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.

WWPC Looks for Win-Win Solutions

Testimony by Phyllis Hasbrouck, Chair of the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition, from Aug. 7th Public Hearing:

Good evening. The West Waubesa Preservation Coalition thinks it is great to have a long-term urban growth boundary, but we disagree with including the Northeast Neighborhood in the boundary, and with ignoring the needs of the farmers in Stoner Prairie. We do not want that, or any other good farmland developed, but something is missing from this plan, and that is some solutions for farmers who want to, or must, stay in farming.

We have spoken to farmers who have large debts, for modernization costs incurred at a time when they were inside a FUDA, and thus a great credit risk. They have no pension, and no other property besides the farm. Some of them have serious health issues, and they have to pay their own health insurance, which is one case is $1965 per month for a married couple! They want to retire, but their high debt load and proximity to urban development makes their farm and business less-than-desirable for others farmers to buy. If they are not allowed to sell to developers, but can’t find a farm buyer, they are trapped.

This is no way to treat the people who feed us! Some will say that they do not have a God-given right to be millionaires, and I agree with that. But they should not retire from decades of farming as paupers either. Every level of government should be working on ways to make farming a viable way of life, with retirement a possibility.

What could Fitchburg do? For the long term, it could set up a PDR program, so that farmers are relieved from development pressure, and so that its 50-year plan is not a joke that can be overturned every 2 years when new alders are elected. If a PDR program were adopted at the same time as a 50-year boundary, it would certainly lessen political opposition, since every landowner would have some form of compensation available.

And right now, even without a PDR program, it is possible for groups like the Natural Heritage Land Trust to purchase development rights, as long as they have a willing partner in the city government.

I see no reason why the Community Economic Development Authority of Fitchburg can’t make it their priority to assist agricultural businesses to come, stay, and prosper in Fitchburg. For instance, why not look for a solution to both the ATC problem and the manure problem, by creating a TIF to fund a cooperative methane digester that would create electricity for the city? Why not let farmers apply for low cost loans under the city’s umbrella? Could the city save Fitchburg farmers money by creating a health insurance pool for them?

What about reverse mortgages or recharge rights? These are possibilities that the CEDA could look into. There are so many things that the city could do, and the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition would be happy to help with research and organizing.

I suggest that if you want to have a minimum of controversy and political fallout from these momentous decisions, you take the time to come up with win-win solutions, where no one is left feeling like they totally lost. There is no hurry. In the east, there is no housing shortage that decrees that the Northeast Neighborhood Plan be quickly approved. Quite the contrary! Every day the stock market reels some more from the slump in housing and rise in foreclosures.

In the west, there is no need to rush through the Urban Growth Boundary that cuts people off from long-expected compensation without fashioning some alternative. Yes, the Comprehensive Plan is supposed to be done by 2010, but already some communities are applying for extensions. And a lot could be accomplished in two and a quarter years if CEDA and other government bodies made it their priority to explore what other cities have done, and to come up with proposals for Fitchburg.

Fitchburg Neighborhood Plan Would Threaten E-way and Lake

By Bill Livick
Oregon Observer editor

This article appeared in the August 2, 2007 edition of the Oregon Observer.

When Oregon’s Village Board unanimously passed a one-year moratorium on residential annexations in May, trustees sent a clear message that they wanted to put the brakes on outward expansion. Under the leadership of then newly elected Village President Steve Staton, the board did an about face from the preceding six years, when boards led by Jerry Luebke gave a green light to virtually any and all development proposals.

Today’s Village Board has indicated its preference for what’s known as infill development, filling unused space within present boundaries and building up, rather than out. In passing the moratorium, the board noted the downturn in the housing market and the decrease in the number of 2007 building permits in the village, as well as the high number of vacant lots in the Bergamont development.

Members of the Village Board have suggested that the annexation moratorium could be extended another year or two if things don’t turn around, and thus far there’s no indication that the housing market will.

Unlike the village’s new go-slow approach to residential development, the city of Fitchburg appears to be moving forward with plans to develop an 868-acre tract between County Hwy. MM and Larsen Road known as the Northeast Neighborhood. Planners estimate the project would add 1,432 new residences and 103 acres of commercial development in an area that is presently agricultural property and woodland. Such urban sprawl in that area, which is very near the Nine Springs E-Way corridor, is unwise.

A group of citizens from Fitchburg and the town of Dunn are opposed to the idea for several reasons. Their No. 1 concern is the threat it would pose to Lake Waubesa and two watersheds – the Nine Springs Creek watershed and the Swan Creek watershed. The streams feed the lake and serve to “flush” its southern basin by moving water northeast and into the Yahara River at McFarland.

An article published in The Fitchburg Star in November says the Northeast Neighborhood development would cause “irreversible degradation” to streams and springs in a state natural area described as one of the highest quality and most diverse wetlands remaining in southern Wisconsin.

The same article cites UW-Madison researcher David Zaber, an expert in freshwater environments, who says the sprawling development would add pavement, homes, storm water runoff and thousands of more automobiles and people to the area. A better use of the land, he suggests, would be to create a conservation corridor from the E-way to Oregon using easements and funds for land acquisition.

Phyllis Hasbrouck, a founding member of the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition, likes Zaber’s idea. And she proposes other uses for the area, such as community gardens, a school of organic agriculture, a farmer’s market within biking distance and “a healthy lake full of healthy fish.”

“We’ve proposed that the Northeast Neighborhood of Fitchburg become a center for sustainable agriculture, instead of one more car-centered development that would incidentally ruin the wetland that keeps Lake Waubesa healthy,” Hasbrouck says. “Maybe you think this is a far-out idea that could never work. But we think that repeating a model whose time is passing is a really kooky idea.”

She goes on to say that if Fitchburg’s alders and mayor were to vote against including the 868 acres in the urban services area, the proposed development would not happen.

“Then all we need to do is raise some millions of dollars to buy the land back from the developer,” Hasbrouck says, adding that it’s not impossible. “People do it every day. More and more donors, foundations and companies are seeing the writing on the wall and want to put their money towards a sustainable future.”

• • •

Why should folks in communities south of Fitchburg care about what happens there? There are many reasons. Most of us value the quality of Lake Waubesa and the Nine Springs E-way, which is part of the Capital Springs State Park and Recreation Area. The area has 3,700 feet of undeveloped shoreline on Lake Waubesa.

Additionally, most people in Oregon, Brooklyn and the surrounding townships commute to Madison to work. Does the idea of hundreds, if not thousands, of more automobiles on Hwy. 14 and Hwy. MM appeal to you? Do you care about air quality?

And what about Oregon’s housing glut? Last week Observer reporter Seth Jovaag detailed the number of condominiums in the village that are sitting vacant – more than double the number per capita in Verona and Stoughton. (And also a far greater percentage than Fitchburg, which has no shortage of available housing.)

Finally, there’s the question of psychological well being. Of course this is difficult to gauge, but right now commuters to Madison pass through an agricultural and environmental corridor that is a welcome relief from the congestion of the city. Most people who live in outlying communities do so for a reason. If Fitchburg’s growth continues unabated, it won’t be too long before southern Dane County begins to look like the sprawling suburbs of Milwaukee.

What can we do about Fitchburg’s proposed Northeast Neighborhood? One option is to get involved in the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition. (Go to westwaubesa.org) If you’re not the activist type, how about writing a letter to Fitchburg’s alders or mayor. Tell them to take a look at what the Oregon Village Board is doing regarding residential development, and suggest they do the same.

In the meantime, just imagine what that nearly 900-acre tract could be other than another sprawling development.

Pourchot Hopes for Courageous Path

Caleb Pourchot's testimony from Aug. 7th Public Hearing:

Good Evening

The elephant in the room tonight that we, the citizens of Dane County, continue to ignore is the fact that we are using more water than is falling from the sky. Saving Stoner Prairie or southern Fitchburg, or even the Northeast Neighborhood for groundwater recharge may be completely irrelevant if we continue to exponentially increase the amount of water we pump out of the ground and send down to the Gulf of Mexico.

Developing around railroad corridors makes a lot of sense, but it ignores the fact that the groundwater underneath us is already tapped beyond its capacity to sustain us. The cones of depression in the deep water aquifer that have developed as a result of over 60 million gallons a day of water pumping have fundamentally changed the hydrology of our area to the point where our lakes are now feeding into our drinking water supply. To take a deep, hard look at this reality and its consequences requires courage and an abandonment of decades of economic dogma.

A dogma that assumes that future problems can be deferred as long as short term interests are fulfilled permeates our culture. Must we always be faced with imminent crisis before we act in our children’s best interest?

Perhaps the purpose of our municipal planning departments should be to re-design what we have in such a way that we can sustain the current population in health and happiness rather than encouraging double-digit growth and expediting our future water crisis.

To this end, as we talk about growth boundaries, we should be talking about the boundary that already exists– that is, the current Urban Services Area. We should also be talking about methods for permanently preserving the land outside that boundary that are fair and equitable to the land owners. Farmers must be preserved as well as farmland. The City should actively promote programs that allow farmers and other agricultural enterprises to innovate and thrive in the urban shadow where they will be perfectly situated to feed the local economy as well as the local population.

Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”

These are challenging words, indeed. My hope, however, is that there will be a few among us who are courageous enough to confront the truth that stares us plainly in the face, and that they will lead us out of our old ways of thinking and blaze a new path toward a sustainable future for our children.

Thank you

Shape Future with Phil Lewis' Vision

Terry's Carpenter' testimony from Aug. 7th Public Hearing:

I would like to see a 50 year or permanent growth boundary and I believe that this process is not a prediction, as some have said, but an effort to shape the future. I want to pick up on Samuel’s comments. On page 138 of his presentation, Phil Lewis provides examples of his Diverse Density design (see below). This graphic shows high density, mixed-use development right along the rail line. Just below that, is the transition to Moderate density as you get farther away. Farming would be adjacent to the Moderate density area and then lastly, Nature.

On the graphic for page 137 (see below), Mr Lewis shows how this would work, from Greentech Village to the points east, including the NE Neighborhood. You can see the existing rail line running N and S parallel to Syene Rd and the existing E-Way, shown in green, creating a buffer of open space north of this entire area extending all the way from Fish Hatchery Rd on the left to Lussier Heritage Center on the right. There is also a large area of greenspace around Lacy Road at the bottom of the highlighted rectangle that represents Watershed Protection for Swan Creek.

Inside the highlighted rectangle, the leftmost reddish/orange box represents High Density along the rail to about ½ way between the tracks and Hwy 14. Moderate Density is shown as lighter orange and ends at Hwy MM on the east. The yellow area from MM to Larsen Rd shows food production and Fitchburg actually ends there but the map goes on to show the Town of Dunn with a large Natural area extending close to Lake Waubesa.

Although Mr Lewis’ vision is being used in the proposed UGB, for example by focusing on the rail corridor, it is being ignored with regard to the NE Neighborhood. His design shows that everything to the east of Highway MM should be Agriculture and therefore excluded from the UGB and I urge you to remove the NE Neighborhood to accomplish this vision.

I think Mr Lewis would agree that more information is needed to see what impact any development in this area would have on the wetlands, streams, lakes and aquifer. So, portions of the NE Neighborhood that are west of Hwy MM should be included for Moderate Density if and only if they can be shown to cause no threat to Lake Waubesa or its ecosystem.

Phasing is extremely important to the promotion of rail for mass transit. So, I also hope that you will not allow leapfrog development to skip over Greentech Village into the NEN.

Another difference between the current UGB and Mr Lewis’ design is that he excludes large portions from the N/S rail corridor for environmental buffers as you saw on the map on page 137. This is important to allow wildlife, wetlands and streams to flourish and I hope you will designate such environmental corridors to connect natural areas and farmland on the east and west sides of the rail line.

I applaud the emphasis on Mass Transit. And rail seems like the best tool for the long term if we want to reduce our carbon emissions and global warming. Although rapid bus transit might be an interum solution.

I also urge you to seek solutions that will not only protect farmland and other resources but will allow farmers to retire gracefully and help new people begin farming in the urban shadow. We need Purchase and/or Transfer of Development Rights and other programs to empower all farmers, including those whose families settled the Town of Fitchburg. We can’t ignore the fact that our decisions pit neighbor against neighbor as farms fall under different economic rules based on changes to the Growth Boundary. We need to protect farms and respect farmers.

I disagree with some who believe that we owe a profit to land speculators. But, I strongly believe that we owe a decent living and retirement to farmers after their decades of Debt, Sweat and Fears. I hope you will take this into consideration. Thank you

Cooke Explains the Depths of Frustration

Samuel Cooke's testimony from Aug. 7th Public Hearing :

I appreciate what you have to go through to set policy. It is not easy weighing all the issues and deciding what is important and what is not regarding land use. That being said, I have to say that I, and others, both here at the meeting and not here at the meeting, are getting very frustrated with what we see happening. Many of us prepare statements and come to the meetings, we write letters to the editor of the Star, for example, and spend lots of time preparing comments on the reports but the Northeast Neighborhood portion of the Urban Development Boundary Map remains exactly the same as when it was originally proposed.

So, I want to help you to fathom the depths of our frustration, such as when we see what the stated Planning vision is for Fitchburg and then we witness something different. Here is the first sentence of the Draft City of Fitchburg Vision Statement’s second paragraph:

Respectful of its past, its unique natural areas, and its agricultural heritage, Fitchburg’s government recognizes the values of the community - our citizens.

That is what this public hearing is all about. That is what previous public hearings have been about. Yet when large numbers of people consistently speak out about the very real dangers to our surface water and groundwater from widespread development in the Northeast Neighborhood the Urban Development Boundary Map remains completely unchanged.

To further illustrate the frustration, 76% of residents who responded to the 2005 survey the City turned out (76%!) were “…very supportive of policies that would maintain open- or green-space between Fitchburg and neighboring municipalities. 79% were very supportive of open- or green-space within the city. That’s right from the Fitchburg website.

Yet the Northeast Neighborhood representation on the Urban Development Boundary Map remains unchanged. There are a lot of very frustrated people as a result of this – we seem to not be listened to at all. How would that make you feel?

And as I, and others, have participate in this process, through attending and speaking at meetings, by spending hours and hours reviewing and commenting on the Ruekert Mielke Draft Stormwater Management report I, and others, watch as many other changes were made from the initial Draft Urban Development Boundary Map. Changes that appear to have originated, at least in part, from comments and interests voiced at past public hearings and meetings.

But not a single change to the Northeast Neighborhood part of the growth boundary has been made.

The other changes have added hundreds of acres of land that weren’t in the original draft map (Stoner Prairie area, McGaw Neighborhood and the huge area north & south of Irish Lane, east of Hwy 14). Hundreds and hundreds of acres added for development and not a single acre removed from the Northeast Neighborhood, despite it being the part of Fitchburg that is adjacent to Nine Springs Creek, the E-Way, Swan Creek watershed, Lake Waubesa wetlands, Big Fen, Deep Springs, organic farms and our immediate neighbors to the east who have invested millions in preserving what a vast majority of Fitchburg residents value also – open, green spaces.

Maybe we just need to come together on a common vision. Maybe we just need to all really listen to Professor Phil Lewis.

Terry Carpenter and I recently attended a presentation on Regional Design by retired Professor Phil Lewis. Professor Lewis is the “father” of the E-Way and has served as a consultant to Governors and other notables from Wisconsin. He has studied the entire region for about 50 years. His vision of a sustainable future includes a number of Wisconsin cities connected by passenger rail. As I’m sure the Planning Commission is aware, he has included Fitchburg in some very special regional plans as part of a Circle City design. Other regional communities have embraced Professor Lewis’ vision. This is an amazing opportunity for Fitchburg to be part of the work of a visionary and his vision includes the Northeast Neighborhood.

I urge the Planning Dept to find a way to share Phil Lewis’ vision with area residents because Phil Lewis’ vision is right in line with what I think the Plan Commission and the Council wants – increases in density where it makes sense, reliance on commuter rail and what the Plan Commission, Council and the people of Fitchburg say that they want – protection of open- and green-spaces.

We are a very polite group and I respect the Plan Commission and Planning staff but we are frustrated. Please listen to our consistent and thoughtful message by following Phil Lewis’ concept of preserving the Northeast Neighborhood east of Highway MM and get the area east of Highway MM out of the delineated growth boundary.

Public Hearing Aug 7th - Yes that's tonight!

Come one. Come all. Let Fitchburg know that you care. Join the chorus (in or out of harmony). Make your voice heard!

This is your chance to comment on the current Long Term Growth Boundary sometimes called the 50-Year or Urban Growth Boundary. I know it's scary but someone has to think about the future. I wish my parents had thought about the future when they got me hooked on internal combustion engines and gadgets (just kidding -- I take full responsibility).

Now: To learn more about what the city’s current plans, go to http://www.city.fitchburg.wi.us/ and click on the link under Comprehensive Plan. Then, check out the Draft Urban Development Boundary Map to see what’s slated for development in the next 50+ years.

I don't like seeing the Northeast Neighborhood targeted for development along with many other rural areas. I think we need to preserve more land, protect more resources and treat the farmers fairly when we add or change rules. That's what I'll be talking about tonight. I hope to see (and hear) you there.

Tonight: Come to the Planning Commission meeting which begins at 7:00 pm in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 5520 Lacy Road. (If you leave now, you can still make it!)

Here is the agenda for the meeting: http://www2.city.fitchburg.wi.us/meetings/files/PLAN_080707_AG.pdf

Agenda item # 8 is a "Public Hearing regarding the draft amended long term growth boundary map in accord with R-30-07." You can register to speak but expect a 3 minute per person maximum. Please consider reading your remarks into the record at the Public Hearing so that everyone can benefit by hearing your concerns.

There are two other Public Hearings tonight so this might be a long one!

Agenda item #6 is for "Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution R-63-07, modifying Appendix H of 1995 Land Use Plan, re: clarifying where neighborhood plans may take place, and dividing McGaw Park Neighborhood into two planning areas."

Item 6 is a bit of mystery to me since I thought we were considering a moratorium on new Neighborhood Plans until after the Comprehensive Plan is completed. So, why would a division of any neighborhood need to take place now? Perhaps I'll hear the answer tonight.

Agenda item #7 is for "Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution R-64-07, a resolution to create Appendix I of the 1995 Land Use Plan re: classifying lands within extraterritorial plat review area as established in Ordinance 2007-O-15."

Item 7 was prompted by the proposed subdivision in the Town of Verona refered to as the "Desperate Housewives" Perhaps it should be called "Desperate Developers" since the plans wouldn't be approved based on current standards if this property were in the Cities of Verona or Fitchburg.

Tomorrow: I'll post my Public Hearing remarks on the Blog tomorrow afternoon and you'll be able to add any comments you have to that post.

Eggleston's Review of "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle"

From Rich Eggleston (emphasis added by Terry):

I recently picked up Barbara Kingsolver's book, "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life," a back-to-our-roots look at industry-driven, petroleum and other chemical based agriculure, that shakes its head at how far America has been led down a path chosen by the agribusiness community, not a bunch of people you'd want your kids associating with.

The book explores how Americans in particular have chosen Big Macs over shepherd's pie, and in the course of doing so we've brought down on ourselves all kinds of health problems. If you want to know what health problems, read the book. They're too depressing to repeat here.

By focusing on a family's year-long adventure away from America's bad food habits, the book somehow avoids being overly judgmental and preachy. It's evangelical, true, but the evangelizing is below the surface of a narrative that flows from asparagus to zucchini, a time for every vegetable under heaven.

Being by nature a political beast who is losing my patience with a lot of today's policies that seem to cater to Wall Street instead of Elm Street, I tend to look for the villains lurking behind the gingham curtains in the kitchen.

And I find them aplenty: the folks who not only took the bread out of bread (replacing it with air), but the taste out of tomatoes and the nutrition out of a host of factory-farmed plants and animals. Kingsolver calls the chain of events "The Case of the Murdered Flavor."

When our friends in agribusiness were through murdering flavor and neutering nutrition, they put the result in microwaveable containers and added enough chemicals to give any particular food a shelf life approximating the half life of radium.

This enabled them to put farmers on an economic treadmill, running as fast as they can to stay in place so they can barely afford higher pesticide and chemical fertilizer costs. Only 19 cents of every food dollar ends up in the farmer's pocket, according to an aside on page 208 of the book.

No wonder farmers are hurting. The government responds by directing nearly three-quarters of farm subsidies to corn and soybean producers, who produce animal food, not people food, the book notes. The subsidies total some $80 billion a year when you factor in transportation, according to Kingsolver's husband, Steven L. Hopp, who provided some of the grim statistics.

Ain't this a great country? And I still have two pages of the notes I wrote on the book to sift through. I'm somewhat proud to have written this junior diatribe (The Fitchburg Star will get the fullblown version) after having eaten a true locavore's supper: lamb chops purchased at the farmer's market in Phillips yesterday and corn from a little ways down Highway 13. The green beans came from Michigan, though. All brought to Dane County at the end of a glorious week in the northwoods.

I somehow escaped tomatoes from our garden in Fitchburg, but I'm sure I'll have to pay for my sin of omission.

Rich Eggleston