Officials seek revitalization, floodplain protection balance

Environmental advocates have warned against building near the river, but elected officials still struggle with competing interests: economic revitalization or floodplain protection?

Bristol Township and the Redevelopment Authority believe they have a plan to accomplish both goals in the development of about 300 acres called the Maple Beach Opportunity Area. A 4-year-old riverfront study envisions a mix of condos, walking and biking trails, retail stores, offices and light industrial space.

The land, currently owned by Dow Chemical, is not technically in the flood plain thanks to a 6-foot high earthen levee that holds back the river and blocks access to the waterfront. To make the land even with the berm and take advantage of the view, officials want to build it up with six feet of fill dredged from the bottom of the river.

Plenty of other improvements would be necessary to allow access to areas on either side of the Burlington-Bristol Bridge, including access roads on either side of the busy Route 413.

Some say all the effort - and substantial expenditure of public funds - is worth it to attract a developer and expand the tax base.

"This is the last large piece of property that Bristol Township could do any developing on," said Councilwoman Linda Tarlini. "We definitely need a larger tax base for our future."

In municipalities where the entire downtown is low enough to flood, Planning Director Lynn Bush noted that saying 'no' to building in the floodplain would mean saying 'no' to development period.

That's where FEMA regulations come in handy. If elected officials agree to approve the development, they can require concessions like elevation and putting non-living spaces such as parking on the first floor, Bush said. That way, she said, seven-story luxury condos like those built in New Hope's floodplain, for example, can boost the economy while withstanding floodwaters.

Places that have tried to block development in the floodplain have found themselves embroiled in pricey litigation - often without the support of the courts, she said.

A pivotal U.S. Supreme Court case from 1992 strengthened landowners' rights. In Lucas v. South Carolina Coast Council, the court said completely restricting a property owner's right to develop amounted to the government taking the property. State coastal regulations at first prevented the owner of two beachfront properties from building.

Bush pointed to a local case from about a decade ago in Upper Makefield. The township zoning hearing board initially denied plans for a home in floodplain, but was compelled to issue a building permit after the case made it to Commonwealth Court.

Township solicitor John Rice said the more recent issuance of special exceptions and variances have allowed people to build on empty lots near the river. It's an issue with which every municipality along the river struggles, Rice said, adding that stronger state and federal laws could ease the burden off local officials.

"If you follow zoning ordinances strictly, no one would be building in floodplain," he said, "but in certain situations certain lot owners get relief. It's something that sometimes gets litigated and sometimes it does not."

Maya K. van Rossum, who leads the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, said her initial reaction to riverfront development, like Maple Beach, is concern for the larger community.

"We have to stop making these decisions through a myopic lens," she said. "It's not a wise investment by any stretch of the imagination unless you're a developer who's going to put the money in their back pocket."

Yet Bob White, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority, called dismissing the potential for commercial development in a struggling community "a missed opportunity."

"It's not like you're in Upper Bucks and you want to save a farm," he said. "This is not the same. Everyone should be able to enjoy the river. You have to have the ability to look outside the box and see what you could have here."

Although an early environmental study showed plumes of dense ammonium sulfate, dissolved acetate and dissolved ammonia, White said it's too early to say how those would affect development plans.

"The phase 1 environmental study shows there are environmental concerns, but nothing that would stop up from doing what the riverfront study or concept plan shows," he said.

On July 1, commissioners plan to consider a township and redevelopment authority proposal to share the cost of land appraisals, environmental studies and other preliminary work.

Democratic Commissioner Diane Marseglia favored the partnership, while her Republican colleagues said earlier this month that they needed more time to review the proposal.

In addition to environmental concerns about the floodplain, Commissioner Charley Martin said he wondered why the county should lend its borrowing power to the project. The county should not invest in "land speculation," he said.

"If it's such a winner of a project I don't know why Bristol can't do it without the county," he said, adding: "You can put a silk ribbon around a pig, but it's still a pig."

But Commissioner Jim Cawley said he welcomed the chance for the county to have a say in the project, as long as no private developers are clamoring to buy the land from Dow.

"Why I thought it was an interesting idea was so we could have a more enhanced role in suggesting a plan that makes sense economically and environmentally for that piece of property," he said.

Jenna Portnoy can be reached at 215-345-3060 or jportnoy@phillyBurbs.com.

 

 

---