housing needs of groups who are not being served by market-driven development, consistent with the EO 418 housing certification form discussed in #2, above. [The outcome of this task could be linked to the affordable housing component of the Community Preservation Act, see #B.1, below.] Review this draft scope of work with the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, and discuss with them the latest information relating to regulations and procedures involved in gaining a state contract for the services.

Note: the rules, regulations, requirements and availability of this “EO 418 service support” are still being worked out as of the date of this report. Tim Brennan, Director of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, cautions that a town does not receive funding through this program. Rather, the town receives a certain set of contracted services that need to be approved by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and the Department of Housing and Community Development, who together provide the $20,000 to pay for the services. Approval is not guaranteed, and the process can be slow. PVPC is still awaiting approval of contracts that were submitted for towns last fall.

Also note that Mass Highway has committed to fund a separate $10,000 worth of transportation-related planning services, but these must meet Mass Highway’s requirements, one of which is that there is funding only for regional transportation services relating to 3 or more municipalities.

Who: Spearheaded by CPSC with input from Town Planner

When: Draft scope and discuss situation with PVPC late Spring 2001

Costs: time and effort

4. Convene a joint working meeting of all Town boards, commissions, and departments to review and consider working findings from #1, above. Ask each set of officials to consider the information from their particular area of expertise and responsibility, and to suggest other implications of the pattern of projected residential development. Working from the specific regulatory and administrative responsibilities of each group, begin to categorize the ways that Belchertown might alter the projected patterns of residential development. [For example, purchase of land or easements for municipal use, standards for approving permit applications, amendments to zoning, adoption of other town bylaws, changes to each board’s rules and regulations, extending or not extending infrastructure, when and whether to allow hookups to water and sewer] Charge each board, commission, and department by then end of January 2002 to tap their own networks and support agencies for examples and suggestions regarding how they might contribute to residential growth management through the exercise of their particular responsibilities. Provide support to assist them with this, for example fees for Citizen Planner Training Collaborative and other instruction programs, registration at conferences on related topics, and purchase of reference materials.

Who: Selectmen convene joint working meeting

with assistance from staff and CPSC

[Potential for consultant to assist with planning & facilitating the meeting]

When: after CPSC has completed #1, above. September 2001?

Costs: time and effort

$300 per board, commission, department for training & information materials

[$1,200 - $1,500 if contract with consultant for assistance]

As followup, schedule working visits by members of the Community Plan Steering Committee to regular meetings of the other boards, commissions, and departments to continue discussions and to integrate their findings and recommendations into the planning process.

Who: CPSC members & chairs of boards, commissions, departments

When: 1 or 2 meetings with each group over course of fall & winter

Costs: time and effort

5. Fold findings and suggestions into Spring 2002 Community Forum [see below].

B. Study ways to protect open space, including sources of money. [Goal I] Information/education for community and for landowners

1. Fully explore and take advantage of the opportunities presented by the Community Preservation Act [“CPA”] to fund open space preservation, historic preservation, and steps to address the community’s unmet housing needs. Endorse and support the efforts of the grassroots Ad Hoc Citizens’ Group in Support of the CPA. Inform townspeople about the specific ways that a Community Preservation Fund could pay for implementing Belchertown’s goals that relate to open space preservation, recreation, historic preservation, and affordable housing. Be clear about the amounts of money that could be expected from local taxes and from matching state funds, and the types of exemptions that could be considered. Draw from Belchertown’s Open Space and Recreation Plan and other local sources of input to outline for townspeople the specific ways that monies from a Belchertown Community Preservation Fund could be spent, and what the resulting benefits would be. Charge the Community Preservation Committee or another group to spearhead outreach to owners of key parcels in town to talk with them about options for preserving their land through purchase of easements or development rights, planned and limited development, historic preservation techniques, and other ways to meet the needs of the property owner and achieve the preservation of community character.

Who: Ad Hoc Citizens’ Group in Support of the CPA initiates effort,

followed by 5 to 9 member Community Preservation Committee with staff support

[potential for technical assistance with informational materials

regarding findings & recommendations]

When: March 2001 onward

Costs: Time & effort of volunteers, informational materials

2. Seek out materials regarding regulatory ways to conserve open space. The Citizen Planner Training Collaborative provides good training sessions for town officials that include aspects of open space preservation. The Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and State agencies have sample bylaws that might be adapted to Belchertown’s situation. These agencies are also concerned with the impacts of sprawl upon open space and landscape character, and they may have developed materials that can be folded into Belchertown’s deliberations. The relative impacts of cluster vs. standard subdivisions should be included in this gathering of information materials.

Who: Open Space Committee

When: Fall and early Winter 2001

Costs: Time and effort, some copying charges

C. Do area plan for Town Center. Include preserving Town Common. [Goals I & III]

1. Identify sources of assistance for carrying out this effort. For example, contact the Umass Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning to see whether an area plan for the Town Center can be scheduled for a planning graduate student team’s studio project. An alternative would be to issue a Request for Proposals and contract with planning consultants to assist the town with the Area Plan. While more expensive than a student team, professionals would offer more in-depth analysis of alternative scenarios and more professional facilitation services for community meetings.

Define the “Center” to include the Common, the Routes 9/202 intersection, the Route 202 business area, the interface with the former State School property, and other areas immediately surrounding the Common. Specify the requested scope of services to include the generation of large maps of the Town Center’s current land uses, infrastructure, natural and cultural resources. Charge the assisting team of students or consultants to examine and illustrate potential alternative land use plans for the Town Center area, including consideration of the best “fit” for business development. Use these information maps and illustrative alternative futures as the basis for a “charette” workshop for townspeople to work for a consensus vision of the future they desire for this key area of Belchertown.

Who: CPSC carry out inquiries and arrangements with potential sources of assistance

[Consider forming specific project committee that includes subcommittee of CPSC

plus landowners, business owners to represent townspeople who live, work in Center]

When: If use student team, Area Plan Study and Charette fall or spring term of 2001-2002 school year,or subsequent year, depending upon availability of student team

If hire consultants, late summer – late fall, 2001

Costs: Time and effort of local people

Estimated $4,000 - $5,000 student studio expenses

$15,000 - $20,000 consultant fees, depending upon extent of traffic analysis requested

D. Form a committee of scribes to consolidate what we have done so far into a working draft of Belchertown’s Community Plan.

Belchertown’s Community Plan will be a concise reference document for use by people who are making decisions on behalf of the town. It will offer a base of key information about the community’s physical and cultural resources, the overarching goals and objectives that should guide decisions, and planned action steps to implement the goals and objectives. In a nutshell, the Community Plan will say where we are, where we want to go, and how we plan to get there. The Community Plan does not need to duplicate other Town documents such as the detailed Open Space and Recreation Plan or facilities improvement plans. Rather, the Community Plan should contain highlights of these other supportive planning efforts, so as to provide a comprehensive picture of how all these different pieces coordinate and fit together. Often community plans are accompanied by appendices that provide a “mini reference library” of detailed information on which the Plan is based. For example, the detailed outcome and analyses of the Spring 2000 community survey could be presented in the appendix, while the key highlights might be summarized in the body of the text.

The Community Plan will be a “living” document that will be updated on a regular basis as Belchertown gains new information about problems and opportunities, and as townspeople reach greater consensus about objectives and action strategies. Every comprehensive plan that people actually use is a work in progress, that is, a reference tool that is updated as knowledge, needs, and possibilities change over time.

Much information about Belchertown is available to be pulled together and consolidated in summary sections about land use, housing, economic development, natural and cultural resources, open space and recreation, transportation and circulation, and Town facilities. The working draft of goals and objectives is contained in this report. A small committee of “scribes” can begin to pull this all together into a consolidated working draft of the Community Plan. Subsequent phases of the community planning process will generate more information and – especially – consensus on the action implementation steps that Belchertown will take to achieve the community’s desired future. The Scribe Committee can revise the draft document to reflect this progress. To keep the Scribe Committee connected with the progress of other efforts, it is recommended that one or two members of the Steering Committee joint the Scribes. Other people who enjoy writing should be recruited from the community.

Who: Small committee of scribes, including 1 or 2 members of CPSC

When: Begin as soon as possible, aim for first working draft by late fall

Costs: Time and effort, copying charges, reproduction of maps [estimate $1,000]

E. Convene Community Plan Forum in Spring 2002 to review progress and agree on next steps.

This next phase of the Community Plan process should establish a pattern of townspeople working in teams to pursue specific tasks that all have agreed are important, and then coming back together (1) to consider findings and recommendations that have emerged from the teams’ work, and (2) to agree on what needs to be done next.

In approximately March 2002 the community should gather for a forum to hear the highlights of work accomplished since the May 2001 Town Meeting, to consider their implications, and to provide guidance on what should be done next – all in the context of the goals and objectives that were endorsed at the February 2001 Forum. This will be an ideal time to gain understanding and feedback regarding priorities for expenditure of resources from the Community Preservation Fund. If the Town Center Charette was accomplished in the Fall, the outcome of that effort could be reviewed and endorsed. The CPSC and other officials could get a reading on which regulatory strategies seem to have support. The Scribe Committee can circulate the latest draft of the Community Plan document in advance of the Forum, and discussions could help fill in key missing pieces.

The timing and content of the Early Spring 2002 Forum need to inform townspeople about what has been accomplished, spotlight and say hurray for progress made, confirm a mandate for taking specific items to Town Meeting, and prioritize potential next steps.

Who: Spearheaded by CPSC with input and participation by various working groups

[potential for facilitating assistance from consultant]

When: approximately March 2002 [in time to prepare for Town Meeting requests]

Costs: Time and effort

[$1,200 - $1,500 if decide to hire consulting facilitator]

Summary of the Recommended Approach

This package of suggested actions is tailored to the priorities set by participants at the February 2001 Forum. It maximizes local leadership, while “spreading the load” by formally involving a new Community Preservation Committee, a Scribe Committee, and other boards, commissions, and departments. The Fall 2001 Workshop of Town officials and their subsequent focused homework assignment also structure a way to gain informed guidance and buy-in from the full administrative team that will in the end be critical to the implementation of the Community Plan. The approach of correlating potential residential construction with the full range of potential growth management tools helps free the planning effort from the “silver bullet” dream that just one action or one board can confront the problem of residential growth. [“If we just adopt a moratorium. . .” “If we just increase the minimum lot size to 3 acres. . .” “If the ________ Board would just do their job. . .”]

Leadership and focused hard work by local people minimizes the financial cost of the effort, but this is much less important than the fact that only this approach will create the broad-based, informed support that is essential to agreeing on what needs to be done, and then getting it done.

Preliminary cost estimates for the next phase of work equal about $10,000 if a graduate student team provides assistance with the Town Center Area Plan. If a professional consultant team is hired to assist with the Town Center Area Plan, the cost for all the tasks could be in that range of $25,000.

A note on funding:

The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and the Department of Housing and Community Development are working out the regulations and procedures that will determine how, whether, and when Belchertown may be able to gain planning services that are paid for through the “EO 418 Program”. In time Belchertown’s community planning effort should be able to gain certain planning support services through this program, but the scope and budget for these services will have to have been approved in advance by the state agencies involved. Their requirements and priorities may not match what townspeople have decided they wish to do.

Creating a Community Plan a few coordinated steps at a time

Belchertown is a small town governed by citizen volunteers with limited staff support. Consequently, the community planning effort can only take on a certain number of tasks at once. A particular challenge is avoiding a leap into action before the community has had the opportunity to seek out and digest information needed to make informed decisions. At the same time, we want to avoid “analysis paralysis” and see that we are making progress. The following chart provides an overview of what we have accomplished so far, what we hope to do in the coming year, and some of what we will need to work on in subsequent phases of our Community Plan process.

What we have accomplished	Things to do next phase	Tasks for subsequent phases
Conduct and analyze Community Survey. Begin considering implications.	Identify locations and characteristics of areas of town where the bulk of residential construction is likely to occur. Begin to match these with potential tools for managing residential growth.	Assess traffic impact of centralized vs. decentralized business areas
Expand public participation through booth at the Fair, media coverage, and two community forums	Craft and adopt a Community Preservation Act for Belchertown as a major source of funding for preservation efforts.	Identify & seek kinds of housing development that will benefit the town
Draft, refine, confirm working statement of goals & objectives	Complete and submit EO 418 housing certification form.	Design & implement measures to lessen negative impacts of housing development
Draft map showing infrastructure systems	Convene joint working meeting of all boards, commissions, departments to begin coordinated review of growth manage-ment options, including regulatory ways to conserve open space.	Refine infrastructure map & consider future extensions
Map of currently preserved open space	Do Area Plan for Town Center	Prioritize open space for preservation
Prioritize next steps in the planning effort	Appoint Scribe Committee to create working draft of Community Plan document	Fiscal impact of different land use types and subtypes.
	Convene Spring 2002 Forum to review progress, gain input, confirm consensus to date, and set priorities for next phase.	Consider & agree on zoning districts, standards, regulations for business development and redevelopment
	Increase and document level of consensus regarding how assertively to act.	Based upon refined definitions of potential sites and types of business
		Consider & agree on preferred types of housing; choose strategies
		Strategies to lessen impact of ANR development
		Roadway improvement policies, standards for permits to connect into infrastructure systems
		Evaluate most promising options and choose most effective strategies
		Assign responsibilities
		Review progress, update Plan over time

Introduction

Preliminary Statement of

Growth Management Goals and Objectives

Creating a Community Plan a few coordinated steps at a time

What we have accomplished

Complete and submit EO 418 housing certification form.

Convene joint working meeting of all boards, commissions, departments to begin coordinated review of growth manage-ment options, including regulatory ways to conserve open space.