2. The failure to count the full cost of infrastructure for new developmentIf it costs $60,000 to service a new home in a previously undeveloped space, and only $10,000 to service that home in an existing community, then there is a $50,000 net advantage associated with the latter choice. The extra cost associated with the so-called "greenfield" site is a hidden liability. The failure to disclose and charge for the full cost of hooking up development disadvantages relatively efficient and accessible communities, both in central cities and in their older surrounding suburbs, where households own a full automobile per-household less than in the economy at large. As sprawl continues people spend more time traveling longer. The average American now spends more time on the road than eating. Recent market research as reported in American Demographics magazine is titled "Fat Road Wallets"66. Goods need to move farther to connect demand and supply, and we are losing our sense of connection to place and to marketplace. One indicator of this is that work-related trips have dropped in thirty years from over one-third to less than one-fifth of the total travel. The balance of trips taken was short trips for shopping, recreational, school and social purposes.67 As we undercut our efficient development patterns and access, we increase our air and water pollution and health risks, and increase our contribution to global warming and more localized climate instability. And as economic networks become globalized, a new generation of civic leaders becomes increasingly less connected to the sense of "why here." There is a resurgence of research on the "costs of sprawl" and there are healthy debates around these costs in virtually every jurisdiction in the country. However, there is virtually no analogous research on the "benefits of reuse," and this lack hampers systematic comparison of the relative merits of different growth patterns. There are also split incentives for considering these merits. There may well be benefits at the regional level of reinvesting generally in older, serviced land versus those associated with spreading out. However, these benefits may not be easily apparent, and there may be disincentives to investing in this apparently more beneficial manner. 68Some of these barriers relate to the need of individual jurisdictions to generate tax revenue. Another hurdle is the source of revenue used to invest in infrastructure. Revenue may be more available for new infrastructure than for its maintenance. The rules on use of funds for infrastructure differ between federal, state and local public sources and most utility services. Publicly regulated utilities are private corporations with yet another set of rules. Competition between jurisdictions within a region may be excessive. The hidden asset is multi-jurisdictional in location and so are the potential benefits. Since there is no value-capture mechanism associated with the infrastructure to fairly distribute the benefits of development between jurisdictions, the opportunities for collaborative development may not occur. Cities may chose to recoup outlays through "development impact fees." This is a preferred method in cases where the impacts of development seem excessive. The village of Naperville, Illinois first levied such fees in 1969. Development interests subsequently challenged this practice. In finding for the right to assess such fees, the Supreme Court found that development costs were "often a matter of intergenerational equity-today's are being taxed to provide benefits to tomorrow's residents and businesses."69 However, the Court left it up to individual jurisdictions to determine the level of assessments, which are rarely close to the full costs of services. Instead of directing the funds raised for redevelopment incentives, these resources are used for general purposes. Also, the impacts are regional but the developments are local. In this case, it is essential to have a regional mechanism to levy these fees on a consistent and extra-jurisdictional basis. When there is no such tool, it is all too easy to play off communities against each other. 70
|
|||||
|
Contents
|
||||