'Green Plan' is Actually SPRAWL

Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to the Editor, Fitchburg Star
Submitted by Rosanne Lindsay, Fitchburg

Call it what you will, but the proposed Sveum development, on the outer edges of Northeast Fitchburg, is SPRAWL by any name, and raises more questions than it offers answers.

This plan may boast many things, including parks, rain gardens, native plantings, and filling a need to “provide houses in an area that reduces commuting distance” (for whom I might ask)? What it does not do is tell Fitchburg residents who care about increased taxes, what they will pay to provide services (water, sewer, fire, etc) to the NE area. Nor does it convey to those who care about protecting our natural resources, how these measures will be enforced.

The need for “greening” this plan was prompted by concerned citizens who believe that runoff pollution from this development will irreversibly degrade the native fauna and flora, creeks, springs, the Northern Pike Fishery, Lake Waubesa, and one of the highest quality and diverse wetlands in southern Wisconsin, only one mile from the site.

While Mr. Sveum’s effort to respond to citizen concerns was noted by some on the Plan Commission, discussion of specific measures by Sveum to address risks to the basic water chemistry and aquatic habitat conditions on pre-existing water bodies (Swan Creek, Lake Waubesa, Deep Spring), was lacking. These risks have been noted to be high and growing, according to Environmental Toxicologist, Dave Zaber (See 11/16/06 Star article).

Mr. Sveum’s consultant predicted that Swan Creek will not be adversely affected by development and that surface runoff will be cleaner than current conditions. However, he did not talk about accountability. In fact, Sveum et al. admitted that compliance with infiltration on individual lots cannot be enforced so how are we assured that groundwater recharge will be maintained or that runoff and the water bodies will remain clean?

There are accountability mechanisms which should be insisted upon: Sveum’s proposed Northeast Neighborhood, like his Harlan Hills, and Swan Creek developments contrast with the very rigorous accountability mechanisms that Bill Linton imposed in the Fitchburg Center. There, independent associations oversee the management and monitoring of compliance with covenants, much like the Natural Heritage Land trust does for PDR easements in the area.

In Harlan Hills, no additional funds will be provided to restore promised prairie land which is overwhelmed by clover. Mr. Sveum seeded and maintained the prairie for 2 years. Unfortunately, prairie restoration needs 3-5 years of maintenance to ensure proper generation of prairie plants, according to local experts. Promises of “no lawn pesticide application” (to protect the Arboretum) became “certain pesticides acceptable.” And even banned pesticides are sometimes applied because there is little, if any, ability to enforce.

As a result of the heavy rains last August, the Village of Oregon is faced with purchasing several flood-damaged homes, at least partly at taxpayer expense. The homes are downhill from Oregon's new Bergamont and Alpine Valley developments. Some have accused the developers of "design error" from poor stormwater management plans. Others say the developers are not to blame because they complied with the stormwater ordinance and other village requirements. Either way, there is little doubt that the developments exacerbated Oregon's pre-existing flood problems, as some residents had predicted.

These local histories prove that good intentions and inadequate city policies are simply not enough. Maintaining our precious environmental resources--the forests, prairies, wetlands, fisheries, and lakes that make living here so desirable--requires nothing less than full commitment to do whatever it takes to accomplish the goal, be it prairie restoration or preserving Swan Creek and the Lake Waubesa watershed.

Developers can talk all they want about "sustainability" and "green" development but they often fail to follow through. So it must be the city’s job to probe for specifics and examine concerns raised previously about the developer's Northeast Neighborhood Plan, including the suitability of the model being used for hydrological impacts, the absence of cumulative effects analysis, the preservation of rare hydric soils and infiltration, and the threats to our aquifer (groundwater) from a burgeoning population, as described by UW Ecologist Cal DeWitt.

Mr. Sveum also gave the rosy economic prediction that his thousand-home development will not cost the city money. But will Mr. Sveum give the city an enforceable guarantee as the country heads toward a recession? Or will Fitchburg taxpayers be the ones who bear the cost when his prediction proves incorrect? Virtually all Cost of Urban Service studies show that residential development leads to a net drain on local government budgets. What justifies Mr. Sveum’s belief that his Northeast Neighborhood development will be any different? What about reality of the nation’s economy; the shortage of credit to homebuyers resulting from the mortgage meltdown, the perceived need for more housing when many homes stand empty waiting for a buyer, or the fall of the dollar? City officials should require a full Cost of Urban Services Study for all new development proposals as a matter of fiscal responsibility.

The public policy question is one of deciding whether or not “market forces” should allow this sort of development at this location when it makes such a dramatic influence on the area’s natural and recreational resources, as well as contributes to commuter traffic and sprawl. The fact that there is the rail line and the Green Tech Village plan, both of which do far more for the City, is an important alternative that must be given more thought.

Proposed developments, in conjunction with past and present developments, are adversely affecting groundwater and surface water resources throughout Dane county and this problem is particularly acute in this part of Dane County. Let's hope that at future meetings of both the Plan Commission and the Common Council, the city will ask many probing, skeptical questions that will truly serve the interests of the many Fitchburg residents waiting for answers.

And while Mr. Sveum may, indeed, share many of our concerns, he may be the only one to see “green” if the Northeast Neighborhood turns into more Fitchburg SPRAWL.

Proposed Development a 'Homebuilding Debacle'

Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to the Editor, Fitchburg Star
By Gary Leverington / Resident of Fitchburg

(Emphasis added)

I'm writing again to express concern about the proposed NE neighborhood plan. It is my hope that sensible leadership will prevail at the City Council to once and for all put a stake in the plans to turn the NE neighborhood area into a massive homebuilding debacle.

I ask all members of our community to consider where we are in the real estate cycle and vigorously oppose the NE neighborhood being turned into additional houses (and lots for sale) that we do not need and most citizens do not want.

More importantly, there are a plethora of valid environmental reasons to put a stop to turning the NE neighborhood area into paved roads and houses that just add to the oversupply of homes and lots for sale in Fitchburg. Creating a huge new supply of houses here will also place additional downward pressure on existing home values in Fitchburg.

To take land that could be used for organic farming, teaching and organic retail - with the ability to provide good quality food for those that live here now, and those that will come after us - and turn it into another grouping of paved roads, over fertilized lawns (with pesticides), and more houses is beyond irresponsible.

As for developers of new houses - once they've already acquired the land, asking them if we need more new houses is like asking the owner of a shoe store if it's a good time to buy shoes.

Let's request that our community leaders maintain control over what's in the best interest of the community. Adopting a people over profits theme.

As an alternative, perhaps the developer can come up with a plan for an organic farming village that can be a shining legacy for future generations - not just here, but for the entire area! Just imagine how popular this would be for the growing number of people seeking healthy, locally grown, organic food products! What a wonderful and beneficial legacy to leave to our children!

Consider the following: Mortgage performance has suffered: An alarming 5.6% of the nation's homeowners have fallen behind on their mortgage payments — up from roughly 4.7% a year earlier and the most since 1986. The percentage of homes in any stage of foreclosure has jumped to 1.7%, the highest since the Mortgage Bankers Association began tracking it in 1972.

According to some estimates, as many as 2.2 million homeowners could lose their houses over the next 24 months!

We've already seen the price of an American home lose 6.1% from a year ago, according to the well-respected research group S&P/Case-Shiller. The Census Bureau shows the price of new homes down even more — 13% in October, the sharpest drop in 37 years. Lending standards have also tightened so fewer would-be buyers can qualify for loans - this also adds to downward pressure on home prices. More supply with fewer buyers is supply and demand 101!

I fully expect more declines in 2008. Home values will likely fall by the mid-single digits nationwide, and more in select markets. For those that think Fitchburg is immune from a downturn - just ask the people in Florida that bought condos at the top of the market and now owe way more than their homes are worth. They too felt they were immune from a downturn. Let's not allow Fitchburg to become overbuilt and place our home values at risk!

For our community leaders, I know it's difficult to resist the temptation to accommodate developers, but in the example of the NE neighborhood plan in particular, denying approval is quite obviously the right thing to do for our wonderful community.

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

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.