Conversation with a Visionary Mayor

I just had an inspiring conversation with a Mayor who could not have sounded more thrilled about his city's greatest accomplishment. This was none other than Mayor Craig from Cambridge Ontario. The man was absolutely gushing about the downtown University campus development that saw the School of Architecture locate in their downtown. Mayor Craig said that the benefits from this development actually exceeded any benefits that were in their proposals.

Mayor Craig talked about how the University just secured the Internationally recognized Venice bennale http://www.labiennale.org/en/. This could not have happened without the downtown location.

He talked about a recent North American Conference just held where downtown facilities were able to handle the overflow from the University Campus. Again, something that could not have happened had the Campus been located elsewhere.

Mayor Craig said he could talk for hours about how this Downtown Campus gave their city credibility in the region and brought investor confidence that is directly related to a half dozen new developments in their downtown.

He referred me to the Dean of this school Professor Rick Haldenby who he said could be also go on for hours about how happy the University was.

What we need now is for our University's board of Governors to educate themselves about the benefits of Downtown Campus'. Especially Dr. Lloyd Brown-John who has recently said he thought a campus would not be beneficial to a downtown. I understand that their PhD's trump my B.A. but it seems like they should be listening to experts from world class institutions.

Debunking the Growth Myth, Part 10

Myth Number 10
Vacant or undeveloped land is just going to waste..

Reality Check: Open space and farmland are valuable assets that contribute significantly to every community.

An undeveloped or idle piece of land is viewed by some as wasteful and unproductive. Virtually any other use is better than leaving it undeveloped, they feel. In part, this perception also implies that the land, like a lazy loafer, is placing a net drain on the community that could be rectified if it were just developed.

Low assessment of the benefits of undeveloped land rests on a number of questionable assumptions. The first is that undeveloped land is a burden on the community. Actually, undeveloped land requires few, if any, public services and there is little or no public cost required to maintain it. Studies by the American Farmland Trust (AFT) consistently show that farmland and open space pay more in taxes than they require in services, providing a net surplus to the community. "Cows don't go to school," they like to point out.

The AFT's latest "Cost of Community Services Study" was performed in Frederick County, Maryland. They found that farmland and open space required only $0.53 in services for every dollar paid in taxes, creating a surplus and halping to make up for the budget shortfall created by residential land. Residential land required $1.14 for every dollar paid, resulting in a $20 million net loss to the county in 1995. A similar study of four New Hampshire towns conducted in 1995 found that each had a net revenue gain from open space and a net loss for residential land. Case studies report that in many places it will be cheaper for a community to purchase undeveloped land rather than allow it to be developed and paying the increased costs of providing infrastructure and services.

The second questionable assumption is that this undeveloped land is producing nothing. At a minimum, the land is likely to be contributing property taxes to the community. But the land is quietly creating a whole set of benefits for the community, including peace and quiet. Valuing open space in an economic sense can be difficult, but not impossible. A greenway in Boulder, Colorado increased property taxes by $5.4 million and resulted in an $500,000 increase in annual property tax revenues according to a 1978 study.

We have all felt the pang of regret at the loss of a particular area of open space in our community. What was that land contributing tour life that will cause us to miss it – a relaxing view, a sense of comforting tranquility, an oasis of nature, a refuge from urban constructs, a buffer from noisy roads and factories? Perhaps we are also disturbed by the permanence of the loss. The farmer's pasture that has sprouted an outlet mall will never again graze sheep.

The third questionable assumption is that the land would generate more overall benefits for the community if it were developed. There are certainly cases where this is true, but many more where it is not. If a house is built, the land is said to be "productive" because it is providing shelter for a family. But this logic assumes that if the land were undeveloped, the family would be sleeping out under the stars. The reality is that the family who would have bought or rented the house, will simply buy or rent somewhere else. The homeless person's plight will not be resolved either way.

Undeveloped land has another value which is similar to having a savings account that you never use. You don't have to spend if to appreciate that it's there in the event you need it. Communities without adequate open space or vacant land have spent their savings accounts and have limited their options for the future.