Ghost From Councils Past

At the Common Council meeting on Dec. 11, the Ghost from Councils Past was put to rest. Through the haze of "institutional memory," there was confusion about whether or not the city had prohibited aerial spraying of pesticides (fungicides, herbicides or insecticides) in the City of Fitchburg. So, some farmers and sprayers were refraining while others were not. While I understand the desire to clean up the books, it seems like overkill to me (no pun intended) assuming nothing was found in the books to clear up. But, I'm not a lawyer. That's why I thought the city attorney should have been asked if a resolution to rescind a ghost resolution was even needed.

[If you are still following me, you probably watched the last two Council meetings where this was discussed.] The bottom line: A resolution was passed to rescind any previous resolution in case one existed. Neither the ghost resolution nor the new one actually has any teeth since it appears the city has no jurisdiction over control of aerial spraying in the first place. I thought simply giving that information publicly would be enough to clear up the confusion and therefore this resolution was unnecessary. Some council members felt this way too.

This action did bring up a lively discussion about the use of pesticides (on farms and lawns) and whether the city would be promoting/encouraging their use by the wording of the original resolution which included phrasing like the city "affirms" the ability of farmers to use aerial spraying. This was later changed to "recognizes" and eventually it was removed from the resolution altogether leaving just the statement rescinding any contrary resolutions.

So, although I didn't think the resolution was needed, the final wording did the job of cleaning up the record without promoting anything. But, more importantly, almost every alder expressed concern about the dangers of pesticides and some wanted the city to explore alternatives such as conversion to organic agriculture.

I know that some alders and residents thought that arguing over something beyond the city's jurisdiction was a waste of time but I don't see it that way. This is an example of an important public health issue where the city can play a leadership role by educating the public and setting a good example.

Does the city use pesticides on any of its property? Are they poisoning the grass where our most vulnerable residents (kids) are playing?

What can you do? Three things:

(1) Attend any future presentation by fellow Fitchburg resident, Professor Warren Porter on the dangers of pesticides. In the meantime, FACTv has been replaying his November presentation as part of "Healthy Lawns, Healthy Children, Healthy Pets," and you can request a copy from FACTv.

(2) Learn more about maintaining a healthy lawn without pesticides. A talk on this subject given by Dr. Astrid Newenhouse, PhD Horticulturalist during the Healthy Lawns... event. So, again, watch for the replay or ask for a copy of this presentation.

(3) Contact your alder, get involved with a neighborhood group to explore this issue, or both!

Effective Simplicity

I recently completed one of Sustain Dane's discussion groups on “Voluntary Simplicity.” This is the second course I've taken and I highly recommend them. The last week of the series, I had a chance to be the "opener" for our discussion about putting what we'd learned into practice. The poem below sums it up.

Effective Simplicity

If Ignorance is Bliss
Why are we stressed out by competing with the Joneses?
Why are we less satisfied than when we knew the shoemaker?
Why do people suffer and die supplying our American lifestyle?
Why do we miss the vanishing landscapes and dwindling diversity of wildlife?

If Knowledge is Power
How can we value possessions over people?
How can we underrate true community?
How can we ignore the global consequences of our actions?
How can we justify destruction of the natural world?

If Love is the Answer
When do we help our neighbors?
When do we support the larger community?
When do we care about people we don’t know?
When do we protect our planet?

If Seeing is Believing
Close your eyes and…
Imagine a world where everyone’s health and well-being matter.
Envision a society where “waste equals food.”
Picture a community with its own sustainable economy.
Visualize your neighbors working together in a “cradle to cradle” cycle powered by the sun.
Now, open your eyes and …
Look for ways to live as “effectively” as a tree.


Terry Carpenter
11/18/2007

Bloomquist Takes Stand on Water

Submitted by Phyllis Hasbrouck:

Hooray for Richard Bloomquist! Here is an alder who isn’t afraid to take a stand for what he knows is right, even when he clearly sees that he’s going to lose the vote. If more alders start to express their true feelings and vote their consciences, all sorts of “politically unfeasible” things may start happening!

At the Oct. 9 Fitchburg Common Council meeting, the alders had to decide whether to accept the Plan Commission’s map for a long term Urban Growth Boundary, which includes 3378 additional acres for development, including all of the Northeast Neighborhood.

Not only did Alder Bloomquist speak out against a plan that may endanger our water table, he also had the political courage to point out that though he and the mayor both opposed it, they had very different reasons for doing so.

(We are currently working on getting a short video on You Tube, and will post the link when we succeed.)

He also deserves our thanks for defending the democratic process. He reacted with incredulity to the news that some Plan Commissioners want to severely limit the public’s participation in the planning process.

“Why’d they shut the springs off?”

As the Council took up the question of whether to adopt the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) map that the Plan Commission (PC) had crafted, Alder Bloomquist surprised many by announcing that he would vote no.

“In the last 60 or 45 days, I’ve had some concerns with what we’re about to do to the city…I have some concerns with water. I have concerns with water recharge of the aquifers underneath us. I have concerns with what we may or may not do with ag ground, that is now inside some of this shaded border. We’ve been told that if we don’t move the borders at all, we have quite a bit of ground at the current rate of development, to last us for several years into the future.

“We’re about to, under the budget, possibly, take up Transfer of Development Rights and Purchase of Development Rights, probably more seriously than anyone thought we might a year ago. And I’m just a little gun shy about putting the kind of land out there, and drawing some maps and have some speculators decide this is what we’re gonna possibly do. One of the resolutions that we have this evening is the McGaw North Neighborhood, with the 5 developers that signed that.

“I just don’t feel comfortable until I hear more about Transfer of Development Rights and Purchase of Development Rights, and keeping certain farm grounds from ever being developed. But mostly I don’t want my name on anything that a generation from now people will say, ‘Why’d they shut the springs off, why’d they do this with the water?’ I just don’t have a comfort level tonight to say I want to see the current Urban Service Area get any bigger, nor the possibility of it getting any bigger. So that is my reason for voting no this evening.”

Alder Steve Arnold replied, “The concerns that you cited, are for me the reasons to support an urban growth boundary.” And he asked Bloomquist to elaborate.

Alder Bloomquist responded,

“…Someone asked me earlier today, if I would be in favor of freezing the current urban service area and not growing and developing any more. And I have a comfort level that would say at the moment, yeah, I’d support that. I’d make the current urban service area, the permanent boundary of the city. But that’s probably not realistic 30 or 40 years down the road, as we grow out. But I’d just really like to know where we’re going with Transfer of Development rights, and Purchase of Development Rights, cause I think there’s been some, almost faith that that’s going to happen, and take the pressure off some the development that’s inside those lines [of the Urban Growth Boundary].

… I have this feeling that if we don’t do this right, we’re gonna screw up the water table, and I think that’s too big of a risk to take. And I’d really like to know more about the water, and the development rights. And if we’re gonna take farm ground that encroaches into some of these areas, and say, even though it’s in the possible Future Urban Development Area, that we’re not gonna do it.

And the more I think about it, is 75 acres the right number? That’s still a lot of ground per year to take out for homes…But it’s just those 2 big things. I don’t want to see the water table screwed up, and I want to know what were gonna do with some of the farm ground.”

A little later, when Alder Arnold asked him if it eased his mind at all to hear that the Plan Commission intends to have a framework for a TDR [Transfer of Development Rights] program by January, Alder Bloomquist laughed and responded, “You should probably quit selling and vote, cause it’s gonna be 7 to 1 anyway.”

When it was the mayor’s turn to speak he said,

“I think this is a real important vote tonight… A lot of the things Richard said, I won’t repeat, cause not only do I think he talked from his heart, he talked from the way I want to talk, of real concern. If you look at the map, on the west side, it’s not balanced…”

Alder Bloomquist later responded,

“Excuse me, Mr. Mayor… I think you and I disagree… on what we consider the shortcomings of the plan. I really don’t care if it’s skewed to one side or the other. …I’m really not anti-development this evening, but I’m not really pro-development to concrete anymore. I’m not really pro-subsistence farming either… I think the taxpayers of Fitchburg will pay for TDR or PDR and keep soils that should be in ag, in ag. I think if it’s explained the right way, that’ll happen. … [Alder] Steve [Arnold] sort of chided on me on have a little bit of faith of keeping farm grounds out. After 57 years, faith is a little thin… so I’ll take some of it at their word, but I’m still going to vote no tonight, but probably not for the reasons the mayor thinks.”

He was right, he lost that vote 7 to 1, but he gained the respect and gratitude of many citizens. We were also glad to hear his incredulous question to Alder Jay Allen: “I’ve been reading the minutes of some of the Plan Commission things. You aren’t really talking about shutting off public participation in the plan process, and not allowing people to speak, are you?”

Alder Allen started to respond with “What…” and Alder Bloomquist interrupted with “No, that was a yes-or-no question.” (For more info on the topic of public participation, see the blog entry Keep "Public" in Public Hearings, and watch the You Tube video of the 10-9-07 Common Council meeting when we post the link in a few days.)

I hope that other alders will take courage from Alder Bloomquist’s willingness to absorb new information, come to uncomfortable conclusions, and then speak out.

Keep "Public" in Public Hearings

Phyllis Hasbrouck and Terry Carpenter discuss comments (some disturbing) made at the end of the Plan Commission meeting on 9/18/07 regarding the public input process.

Phyllis: Mark McNally started in again on what’s becoming a recurrent theme: that the public talks too much, and repeats themselves! He thinks they should be silenced after 150 seconds, no exceptions! Get an egg timer, and just cut them off!

Terry: He mentioned bringing in a gong not an egg timer. How appropriate for the all powerful commission.

Phyllis: Ed Kinney went him one better, and said, “It should be one minute! If they can’t say what they need to in one minute…” My notes fade out there: was it because he faded out, or he couldn’t express himself in one minute?

Terry: If Ed is serious, it would appear that he has no appreciation for the level of involvement and amount of research that some of the public bring to these meetings. I daresay that few topics can be covered in one minute or less.

Phyllis: Jim Anderson was absent, but at the Sept. 4 meeting, he complained about how much the public repeats themselves. If they start repeating, he said, they should be cut off! Next time, he said, let’s only let them talk about changes to the plan. If they say anything else, cut them off!

Terry: As the Plan Commissioners know all too well, repetition is sometimes needed to make a point when it has not been previously understood. For example, the commissioners have discussed whether or not schools should be considered as one of the guiding parameters to determine the Urban Growth Boundary. The Mayor repeats that “schools are huge.” Others follow along those lines. The Commission is divided on the subject. Thus, we end up hearing the very same discussion on many occasions. Does that mean that they didn’t need discuss the issue again on 9/18? Evidently not, because it was brought up for the umpteenth time and voted down for the umpteenth time through this decision to move the land use plan forward rather than waiting for a meeting with the superintendent of the Oregon School District as suggested by Mark McNally. (More details about this and the rest of the 9/18 Plan Commission meeting from an earlier blog are here.)

I was disappointed to hear one of the Commissioners say that he knew what some people were going to say before they opened their mouth. In some circles, this is known as “already, always listening” as in "I'm already listening for what you always say instead of for what you are saying." This leads nowhere. Perhaps this Commissioner (or others) could consider listening for something new in each comment and create the possibility of learning something. For example, why is this person upset or what facts are not being communicated to the public?

It makes no sense to limit public comments to only changes to the Neighborhood Plan. What if the earlier comments were not heard and not incorporated into the plan? Should we have just give up explaining that water is a finite resource because it was ignored the first few times it was mentioned and it doesn’t specifically address a change the plan? I don’t think so.

And how the heck would they implement these restrictions on civic participation? Who would keep track of what each person said before? Who would keep track of the list of changes that could be addressed?

Phyllis: The Mayor said that he does remind people to finish up, but Mark McNally told him “you’re too nice! You need to cut them off!”

Terry: This is one time that I partially agree with the Mayor. People should be allowed to speak. The city should be open to input from the public and I appreciate the Mayor’s interest in allowing it. But, clear standards need to be defined and implemented to make it fair for everyone. I’m as guilty as the next person of talking more than 3 minutes. But, when people are timed and interrupted (like me) and others are not (even when they talk for over 7 minutes), it is inconsistent and unfair.

Phyllis: Of course, under their new plan for limiting comments, all of these comments by commissioners and many more made at the same meeting, would have been inadmissible, because they were either repeating themselves, speaking off topic, or taking more than 1, 2 or even 3 minutes. Oh, I forgot, those rules are just for the public!

Terry and Phyllis: Dear Commissioners, we know that it can be tedious listening to the public. We know, because it can be tedious for us to listen to you at times. We are all human, and may repeat ourselves or even ramble on. But listening to people we’d rather silence is one of the prices of democracy. Because once you start getting into the business of setting criteria for who is allowed to speak (e.g. no repetition, only speak to changes in the plan) you have to consider, “how would I – or how will I like it when this is done to me?” It’s a slippery slope, and we never know when we might be in the party or faction that is out of power. And that’s why we all need to protect the rights of the public to fully participate. Remember, you might become a member of the public at some time in the future.

However, we also realize that the Commission is busy and your time is limited. Although some seem to suggest that (almost?) all comments from the public could and should be made through phone calls and email, this is not a good way to keep the public involved in the planning process. This might benefit those commissioners who faithfully answer the phone, return messages and read all their email. But, not only does this potentially limit information sharing with some commissioners who are less diligent but it also omits the entire public. Public meetings and especially public hearings, should benefit the public as well as the commissioners. We are there to hear each other’s concerns and that doesn’t happen when most things takes place behind closed doors or (email) windows. The public wants to learn from other residents. How can we do that if we are silenced or stifled?

The Mayor is right to tread lightly when asking people to finish up. Of course, he could be much more consistent, as we noticed that Phil Sveum spoke for over 7 min. on Sept. 4 without a word from the Mayor, while several WWPC people were reminded after 3 or 4 minutes. But in general the Mayor has managed to let everyone have their say at 3 minutes or a bit longer. Perhaps he is more attuned to just how mad people get when they are told that they cannot speak, because he needs their votes, and the Plan Commissioners don’t. Or maybe he’s just more polite.

The Mayor and others often bemoan the fact that more people don’t attend meetings and show they care. Wouldn’t it be smart to reward those who do care by listening to them for a whole 3 to 5 minutes or whatever time allotment is set, even if you find it tedious? People come to meetings because they care deeply about the topic at hand. Very often, their lives will be seriously impacted by what you are deciding. Whether you agree with them or not, in a democracy, your duty is to listen to them respectfully. Sounding a gong after 1 minute won’t do it.

Concerned Citizens:

We’ve reviewed a document presented by the planning department staff to the Commissioners listing options to discuss with regard to the public participation process for agenda items, non-agenda items and public hearings. Although many of the ideas are helpful, others are potentially restrictive. One troubling section includes “Fitchburg has been very generous in allowing persons to speak on any agenda item (and even non-agenda items), although that practice could end if the Commission so chose. The meeting has to be open to the public… but the only right to speak is when a public hearing is noticed.”

We recommend that all concerned citizens weigh in with the Plan Commissioners on this important topic (public participation) before the next Plan Commission meeting on 10/2 at 7:00 pm.

Politics and Planning

Submitted by Phyllis Hasbrouck

I must recommend Fitchburg Plan Commission meetings to FitchburgVoices readers. Though Terry Carpenter and I are sometimes the only people there who aren’t either elected officials or someone putting up a new deck or trying to get a liquor license, it isn’t as boring as you probably imagine. You really learn a lot: about the people who make decisions for you; about planning topics; and about politics.

This last meeting on Sept 18 was especially interesting.

There was high drama (for the connoisseur who knows how rare it is) when the Plan Commission voted 5 to 1 against Mayor Tom Clauder, to send the draft map for a 50-year Urban Growth Boundary on the Common Council. Sitting in the audience, knitting a purple scarf, I felt torn. On the one hand, I appreciated the Mayor referencing the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition’s statement of “We don't have to rush this.” The truth of that statement still stands: there is no rush in approving more development when there is a housing glut in Fitchburg, and water questions remain unanswered.

On the other hand, the comments of the other commissioners resonated much more strongly with me. In response to the Mayor’s plea to “Let the market do the growth,” John Freiburger answered very strongly, “If you want to see the market, go to Houston!” He painted a picture of unplanned growth gone wild, and said that real estate courses now point to Houston as an example of why zoning and planning are necessary.

Jay Allen agreed, saying that the problem with saying “Let the market decide” is that “you end up destroying wetlands,... creating problems with lakes and streams, you end up with fly ash dumps" and "all sorts of transportation problems.” He also indicated that he would like to make a plan to incorporate lower income housing into new neighborhoods, and to take a closer look at groundwater issues.

Ed Kinney defended the map as it stood, and said, “We put together a map that identifies the areas of Fitchburg that best meet those parameters." (Now I'm paraphrasing.) This map takes the politics out of the planning process.... We make it clear.... Of course, there are going to be changes to the map.... If you don’t want to be bothered by more proposals like Ballygrady, then vote for this plan. Otherwise, you open the door for politics.”

Al Cooper agreed that it was time to pass the plan on, as work expands to fill the time allotted.

And Mark McNally, though he was clearly uncomfortable abandoning the Mayor, seemed to be convinced by the other commissioners. When he asked for just 2 weeks delay to let the Mayor meet with the superintendent of the Oregon School District, John Freiburger said, “The Oregon School District cannot tell us how to plan. If we wait 2 weeks, in 2 weeks there will be another argument, and then another.”

In the end, they all voted yes except the Mayor, who said (I think) “With deep inner resolution, No.”

For me, it was a mixed bag. I totally agreed with the motivations expressed in favor of planning, and yet it was painful to see the Northeast Neighborhood (NEN) being included as part of the Urban Growth Boundary. I just have to take comfort in John Freiburger’s statement that “We’re showing the Northeast Neighborhood all in red, but we all know that we’re not going to develop it all.”

But there was one topic that I disagree with John on. He said that you can’t make plans for traffic until you’ve agreed on a map of where the development will take place. City Planner Tom Hovel concurred, saying, “Traffic studies don’t tell you ‘Don’t grow there.’ They tell you how to accommodate your traffic.”

I assume that he’s right in saying that (so far) traffic studies haven’t said, “Don’t grow there.” That probably has something to do with the mindset of traffic engineers, who can always envision a wider road, more on and off ramps, or a new frontage road. But maybe elected leaders should say “This traffic study indicates that we shouldn’t grow there,” if they see that the accommodation measures would violate certain values that the community holds dear.

Take, for example, the case of the Northeast Neighborhood. With only two possible routes into Madison, (the destination of choice for most of the tens of thousand of daily car trips that development will cause), the measures necessary to accommodate that traffic need to be looked at carefully before approving development.

At a meeting last summer with the Dept. of Transportation and Fitchburg officials, widening Hwy. MM to four lanes, or even six lanes, was discussed. They called it “improving” MM, but I wonder if the scores of people with houses on it would feel improved by having a highway in their front yard.

And the people who enjoy the Lussier Family Heritage Center, Lake Farm Park, the Capital Springs Centennial State Park and campground, or the Capital City Bike Trail, might like to know sooner rather than too late that Lake Farm Park Road will become clogged with traffic as people try to avoid the Hwy. 14 and Park Street jams caused by the NEN traffic.

Sure, a traffic engineer could tell you to improve traffic flow by making Lake Farm Park Road four lanes wide, but how does that mix with the quiet, rural experience that people seek when they go there? Of course, Fitchburg wouldn’t have to pay for that “improvement” or deal with the landowners who don’t want to move their houses, because it’s in the Town of Blooming Grove and the City of Madison. But, as Jay Allen has so rightly said, (in the case of the planned Grandview development on Fitchburg’s western border) it isn’t fair for one community to create a development that will pile transportation problems and costs on their neighbors.

If we talk about these clearly foreseeable traffic problems before approving a development, people have a chance to make their wishes known to Fitchburg alders and planners. And that’s what our system is all about: democracy – rule of the people. Hmmm… that reminds me of some very disturbing comments made at the end of this most interesting meeting. More on that later, so please stay tuned.

Thanks to all who read these words for taking the time to become informed. I hope to see you at the next Plan Commission or Common Council meeting!

Leverington Warns About Over Development

Submitted by Gary Leverington, Fitchburg

Dear friends and representitives,

I've grown increasingly concerned regarding the recent discussions of the NE neighborhood development.

What I hear mostly are concerns (quite valid) about the negative impact that building a large number of houses will have on the environment and animal habitat - what's missing are concerns about the impact on housing values.

Certainly current residents (if more informed and aware of the risks) would not be happy to see additional new housing being permitted in Fitchburg. Most are not in favor of it anyway!

And for those listening to the developer's point of view - rather than doing their own due dilligence to learn the true state of affairs about the health - or lack thereof - of the housing market in the Madison area - perhaps the following data linked below will serve as an information source.

Please remember - many people bought at the top in Florida and are now getting their heads handed to them (with a 29 month supply of homes for sale in some areas and home auctions with zero bidders)! They also mistakenly believed (at one point) that they were immune from a decline.

The facts are: Lending standards have tightened dramatically, and many would be buyers can no longer qualify for a loan - additionally - smart buyers are choosing to be prudent and wait for lower prices - and an increasingly large number of owners are facing mortgage resets that will raise their payments by 20-40% and give them little choice but to bail out and place their homes on the market.

Note: The majority of mortgage resets (subprime, ARMs, zero down) will occur in the latter part of this year and in 2008, thus placing additional downside pressure on an already weakening housing market.

Please become informed and refrain from adding additional housing supply into a market at precisely the wrong time (amid slowing demand and a slowing economy).

Just look in the Madison Sunday paper homes for sale section and see the increasing number of ads with the headline "Price Reduced" - do you still think Madison (Fitchburg in particular for purposes of this discussion) is immune from a down turn in prices during a period of falling demand and too much supply!

With more houses potentially on the way - with developers (example NE neighborhood that the public does not want or need!) promoting their own agenda regardless of the facts?

Some of you may choose to go along to get along with the developer crowd - and put your housing values at risk - but I for one do not appreciate the obvious naivete regarding this matter.

I'm aware you do not have an easy job amid developer pressures to continue adding more houses/condos. But the time has come to stand up and support the facts, not pie in the sky wishful thinking that our community is somehow immune to oversupply and slowing demand. It is not.

The evidence is below and the data speaks for itself. Please do the right thing for the people that already reside here - not to mention the land, the deer, the lake, traffic issues and infrustructure costs!

All the best to you in making your decisons.

Gary Leverington / Fitchburg

Here is the link - please print and distribute. Keep in mind - the information in the report is objective. (See Market Wrap Up for Thursday, Sept 27 titled "Markets Betting on More Fed Rate Cuts" by Gary Dorsch.)

Current supportive data is below as well (or read link):

S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index Falls 3.9% in July

Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Home prices in 20 U.S. metropolitan areas fell the most on record in July, indicating the threat to consumer spending was rising even before credit markets seized up in August, a private survey showed today.

Values dropped 3.9 percent in the 12 months through July, steeper than the 3.4 percent decrease in June, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller home-price index. The index declined in January for the first time since the group started the measure in 2001, and has receded every month since then.

Stricter lending standards and reduced demand are prolonging the housing slump, now entering its third year. Prices may continue to fall as homes stay on the market longer, economists said. Diminished housing wealth may spur households to pare spending, hurting economic growth.
The housing slump "doesn't seem like it will go away any time soon,'' said Michael Gregory, a senior economist at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto, who forecast the index to drop 4.1 percent. "As far as consumers go, this is another sort of pall over'' their ability to borrow against the value of their homes, he said.

Economists forecast the gauge would slide 4 percent, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey.

After the report, 10-year Treasury notes stayed higher, with the yield falling to 4.59 percent at 10:13 a.m. in New York, from 4.63 percent late yesterday.

The group's 10-city composite index, which has a longer history, dropped 4.5 percent in the 12 months ended in July.

Summer Declines

Compared with June, home prices in the 20 areas fell 0.4 percent after a 0.4 percent decline the month before. The figures aren't seasonally adjusted, so economists prefer to focus on the year-over-year change.

"The housing market has been weakening now for a couple of years and it just continues on its trajectory,'' said Robert Shiller, chief economist at MacroMarkets LLC and a professor at Yale University, in an interview.

Shiller and Karl Case, an economics professor at Wellesley College, created the home-price index based on research from the 1980s.

The index is a composite of transactions in 20 metropolitan regions. Fifteen cities showed a year-over-year decline in prices, led by a 9.7 percent decrease in Detroit. The area showing the biggest gain was Seattle, where prices rose 6.9 percent.

Prices for single-family homes in the New York metropolitan area were down 3.8 percent compared with a year earlier.

Other Reports

Separately, the Conference Board said today that its index of consumer confidence fell more than forecast in September to the lowest level in almost two years, as declining home values and tougher borrowing standards took a toll on Americans' spirits.

The National Association of Realtors, in a report today, said sales of previously owned U.S. homes fell in August to a five-year low. Purchases were down 4.3 percent, less than forecast, to an annual rate of 5.5 million, the Realtors group said in Washington. Sales dropped 13 percent from a year earlier and median home prices rose 0.2 percent to $224,500.

Existing homes account for about 85 percent of the market and sales of new homes make up the rest. The report on new-home purchases, which are calculated based on signings and are considered a more timely indicator, is due from the Commerce Department tomorrow.

Rate Cut

The measures from Commerce and the Realtors group can be influenced by changes in the types of homes sold. Because the S&P/Case-Shiller index and another gauge by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight track the same home over time, economists say these more accurately reflect price trends.

Most economists expect housing to extend its two-year slump and continue to be a drag on economic growth as loan foreclosures rise and tougher lending standards make borrowing more difficult.

The Federal Reserve, cut its benchmark interest rate on Sept. 18 for the first time in four years and said the credit meltdown "has the potential to intensify the housing correction, and to restrain economic growth more generally.'' Weakness in the housing market was part of the reason U.S. payrolls fell by 4,000 last month.

The number of Americans who may lose their homes to foreclosure more than doubled in August from a year earlier, according to a report Sept. 18 by RealtyTrac Inc.

'Heavy' Discounts

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, on Sept. 20, repeated the central bank's intention to issue new consumer-protection rules by year-end. He also told the House Financial Services Committee that the subprime turmoil has spread through financial markets, ``raising concern about the consequences for economic activity.''

Bernanke made his comments at a Congressional hearing that also included testimony from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson.

A glut of homes on the market adds to pressure for sellers to lower prices. The inventory of single-family existing homes on the market represented a 9.2-months' supply in July, the most since October 1991, the Realtors group said on Aug. 27.

Earlier today, Lennar Corp., the largest U.S. homebuilder, reported the biggest quarterly loss in its 53-year history. Revenue at Miami-based Lennar fell 44 percent to $2.34 billion, the lowest in more than three years.

"Heavy discounting by builders, and now the existing home market as well, has continued to drive pricing downward,'' Lennar Chief Executive Officer Stuart Miller said in a statement.

To contact the reporter on this story: Courtney Schlisserman in Washington cschlisserma@bloomberg.net Last Updated: September 25, 2007 15:25 EDT

No Substitute for Water

Here’s a great line from one of my favorite comedians:

"You never know what you have until it's gone, and I wanted to know what I had, so I got rid of everything." - Steven Wright

Maybe that’s not such a bad idea. What would we really miss? What would we put in its place?

I certainly wouldn’t miss the closet full of project files that I ended up with after I sold my business. Come on… admit it… you also harbor a different, but equally useless, stash. Let’s face it; nobody alive today will ever ask for papers that are already 5 to 25 years old even if we did manage to remember we had them! (Exception: This excludes all documentation required by guys with guns… the IRS.)

In addition to the cardboard-clad “files” of paper, consider all those plastic-encased tubs of trinkets. It probably amounts to quite a pile of stuff weighing us down and not a collection of treasures that lifts our spirits. In fact, this assortment often distracts us from more important things. Oh sure, you have it closeted all right, but how many times are you going to move it from dwelling to dwelling or room to room over the course of your life?

Wouldn’t it be better to clear some of the clutter to create an opening for new thoughts and room for new interests (ok, new stacks of paper and plastic)?

I think Fitchburg residents have an equally useless and distracting set of clutter. (You knew I’d somehow relate this to the Blog’s theme… right?) We seem to shelter tattered ideas and drag them out from time to time instead of tossing them into the recycling bin. Sure we need to preserve some history (those breadcrumbs showing where we have been) but, above all, we need to pay attention to new information.

In case you haven’t guessed where I’m headed, this new input should serve as the basis for our revised vision of Fitchburg in the year 2030 or beyond. Instead of harping about the previous versions of the Future Urban Development plan, let’s listen to experts as they guide us in a new direction. We have more tools and more facts now than at any time in the past. This is both bad and good. We have more ways to destroy our habitat, our environment, our home. But, we also have more ways to measure this destruction and evaluate how to reverse the trend.

(1) One such reversal is to restore wetlands and protect streams and creeks through buffers and stream bank projects. (Water Quality)
(2) Another is to create (and live within) our Water Budget by knowing how much water we extract from the aquifer and how much we put back. (Water Quantity)

Although the Plan Commissioners have looked at farmland preservation and many other factors as they create a new Urban Growth Boundary, they have yet to factor in these two related concerns.

During his presentation on Sept. 4th (described in an earlier entry here), Professor Cal DeWitt recounted a conversation with someone at the Fish Hatchery. He described his research showing that adding a new municipal well probably reduced the flow of an old artesian well one mile away at Nevin Springs Fish Hatchery. The person responded to this discovery by saying “That well’s already built. Right? Then, we can’t do anything about it.” But, as Professor DeWitt pointed out, that’s the way our whole environment deteriorates, of course.

Let’s not destroy this wonderful area by a thousand tiny cuts to our support system.

Instead of only caring about the “top quality” wetlands, streams and lakes, we should be doing everything we can to restore all water resources to their original state. It is foolish to let some resources die an unnatural death at our hands just because we’ve let them degrade up until now. There are ways to protect them from further harm and also to slowly restore them to health.

Creeks and streams have a purpose and we need to appreciate their role. I was amazed to learn that once we’ve degraded a creek to certain level, the city no longer offers it the same protection as one that managed to escape that level of damage. Isn’t this backwards? Shouldn’t we be doing more to protect the one that needs it the most?

Wetlands help clean and regulate the water in our area and we need more of them not less. Our current guidelines protect the “high quality” wetlands more than those we’ve degraded to a greater extent. Again, this is backwards or at least short-sighted. Let’s strengthen the regulations to protect them all (when feasible). We should also identify areas that were once wetlands by evaluating the telltale hydric soils and restore them whenever possible to help prevent catastrophic floods and purify our water for decades to come.

A recent study, Strategic Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan for the West Waubesa Wetlands, by a UW–Madison class evaluated hydric soils in one watershed covering a large portion of Fitchburg along with parts of the Town of Dunn. The map below shows hydric soils identified in the study. For orientation, Hwy 14 runs north and south through the center of the map from McCoy Rd (top) to north of Hwy M (bottom). Click here to view a larger version of the map and for more information about the study, please email me at fitchburgvoices@gmail.com.

Although groundwater recharge has been considered by the Planning Commission, it has been analyzed under the assumption that we want the most “recharge” per acre so areas were considered more valuable if they scored in the top 25% based on infiltration criteria. Although their definition of good infiltration is debatable, even if it’s accurate it misses the point. Dr. Ken Bradbury, Groundwater Expert and Hydrogeologist, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, gave a presentation last week explaining the hydrogeology system which underlies the Yahara Basin, including Fitchburg, and describing how scientists model and predict underground water movements. During the Q&A discussion, he indicated that although some recharge areas may be considered more important than others, all are important because some areas recharge different water features than others.

See the problem? If we recharge areas that affect X and not those that affect Y, Y will suffer.

In addition to recharge, the quantity of water we pull from the aquifer is also a big concern. As reported in recent newspaper articles, Dane County is now drinking from a couple of its lakes because numerous high capacity wells in the area are drawing down the aquifer enough that the water is no longer flowing into some lakes and is instead seeping from the lakes into the aquifer.

Dr. Bradbury also stated that in all of Wisconsin there are two areas that are having serious problems with groundwater (Green Bay and Waukesha) and two others that are designated as Groundwater Attention Areas to be watched – the Little Plover River (which recently dried up for the first time ever) and… you guessed it… Dane County.

I recently saw the new documentary film The 11th Hour. Without giving away the “plot” (which you probably already know), I was struck by one very unusual and startling calculation; it would cost the world about $35 trillion a year to perform all of the functions that nature does for us free of charge. That’s something like twice the size of all the world’s economies! Talk about externalities! This free service includes things like turning carbon dioxide into oxygen and pollinating plants. I assume it would also include flood control and water purification.

So, shouldn’t we use the *Precautionary Principle as we plan for our city’s future? The natural world is not just priceless from an aesthetic standpoint but is way beyond reach in economic terms. Will we miss it when it’s gone? Of course! What would we put in its place? The truth is; we can’t afford to replace it even if we knew how!

Please let your Plan Commissioners and Alders know that you want them to protect all of our water resources as they plan for the future of Fitchburg.

Footnote:

* (From Wikipedia) “The Precautionary Principle is a moral and political principle which states that if an action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm to the public, in the absence of a scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would advocate taking the action.”

FLOWCHART: Are you a resident of Fitchburg, WI?

Sure, I'm guilty of saying that I'm from Madison when I travel outside of Dance County. But some folks seem to be genuinely confused about their city of residence, so I thought this flowchart might help. Click on the link below and when it opens, you may have to enlarge it by clicking near the top of the chart (if you see a "plus sign" or other "expand" symbol when you move the cursor over it).

I just noticed that sometimes, I'll get a message in Internet Explored indicating that it couldn't find the file. But, if I click "refresh" after the file fails to appear, it finds it! No, I don't understand why it works the second time, but you might give a try!

FitchburgResidentFlowchart1.jpg

P.S.
This is my first attempt to link to my own file so please email me at fitchburgvoices@gmail.com if it doesn't open for you. It would help to know what kind of computer and OS you are using. Thanks.

Website for Southdale-Rimrock

The Southdale-Rimrock Neighborhood Association has a new website (here). The home page includes the introduction below. Please share this with anyone interested in the area or the new re-development project:

"The neighbors, homeowners and tenants of the Southdale-Rimrock Neighborhood have renewed our Neighborhood Association and are ready to take an active role in the development and implementation of the neighborhood plan now being drafted. We are looking to work in partnership with our elected officials in shaping the future of our streets, homes and public places. We are becoming better-informed citizens and are proud to be active participants in developing our neighborhood character and quality-of-life.

We have been meeting regularly in an effort to get to know each other, share information, and form a neighborhood association. There are significant plans and changes being proposed that will impact our neighborhood, but very few of us seem to know in any detail what the true proposals and changes are. We want to be involved in the planning process and feel that the time has come for an open dialog with our elected officials and the major stakeholders about all aspects of the redevelopment of the Southdale-Rimrock area."

Water, Water... Anywhere?

The word is out. Professor Cal DeWitt has sleuthed some amazing and disturbing facts out of the recesses of our aquifers. At Tuesday night’s Planning Commission meeting, he explained the relationship he discovered between Fitchburg’s deep-aquifer, high-capacity Well #10 (located on Granite Circle) and the 125-year-old, upper-aquifer, cased artesian Well #8 (located at Nevin Springs Fish Hatchery). It had been assumed that both wells were drawing from separate aquifers based on their depth profiles (800 feet or more for Well #10 and 180 feet for Well #8), and one mile distance from each other. However, Professor DeWitt found a significant correlation between them that changes the original assumptions.

Nevin Springs was producing 400 gallons of water per minute (gpm) for a number of years until late 2001 when it started dropping. It has since continued at a lower rate of 300-350 gpm. A mile away, Well #10 started pumping in 2001 and within a year was pumping around 600k gallons per day.

As shown in one of his graphs, a pattern appears when comparing the flow volume drawn by the new, municipal well and the decreased flow, about 12 months later, from the artesian well.

The bottom line? About 10% of the pumpage of Well #10 is equal to the losses at Well #8 that show up after a 12-month lag. So, there is a connection between these wells in the upper and lower aquifers and water is traveling at the rate of 14.5 feet per day from Nevin Springs in the direction of the Granite Circle well.

The fact that Professor DeWitt was able to find this relationship buried in the data from many area wells is surprising enough but I received another shock when he told us that we don’t really know how this happens. It appears that, at least sometimes, the upper and lower aquifers are indeed connected even though they separated by an aquitard (made of layers of sedimentary rock) which limits vertical waterflow except in cracks. To complicate matters, the horizontal flow between these two wells is 10s of thousands of times greater than the vertical rate of water flow through the aquitard, perhaps because of long horizontal pipes that formed over the years.

What does this mean? Professor DeWitt urges us to consider the entire groundwater hydrology system before we do something that would stop the flow of water to important springs and lakes in the area. For example, if we turn off Deep Spring and other groundwater resources that refresh Lake Waubesa, the entire southern boot (most of the lake) would die (eutrophy). And distance does indeed make a difference when dealing with solutions. The farther away we stay from precious water resources, the better chance we have to protect them. So, locating any new well in the vicinity of the NE Neighborhood is more of a threat to Lake Waubesa and the natural resources because of its impact on groundwater flow to the watershed.

Although this bombshell was dropped during the agenda item for the NE Neighborhood and Stormwater Plans, it also must be considered for all well drilling activity and increased water use (ie. development) in Fitchburg and beyond. If we fail to consider how new high-capacity wells will draw groundwater from the surrounding area, other springs or wells (including private wells) could dry up. This has happened with many of the famed springs of Waukesha and the Little Plover River in Stevens Point, among others.

[Side Track: According to Devil in the White City by Erik Larson (link here), one entrepreneur wanted to pipe water from a Waukesha spring on his property all the way to Chicago to supply the 1893 World’s Fair. But, Waukesha residents didn’t want the water to leave the city and they showed up with guns, knives and pitchforks to stop the pipeline workers, returning at 2 am with a cannon (!) to drive away them away again. For the rest of the story, see the Lake Lore article on page 4 of the Alliance for the Great Lakes newsletter here.]

Fast forward to Fitchburg 2007.

Professor DeWitt explained the concept and vital need for Groundwater and Watershed Budgets which he likened to other budgets. Simply put, we need to know how much we are depositing (infiltration) into each aquifer and withdrawing (wells and springs) from each aquifer to be sure that we don’t overdraw our account and live beyond our means. To protect against this, he suggests that the City of Fitchburg recommend to Dane County and CARPC (Capital Area Regional Planning Commission) that:

1. they place high priority on developing a policy for a Groundwater Budget for the region; and
2. they work with Fitchburg on procedures for monitoring and evaluating diminished well and spring flow to the city and region.

I am happy to report that, after the presentation, applause (normally against the rules at these meetings) was allowed to acknowledge Professor DeWitt’s efforts, and the Planning Commissioners wisely responded to these sobering data by asking for more information before making a decision about the NE Neighborhood. I’m not sure if they actually ordered a Groundwater Budget but I think that prospect is at least on the radar if not the table.

(NOTE: FACTv recorded the entire meeting including Professor DeWitt's presentation. So, you can contact them to have a DVD made of all or part of the meeting or to rebroadcast it during their Thursday morning request slot. If that doesn't work for you, drop me an email at fitchburgvoices@gmail.com to borrow my copy.)

Calling All Localvores

Localvore -- A person committed to eating foods grown within their local food shed. (No, not a building!)

In case you haven't already heard about this, here's an event to seriously consider that was sent to me by a Sustain Dane Board Member (http://www.sustaindane.org/). What better way to support your local producers/growers and reduce your carbon footprint to boot? --- Terry

Eat Local Challenge – a 10-day challenge for you – and your organization

Join us in the challenge of eating locally for 10 days in September.
Fresh, locally grown food doesn’t just taste delicious, it can be better for our health, for our communities, for the Earth. When we eat locally grown food we support local farmers and our own community. The challenge is to have at least 10% of our food be local during the 10 days September 14 - 23. Go to http://www.cias.wisc.edu/eatlocal to register or for more information.

The challenge is to spend 10% of your food budget on locally grown or produced food during the 10 days from Friday, September 14 through Sunday, September 23.

What is “local”?

Buy food that is grown or produced as close to your home as possible. It could be from your own garden. Or it could be from your local Farmer’s Market. For the purposes of this Eat Local Challenge we are counting any food from Wisconsin or within 100 miles of your home as local.

Local also includes foods prepared or processed by locally owned companies or restaurants, preferably from locally grown ingredients.

The Trouble With Happiness

I’m finishing up the last chapters of “Stumbling on Happiness” by Daniel Gilbert (link here), an entertaining and thought-provoking book about how the mind works. What does the mystery of the mind have to do with Fitchburg? Plenty!

Gilbert explains that based on various studies “Starting points matter because we often end up close to where we started.” So, it was inevitable that after a maximum growth rate for Fitchburg of 75 acres per year was voted in, it would be seen as a target instead of a maximum. (Those of you who follow Council and Commission meetings may remember that I predicted this danger at the time. But admittedly, it was intuition not research that led me to that conclusion.) Every time I’ve heard it mentioned since then, the statement includes a comparison such as “we have enough land already identified in the Urban Service Area to last for X years at 75 acres per year.”

However, back on Feb. 20th, before this “maximum” was established, a presentation to the Planning Commission by city staff included the statement that, as of 2005, we had about 1,000 acres left to develop within the current Urban Service Area (USA) so we only need to add 250 acres from outside the USA to take us from 2005 to 2030. The assumption was based on a growth rate of, not 75, but 50 acres per year.

I don’t want to stray too far, but the February presentation also included an example of what would happen if we continue to develop at 100 acres per year which is close to the 104 acre average since 1990. The result when factoring in a “50% flexibility factor” is that by 2060, we’d use up roughly 10,000 of the remaining 11,000 acres that could be developed outside of the current Urban Service Area. If you aren’t alarmed, reread the last sentence! Let me put it another way. Under this scenario, all but a small portion of our entire 36 square mile city that isn’t preserved as a park or someone’s lawn could be covered with roads and roofs by 2060.

What if we want to protect more farmland and open space and “only” pave over 50 acres per year… or even 25 acres? Those amounts are still less than the maximum established (so they meet that criteria) but they are no longer even being considered as options at any of the meetings I’ve attended (and I haven’t missed many in the last six months). Was silencing all other discussions about Fitchburg’s rate of growth the intent of the 75 acre per year maximum or was it one of those unintended consequences?

This brings me back to the happiness problem. It turns out that it is quite difficult for us to predict what will make us happy in the future partly because, as Gilbert explains, “we use our present feelings as a starting point” and we “expect our future to feel a bit more like our present than it actually will.” So, when Steve or Hans or Phyllis describe a future with fewer car trips, we can’t imagine it since that’s not what most of us are currently experiencing.

Remember being warned that you should not grocery shop when you are hungry because you’ll buy things you don’t need? Similarly, we shouldn’t shop for Fitchburg’s Future with gasoline in our veins. It’s going to sway our judgment.

Instead, what if we used the gas shortages of the 1970s as our starting point when talking about the future of Fitchburg? (You may need to ask your parents or the all powerful Google about this if you are under 50.) How would being able to walk or bike to work, or the convenience of taking a commuter train or an express bus, compare with being stalled in traffic jams and waiting in line for hours every time you had to buy gas at ever increasing prices?

I contend that if you walked up to someone, who anticipated an hour or more wait to buy gas (like the picture below), and offered them an instant ticket on the Fitchburg Express (and a convenient way to get to the terminal), you could probably convert an unhappy driver into a happy passenger.

Line at gas station on Sept. 15, 1979 (from Wikipedia)

Another limitation of our brain, that affects our happiness, is described by Gilbert this way: It is “so much easier for me to remember the past than to generate new possibilities. I will tend to compare the present with the past even when I ought to be comparing it with the possible.” In this case, the past is not the 1970s but the more recent past. We have a hard time generating new possibilities going forward. This takes vision and requires a willingness to consciously remove some things from the table to make room for new ideas. By design, most of us are not gifted in this area. (More about this later.)

Our lack of vision also means that we often “fail to realize that our future selves won’t see the world the way we see it now.” I believe our inability to recognize that our future selves will be living in a different world, (with a different set of facts, and therefore a different set of values and beliefs), hinders our ability to make the changes necessary to create a better future.

It turns out that we are programmed to pay attention to the things we want to hear, to remember details that support our views, and to accept a lower standard of proof for facts with which we agree. While that seems like a rather immature way to act, it’s all in the name of happiness. In Chapter 8 - Paradise Glossed, Gilbert explains that people have a “Psychological Immune System that defends the mind against unhappiness in much the same way that the physical immune system defends the body against illness… A healthy psychological immune system strikes a balance that allows us to feel good enough to cope with our situations but bad enough to do something about it.”

Yes, there is trouble with happiness. We need to happily cope with today’s problems. But, let’s not let things get bad before we do something about them, because today’s solutions (including inaction) could create irreversible problems in the future. And that’s a place that we (or someone we love) must live.

Kurt Questions City's "Diversity"

I like the following comments, stolen from a newsletter by Jim Kunstler:

In the natural course of things, new buildings command premium prices precisely because they are new. Affordable housing, in the natural course of things, is prime housing that has gotten older. Historically this occurs in cycles. However, that cycle was interrupted after the Second World War -- and with it, the natural course of things...

If affordable housing is the gripe, there's one way that the city could create a lot of affordable housing, without any government subsidies, at the stroke of a pen: change the bylaws that restrict accessory apartments and rental out-buildings in the neighborhoods. This way, someone who is not in the market for a house -- a young single teacher or fireman -- could live in-town, and the homeowner-landlord would get an income stream to help cope with a high mortgage. You can specify that the landlord has to live on the premises. The idea that apartment dwellers destroy housing values in a neighborhood is not consistent with reality. It's another perverse hold-over from the last real-estate cycle during which there was so much demolition and little was replaced, except by one-story strip mall-style retail structures with no rental apartments in them. Another ironic result of all this is that government is now required to supply an artificial commodity called "affordable housing" to make up for the fact that almost no traditional downtown rental market housing was built in this country in the second half of the 20th century -- so it's not there getting older and becoming more affordable.

There will always be better and worse neighborhoods. An ideal of absolute social equality in all neighborhoods is probably unrealistic. There will be better and worse renters, too, and better and worse apartments. The cycle of home ownership may even change a lot in the years ahead. The relatively high rate of individual home ownership of recent years will very likely fall as the current mortgage mess works itself painfully out over the years ahead. It will become more normal -- less of a stigma -- to be renter. The benefits of home ownership for everybody have been over-hyped in recent years, especially as an unprecedented real estate up-market turns steeply down and property taxes go up.

-------------

Fitchburg’s near total focus on new development – partially understandable, I suppose – attempts to foster more diversity, but it’s a very limited spectrum. We want diversity if it’s a marketable, risk-free commodity with some cachet.

Fitchburg officials occasionally tout the city’s diversity, but it’s an empty boast. The city is heavily segregated by economic status and the new developments promise more of the same. There seems more potential for diversity in older neighborhoods, but the city’s focus is elsewhere.

I remembered an era when houses decayed along with their owners, adding a mosaic of diversity that would simply not be possible today. Get old or poor here and you have to get out. That is, I suppose, characteristic of most places in the U.S.

The thought of growing old in Fitchburg is still pretty depressing. Yes, we now have more places to eat, more places to live, and good sanitary sewers. It’s a good place to excavate, eat and evacuate.

Fitchburg's Grand Opportunity

Phil Lewis, "retired" Professor Emeritus of Landscape Architecture, shares with us a revised version of the comments he recently submitted regarding Ruekert-Mielke's proposed "Northeast Neighborhood" Plan. [Emphasis and clarification in brackets are mine.] -- Terry

To Ruekert-Mielke and Fitchburg's Planning Commission:

The option to integrate the two plans (on the rail corridor) of Kelly and Wall appears to be taking shape. Truly high-density economically viable development at this location should be considered. A design providing opportunities for such high-density development, starting with a foundation framework than over time can be added to as demand for more facilities increases, is required. Such a design could also assure that future development would occur over first-phase surface parking lots. Ideally, such a design would look to underground parking now and in the future.

Based on information presently available to me, development of the Sveum property [in the Northeast Neighborhood] should be postponed until the necessary transit-oriented density on the rail corridor is achieved. This requires a major effort by all to improve and utilize the rail corridor for transit. Consideration should be given to moderate-density adjacent to high-density development and organic food production opportunities should be pursued (see Sveum property) along with E-Way expansion at this time. I have presented such ideas publicly on a number of occasions.

I have also noted that a large percentage of the people in Dane County live within one mile of a rail corridor and Fitchburg has a grand opportunity to put into practice the kind of development that supports mass transit and higher liveable densities, that provides greater amenities for daily living, local food production, preservation of natural and cultural resources, and avoids mindless sprawl.

Since a high percentage of Dane County people live within a corridor, one mile either side of a rail line, and since this percentage uses electricity, doesn’t it seem reasonable to locate proposed new [ATC] transmission lines within this rail corridor, placed within or attached to higher density structures, or beneath them, as is possible in Fitchburg? As part of urban structures (easily accessible for repair, less susceptible to weather and other damage, grounded to eliminate stray voltage problems, and well insulated for protection of their surroundings), electricity for magnetic induction motor propelled personal rapid transit or other applications with minimal line losses would be available. Towers that unnecessarily disrupt our magnificent landscape would not be needed.

Philip H. Lewis, Jr.

Check Out This Blog

There's a new blog in town called Healthy Future for Kids. I consider this a local blog because one of the authors is a Fitchburg resident. From their blog:

"2 Moms, Melinda, a journalist, and Rosanne, an MS Environmental Health Scientist, discuss health articles, information and ideas with the goal of healing our kids and saving our nation's future from big-ag, big-pharm and others who make money off of sick people."

Now that's a great goal for us to support!

I've benefited (via email) from the research by these two energetic and internet savy women for a number of months now. So, I'm glad to see them reach out to a broader audience through the blogosphere.

Please check it out and spread the word.

McIntosh Questions Indulgent Development

[The comments below (emphasis mine), and other public comments submitted to Ruekert-Mielke regarding the NE Neighborhood, can be found in 6 PDF files on the City's website here under "Comments from 7/12/07 Public Meeting."]

My name is Melanie McIntosh and I am a resident of Fitchburg's Hatchery Hill neighborhood. I have been following the issues involved in Fitchburg's urge to develop outwardly, especially in the eastern direction. Sprawl is a problem most everywhere and it is a problem here as well. Water resources are challenged by the pressures of development and other quality issues most everywhere and they are challenged here as well. Farmland is disappearing most everywhere and it is disappearing here as well.

What is wrong with city and land use planning processes that they don't favor the preservation of natural resources and farmland? Why won't we stand up and initiate new planning processes such as have been adapted in Ashland, Wisconsin and some other communities? Perhaps there isn't the knowledge level on Fitchburg's City Council to be able to move toward such planning processes?

It baffles me that the majority of Fitchburg officials seem to be able to place economic development as paramount over preservation of land to grow food and over water to fulfill basic needs. Even if the aesthetic and moral aspects of preserving nature are set aside, and it seems that they are frequently set aside in this land use planning process, then how do Fitchburg officials square with the idea of no holds barred development of farmland?

And how do Fitchburg officials stand up for a process that puts at risk one of the lakes and wetland areas that make Dane County such a great area to live in? Perhaps it is a problem of putting other community's resources at risk not our own? Hopefully not. Perhaps it is that developers make great neighbors and community leaders? Hopefully not. Or that they are men relating well to the men of the council? Let's hope that isn't the reason. As you can see, I don't understand the dynamics involved in such indulgent approaches to development and the conversion of farmland to more residential developments. It seems the mayor and a few other Council members are impatient when it comes to the discussions of land use and natural resources. I watched part of the testimony on local access television and I learned how impatient the council is with public testimony.

I was attracted to Fitchburg because of the leadership it showed in recycling. I thought it was a community committed to sustainability of natural resources. Was I mistaken?

Please register my view that residential developments should be limited to the areas nearer to Fish Hatchery Road. Please don’t allow unlimited development in the city's northeast area.

Thank you for this opportunity to share my opinion,

Melanie McIntosh
Fitchburg

New City Website

It is immediately obvious that the new City of Fitchburg website (here) is a vast improvement over the previous version. Gone is that horrible list of buttons that scrolled on forever and appeared to be sorted by a cryptographer. And locating material is no longer a guessing game. Want to know where to find the Phil Lewis presentation? Use the Search box.

“You are here” provides the current “breadcrumb trail” which, according to Wikipedia, gives “users a way to keep track of their location within programs or documents. The term is taken from the trail of breadcrumbs left by Hansel and Gretel in the popular fairytale.” (And you thought you wouldn’t learn anything new today!)

I was excited to see “Coming Soon… Community Videos” until I noticed the lead in -- “Moving to our community?”

My wishlist still contains two things: (1) the ability to watch FACTv recordings of the City Council and Planning Commission (or other) meetings via the website at my leisure (but, would I really give up those parking lot conversations?) and (2) RSS feeds to review, at a glance, summaries of new web content as it is added.

I don’t believe there is currently money in the 2008 budget for website maintenance including my wishlist items which would increase community involvement and awareness about our city government. So, don’t we all have a few phone calls to make? (Common Council phone #s are here.)

Phil Lewis - Workin' on the Railroad

Regional Design – Creating Frameworks for Quality of Life, Peace & Survival

You gotta love that title! On July 26, 2007, I had the pleaure of attending this presentation by retired UW Professor Emeritus, Phil Lewis who just completed his 57th year of focusing on "Regional Design," a study that requires an understanding of how communities in the region fit in harmony with the values and visions of its people. Other first-time and repeat attendees included members of the Fitchburg Planning Commission, city staff and others.

I'm not the first (or last) one to say it: Phil Lewis is a true visionary. As the UW Professor of Landscape Architecture who, in 1970, designed the E-Way (environmental protection corridor), we owe him a debt of gratitude for bringing his beautiful vision to life. With 3,600 acres of greenspace covering an area that is 4 times the size of famed Central Park in NYC, the E-Way is enjoyed by almost everyone in the county.

Phil Lewis (Photo by Steve App, State Journal)

Over a few posts, I will share some of what I learned about his regional designs especially for the southern part of Wisconsin including Fitchburg. The City of Fitchburg website has downloadable PDF files (here) containing slides from his Powerpoint presentation some of which I will include in my articles.

Fitchburg and all of Dane County has a tremendous opportunity to take advantage of Professor Lewis’ decades of research and design in our region. And I hope that more people are able to hear his ideas and discuss his visions for the future.

If you want to skip ahead and read about Professor Lewis' ideas for Greentech Village and the Northeast "Neighborhood" in Fitchburg, click here.

Regional Design is crucial to Goals and Visions

From Professor Lewis’ slideshow introduction:

"The use of regional design to reflect and enhance natural, social, and economic resources indigenous to a given region maximizes the existing strengths of that region... Regional design is required to make good comprehensive and transportation plans, and is deeply involved in landuse planning of all kinds... Regional design provides the designation of the proper frameworks, and the organization and methods of interpretation of available data for the development at any scale…

Development issues and the transportation and energy crisis bring regional design to the forefront. We no longer have the luxury of permitting any development scheme to proceed without determining regional goals and visions as well as the forms which they will take.

Although considerable time is required for the actualization of ‘big picture’ plans… their utility and worthiness is clear. They provide a long-term context within which to identify and evaluate short-term opportunities.”

Regional Design should precede Planning

Unfortunately, Regional Design doesn’t always precede Planning as it should. Design concepts begin by identifying all natural and cultural features you want to protect and enhance. They also look for regional patterns and identify 3D concepts for how to build higher, livable densities without destroying critical, life-sustaining systems. This certainly sounds like the right place to start.

Once the Regional Design is complete, Planners use "democratic, social, political, and economic tools" to implement the overall design. As you would expect, for best results, Regional Designers and Planners should work together with feedback between them.

Unguided growth threatens global life support systems

Professor Lewis took us on a whirlwind tour starting with the broad view (the planet) and eventually focusing in on Fitchburg.

This shouldn’t be news to you, but “Unguided Growth Threatens Global Life Support Systems.” In the U.S. alone, the projected net population increase for 2007 is one person every 10 seconds. The world population is expected to double in the next 30 years. It's hard to imagine the huge impact on all of our systems. But, as Mr. Lewis points out, it certainly elevates our responsibility to future generations.

[Side note: One of my favorite tools for explaining growth rates for populations or anything else is a video by retired Professor of Physics, from the University of Colorado, Dr. Albert Bartlett. Do you think 2 or 3% annual growth is insignificant? Click here and choose Video-Stream.]

With increasing population and diminishing cultural and natural resources, what will the future look like? Phil Lewis believes that part of our challenge is to build in harmony with the area’s cultural and natural treasures and to “urbanize sprawl.” Although this sounds like an oxymoron, it means that future growth will be higher in density to lessen the impact on (at least some of) our natural resources.

How could we do this? Build densely around rail corridors.

Dane County’s Rail Network connects to Circle City

The concentration of light, seen in photographs taken from a satellite at night, shows that every one of the cities and villages in Dane County rose up along the old rail network that radiates out from Madison like a nine-armed (or is it legged?) octopus. (See image from page 4 of the presentation.) Most of the people in Dane County are within a 1-mile walk from a train track, yet we no longer transport people by rail. This offers an opportunity for the county and the region.

As the diagram below (from page 17) shows, we are part of a large Circle City network representing one of the 23 “Urban Constellations” identified in the U.S. These groups were formed by connecting cities, with over 20,000 people, in a way that would have the least impact on the nations resources. Circle City covers a 4-state region and its perimeter includes Chicago, Cedar Rapids, Minneapolis, Green Bay and Milwaukee.

Circle City - Major Cities and Rail Lines (page 17)

Dane County sits close to the middle of this ring of growth, situated along one rail line that traverses the state from Milwaukee to Prairie Du Chien and others extending from Madison to Janesville or Rockford before connecting to the circle near Chicago. I can't help but think that it must have been fun to create the enormous 3D model of the entire Milwaukee Road line which occupies a fraction of his immense studio. (See photo below from page 72 of the presentation.)

Approximately 85% of all people in the U.S. live in one of the 23 Urban Constellations. There are 17 million people inside of Circle City constellation, of which, as many as 85% live close to the rail lines. Thus, this large population would be well-served by passenger trains. And not just for commuting but for vacationing as well. For example, one of the scenic, recreational gems inside of the circle is the “Driftless Area,” a vast expanse of unglaciated landscape, in south-western Wisconsin and beyond, that is a valuable but little known natural resource.

The ruggedness of the landscape can be seen in the picture below (from page 21). Imagine getting on a train in Fitchburg and traveling to Lake Michigan or Chicago or perhaps heading toward the Driftless Area and then on to Prairie Du Chien where you board the Delta Queen for a trip to New Orleans (after it recovers). [Pardon the rhyming names... it couldn't be avoided.]

Circle City - 17 Million People (page 21)

Environmental Corridors

An inventory of natural resources includes water and wetland systems which were crucial to every settlement and steep topography which often meant that timber operations were inhibited making this an area rich with both natural and cultural features. The Driftless Area is a prime example of a huge environmental corridor that should be preserved.

In the 1960s, a major study categorized various landscape features and found that Wisconsin, with its Driftless Area, Northwoods and abundance of lakes and rivers, had 72 different "landscape personalities" compared to only 7 in Illinois. Anyone who has traveled through both states can surely attest to this! In Wisconsin, you need only travel a few miles for a complete change of scenery. In Professor Lewis' studio, you can examine the results of that study represented on a huge map of Wisconsin showing these cherished cultural and physical features. (See picture below from page 41.)

The Wisconsin Landscape Inventory showed that over 90% of the features, (such as trout streams, caves, hiking trails, farmers' markets, museums and marinas, to name a few), fall within the "environmental corridors" identified. Preserving these corridors is one of the goals of Regional Design.

To be continued in Part 2:

Currently, there is building and expansion on some of the richest farmland in the world all the way from Madison to Rockford. How do various growth strategies compare for resource preservation? And how can we use democratic tools, including education, to help protect our remaining resources as the population grows?

Downshift Your Driving

According to the Carbon Conscious Consumer (C3), "It takes total carbon dioxide emissions from most countries worldwide combined to equal just vehicle emissions in the United States, and as we consume more and more gas, pressure builds to drill in fragile and conflict-ridden areas. Yet a quarter of the trips Americans make are within walking distance, and each American driver could keep nearly a thousand pounds of carbon dioxide out of the air by taking the Carbon Conscious Consumer pledge to find an alternative to driving only one day each week. With gas prices so high, now is a great time to start reducing our reliance on cars."

Gas prices. Carbon emissions. Traffic. Three good reasons to join in pledging to reduce our driving each month through December. If we keep the car in the driveway one day each week in August, each gallon of gas that goes unused keeps twenty pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

I work from home so it's not about commuting for me. But, there are plenty of times when I really don't need to run that errand or I could take my bike instead of the car. And with some common sense (and a pinch of planning) I can easily combine errands in one trip. In fairness, I'd have to leave my car home 3 days a week to be much of a challenge so I'll commit to that.



Like many of you, I don't live in the most walker/biker-friendly area. The closest business, about 1 mile away, is ...(drum roll)... a gas station. Sadly, when nothing else is within walking distance, gas stations emerge. You can assess your neighborhood's "greenness" with the online evaluation tool Hans Noeldner recommended at http://www.walkscore.com/. Although it is not as accurate in a place like the ever-changing Fitchburg, it does help us think about options within walking and biking distance.

Even though I'm not as comfortable as Hans is about riding my bike on some of the local roads without bike lanes (not to mention donning tight black and yellow bike gear--go Hans!), I still have low carbon choices. (Not to be confused with low carb choices but there's certainly a connection since emitting fewer carbons might mean you don't have to watch the carbs. Now there's a win-win solution!)

Instead of just hoping that the rest of the world won't pick up our bad habits (like hopping into cars when we could walk or wait), doesn't it make sense to set a better, more sustainable, example for the world?

We can all contribute in our own ways. Do you have any ideas to share?

What If The Experts Are Right?

[Originally published as Letter to Editor in the Fitchburg Star on November 30, 2006.]

What if the experts are right
That the earth is a closed loop system
With limits on many of its natural resources
And long term consequences for many of our actions?

What would you change if you knew
That our unsustainable lifestyle
Wastes precious and finite assets
Like oil, natural gas and water?

What would you want if you realized
That our excessive consumption
Lowers the future standard of living for our children
By producing mountains of junk destined for landfills?

What would you do if you believed
That our disregard for resource limits
Allows us to enjoy the luxuries of today
In exchange for the necessities of tomorrow?

What if the experts are right
That we must make changes to ensure that
Our children have the resources they need
To lead healthy, happy and productive lives?

Terry Carpenter

Lindsay Questions Water Supply

Rosanne Lindsay's testimony from Aug. 7th Public Hearing:

[Most content from Letter to the Editor which appeared in the Fitchburg Star on Aug. 9, 2007.]

I’d like to talk about something that links all of us on the issue of Smart growth and growth boundaries, and that is the water.

The term water shortage has become a buzzword in Fitchburg this summer with two warnings from the city, including one mandatory warning, announcing water restrictions that limit yard sprinkling. Perhaps the water restrictions are due to increased growth in the area, or drought conditions, or both.

But as the city warns current residents to limit water usage on one hand, they are also moving to allow increased growth to our outlying rural corridor through the Urban Growth Boundary proposal. The approval of the Growth Boundary would pave the way for the approval of the NE Neighborhood development which would bring in thousands of new residents and hundreds of new businesses. It might also require siting a new municipal high-capacity well, diverting more water out of the ground.

Why would the city risk expanding our resident base, as sprawl, knowing that water shortages around the state are generating heated arguments about our current water supply?

For example, the city of Waukesha, known for overdevelopment and sprawl, still struggles to gain access to clean drinkable water even as they plan for new development (they drink radium-contaminated groundwater). Recently, a Waukesha developer and the utility proposed annexing Town property to sink two new heavy pumping wells near the 4600- acre Vernon Marsh Wildlife area to gain access to clean water for 200 new homes. But opponents to this plan convinced the Common Council to vote against it, saying they should halt new development so that they could live with their existing water resource.

Is this a novel idea whose time has come? Halt development and annexation in favor of conservation? More locally, the Village of Oregon Board and Planning Commission recently stopped annexing residential property due to concerns that the village has too many vacant residential lots.

I read, more often now, that developers are seeking to build closer to rural environmental corridors, wetlands, marshes and lakes, not only because they are often the only areas left to develop, but also because they are areas with a ready source of water.

The plan to chop up the open space of the Northeast neighborhood and cover it in asphalt is no different. But it doesn't have to happen. There are plenty of opportunities within Fitchburg's city core for infill development using existing wells that would lessen the impact on the flowage to Lake Waubesa's ecosystem. Further, why take away our access to highly fertile farmland, forest, and wetlands, surrounded by protected lands and parks that represent Fitchburg's unique rural, environmental corridor?

If current drought conditions should persist as a predictable summer occurrence then shouldn't we be cautiously planning our future growth to ensure that there will be enough water to sustain current residents? If future droughts continue to affect the levels of our area lakes, how will new high-powered wells for thousands of future residents from elsewhere help us to sustain our current water needs?

In considering the expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary, city planners and council members should explain how sprawl development would not sap city resources, spend more taxpayer dollars, and short our water supply in the process.