A Revised Plan to Discuss The Plan.

Cranston’s First Comprehensive Plan Meeting – a Victim of Bad Planning?

In what seemed to be a microcosm of the general state of Cranston’s planning, the May 13th public “workshop” about the housing, natural resources and open space/recreation elements of the Comprehensive Plan lacked structure, and as a result, never truly materialized. Cranston has been operating under a plan that was adopted in 1992, but never mandated by the state. The major point of difference between the city and the state was the control and use of the 275-acre Howard Center property. So the current plan, which by law is supposed to be updated every five years, hasn’t existed in an official, state-mandated capacity for the past fifteen.

The slow start to the forum was partly due to the venue. It was difficult to view the draft of the plan (which was being projected onto the far wall behind the gated area of the council chambers), the terrible acoustics made it hard to hear the discussion, and by the third hour of the meeting, it was apparent that the chamber benches weren’t designed with comfort in mind.

There also seemed to be an overall lack of structure. The public hadn’t seen the plan to date, and therefore there was nothing to discuss. Residents used the opportunity to voice their displeasure about how the city is handling what’s left of its open space. At one point the meeting got very 1990’s hip-hop, as it erupted into an East vs. West thing – arguments were made about which side of the city should bear the brunt of the growing pressure to develop Cranston’s open space. Hopefully the results of the first workshop won’t deter the large crowd from attending the second. At the end of the session, Planning Director Peter Lapolla promised to change the format and hold the next meeting in an environment more conducive to interaction. He also noted that the draft of the Comp Plan would soon be posted on the city’s Web site, along with a place for citizens to contribute comments.

So what exactly is supposed to happen at these workshops? We know that the City Planning Commission is required by law to open this draft of the Comprehensive Plan to public forum, but how much of that input actually influences the final plan? And how much will the final Comprehensive Plan shape the decisions of what at times seems to be a wholly independent zoning board?

Incensed by the ill-conceived concrete plant and Mulligan’s Island projects, it was obvious that the majority of the workshop’s attendees had concerns about the continued development on what’s left of the open space in Cranston. Peter Lapolla and his staff are required by law to listen to the concerns of the city’s residents, but the extent to which those concerns get put into action remains to be seen.

For a succinct recap of the first meeting, including a detailed description about the state’s disagreement over Cranston’s 1992 plan, read the story written by Rachel McNally.