February 15, 2007

By Diane Chiddister

How would annexing the Fogg farm into Yellow Springs affect the economic and social life of the village? Would the new residential development address the local need for affordable housing, or are there better ways to create affordable housing without changing the borders of the village? What is the most effective way for the Village to produce new revenues?

These were some of the questions and issues raised Sunday afternoon at “Community Perspectives on Annexation,” a forum sponsored by the Smart Growth Education Task Force. About 90 villagers crowded into the Senior Center Great Room for the event, which featured short presentations by panelists and questions and concerns raised by villagers on the issue of the proposed annexation of the 40-acre Fogg farm on the western edge of the village.

The event’s purpose was to offer a variety of perspectives on the issue, according to facilitator Gina Paget.

“We hope this won’t be a debate but a time to get out different perspectives and to weigh them against our own, to put aside our preconceived ideas and listen to each other,” she said at the event’s beginning.

Village Council must either accept or reject the expedited request from Fogg farm owners to annex the land by its April 16 meeting. At a special Village Council meeting Jan. 29, Fogg farm co-owner Doug Miller proposed a “concept plan” of The Village Greene, which included 210 housing units on the land, including both single family and multiple family dwellings.

Residential vs. job growth
Some who attended the meeting expressed reservations about the proposed annexation as an effective way to address the Village’s financial challenges.

“We are not going to solve the Village’s economic issues by building residential units,” said panelist Steve Conn of the Smart Growth Education Task Force, who stated that the Village should focus on job growth instead. An urban history professor at Ohio State University, Conn described the proposed Fogg farm development as following outdated urban planning principles by segregating residential development from commercial use. Such development promotes automobile use over human needs, he said.

If the village wants to attract new business and jobs, it would do well to keep its distinctive nature rather than to invite urban sprawl, he said.

“The reasons people will want to have their business here is that we have attended to physical space in ways profoundly different” from other communities in the area, he said.

Panelist Chad Runyon agreed that the Village should increase jobs rather than housing units to shore up Village finances.

“Job growth offers a bigger bang for the buck,” he said. “It’s a more efficient way of developing revenues.”

Annexing the Fogg farm does not guarantee that its residents will work or shop in the village, according to Dimi Reber, who stated her concern that 400 new residents on the western edge of town would “shift the balance of town” away from the center.

Affordable housing?
The proposed annexation might offer badly-needed affordable housing, according to panelist Marianne MacQueen, executive director of Home, Inc. Miller has stated that a “good percentage” of the housing units would fall within the $140,000 to $170,000 range due to market forces in Yellow Springs.

“How can we be a community where young people who grow up here can afford to come back?” MacQueen asked.

Several other attendees spoke of their desire to see more affordable housing in Yellow Springs. The lack of such housing in Yellow Springs is of great concern, said longtime villager Al Schlueter, who said that he has over the years seen the village become older and less racially diverse because many young people and African-Americans can’t afford to buy homes here.

“I’m afraid people don’t see how the village is changing,” he said.

Yellow Springs schools need more students and Yellow Springs needs more affordable housing to attract young families, according to Yellow Springs High School teacher Yvonne Wingard, who urged attendees to support the annexation in the light of that need.

But some villagers questioned whether the Village has the legal means of ensuring that the final Village Greene development would actually include affordable housing. Currently, the development is only a concept plan, according to Village Assistant Planner Ed Amrhein, who stated that the Village may decide to include a specified amount of affordable housing in a pre-annexation agreement with Miller. However, in response to a question from Mary White, Amrhein said he does not know at this point how to make sure that pre-annexation agreements are legally binding.

And describing housing in the $140,000 to $170,000 range as “affordable” is inaccurate, according to villager Carmen Milano, who said that many of those who already work in the village need housing that costs no more than $100,000. “We have set the bar in the wrong place,” she said.

Village land available?
Most villagers who attended the event agreed that the village needs more affordable housing, but some questioned whether expanding the borders of Yellow Springs is the best way to get it. Currently, the Village has more than 100 acres of developable property within village borders, including the Village-owned 28-acre Glass Farm, according to Rick Donahoe, who urged Council to limit new development to within current Village borders.

“We have the land,” he said. “It’s right under our noses.”

Panelist Don Hollister expressed his concern that if the Fogg farm is developed and if more homes are then built inside current borders, Yellow Springs could grow beyond 5,000 residents, a change that social scientists identify as affecting the quality of life.

“We need to continue to think about the size and the quality of life in Yellow Springs,” Hollister said. “I would argue that we have enough land within current boundaries” to increase the population.

But much of that empty land is owned by people who don’t plan to develop it, according to MacQueen, who said that Home, Inc., spent two years in an effort to identify available lots upon which affordable housing could be built.

Domino effect, green space
Several villagers expressed their concern about the possible “domino effect” of annexation, in which the Fogg farm annexation could make future annexation of neighboring land more likely and lessen green space around the village. Currently, the Fogg farm is bordered to the south by several hundred acres of land owned by developer Matt Arnovitz, who has stated that he will develop the land at some point, but he does not yet know when.

Of special concern is land identified in the Village Comprehensive Plan as the Jacoby green belt, which planners in the 1970s identified as land necessary to preserve to protect the borders of Yellow Springs, according to Tecumseh Land Trust Director Krista Magaw. Many people assume that the Jacoby green belt has already been preserved but much of it has not, she said, including land to the south of the Fogg farm. However, the Fogg farm itself is not a part of the Jacoby green belt and was identified as open to possible annexation in a Village planning document, she said. To protect Jacoby green belt land, villagers need to band together to buy the land, she said.

However, the Village’s interests might be better served by annexing the Fogg farm because the Village would then have control over use of the land, according to Paul Abendroth. If the land is not annexed, the developer could still build on it, although he would be limited to building up to 12 homes on three-acre plots, which is land use that many find objectionable for both environmental and density reasons

But the argument that the Village should annex the Fogg farm in order to have “a seat at the table” regarding control of the land does not make sense, according to Chad Runyon, because that argument can also be made for the next potential annexation, and the next and the next.

“My biggest concern is, where does that argument end?” he said.

Annexing the Fogg farm would provide huge financial benefits to the developer, according to George Bieri, who cited a statement that the Fogg farm land, if annexed, would sell for about $50,000 per acre, or about $2 million altogether.

“If Yellow Springs is going to give that much, what does it get back?” Bieri said.

Bieri proposed that the Village, if it chooses to annex the Fogg farm, require the developer to make half of the housing units affordable and to leave half of the land in green space.

Concern about process
Since moving to Yellow Springs several years ago, he has been troubled by the acrimony of public discussion, said Pat Murphy, executive director of The Community Solution, who said he feels concerned that villagers sometimes “demonize” developers and members of Village Council.

“I think mutual respect is missing in our public dialogue,” he said. “Everything that takes place here is a great battle.”

But the public debate around the annexation issue is intense, Reber said, because “people speak passionately because they feel disempowered.”

While she has no wish to “demonize” Miller, villager Dagmar Smith cautioned villagers to “look at his track record.” A former resident of the Fairfield Mall area in Beavercreek, she attempted to work with Miller when that mall was planned and developed, she said. A commercial realtor at that time, Miller promised things he did not follow through with, she said.

Because the annexation is such a significant issue to Yellow Springs, Council alone should not make the decision, according to Jeff Reich, who suggested that all villagers should vote on the issue.

“Not since Whitehall Farm have we faced an issue that could have such widespread effects on the community,” he said.

Contact: dchiddister@ysnews.com