You asked us to compare the Harvard Design School's (HDS) smart growth recommendations for Connecticut with those proposed by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in CONNSERVE Connecticut. You also asked us to compare HDS's recommendations with current policies and practices.

SUMMARY

HDS's Promoting Smart Growth in Connecticut (2002) addresses many of the same issues as DEP's CONNSERVE Connecticut (December, 2000). "Smart growth" is a strategy that seeks to conserve undeveloped land by channeling development to specific areas where the supporting infrastructure already exists. HDS and DEP generally address the same issues and concerns as Connecticut's current land use policy plan: Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut for 1998-2003 (Plan of C&D). They also recommend similar actions, many of which mirror the Plan of C&D's policy goals.

As Table 1 below shows, HDS and DEP agree that the state should adopt certain procedures to insure that state and local agencies implement smart growth policies. Currently, proposed state projects costing over $ 100,000 must be consistent with the Plan of C&D, and towns must consider the plan when amending their own C&D plans. Both HDS and DEP agree this requirement should extend to state permitting decisions. They differ with respect to local consistency: HDS recommends encouraging towns to make their plans and regulations consistent with the state while DEP proposes a more mandatory approach.

DHS and DEP agree that the state should use its resources to channel or induce development in designated areas; preserve more open spaces, greenways, parks, and farms; and make housing more affordable in urban areas. DHS favors creating a dedicated funding source to acquire open space land and preserve farms while DEP recommends increasing the bond authorizations for these purposes. The Plan of C&D designates areas for preservation and development and sets many specific policy goals for conserving land and developing affordable housing.

Unlike DEP and the Plan of C&D, HDS discusses how towns unwittingly encourage sprawl by zoning open space land for new development in order to increase the value of taxable property, which theoretically lowers everyone's tax bill. HDS recommends that the state could help towns rely less on property taxes by encouraging them jointly to provide services or share revenue generated by new development. The law already allows towns to do these things but offers no incentives for doing so.

HDS also recommends land use practices that reduce the amount of time people spend commuting. The Plan of C&D, but not CONNSERVE, makes similar recommendations.

SMART GROWTH GOALS

HDS and DEP acknowledge the need to set smart growth goals, but only DEP recommends specific goals. HDS recommends only that the state set a few clear and simple goals while DEP presents a vision and five goals aimed mostly at conserving land. The Plan of C&D sets more goals, but these seek to promote development while minimizing it environmental effects. The Office of Policy and Management prepares and updates the plan every five years. (The next plan update is due on March 1, 2003 for the period 2004-2008).

PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSISTENCY

HDS and DEP recommend that state agencies make all decisions about whether to issue a permit or where to build a new road or office building consistent with the goals. The law currently requires consistency only with respect to state physical development projects costing over $ 100,000. DEP additionally recommends requiring agencies to determine annually how their policies and budgets affect the goals.

HDS and DEP recognize the value of having local policies, plans, and regulations be consistent with the state's but recommend different ways to achieve this. HDS recommends a "carrot approach," one that rewards towns for such consistency with the state by giving them priority for discretionary grants. DEP, on the other hand, recommends procedures and practices that identify and reconcile inconsistencies.

The law appears to acknowledge the need for consistency but does not force it. It requires towns to consider the Plan of C&D when adopting plans and regulations and note any inconsistencies between them. But it does not require the towns or the state to reconcile their differences.

PLAN OF C&D

HDS and DEP recommend using the Plan of C&D as a smart growth tool. The former recommends transforming the plan "into a more effective state growth management plan," but it does not specify how this should be done. Likewise, DEP recommends incorporating growth management standards in the plan but does not specify the standards.

Smart growth tools and standards include designating conservation and development as a way to channel or control development. The Plan of C&D already does this with respect to proposed new roads, state office buildings, and other large physical development projects.

CIVIC GROUPS

HDS recommends creating an independent civic organization or a statutory advisory committee to oversee how the state implements its smart growth policy. DEP makes no comparable recommendation. The nine-member Council on Environmental Quality currently helps state agencies assess how proposed projects affect the environment (CGS § 22a-11) and could serve the same purpose as HDS's proposed advisory committee.

GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS)

HDS and DEP recommend creating an integrated, statewide GIS. Currently, state and many local agencies use GIS but do not integrate their separate systems.

TARGETING GROWTH

HDS and DEP recommend designating areas where the state should target or channel growth, and the latter includes many programmatic recommendations to achieve this, such as increasing tax credits for private investments in these areas. The Plan of C&D generally favors siting proposed state projects in areas where sewers, roads, and other supporting infrastructure already exist. The state also uses its economic development incentives to stimulate growth in these areas.

DEP also recommends directing growth toward urban or already developed areas by:

1. expanding the Main Street Program,

2. increasing incentives to restore historic properties,

3. establishing an aesthetic code for urban areas,

4. expanding the Urban Sites Remediation Program,

5. exempting remediation services from the sales tax, and

6. increasing reinvestment tax credits and making them more accessible.

OPEN SPACE

HDS and DEP recommend spending more money on acquiring and preserving open spaces but differ regarding the funding mechanism. HDS favors creating a dedicated funding source, but does not identify one. (The legislature considered using the real estate conveyance tax as a source but did not adopt it. ) DEP recommends increasing the bond authorization for open space acquisition and allowing taxpayers to claim deductions for open space preservation. (The law already allows businesses to claim tax credits for open space land donations. )

DEP also recommends:

1. targeting open space purchases on land having certain characteristics, such as ridgelines and river corridors;

2. allowing corporations to sell unused tax credits they earned for donating open space land;

3. restating the state's commitment to improve and maintain Connecticut's parks and forests; and

4. developing urban parks near the water and other natural resources.

HDS and DEP recommend renewed funding for the farmland preservation and greenway development programs. The former has received little or no funding in recent years. The state currently develops greenways with federal Enhanced Transportation Act funds.

HDS also recommends that the state encourage towns to conserve open spaces through cluster development, transfer of development rights, and other land use techniques. The law already allows towns to adopt zoning and subdivision regulations specifically for cluster housing developments and open space preservation, but the state does not actively encourage them to do so. (The law also provides property tax incentives to people who keep their land as open space, forests, or farmland. )

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

HDS endorses the Plan of C&D's affordable housing policies, which include promoting "new development where sewer, water, and other services exist or can be reasonably provided" (Plan of C&D, p. 54). DEP also recommends promoting affordable housing in developed areas by providing incentives for buying or developing housing there. The state currently runs several programs designed to stimulate homeownership in urban areas.

FISCAL ZONING

HDS recommends encouraging towns to share revenues and services as a way to keep taxes from going up. It recommends this strategy as an alternative to zoning open space land for new development, which could theoretically keep taxes down by increasing a town's taxable grand list. DEP makes no similar recommendation. The law already allows towns to share property tax revenue and jointly perform any function they can perform separately.

LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION LINKAGE

HDS recommends that the state promote transit uses along urban corridors. It also recommends that the state and towns stimulate "station area development. " DEP makes no transportation specific recommendations. The Plan of C&D proposes strengthening the relationship between transportation and land use planning by directing new development to areas where transit facilities already exist. The Connecticut Transportation Strategy Board also recommended a strategy that allows development to occur without congesting highways or requiring the state to expand them.

Table 1: Comparison of Harvard Design School's Smart Growth Recommendations with DEP's and Current Policies and Practices

JR: ts