Wetland Scientist Dr. Joy Zedler Re: Proposed NEN Development

Department of Botany
University of Wisconsin-Madison

June 5, 2014

To: CARPC Staff and Commissioners, and Kamran Mesbah, PE, Director of Environmental Resources Planning, Capital Area Regional Planning Commission, City County Building, Room 362, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Madison WI 53703 allcommissioners@CapitalAreaRPC.org, KamranM@capitalarearpc.org

From: Joy B. Zedler, Ph.D., Professor of Botany and Aldo Leopold Chair of Restoration Ecology

Re: Northeast Neighborhood (NEN)

I am a wetland scientist; I reside in the Town of Dunn at the headwaters of Murphy Creek. I have personal experience with runoff from Fitchburg, because a farm across the road from me despoils my native sedge meadow with sediment, nutrients, and pesticides. The runoff is converting native vegetation to Wisconsin’s worst wetland weed (reed canary grass, Phalaris arundinacea). A graduate student of mine recently showed that the portion of my sedge meadow that is dominated by reed canary grass has only half as many plant species as the area in front of the invasion, and many of the associates of reed canary grass are weeds. Another student documented increased nitrogen content of plant leaves as we sampled plants away from and close to the culvert that imports Fitchburg runoff from the corn/soybean field. The source of the problem is nutrient- rich runoff and the outcome is continued degradation and loss of substantial value (“natural capital”) due to runoff from a Fitchburg farm.

Here are my science-based concerns about urban development west of Larsen Road:

Agricultural runoff is damaging; urban runoff can be much worse. As rural agricultural lands convert to urban land use, the downstream wetlands lose native species and become dominated by invasive weeds, particularly
reed canary grass and hybrid cattails (Boers, Veltman and Zedler 2007, Frieswyk & Zedler 2007: “Our results show that increased urbanization in the watersheds of the Green Bay coastal wetlands (Fig. 3) coincided with the loss of wet meadow habitat (Fig. 7).”

The components of urban runoff that cause the conversion of wetland vegetation to invasive weeds are excess water, excess nutrients in the runoff, and excess nutrient-rich sediment, based on patterns in the field and controlled experiments in mesocosms (Kercher and Zedler 2004, Kercher, Carpenter and Zedler 2044, Kercher, Herr-Turoff and Zedler 2007: “We discovered a three-step invasion and degradation process: (1) initially, resident native species declined with prolonged flooding and sediment additions, and (2) prolonged flooding, sedimentation, and nutrients accelerated Phalaris aboveground growth; biomass rose to 430 times that of the control within just two growing seasons. The dramatic expansion of Phalaris in the second year resulted in the formation of monospecific stands in over one-third of the treatments, as (3) native species continued their decline in year 2. Disturbances acted alone and in combination to make the resident wetland community more invasible and Phalaris more aggressive, leading to monospecific stands.”).

Wetlands that hold water (i.e., prolonged hydroperiods) can support highly productive cattails at the expense of providing other ecosystem services, such as nutrient removal, soil stabilization, flood peak reduction, stormwater retention, and plant diversity support. In constructed wetlands, where we measured these six ecosystem services, we found the lowest levels in the wetland that became a wet pond (Doherty, Miller, Loheide, Prellwitz, Thompson, and Zedler In press): “Hence....ponding supported such high levels of NPP that other services appeared to be limited (suggesting tradeoffs).”

Settling ponds can remove some total suspended solids and some phosphorus, but dissolved phosphorus flows through the system, as does nitrogen (in both particulate and dissolved forms). Furthermore, nitrogen, which is poorly removed by wet ponds, is a major stimulus to species invasions in downstream wetlands (Herr-Turoff and Zedler 2005: “Increased N alone facilitates its suppression of native wetland vegetation (Green and Galatowitsch, 2002). Thus, Phalaris is presumed to have high N uptake and to increase retention of N within a wetland.”)

I often drive to/from work on Larsen Road and view the degraded wetland to the west. When it rains, I watch it collect enough water to become a pond, and when it rains heavily, it becomes a lake that spills over into the ditch along Larsen Road. The runoff is likely polluted with sediment, nutrients and pesticides. I have observed Swan Creek and Murphy Creek via canoe along the Lake Waubesa Wetlands (areas set aside by The Nature Conservancy and WDNR as a State Natural Area and recognized by Wisconsin Wetlands Association as a “Wetland Gem”). Wisconsin’s worst invasive weeds (reed canary grass and hybrid cattails) are poised to expand, as even more runoff and more nutrients flow downstream. And in Lake Waubesa, dense bluegreen algal blooms already occur in summer. More nutrient-rich runoff will further degrade the ecosystem services of both the lake and its adjacent wetlands.

These changes are inevitable if the NEN is allowed to develop without adequate buffers (at least 300’) around the maximum water level of the degraded wetland. A vegetated buffer could help absorb water, nutrients, and other pollutants. All one needs to do to see the effects of urbanization on our local wetlands is to compare vegetation along Swan Creek downstream from the Swan Creek development, or, at a much larger scale, the Nine Springs E-Way, which is dominated by the two worst wetland weeds in the state—reed canary grass and hybrid cattails. Waubesa wetlands need to be conserved and protected before it is too late. Upstream landowners who fail to protect downstream wetlands should be held responsible.

Why is it essential that our wetlands be protected from excess runoff of low quality water? In a updated analysis of the value of the world’s biomes, Costanza and colleagues (2014) provide new data that show the following (in 2007 US dollars): Four broad groups of wetlands provide $125,521 per hectare per year in ecosystem services, all of which lead to human well-being. That amount is 25 times the average for all other biomes. And comparing just the estimated value for ecosystem services derived from inland wetlands ($25,681/ha/yr) with that for cropland ($5,441/ha/yr) the ratio is 4.6. These services benefit all in perpetuity, so long as wetlands are conserved and protected from degradation.

Clearly, our inland wetlands are extremely valuable and deserve protection. Since Costanza published his first estimates of ecosystem service values in 1997, wetlands have become relatively more important providers of global ecosystem services, because other lands have undergone conversions to alternative uses, such as urbanization. Those changes in land use have reduced overall values of global ecosystem services some $4.3 - $20.2 trillion/yr from 1997 to 2011 (ibid.).

Some questions CARPC staff should look into:
• Why should wetlands in the Town of Dunn be degraded by inadequate protection measures in
Fitchburg?
• Why shouldn’t farmers be required to leave a buffer where their runoff flows downstream?
• Why shouldn’t urban developers be required to provide adequate buffers and treatment wetlands (not
just pits to collect phosphorus)?
• How will the impacts of any new development be assessed through actual monitoring of water,
nutrient, and sediment discharges?
• Why not establish a fine for improper protection of downstream wetlands? Fitchburg could require
developers to establish a bond so that downstream residents could obtain funds to provide weed abatement and other mitigating measures, such as nitrogen traps at the point of entry.
• Will contractors use the latest science-based information to design their runoff-control structures, instead of “best” management practices that are proving to be ineffective? I refer to topsoil addition to vegetated wetlands, reliance on “thick” vegetation to stabilize soil, and use of productive vegetation to indicate the presence of other ecosystem services. In our recent writings (Doherty et al. In press and Leaflets 27-28), we show how assumptions and predictions of models based on abiotic factors do not always hold up to actual measures of vegetated wetlands.

The Town of Dunn aims to protect wetlands that provide ecosystem services that benefit human well-being. If we apply the average value for inland wetlands from Costanza et al. (2014) to ~1,000 acres (404.7 ha) of set- aside lands, we provide an estimated $10,393,100 in ecosystem services per year. Even if that estimate is an order of magnitude too high, we still provide a million dollars in services annually, to the benefit of all in perpetuity (given wetland protection). Why should those values be diminished by inadequate buffering of upstream development to benefit a few people in the short term?

References cited:
Boers, A., R. Veltman, and J. B. Zedler. 2007. Typha x glauca dominance and extended hydroperiod constrain restoration of wetland diversity. Ecological Engineering 29:232-244.

Costanza, R., R. de Groot, P. Sutton, S. van der Ploeg, S. J. Anderson, I. Kubiszewski, S. Farber, and R. K. Turner. 2014. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26:152–158.

Doherty, J. M., J. F. Miller, S. Prellwitz, A. M. Thompson, S. Loheide, and J. B. Zedler. In press. Bundles and tradeoffs among six wetland services were associated with hydrologic regime. Ecosystems.

Frieswyk, C. B., and J. B. Zedler. 2007. Vegetation change in Great Lakes coastal wetlands: Deviation from the historical cycle. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33:366-380.

Green E K and Galatowitsch S M 2002 Effects of Phalaris arundinacea and nitrate-N addition on the establishment of wetland plant communities. J. Appl. Ecol. 39, 134–144.

Herr-Turoff, A., and J. B. Zedler. 2005. Does wet prairie vegetation retain more nitrogen with or without Phalaris invasion. Plant and Soil 277:19-34.

Kercher, S. M., A. Herr-Turoff, and J B. Zedler. 2007. Understanding invasion as a process: The case of Phalaris arundinacea in wet prairies. Biological Invasions 9:657-665.

Kercher, S. M., and J. B. Zedler. 2004. Multiple disturbances accelerate invasion of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) in a mesocosm study. Oecologia 138:455-464.

Kercher, S. M., Q. Carpenter, and J. B. Zedler. 2004. Interrelationships of hydrologic disturbances, reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.), and native plants in Wisconsin wet meadows. Natural Areas Journal 24:316-325.

Leaflet #10. Why are wetlands so valuable? Online at uwarboretum.org/research - publications menu.

Leaflet #27. How ponded runoff and invasive cattails reduced wetland ecosystem services in three experimental wetlands. Online at uwarboretum.org/research - publications menu.

Leaflet #28. How ponded cattail marshes can expert phosphorus: A conceptual model. Online at uwarboretum.org/research - publications menu.

What happened at the Fitchburg Common Council meeting on Feb. 26, and what it means

The Common Council approved the resolution to create an application for an Urban Service Area Amendment for the Northeast Neighborhood, but our fight isn't over yet! Click here to read more.

Phyllis Hasbrouck: Fitchburg doesn't need more undeveloped land

[The original letter to the editor.  An edited version appeared in the Wisconsin State Journal on 2/25/2013.]

Dear Editor,

Fitchburg Mayor Shawn Pfaff's desire to bring the Northeast Neighborhood into Fitchburg's Urban Service Area (USA) doesn't make sense from a taxpayer's point of view.  His Plan Commission voted on Feb. 19 to instruct staff to create an application to the Capital Area Regional Planning Commission (CARPC).

But Fitchburg already has around 1175 acres of vacant land in its USA waiting to be developed, and its taxpayers are already on the hook to maintain and repair all of that infrastructure as soon as it is installed.  The city leaders are already gambling that this huge area will fill up and provide the increased taxes needed to maintain and service it.  Is this a good time to add another neighborhood's worth of infrastructure to sweep, plow, inspect and repair?

With 15 years' worth of land just waiting for builders and buyers, why extend urban services even farther from the city center? It doesn't take 15 years to jump through the CARPC hoops: more like 6 to 18 months. There is plenty of time to apply when Uptown and the North McGaw area fill up.

Ask the taxpayers of Oregon, Sun Prairie and Stoughton how they like paying to plow streets with just a few houses on them. Developers are risk-takers: when they are skilled or lucky, they get a big payoff.  But the taxpayers shouldn't be forced to bet their hard-earned dollars on such a risky scheme.

On Feb. 26 the Fitchburg Common Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. and decide whether to plow ahead or wait. The taxpayers are invited to contact Mayor Pfaff at shawn.pfaff@city.fitchburg.wi.us and let him know what they want.

Yours,

Phyllis Hasbrouck
Chair, West Waubesa Preservation Coalition

The Missing Aquitard: A short explanation of why you shouldn't drill deep wells near the Yahara chain of lakes by UW Madison Professor Cal DeWitt

Here is an illustration from Wisconsin Geological Survey's Ken Bradbury that shows that he knows the situation with the Eau Claire formation:

You can access this from:
http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/partnerships/programs/docs/bradbury_slideshow.pdf

The whole presentation is worthwhile to read, but the illustration above (from page 5 of this report) is a good summary.

A few things to observe here:

1. A the base of the diagram is "Recambrian crystalline rock" -- note that it steadily rises from the west to the east; this rise in Precambrian bedrock is part of the Wisconsin Arch.  The "Mount Simon aquifer" was formed largely by sand deposition by an ancient sea over this arch. 

2. The "Eau Claire aquitard" (also call the  Eau Claire "Confining unit" was deposited next by the ancient sea, but as the sea got shallower from west to east, the deposition of silt gradually changed to the deposition of sand as the sea reached the beach (the deeper quiet waters allow deposition of silt, which later becomes the "Eau Claire shale" but the shallow more turbulent shallow waters in the foreshore and shore areas deposit sand which later becomes sandstone.

3. The Eau Claire formation thus becomes thinner and thinner from west to east, even as it changes from having much silt (which forms the shale) to having less and less silt and more and more sand (which forms the sandstone).

4. As this thinning progresses from west to east, and as this shift from silt to sand occurs as the sea water becomes shallower to the west toward the shore, the quality of the Eau Claire formation as an aquitard (confining unit) becomes less and less.

5. Upshore from the water the Eau Claire formation disappears altogether.

6. This diminishing and disappearance of the Eau Claire formation is strongly accentuated by the ancient bedrock valley that cuts below the Eau Claire formation as it progresses from north to south---a valley that now contains the Yahara chain of lakes and glacial till deposits---a classic "buried bedrock valley."

The recent work of Wasinee Aswasereelert adds vital information to all of this, and has been published not only as her Master's dissertation in Geology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, but also published as a refereed paper at:   http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/geoscipdf/1_GS19.pdf

Jay Allen: Say no to leapfrog development in Fitchburg

(Jay Allen, former mayor of Fitchburg and current mayoral candidate)

Many people believe that new development is always good for a community. Some types are good. They add to the tax base, create efficiencies in services, and, in some cases, can actually improve the pre-development environmental conditions.

Other developments may create new tax base, but also create huge drains on municipal services, cause significant environmental damage, and cost taxpayers far more than they provide in tax revenue.

The City of Fitchburg is currently considering a development in the second category. Known as the Northeast Neighborhood, the area is bounded by Highway 14 on the west, Larsen Road on the east, East Clayton Road on the north, and Goodland Park Road and Haight Farm Road on the south. This area is not contiguous to any other development.

Fitchburg has roughly 1200 undeveloped acres within the Central Urban Service Area (CUSA). Those areas have available water and sewer. Almost all are within the a 4-minute response time for the fire department. They are contiguous to current development, so it is efficient to provide other municipal services, like police, trash collection, street maintenance, snow plowing, etc.

The Northeast Neighborhood is not within the CUSA. Fitchburg is considering submitting an application to the Capitol Area Regional Plan Commission (CARPC) to add it. This application should not be submitted, and, if submitted, it should be rejected. Some reasons are as follows:

1) The area is almost ¾ of a mile from the current edge of development. Municipal services will have to travel 1.5 miles round trip across vacant land, at significant cost.

2) The area currently has no water or sewer service. Fitchburg’s Water Utility will have to borrow in excess of $2 million to build those utilities. The area within the CUSA can currently be served with little additional investment. Existing areas should be built before burdening the ratepayers with the cost of new infrastructure.

3) The Northeast Neighborhood is 7 to 12 minutes away from Fire Station #1. This is unacceptable, and people will be endangered. The current mayor has suggested that the City of Madison could potentially cover that area. It seems unlikely that Madison taxpayers would subsidize this service. Current staffing at Madison Fire Station #6 is barely adequate, and an additional crew and an additional engine would be very costly.

4) Fitchburg’s last Urban Service Area amendment was approved in 2010. CARPC was promised that it would be at least 5 years before another request, and that was predicated on significant development occurring. Fewer than 6 buildings are under construction in the 1200 acres available. Reason would expect hundreds of buildings before requesting another amendment.

5) Development of the Northeast Neighborhood poses a significant risk to Lake Waubesa, which already has a eutrification problem. No studies have been done to examine what the effect will be on Lake Waubesa.

6) There is no reason to do this with so much land currently available and a sluggish market.

The major landowner involved is a political supporter of the current mayor. Politics should not play a factor in what should be objective planning decisions. Sacrificing environmental protection and taxpayer money should not happen to reward a political supporter. No reasonable person would support this amendment. I hope that in this case, reason will prevail.

Jay Allen
Former Mayor
City of Fitchburg

Rich Eggleston: Fitchburg development plans overly ambitious

(From a Letter to the Cap Times)

Dear Editor: The guy in the red vest got it wrong. It’s Fitchburg that is truly 35 square miles surrounded by reality.

Our little city is entertaining grandiose plans to develop not one, not two, but four new “neighborhoods” that will house thousands of new residents with whom we, the existing residents, will be expected to share our schools, our roads, and our limited crime and fire-fighting resources.

These starry-eyed development blueprints include:

• The North McGaw neighborhood, a 398-acre tract. The entire McGaw neighborhood, 720 acres, is supposed to provide 1,900 new homes and 2.4 million square feet of commercial space — enough for 13 “big box” stores.

• “Uptown,” 450 acres in northeast Fitchburg, on which construction has already begun on 150 apartments in two buildings.

• The Northeast Neighborhood, which could add 800 to 1,400 new homes

• The North Stoner Prairie neighborhood, 322 acres including some of the best farmland in the world, which is envisioned as mostly industrial, but with a residential component as well, east of Seminole Highway.

This is all very nice. None of these developments is likely to include the kind of ticky-tacky that development entailed in earlier days. But Fitchburg may be biting off more than it can chew.

The comprehensive plan that developers and city officials are using to justify this growth was developed without in-depth consultation with our neighbors on how to manage expected growth. Infrastructure costs money. Despite the best-laid plans, growth inevitably damages the environment. Fitchburg should not seek to bite off more than its rightful share of Dane County’s expected population and economic growth. Doing so puts existing home values, existing neighborhoods and the environment we all cherish at risk. City officials must consider existing residents before being seduced by the sirens of development.

Rich Eggleston

Fitchburg

Read more

Testimony before the Fitchburg Plan Commission, 2/19/13 - Phyllis Hasbrouck

Good evening.  My name is Phyllis Hasbrouck and I'm the chair of the West Waubesa Preservation Coalition. There are so many reasons to oppose this development, and there are so many reasons why a person who supports it would still oppose it at this time.  From a taxpayer's point of view, the most important reason is that it would be bad planning, and it would unnecessarily raise the real estate taxes that homeowners pay, and that renters pay indirectly through higher rents.

As of June 2012, there were already 1175 acres of vacant land within the Fitchburg Urban Service Area.  The largest chunks are Uptown, formerly called Green Tech Village, and North McGaw Neighborhood.  There are only 6 buildings underway in Uptown, and none as far as I know in McGaw, so where's the need for yet more space?

You may ask, "What's the problem with just getting all of our ducks in a row, going through the CARPC process so that when the market is ready, we will be too?"  Well, you've already done that, by bringing in Uptown and North McGaw.  When the market wants to build, you've got areas all ready for single family, multifamily, mixed use, civic, retail, even some industrial.  By your own estimates, you have enough for almost 15 years of expansion.

It doesn't take 15 years to jump through the CARPC hoops.  It's more like six to 18 months.  So why not wait until you think you are 2 years away from filling up Uptown and North McGaw, and then start getting your ducks in a row?

What is the downside to getting ready too soon?  As soon as a developer puts in infrastructure, the city has to spend tax dollars to do all the cleaning, plowing, inspecting and repairing.  By opening up 1175 acres, you've already signed up the taxpayers for a big burden, and it's not clear when the tax base will catch up to the cost of the new services.  So is this a good time to bring in two more neighborhoods' worth of infrastructure?  I say "two more" because Mayor Pfaff also wants to bring in the North Stoner Prairie Neighborhood.

Now, I know that Fitchburg has a much better planning record the Village of Oregon and Sun Prairie, both of which expanded too much, too fast, and were left with largely empty "ghost neighborhoods."   But when you get new staff and new elected leaders, practices can change.  Senior Planner Tom Hovel has done an excellent job of carefully phasing in new developments, but in three years he could be retired, and there's no guarantee that his successor would be as wise.  There are many pressures on staff and commissioners and alders to accommodate powerful and wealthy people who want to build.  It is harder to resist those pressures when the land in question is already in the Urban Service Area.

This environmentally-sensitive piece of excellent farmland should only be considered for development when there is nowhere else to build.  That is clearly not the case now.

In Support of 300 ft Wetland Buffer

Photo of the southwest portion of Lake Waubesa and wetlands to the west by Nadia Olker.






Fitchburg has written into the Comprehensive Plan the use of 300 ft. buffers for wetlands outside of the current urban service area. This is a major step forward by the Fitchburg Planning Department, because the County only mandates 75 ft.

Below is an appeal by Peter Ellestad to protect our wetlands.

Please submit your comments to the Planning Deportment on this or other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan by the Dec. 28th deadline, or better yet, give them a bit more lead time and turn them in by Dec. 23rd. Click here for the city's comment form.

-- Terry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Members of the Fitchburg Planning Dept and the Common Council:

I am sending you this message to go on record as supporting the maintenance of a 300 foot buffer for wetlands outside the urban services area. I believe that the reduction of that barrier to 75 feet would provide almost no protection at all, and would put the precious west Waubesa wetlands, and the lake itself, at unacceptable risk. If in spite of compelling arguments against it, a large subdivision is created in the northeast neighborhood, the city should mandate requirements that allow as little damage as possible to environmentally sensitive areas.

In my opinion, a 75 ft buffer would lead to the creation of a sterile greenspace speckled with inert ponds and patches of invasive grasses, one that would be more like the numbing sprawl of suburban Chicago, with its depressing and inadequate imitation of a natural landscape, than the flourishing natural communities that exist in the watershed now. Please don't allow that to happen.

Sincerely,

Peter Ellestad
Fitchburg

Drumlin Community Garden

Here's a beautiful and timely letter from Rich Eggleston followed by several others on the same important topic. For more information about Drumlin Community Garden, check out their website here. -- Terry

----------------------------------------------------
Date: November 3, 2008
To: Elected officials and planning staff
From: Rich Eggleston, Fitchburg

Much of Fitchburg's celebration of 25 years as a city has focused on our strong rural roots, and as we contemplate our next quarter century, it behooves us to consider how to combine the best of our urban future with the lessons of our rural past.

One way to do that is to bring agriculture, even on a small scale, to families that otherwise might not enjoy the rewards and frustrations that come with tilling the soil. And I can't think of any program that is better at that than Drumlin Community Garden.

The northeast corner of Fitchburg has been an issue since before we were a city, and maybe that's a good thing, because we know more about what we've gained -- and lost -- through development than we did in the 1980s.

Maybe we're learning that every spot that brings us closer to our rural past is special.

Drumlin Community Garden is one such place.

It comprises more than 40 families working together to provide roughly 1.5 acres divided into family-size garden plots rented out on a sliding-scale basis, and two acres of larger plots managed cooperatively where crops are grown for the South Madison Farmers Market and local restaurants, all of it managed in an environmentally responsible fashion that's about as organic as can be.

Besides hands-on experience in sustainable, small-scale urban agriculture, the garden partners with neighborhood organizations to educate families and youngsters in sustainable food production, and offers workshops in some of our rural traditions like composting, canning and making meals from scratch.

Drumlin Community Garden isn't just a "commercial zone" on a land-use map. It's a doorway to our rural past. It's a very special place.

Preserve Existing Gardens

Submitted by: John Fournelle and Judith Munaker, Fitchburg
November 3, 2008

Dear Planning Commission

We would urge you NOT to change the Southdale/Rimrock Neighborhood's zoning to "commercial" status.

In this time of growing difficult economic conditions, it is becoming increasingly obvious that we should not necessarily rely upon food coming from long distances -- which assumes low transportation costs. The day may not be far away when food grown locally will be considered absolutely essential, rather than an idiosyncrasy of a minority of citizens. Thus, zoning away a local community garden and replacing it with asphalt and luxury hotel rooms, is nuts.

Rather, if anything, you should instead insert language to "preserve existing gardens" with specific mention of Drumlin Community Garden located at 2849 Oregon Road. The decision to eliminate one of Wisconsin's first organic urban garden projects, now supplying healthy food to forty families, should not be made without exploring all the options available. We owe it to ourselves and our children to save all the urban farmland that we can.

Fantastic Opportunity

Here's an excerpt from another letter regarding Drumlin Garden. -- Terry

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

Submitted by: Shannon Day, Fitchburg
November 3, 2008

Dear Fitchburg Officials,

... I feel that City Planners are missing a fantastic opportunity here in Fitchburg. We can preserve Drumlin Community Garden and work within the confines of current neighborhoods to make Fitchburg great. We should PROMOTE the gardens and the community it represents and be smarter about using surrounding land to promote the long-term health of greater Fitchburg!

My Confession of Terrorist Ties

by Rich Eggleston
October 6, 2008

Fellow Fitchburgers:

Well, given the conduct of the McCain-Palin campaign, I guess it's time to confess my ties to domestic terrorism before they run an ad about me, or worse yet, hustle me off to Guantanamo Bay and throw away the key.

My ties to former Weatherman radical Bill Ayers are almost as strong as presidential candidate Barack Obama's.

It turns out my father, Bill Eggleston, worked for many years for Ayers' father, Thomas G. Ayers, who was CEO of Commonwealth Edison, the power company in Chicago. They didn't work closely together, but undoubtedly greeted each other in the elevators in the Edison Building at 72 W. Adams St. in Chicago's Loop. They may even have talked about their children, who were nearly the same age.

At the time, of course, no one could have known that Bill Ayers would grow up to marry Bernardine Dorn and join the radical movement, and later become Barack Obama's neighbor and an advocate for public education, a dangerous radical concept. Worse yet, Bill Ayers is now a professor at the University of Chicago, a dangerous radical institution.

During the 1960s, I admit that I had dangerous radical thoughts. I thought the war in Vietnam was wrong and the guy in the White House was a dangerous criminal. To this day, I'm a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union. I was never convicted of anything, though.

Neither was Bill Ayers, though he was charged. I don't know what evidence the feds had against him, but I know it was obtained through illegal wiretapping, because that's why the charges were thrown out. This was long before Congress passed the USA Patriot Act, and illegal wiretapping became legal.

Like Bill Ayers, I've been rehabilitated by the passage of time. As the Phil Ochs song proclaimed, "I believe in God and Senator Dodd and keepin' ol' Castro down." Bill Ayers may feel the same.

But by the standards of attack politics, he is still fair game. A campaign that has seen attacks on Barack Obama because of statements by his former minister can surely stoop low enough as to attack a man based on who lives in his neighborhood.

I wonder who lives in John McCain's neighborhood. Or, rather, his seven neighborhoods.

Rich

Is Fitchburg Serious About Sustainability?

By Phyllis Hasbrouck

Once in a while we see flashes of brilliance among the alders of Fitchburg, and they must be acknowledged. Though I no longer haunt each and every Fitchburg Common Council and Plan Commission meeting, being too busy organizing and fundraising for Fitchburg Fields, I do catch up on what happened by reading that excellent publication, the Fitchburg Star. And I was delighted to read that on Aug. 5, Alder Jay Allen took a principled stand and voted against the Lacy Rd. interchange with Hwy. 14!

Why did Alder Allen do it? Because the interchange is integral to the current plan for Green Tech Village, and he wanted to get people's attention as to how far the city has strayed from its original conception of that development. He said that the city "lacked the political will to enforce the standards it had once deemed essential. He referred to the protracted discussions involving the development of Orchard Pointe, the failure of the [Green Tech] Sustainability Task Force to endorse standards, and continued pressure by developers to create just 'another run-of-the-mill development.'"

I admire someone who can admit that something that they have supported is turning out differently than they had hoped. Conditions change, commitments are not always kept, and a person with flexibility and intelligence can change their vote if they realize that a project is no longer in keeping with their values. I want to know what happened to the rest of the alders? Why didn't they vote with Alder Allen?

As we parents know, if there are no consequences for bad behavior, children will stop taking our pronouncements seriously. Likewise, if developers' initial statements about how "green" a development will be are discovered to be just window dressing, but no one says, "Meet our standards or go somewhere else" then developers will just learn to give lip service and then do what's best for their own bottom line.

Stopping that interchange would have gotten the attention of all those who aren't taking sustainability seriously. I hope that we'll continue to see such leadership from Alder Allen, and that the rest of the alders will follow suit.

Fitchburg is planning for the past

By RICH EGGLESTON

It's only coincidence that communities across Wisconsin are required to have their much vaunted comprehensive plans completed not long after the last SUV rolls off the General Motors assembly line in Janesville.

But it's no coincidence at all that our best efforts to map our future via comprehensive planning could end up just as ungainly a dinosaur tomorrow as the Chevy Suburbans that made big money for GM in the era of $1.15 a gallon gasoline.

That's because we're drafting plans for a future that threatens us with $4, $5 or $6 a gallon gasoline under parameters established by the state when gas was $1.15 a gallon.

By the time most communities even thought about comprehensive plans, gas was heading toward $2 a gallon and urban density was still the poor stepchild of development. It never got invited to the ball.

At $6 a gallon, density might be the life of the party. But government is a dinosaur all its own, and a lot of time and effort has been invested in planning for a future of $2 a gallon gas. We have to shift gears, and fast.

Written only 10 years ago, the comprehensive planning law uses terminology that today is outdated as a roadmap to the future. It tells us to plan for transportation and utilities but doesn't say a word about climate change, energy conservation or sustainability.

As a result, we're driving full speed ahead into the past, and our brakes are bad. Fitchburg approved marvelous developments that were well suited to $2 a gallon gasoline. But as the words "subprime mortgage" entered the vernacular, miniature mansions for the masses still rose on Fitchburg's skyline.

The surest way to ease the pinch of high energy prices is to reduce energy consumption. Make the kids walk or bike to soccer practice. Pick up the phone instead of the car keys. Take a train or bus. Let's design our community to make those things easy to do instead of almost impossible.

Around the country, transit saves 3.4 billion gallons of fuel each year, saves us 541 million hours that otherwise would be spent in traffic jams and cuts greenhouse gas emissions by 26 million tons.

According to USA Today, Americans drove 22 billion fewer miles from November through April than during the same period in 2006-07. We are doing it.

And it's happening in a society that until yesterday was transit unfriendly. At $4 a gallon, it might be possible to get people out of their cars without prying their cold, dead hands off the steering wheels. At $6 a gallon, it's a sure thing.

As Fitchburg finalizes our comprehensive plan, we must plan to do more with less energy. If we don't, we'll have a community that is just as well suited to the future as a bunch of ungainly dinosaurs are suited to the 21st century.

And we're going to have to settle for a lot less in terms of quality of life and economic growth as a result.

Suburbs feeling the pinch as fuel prices soar

Open letter to District 2 alders
Submitted by Rosanne Lindsay

This is about the third article (click here) I've seen in as many days, on the need to rethink the status quo planning of suburbs. It offers some ideas to consider. Do we really need to plan and build extra homes when so many are standing empty and those who commute are struggling to fill their gas tank? I'm writing to you to consider how our times are changing and to reflect on these changes when considering the Fitchburg Comprehensive Plan and the approval of development in the NE Neighborhood Urban Service Area. Is there really a true need to add another 1000-plus homes to our Northeast corner when the dollar is heading south, gas prices are heading north, foreclosures and unsold homes are on the rise, and apartment rentals are gaining while home ownership is failing?

When many builders are going bankrupt, and others are trying to unload their unsold lots (see article), then something needs to give. Planners and local governments must find new paradigms. Does Fitchburg really want to add and pay for services to reach the far NE corner when the "core" is really just identifying itself as the area around City Hall and there is plenty of room to promote infill development first? If a new library does go in at the City Hall site, how will new residents on the NE side access it at an affordable price? Will we add transit services? At the moment, we don't even have enough money to expand our current transit service beyond the few runs down PD and Fish Hatchery. Has the Plan Commission considered these pressures on our budget and the pressures on the average homeowner?

Thanks for your consideration.

NE Neighborhood Land Use Committee

Notes from the Committee Meeting on 5-20-08

By Phyllis Hasbrouck

Present at the table: Alder Steve Arnold (Chair), Alder Andy Potts, Alder Jay Allen, Alder Bill Horns, Samuel Cooke (RCC Chair), Tom Hovel (Senior Planner), Randy Christianson (with Sveum Enterprises). Present around the edge of the room: about 18 consultants, neighbors, and observers.

I won't report everything, just some highlights and lowlights.

Frog and Toad Need More Space!

At the last meeting, developer Phil Sveum said that a 75 ft. buffer would be enough for the restored wetland, not the 300 ft. buffer that the city had proposed. He was answered today by Professor Joy Zedler (UW Madison) who spoke about the need for very wide buffer zones around streams and wetlands to protect amphibians and reptiles. She cited the work of Dr. Ray Semlitsch, who found (using transmitters) that amphibians travel 125.3 meters (370 ft.), from wetlands to terrestrial habitat.

Dr. Semlitsch suggested an aquatic buffer zone of up to 30 - 60 meters, then the core habitat at a width of 142 - 289 meters, and then a terrestrial buffer of 50 meters, for a total of somewhere between 222 meters and 399 meters (728 feet and 1309 feet).

Dr. Zedler also spoke of how buffers help protect wetlands from the negative effects of stormwater runoff, which are: excess water, excess nutrients, and excess sediment. At the Arboretum, Dr. Zedler's team has shown how tubs planted with 14 native species are filled with nothing but Reed Canary Grass (a highly invasive, non-native species) in just one season when exposed to these effects.

She displayed a map that showed how huge portions of the E-way and other Dane County wetlands were completely overrun with Reed Canary Grass and cattails, another invasive species.

Which Will Prevail: Parks or Subdivisions?

Then there was the whole curious matter of the clash between the Sveum plan and the Parks and Open Space Plan. Randy Christianson said that Sveum Enterprises had adjusted their plan to accommodate environmental corridors, and Anne Marie Kirsch (of Montgomery Associates, hired by Sveum Enterprises to do their water studies) showed a composite slide which I found confusing because, although I believe it was intended to reconcile the parks plan with the street plan, it didn't seem to show all of the proposed Parks Dept. areas on it. Jim Schreiber, a consultant for Sveum Enterprises, also showed a slide of the changes they had made to accommodate wildlife: I found them underwhelming.

Ed Bartell, City Forester, from the Fitchburg Parks & Forestry Department, showed a revised map of what they would like to have as parks and open space in the NE Neighborhood (NEN), and frankly, it doesn't leave a lot of room for houses! Bartell wants to have an assessment done on the tree line (~100 ft. wide) that goes north from Goodland Park Rd to the forest at the top of the hill. He said it may be a corridor for wildlife and may contain remnants of oak savanna.

They also want to preserve a diagonal band of recharge area in the northwestern part of Sveum's land, and to investigate if there is an Indian trail west of the tree line, as historical documents indicate.

Parks revised their map because at the last NEN Land Use Committee meeting on April 29, Jeff Kraemer of Natural Resources Consulting (hired by either Sveum Enterprises or Montgomery Associates) said that the soil tests that he had conducted showed that much of what the USDA maps listed as hydric soils (wetland soils) were not hydric at all. So Parks gave up trying to save them.

But a funny thing came to light at this meeting: Resource Conservation Committee Chair, Samuel Cooke, had shown the data to a soil scientist, and the scientist maintained that Kraemer was not accurately portraying the data. For example, Kraemer cited pit #14, located in "Lake Larsen" (the degraded wetland that held about 15 acres of open water this spring) as a site which had hydric soil. About a quarter mile west was pit #17, which he said was not hydric.

Cooke asked how Kraemer could be sure where the boundary was between hydric and non-hydric soils, using only two reference points. Kraemer replied that he had not mapped the hydric soils, but then expressed his opinion that they only existed in one area and not another, something that was not proven by his data.

I've noticed that it is very hard to pin consultants down. They are very smooth talkers and rarely (if ever) say, "I don't know," or "I see your point," or "I guess you're right about that." Instead, I hear things like "We are addressing those issues," or "It's very early to have that level of detail, we'll address that later," or "We are seeking to achieve a balance." So, Samuel Cooke deserves a lot of credit for following up and restating that the data did not reflect what Kraemer was saying.

Can Amphibians Read?

Jeff Kraemer also explained that the largest wetland buffer demanded by law in Wisconsin is 300 ft., for the Butler Gartersnake. But he said that it doesn't really have to be 300 ft. all around: it can be less in some places, as long as the total acreage in the buffer is equal to what it would have been had it been evenly laid out.

So, by extension, he felt it was all right if the western buffer of the "Lake Larsen" restored wetland were only 75 ft., because there would be ample open space to the north and the south. I wonder if they put up little signs in frog and toad language, reading "Go North or South and you'll find all the habitat you want. Don't try to cross this bike path 'cause you'll get crushed." And I wonder how well those signs work.

Eau Claire Shale and Infiltration

The question came up of whether or not the Eau Claire Shale Formation (an aquitard layer separating the upper and lower aquifers) exists under the Northeast Neighborhood. This was the subject of Dr. Cal DeWitt's presentation to the Common Council on Jan. 15, 2008. No one expressed any criticisms of Dr. DeWitt's logic or data, yet Rob Montgomery expressed his own belief that the shale does in fact exist here, and no one countered him.

Anne Marie Kirsch's explanation of the infiltration system, for the proposed Sveum development, didn't convince me of its short or long term effectiveness. She explained that the outlot raingardens (not necessarily on each block, as I thought I had heard before, but totaling five acres) would be maintained by the Neighborhood Association, and might have to be rehabbed in 10 years. If the raingardens stop working, and the Neighborhood Association stops functioning, will anyone care enough to rehab them? And how will that affect the wetlands, the groundwater, and Lake Waubesa?

She also said that the whole infiltration system wouldn't fully work until the upstream is stabilized, i.e. "some of the houses are built." (Why not all of the houses?) She explained that sediment running off a construction site could clog the system. This shocked me, because I know that the county has a stormwater ordinance that controls sediment runoff from construction sites very strictly. It's not supposed to happen.

Anyway, Kirsch conceded that the downhill retention ponds "may be a bit taxed at first." If the system doesn't work until the whole project is done, how much damage will have been done by the time the work is finished? Will there have been enough sediment, water and nutrients for Reed Canary Grass to completely take over the newly restored wetland.

If you care about how development decisions are made, you need to get involved. Please contact all of the Alders on the NEN Committee (Arnold, Allen, Potts and Horns) and tell them that you want decisions made for the good of the environment and the taxpayers. Developers perform a necessary function, but their monetary interests should not come before those of the city, the taxpayers, or the environment. If citizens don't call the alders, the only voices they hear are developers and their consultants!

Contact info for Alders can be found at http://www.city.fitchburg.wi.us/common_council/index.php

Suburbia - The Next Slum?

Here's an important and timely email (with emphasis added) from Rich Eggleston to the members of the Plan Commission, Common Council, Citizens Advisory Committee on the Comprehensive Plan, and Mayor Tom Clauder.

Monday, 25 Feb 2008

One of the hallmarks of a comprehensive plan that works is flexibility. What we know about the proposed Northeast Neighborhood now, for example, is more than we knew about it two weeks ago, much less two years ago or 20 years ago.

That's why I was miffed by a member of the Plan Commission who suggested recently that I should have brought up concerns about the proposed Northeast Neighborhood in 1985, or, presumably, forever hold my peace.

The need for flexibility in planning is highlighted further by developments in the national economy over which Fitchburg has no control, and immutable demographic reality. You folks are getting older.

A business column in Saturday's New York Times cited research by Arthur C. Nelson, director of Virginia Tech's Metropolitcan Institute, who has predicted that, by 2025, there will be a surplus of 22 million "large-lot homes" (those built on at least one-sixth of an acre) in America.

The column quotes Leinberger as ascribing that surplus to “'the pendulum swinging back toward urban living,' thanks to a set of economic, social, and demographic trends." The result, he says, could be that low-density suburbs “may become what inner cities became in the 1960’s and 1970’s — slums characterized by poverty, crime, and decay.” (article here)

The column built on an article in the latest Atlantic Monthly (here) that said, in part:

"In most metropolitan areas, only 5 to 10 percent of the housing stock is located in walkable urban places...

"Yet recent consumer research by Jonathan Levine of the University of Michigan and Lawrence Frank of the University of British Columbia suggests that roughly one in three homeowners would prefer to live in these types of places. In one study, for instance, Levine and his colleagues asked more than 1,600 mostly suburban residents of the Atlanta and Boston metro areas to hypothetically trade off typical suburban amenities (such as large living spaces) against typical urban ones (like living within walking distance of retail districts).

"All in all, they found that only about a third of the people surveyed solidly preferred traditional suburban lifestyles, featuring large houses and lots of driving. Another third, roughly, had mixed feelings. The final third wanted to live in mixed-use, walkable urban areas—but most had no way to do so at an affordable price. Over time, as urban and faux-urban building continues, that will change.

"Demographic changes in the United States also are working against conventional suburban growth, and are likely to further weaken preferences for car-based suburban living.

"When the Baby Boomers were young, families with children made up more than half of all households; by 2000, they were only a third of households; and by 2025, they will be closer to a quarter. Young people are starting families later than earlier generations did, and having fewer children. The Boomers themselves are becoming empty-nesters, and many have voiced a preference for urban living. By 2025, the U.S. will contain about as many single-person households as families with children."

Topics for comprehensive plans to consider.

Rich Eggleston
Fitchburg

Greener Homes & Gardens Feb. 27th

Greener Homes & Gardens Expo
Simple steps you can take now, for a cleaner & greener tomorrow

Date: Wednesday, Feb. 27th
Time: Come anytime between 6:30 and 9:00pm
Place: Ancora Coffee -2690 Research Park Dr., just across Lacy Rd. from Fitchburg City Hall

Visit booths, and talk with experts one-on-one, to learn more about:

*How to enhance the beauty of your yard while protecting our lakes, streams, and ground water with rain gardens, rain barrels, & natural yard care

*Simple, practical steps you can take now to reduce water use inside and outside your home

*How to maintain a greener home & cut your energy bill: lighting, conservation, and energy solutions you can use now

*Your solar energy options

*What a CSA farm is, and how you can enjoy healthy, affordable organic foods all year long

* How to sign up for free hands-on nature education opportunities for your child’s classroom or scout troop

*Homeowner grants for native prairie plants at half price

Register to win great green door prizes:
*Sustain Dane rain barrel, installation included
*Water conserving showerheads
*Energy efficient light bulbs
*Nature books for kids and adults
*Nature curriculum materials from National Audubon Society & Cornell Lab of Ornithology

Please call or email Nancy Hylbert for more information:
271-0956, Nancy.Hylbert@Fitchburg.WI.US

Dr. DeWitt's Presentation Posted

As a follow-up to a previous blog, the city has posted Dr. Cal DeWitt's presentation on their website here.

The slide below is my favorite showing the various layers of bedrock deposits in Dane County (top left is north). The two darkest layers are the thickest areas of the Eau Claire formation which comprise the best aquitard separating our upper and lower aquifers. As you can see, much of the county does not benefit from this layer of shale.

Wake Up Dane County!

Last Tuesday night the room was packed for Dr. Cal DeWitt's remarkable presentation which was entertaining, important, and memorable! If you missed it, you might catch the replay on FACTv.

I'm sorry Channel 15 news was unable to record the unveiling of Dr. DeWitt's latest research during his second presentation to the Plan Commission, which unfortunately was delayed for an hour in order to accommodate people there for other agenda items.

Eau Claire Aquitard and Buried Bedrock Valleys

During his presentation, Dr. DeWitt shared his remarkable and eye-opening discoveries, involving over 700 hours of research since his September 2007 presentation to the Plan Commission. He unearthed to the public, the secrets of the hidden bedrock valleys which lay beneath the surface of Fitchburg. The bedrock was created in layers by various sea deposits over millions of years including a series of deposits from the ancient "Eau Claire Sea."

These deposits of mud, silt, and sand form the Eau Claire Formation and it is the shale in this formation that forms a barrier (aquitard) that separates the upper and lower aquifers. Valleys, cutting through this bedrock, make it look much like the rugged, exposed topography of the driftless area to our west. And the Nine Springs bedrock valley cuts completely through the Eau Claire Formation. After these incisions, however, the valleys around here were filled in by the glacier (which also created a fantastic chain of lakes) and they now lie silently below us.

Through research of previous core samples taken from wells, Dr. DeWitt demonstrated that the aquitard is slowly reduced in thickness from Southwest to Northeast Fitchburg, where it thins as it approaches Lake Waubesa and then disappears completely. This results in a joining of upper and lower aquitards, making them one.

In Northeast Fitchburg, east to west along the 9 Springs E-way, and in much of Madison and Sun Prairie, there is a joining of upper and lower aquifers, and this may more fully explain the reason for Madison's many water quality/contamination problems.

Caution is Urged

Dr. DeWitt strongly urged against drilling any new wells in or near areas where the aquitard is lacking and suggested that Fitchburg steward the land by "sleuthing" the science (hydrology, geology, hydrogeology, limnology) of the area carefully in future planning.

He warned against relying on current groundwater models, when considering new development (such as the Northeast Neighborhood). While these models are helpful for many areas where bedrock is fairly uniform, they do not account for the cutting through of the Eau Claire aquitard by the Nine Springs Bedrock Valley or the thinning of the Eau Claire Shale to zero in the northeast.

Other models being used for runoff similarly must be used wisely; and their current use does not adequately address phosphorus loading inputs. He suggested that unless care is taken to prevent the eutrophication of Lake Waubesa, by reducing the phosphorus runoff below levels found in present and future developed neighborhoods, Fitchburg would eventually pay in increased taxes for future remediation to restore the watershed.

Rosanne Lindsay
Fitchburg

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

To the 100 or more people that came to listen to Professor DeWitt's talk (some are pictured above before all the seats were filled!), I’m sorry that the Mayor decided to rearrange the agenda at the last minute. I’m glad that you were able to stay that extra hour and I’m sure you agree that this presentation was worth the wait!

Terry Carpenter
Fitchburg