Citizens for a Green North Tonawanda - Stop Sprawl, Save Green Space, and Save Taxpayers' Money

An editorial from one of our kindred spirits at Speak Up WNY.com
"Sprawl Or Smart Growth, You Be The Judge"
By Lee Chowaniec - May 31, 2004

Remove bias from data and the statistical analysis performed on it and the finished work should be credible. One would have to believe a study performed by the Brookings Institute, a Washington, D.C think tank, as an independent, unbiased study, is credible.

The Institute�s study found the number of new houses being built in the counties of Erie and Niagara outpaces the number of new households by a 4-1 margin. This fact, along with a dwindling Western New York population is a common sign of sprawl.

The city of Buffalo is experiencing a population, property value, and tax base decline caused by residential exodus to the suburbs and by the erosion of its commercial base; being devoured by the same municipalities who feign allegiance for its survival.

Suburban municipalities are draining the city of commercial enterprises by the lure of shovel-ready-sites and tax incentives. We will really find out whether regionalism is alive and well in Erie County when County Executive Joel Giambra really gets serious and gets in the face of municipal leaders � as he is wont to say.

The informed individual will attest to the fact that sprawl policies and practices are the norm in Western New York. Population and jobs are diminishing, the economy is weak, unemployment is rising, and we continue to sprawl outward.

Or, maybe not. Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano/Marc Equity Corp., a local builder, stated in today�s Buffalo News, �I cringe when I hear the word �sprawl� associated with Erie County. We don�t have sprawl in Erie County.�

Martucci goes on to say that home building in Erie County is not excessive, despite a stagnant population. There is a new prime demographic made up of people between the ages of 35 and 55 years of age, he said. �We�re just keeping pace with the demand.�

We have all heard town officials utter the same �we have to provide what the people want� mantra on several occasions. Statements like: �I want to grow the town�; I am pro-development�; I made it possible for you to live here, so why shouldn�t we open the town up to others�, should be accompanied by Comprehensive Plans that protect current residents and the environment from developments that are intrusive to one�s quality of life and/or wantonly destroy the environment for the sake of builder greed.

Michael Clarke, director of the Buffalo office of the Local Initiatives Support Corp., a group that helps communities revitalize housing and commercial businesses, stated in the Buffalo News that, �We are in a economically weak market. You can�t constrain people�s preferences, but we have to come up with a balance.�

Being a member of a pro �smart-growth� movement, Clarke advocates a coordinated regional approach to local land use planning. The smart growth advocacy believes prosperity can be realized without many of the problems associated with sprawl, including higher taxes to pay for the services and infrastructure needed for new subdivisions.

Would that there could be harmony and success with a regionalism approach. Builders, municipalities, and the involved governmental agencies are only acting to give the public what it wants, new housing, or, so they say. And sometimes they provide extras� like flooding and drainage issues, and the structural damages associated with homes sinking in low-bearing strength soils.

The town of Clarence instates a 6-month residential building moratorium to take a time out to ensure that by following smart-growth principals they are acting in the best interest of their community to maintain its unique character.

The town of Amherst caved to the developers and parroted their economic devastation claims. A 6-month residential building moratorium in the town of Amherst, in only three of the impacted areas, would have meant financial devastation for this prospering community. Go figure!

Uncontrolled growth by any other name is still sprawl!

We have the power to change the landscape, to conserve what is valuable to us, or to destroy places that may be important to our future. Let�s preserve our open space and we'll lower our taxes in the process.

The following statement made by a city leader in North Tonawanda is so wrong it begs for a history lesson-- "The school district could utilize some empty land that it owns and benefit taxpayers citywide. The land could be sold to generate immediate cash, while at the same time placing the property back on the tax rolls".

If development has been so good for this community then why are our tax bills increasing significantly?

The population of North Tonawanda was 36,012 in 1970 but declined to 33,262 for the 2000 US Census. School enrollment dropped by nearly 1,000 students between 1997 and 2003. While North Tonawanda�s population declined, the city�s residential units increased by 27% from 1970 to 1990. From 1990 to 1998, an additional 330 new residential structures, containing 420 units were built, bringing the total number of residential units to 14,422. The overwhelming majority of this new construction was single-family homes.

Elected officials in other communities scrutinize developers who claim their projects "pay for themselves and then some" by conducting "Cost of Community Service" analysis. These studies assess current conditions based on existing budgets and real dollars. They provide hindsight from past land use decisions. Costs are associated in these categories: residential development, commercial/industrial development, and farmland/forestland/open space. The results of studies by 26 research teams working in 18 different states indicated that favoring residential development at the expense of open land does not alleviate the financial problems of communities. Indeed, it makes it worse.

Studies conducted in more than 70 communities show that residential land uses are a net drain for it costs local governments more to provide services to homeowners than residential landowners pay in property taxes. Recent studies in New York State found that for every $1.00 received in tax revenues, the cost of community services ranged from $1.05 (in Kinderhook) to $1.88 (in Reading) for residential land use, as compared a range of 17 cents (in Amenia) to 74 cents (in Fishkill) for open space land use.

The costs for local services (schools, police and fire, roads, solid waste and sewer treatment, etc.) outweigh the increased tax revenue produced by new residential development. Targeting development through careful land use planning and redevelopment of areas already served by existing infrastructure, thereby protecting open space, makes economic sense and helps revitalize urban areas. Communities that have little commercial/industrial base to mitigate the costs of servicing new residential developments make substantial tax increases to existing residents inevitable.

There is convincing evidence dating back almost 150 years to the pioneering work by Frederick Olmsted that suggests the conventional wisdom that parks/open space offers no economic return is wrong. Olmsted noted, "It has been fully established that...a local park of suitable size, location and character�adds more to the value of the remaining land in the residential area which it serves than the value of the land withdrawn to create it." The New York Parks Commission determined that before Central Park was developed, the 3 wards adjacent to the park paid $1 dollar in every $13 the city received in taxes; but after its development they paid 33% of the entire expenses of the city, even though acquiring the land for Central Park removed 10,000 lots from the city�s tax roll.

In 1998, the break-even value of a new home in Pittsford (a suburb of Rochester) was determined to be more than $300,000. Break-even occurs when the tax revenue gained from the addition of a house equals the cost of community services attributable to a new home. Their analysis showed that protection of open space, including purchase of development rights, would cost taxpayers less per year for support of community services than a full build-out of the town.

The Town of Clarence determined that new homes must have a value of $200,000 to $225,000 to bring more revenue to their community than cost. Clarence has the ability to acquire up to 8% of developer�s project land for park use. The town enacted an open space fee for all residential and commercial/industrial projects developed. A green space initiative approved by Clarence voters in 2002 allows the town to buy vacant parcels using up to $12.5 million. [This paragraph was removed from the article to cut it down for space considerations].

North Tonawanda should formulate an Open Space Plan and not sell vacant land because green space is good for our community�s health, stability, aesthetics, and quality of life�and it saves taxpayers� money.

A green space initiative approved by Clarence voters last week allows the town to begin buying up vacant parcels in order to preserve the rural vistas of Erie County's fastest growing municipality. The proposition, supported by 53 percent of voters in last Tuesday's vote, authorizes town officials to borrow up to $12.5 million to purchase property. "The main object is to preserve land, particularly land that we can objectively identify as the most desireable to purchase," said Councilman Thomas Sweeney.

Residents and other property owners should not expect the town to begin purchasing any parcels for at least another six months as the town begins to craft the criteria it will use to determine which properties to buy.

Helping to remove politics and guesswork from the equation, paid interns and staff from the University at Buffalo and Buffalo State College will assist the town as it develops an object process or "green print" to identify the best properties to land bank.

"With the green print, we're going to be looking townwide," said town Planning Director James Callahan. "The aim is to make (the process) as scientific as possible by identifying characteristics and not necessarily specific pieces of land."

Among the characteristics the green print will seek to identify are valuable soils, nature and forest lands, wetlands and active agricultural lands. "There probably won't be any acquisitions for another six months until we get the green print under way," Callahan added. So called green prints have been used successfully in other cities and states across the country, according to Sweeney.

Last year, Maryland Governor Parris N. Glendening announced a land banking program in his state that would incorporate the use of green printing to identify 615 acres of pristine forest and wetlands the state will buy.

The formula that will be developed for Clarence will take property lines and property ownership out of the equation, so that the town goes after only the most desirable lands, said Callahan.

Once acceptable properties are identified, the town will hold public hearings for each of the parcels it proposes to land bank. Town officials said funds from the bond issue will likely be spent over a number of years and leveraged with matching funds.

The estimated increased tax cost is $52 a year for a homeowner in the town with a property assessed at $100,000.

Congratulations to the Western New York Land Conservancy for Saving Green Space in Amherst

On February 23, 2004, the Amherst Town Board members voted, 4-3, to end a four-year legal battle with the Western New York Land Conservancy over who has the right to oversee Nature View Park in Amherst.

This is fantastic news for an organization that we both respect and that we have partnered with in our efforts to preserve the Klydel Wetland in North Tonawanda.

The action came just weeks after the town lost its third consecutive court decision in the case, which began in 1999, when the board granted the conservancy approval to oversee more than 1,200 acres of town-owned land in the northwest corner of Amherst.

Amherst officials never signed a contract with the conservancy, and a new board of politicians rescinded the previous board's approval vote, including a $69,000 payment to the conservancy.

"I think you should end it now and stop wasting the taxpayers' money. . . . Don't appeal again," conservancy supporter Bruce Kershner told board members shortly before the vote as quoted in the Buffalo News.

Moments later, Kershner, conservation chairman of the Buffalo Audubon Society, thanked the four Town Board members who voted to pull out of the dispute: Daniel J. Ward, William L. Kindel, Shelly Schratz and William A. O'Loughlin.

The measure called for an immediate halt to the town's legal actions and set aside 250 acres of the park to be dedicated as a recreation area. However, the balance of the land, more than 1,000 acres, will be preserved as "forever wild," according to Kindel.

Ward, the lone Democrat in the group, and Kindel, who sponsored the motion ending the lawsuit, steadfastly supported the conservancy throughout the court battles, even joining with the group as a plaintiff in its complaint.

Stop Sprawl & Save Green Space

Save Tax Dollars & the Environment