I apologize in my delay for replying to Craig's post.  I decided to do some
research as he suggested.

On 4/2/02 11:08 AM, "Craig Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> CM:  New urbanist want to align everyone to their Borg like thinking.
> Observe, above.  "developers, city councils, neighborhoods",  all must do as
> we say.  Go ahead and ridicule them along the way to making your point.
> Such as comparing them to ostriches.

Again with the colorful euphemisms - what exactly is a Borg?  I do apologize
if anyone felt ridiculed by my statement and wish to clarify.  A big problem
with our metro area, in my opinion (as I think Terrell Brown was also trying
to point out) is that we think a little too "locally" on many issues.  We
see housing developments proposed in Eagan or perhaps in Windom Park,
Minneapolis and think that the only affected people are those nearby when in
fact that's often not true.  Met Council provides a framework for
considering the bigger picture, so to speak, and ensure that decisions made
at the local level consider broader issues such as transportation
congestion, affordability and access to jobs.  Things that are easier to
overlook when we only think about our little neck of the woods.
 
> CM:  I live in an exurb on a lot of less then a third of an acre, so do the
> majority of my fellow city residents.  As to your statement about "not
> everyone".  Well your right and last I checked most don't.  It's called
> checking the facts.
 
Perhaps that's true.  I'd like to ask how old this community is, though?
The people I know live in newer developments, like the one I mentioned in
East Bethel and it is very much true out there.  If anyone knows of a source
for breaking down properties by location and lot size, I willingly volunteer
to do the grunt work on this and post results.

> CM:  They have to make a profit.  Or they lose money. Cue the Beachboys.
> Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have profit.  McDonalds, Bryant Lake Bowl,
> Target, Ragstock, TGIF, Kieran's would stop making profits.  And they would
> all stay in business for everafter.

I have no problem with organizations making a profit.  I do have a problem
with putting short-term profit ahead of every single other consideration.  I
particularly have a problem with the notion that we should be carving up
farmland or prairie for yet more oversized housing plots where homeowners
will dump loads of fertilizers and pesticides in an attempt to create a lawn
resembling the greens at Pebble Beach (and contaminating their groundwater
in the process - no wonder the 'burb residents want MUSA access!)
 
> CM:  Maybe we should charge a demolition tax for every house or unit the
> city of Mpls bulldozes to the ground.  Let's see 1,000.00 for all 500 Holman
> wreckings.  Say....that's half a million!!  We could spend that on a new
> condo and house one family if we put a non-profit in charge.

I'd be fine with a demolition tax.  Although I'd use the money to fund Mayor
Rybak's plan to renovate existing housing that currently sits vacant because
it's in disrepair.
 
>> For those unfamiliar, MUSA is the sewer lines.  My understanding of Met
>> Council's process is that they extend sewer lines upon approval of a local
>> government's planned development.  If a local government follows Met
>> Council's development guidelines, then Met Council will extend the lines.
>> If not, then the development gets to dig wells or it doesn't happen.  So
>> when developers cry about being "penned-in" by MUSA, what they're really
>> saying is that they don't want to play by the guidelines Met Council lays
>> out.
> 
> CM:  In a twisted fashion, yes it's true.  But it still pens them in.  Thus
> you haven't answered the original thesis.  The Met is driving up land costs
> in the MUSA.  Making housing less affordable.

You're right, I did not answer the original question.  What I did do was
show how the original question was flawed because it ignored part of the
equation.  You admit that if developers followed guidelines, then lines
would be extended - so here's my question - why won't developers follow the
guidelines?

> CM: They don't.  They only extend when the petitioner pays the
> pre-determined cost.
> 
> Example: My family in Stearns County can't get service, even if they ask
> pretty please.  So don't make it sound like the Met expands willy nilly.
> They don't.

Met Council doesn't expand willy-nilly and they shouldn't.  I did some of my
research by visiting the Met Council web site (www.metrocouncil.org) to see
how they are funded:

- 41% by user fees on wastewater treatment and bus fares
- 23% by a property-tax levy on the seven county metro area
- 28% by state and federal funds
- remainder from reserves and other sources

So most of the Met Council budget comes from the metro area - I suggest that
if Stearns County would like MUSA access, they should offer to take on the
same property tax levy that those of us in the seven-county metro area pay.
Oh, and they should probably try getting Wright County to go in as well so
we wouldn't have to run sewer lines around Wright to get to Stearns.  For
those who don't know the counties that well, Stearns is about 80 miles NW of
Minneapolis and includes St. Cloud.
 
> but when suburban officials wake
>> up and start focusing a little less on NIMBY and a little more on offering
>> variety and choices for housing development, including *gasp* affordable
>> housing and access to transit for "those kinds of people" - then Met Council
>> would no longer need to dictate anything to the 'burbs.
> 
> CM:  Glad we have the New Urbanist admitting in print what the Met Council
> is up to.  The word is "Dictate"

Yes, Met Council does indeed dictate.  Since they are responsible for
maintaining the sewer lines, they need authority to dictate their use and
protect the public investment.  How is that different from a housing
provider dictating behaviors to tenants in order to protect his investment.

> CM:  I have an opinion how bread tastes and how it should look.  Short of a
> small comment here and there, I don't expect the Woullet's family to take me
> seriously in their kitchen.  Yes sir, the modern term is stakeholders.
> What's your stake, other then your opinion?

I pay a property tax levy to Met Council.  If any of the state funding
provided to Met Council comes from general revenues (the budget breakdown
wasn't specific), then I pay into that as well.  That's my stake.  What's
yours, Craig?

>> One thing that our oftentimes shortsighted developers and local governments
>> fail to realize is that our housing choices have much broader impacts than
>> things like sewer lines and plot sizes.  We already know about the
>> congestion problems caused by folks who insist on living in Maple Grove and
>> working in Eagan.
> 
> CM:  They don't insist, they chose.  Do you insist on living in Mpls?  Or
> did you chose?

I did choose to live in Minneapolis.  However, I don�t cry and whine about
the fact that my commute to work isn't the theoretical 20 minutes it
*should* be if only all of our freeways were six lanes in each direction as
many of my neighbors in Maple Grove and Eagan are often prone to.
 
>> The latest issue of Minnesota magazine (for U of MN alumni) also has an
>> interesting article entitled "On Race and Space", that discusses the impacts
>> of sprawl on people of color.  One example from the article is Detroit -
>> it's a doughnut of affluence out in the suburbs and a gaping hole of neglect
>> in the inner-ring area.  It is estimated that there are something like
>> 40,000 abandoned homes in inner-city Detroit.  While Minneapolis is not
>> likely to get this bad anytime soon, it's something we need to be aware of
>> and we need to be proactive to avoid.
> 
> CM:  Start by cleaning up the crime, garbage, and less dictating to people.

Umm...in the last ten years, crime is down bunches in Minneapolis.  Garbage
continues to be a problem, but that's not restricted to Minneapolis.  I see
plenty of garbage along the highways when I drive out on Hwy 10 to visit my
dad (on his five-acre plot) in Andover or up Hwy 65 to visit friends living
in East Bethel.  

I would also venture to argue that Detroit's problems may have been caused
more by the Pat Awada-style mentality of the 'burbs than too much
"dictating".  As john powell eloquently states in the "On Race and Space"
article, "sprawl is the new face of Jim Crow."

For anyone who missed the Awada gems - catch them while the link still last
in the Strib at: http://www.startribune.com/stories/562/2205624.html
  
> Minneapolis Content.  I am constantly amazed at how much time is consumed by
> Mpls citizens, policy makers, in telling suburbanites how to build their
> cities.  What would happen if the numerically superior suburbs took an equal
> interest in what Mpls is doing in their back yards?  Wouldn't that be
> charming?

Terrell Brown's response answered this pretty well.  I'd add on that
suburbanites cry about their schools receiving a smaller per-student funding
than the Minneapolis school district (despite having far fewer immigrant or
poverty-stricken students that need those extra funds to succeed),
suburbanites cry about "their road money" being used for transit because
"they don't use it" - instead they want more and wider roads to accommodate
their 12-mpg Ford Excursions and Lincoln Navigators.

Mark Snyder
Ward 1/Windom Park
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to