Stoughton annexation vote paves the way for Wal-Mart
By Karyn Saemann Correspondent for The Capital Times
December 14, 2005
STOUGHTON - About 185 acres that could someday be home to a Wal-Mart Supercenter and surrounding new neighborhood will be added to the city of Stoughton.Ald. Patrick Schneider, who cast the deciding vote in September against an identical annexation request, swung the other direction Tuesday night, offering the final vote for two-thirds majority approval. Tuesday night's vote to annex land near County B and U.S. 51, of which 183 acres are owned by Oscar and Shirley Linnerud in the town of Pleasant Springs, was 8-4. The remaining two acres belong to two landowners in the town of Dunkirk. Alds. Denise Duranczyk, Kathleen Kelly, Melissa Lampe and Gary Locke dissented. On the advice of the city attorney, Alds. Paul Lawrence and Dave McKichan voted despite calls by Wal-Mart opponents that they abstain due to potential conflicts of interest. Schneider said he came to his decision after weighing his personal opinion, public opinion and the facts of what is proposed. He also said a council session in October, during which a series of recommendations was approved regarding the project, helped sway him. He said he was encouraged by the willingness of the council to come together to draft the recommendations, which include doing a detailed neighborhood plan sometime during the upcoming planning process, allotting the maximum amount of parkland possible under city ordinances, limiting the number of dwelling units per acre, limiting the amount of multi-family housing and adhering to the city's big box ordinance. Schneider also said he hopes to be a voice of moderation in the upcoming planning and construction approval process. The pro and con "extremism" that the city has seen since the Supercenter was first proposed more than two years ago is damaging, he said. "All it does is breed contempt." David Schreiber, a landscape architect representing the Linneruds, said the couple is willing to work with the city council to ensure that the expectations are met. Duranczyk said she voted "no" because plans to devote 40 of 185 acres to commercial development constitutes all of the acreage the city expects to develop commercially in the next 40 years. It will draw businesses away from downtown to the periphery and existing businesses will lose sales, she also predicted. "The combination of all three risks...will seriously jeopardize our whole commercial district," Duranczyk said. Kelly said Schneider will go down in history as the council member who opened the door to a Supercenter in Stoughton. The city has had a smaller Wal-Mart, without amenities such as a grocery store, since 1988. "I really think it's a sad day for Stoughton," Kelly said. "I think the character of Stoughton is going to change. Stoughton is a wonderful community and Wal-Mart has destroyed wonderful communities all over this country." Local resident Terry Parisi also said she's "sad for what's going to happen to Stoughton. I'm sad that we're going to look like 'Anywhere USA.'" Roderick Scott, a community affairs manager for Wal-Mart, said he has no timeline for how long the approval process might take before a groundbreaking might occur. He stressed that while it's rare, there have been cases in the past where annexations are approved but the project never materializes. "We want to make sure this is done right, and that we listen to people's concerns," Scott said. Scott said Wal-Mart simply wants a chance to reinvest in the community by opening a store it owns, rather than the current situation in which it leases, and to add the new grocery component. About 15 citizens also spoke Tuesday night during a public comment period, offering pro and anti-Wal-Mart sentiments. Scott Hartman, 1708 Barberry Road, lives near the site. "If I knew a big-box store would be built in my backyard, I would not have purchased property and built my house there," Hartman said. About 60 current business owners asked in a letter that an economic impact study be done prior to the annexation. The council did not agree to the request. "They do not believe that you have the information needed to make an informed decision," said Kay Davis, 1021 Riverview Drive, who spoke on behalf of letter signers.
|