September 14, 2005
Let's talk *Moratorium*
A friend sends this:
“Somewhere along the line of development we discover who we really are, and then we make our real decision for which we are responsible.”
Eleanor Roosevelt in her original statement was referring to each person’s individual development, but it applies as well to how a community develops. In the next few years South Haven will discover who we are as a community as we decide how we will develop, who will profit, who will lose.
We are a beautifully situated community. It is clear why others would want to relocate here to retire or live seasonally. Visitors describe us as “friendly”, “charming” and a town that recognizes and preserves our heritage. Like many other towns in the industrial Upper Midwest we are also a community which has lost our industrial base that provided a comfortable living for families for generations.
We’re a lovely community and in many ways we are hurting. There are few living wage jobs in town. Real estate values have increased to the point that a young family just getting started could not afford to live inside the City limits. We are already a community that is half empty for a large part of the year. And we are aging; most of us living here are eligible to make up a very large chapter of AARP. This is not the recipe for a truly healthy community.
Developers of condominiums have eagerly approached the City with plans for both large and small developments. Understandably, the increased tax base offered by such development is attractive to City government. The benefits of development to the City General Fund are obvious.
Or are they? There are costs to development in increased need for streets, sewers, water systems and police and fire protection. Several studies have shown that for every $1.00 of tax income a local government receives as a result of new development it spends up to $1.50 in additionally required services. We have also had the experience of developers who make beautifully constructed power point presentations of their proposals, but in reality create environmental or neighborhood nuisances.
Development here is inevitable. But we should not be an easy mark for developers who want to turn a rapid profit. We must ask a lot of anyone wanting to profit from our assets. In some cases certain of our assets should not be for sale. For instance, South Haven will be permanently changed and an essential part of our character will be lost if we sell access to the Lake and River as a fix for current budget stresses. We can ask that anyone proposing development here use local labor and buy whenever possible from local businesses. We can develop ordinances that favor construction using renewable heating and cooling mechanisms or maintains a high proportion of green space.
We can be creative in granting developers the privilege of building in South Haven. Let’s take time to understand the costs and advantages of development and to specify development investments that benefit many facets of our community. Let your City representative know that you support a well-defined, time limited moratorium on any development plans asking for waivers to current ordinances.
Posted by Elaine at September 14, 2005 11:06 AM
Comments
Another friend already responds:
Elaine
I know I've really been out of it for a while but I have followed your emails and watched some of the last late night meeting. I (support) the moratorium because I think that plunging ahead with permits that cannot be changed later on and everyone's overall passive attitude about what the local environment can bear may well lead to our becoming a choked up little tourist trap that is unhealthy to live, work, and recreat in.
Sustainability is a term that many thinking people are throwing around lately. It basically stands for a balanced way of living and working in the environment rather than just use it to squeeze out the last dollar. Even economically, an area whose citizens and investors have overextended their use of the local resources is no longer viable. You're probably familiar with this way of thinking but many are not.
A long range look at this area's development potential should be ongoing and a part of planning. I suppose there ought to be some way to set benchmarks on what we have now (in terms of land use and population) , weigh this against our infrastructure, and provide for some ongoing method for updating the city council on where we stand. In many ways, I think officials in city hall think they already have this.
Posted by: Elaine at September 14, 2005 11:34 AM