I read this great article in Time
earlier this week. It’s a brief primer for anyone who wants to hear about how so
much of today’s sprawling suburban and commercial development that is touted as
economic growth has the opposite effect in the long run. Chuck Marohn is a
former municipal planner turned evangelist for Smart Growth.
I heard Chuck Marohn speak about a year and a half ago, and he
converted me. The bottom line of Smart Growth is that communities must be sustainable,
and new development far removed from existing population and infrastructure is
typically not sustainable. All municipal officials should be doing long-term
cost/benefit analyses for any new development projects they are considering
approving, and private development should not be subsidized by public funds
unless there is sufficient long-term pubic benefit.
Unchecked development in the present, sprawling into former farm fields, is not the path to future
long-term prosperity. Developers who receive subsidies from state or local
governments – whether it’s to extend a sewer line or road widening and traffic
signalization – are typically no longer in town to share maintenance costs
after the project is built out and sold. They are not around to share in the
replacement costs of that new public infrastructure when it’s time to replace the
first-generation structures. And because the long-term costs were not
considered up front, the tax payers must pay perpetually for those
project-specific improvements. It's amazing that more fiscal conservatives have
not figured out that sprawl is fiscally unsustainability.
Where I live, in Lower Macungie Township, PA, our Planning
Commission and former Board of Supervisors seemingly used to give developers almost
anything they asked. Utility concessions, road improvements and stormwater
infrastructure were all fair game. Accepting dedications of streets in new
residential developments or industrial parks is nothing unusual in most areas,
even though the municipality then becomes liable for all repairs, repaving and
snow removal. And there is a public safety argument there, because emergency
services vehicles need to reliably be able to get to emergencies in these
developments.
Stormwater basin in Lower Macungie Townshp, PA
(photo by Lower Macungie Township)
|
Stormwater management is one thing that local governments certainly should not be subsidizing for developers. Until recently, our municipal
government was accepting ownership and liability for stormwater infrastructure
from developers. In fact, as of last Fall, out of 88 stormwater basins on
record in the township, Lower Macungie township was fully responsible for 23
stormwater basins, with another 23 basins previously agreed to be dedicated to
the township upon completion of the projects and transfer of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits from the respective
developers. So the Lower Macungie taxpayers are on the hook to fund the
perpetual maintenance on these stormwater facilities.
Four Seasons Development in Lower Macungie.
Development is not connected to surrounding
neighborhoods, but stormwater basins are
maintained by homeowners association.
(photo by Newton Engineering)
|
Our current Board of Commissioners has gone on record as
saying that, going forward, they will no longer accept new stormwater
facilities from developers. That's great, because it means that any new residential, commercial or
industrial developments must maintain their own stormwater retention basins.
That’s significant for new residential developments, because it means that they
will have to form a homeowners association to manage their stormwater facilities
and associated liabilities. But municipalities cannot afford to continue to
absorb these long-term costs from the developers of subdivisions and the
subsequent owners of the resulting parcels.
Emmaus, PA. A classic community with mixed-use areas and
a vibrant,walkable downtown district. (photo credit:
http://fltquest.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v4/p956485518-3.jpg)
|
So while my community’s new projects may remain subject to
an illogical, Euclidean
zoning map and might not be walkable or connected with the existing
community in a Smart Growth kind of way, we can demand that new development
must pass a cost/benefit analysis to ensure that the taxpayers will not be
saddled with long-term costs unique to the new project.
No comments:
Post a Comment