Sustainability Includes Economic Sustainability

In Flagstaff's Daily Paper recently, there has been a running controversy about the alleged conflict between affordable housing and green housing. The charge of some is that impact fees will increase the cost of our already above average homes, making affordable housing in Flagstaff impossible. Also that the green building codes under consideration will increase the cost of housing. Another recent editorial accused city administrators with sending "mixed messages" about sustainability by organizing and subsidizing a huge expansion of our retail mall and encouraging the establishment of an auto mall next to it. The Sun sarcastically referred to the city's green policies as a "mantra."

The Daily Sun limits the length of letters to the editor, so my response was constrained and incomplete. For example, I didn't have room to talk about federal tax credits that are available to builders and consumers for energy efficiency in homes. Or, to express my belief that it would be good for the country to expand those tax credits. Nor, did I have time to point out that one of our local developers has found a way to build developments that include affordable housing units sold under a city mortgage program while selling most of the units at market prices. And incorporating energy-efficient features to boot! But in a short letter, here is what I was able to say:

"Tuesday's editorial was a bit off base in charging the City with sending "mixed messages" on sustainability. Sometimes a city needs to take a step in one direction to prepare to take larger steps in another direction.

"Thus, an expansion of the mall and creation of an auto mall is not inconsistent with sustainable development. Keeping shoppers and retail tax dollars in Flagstaff instead of driving to spend money in Phoenix is neither a bad idea nor inconsistent with sustainable living. Consolidating the auto dealers in one location to free up central city land for infill and to cut down on auto buyers' driving all over town to shop for cars also makes "green sense." The trick is to use the tax dollars for smart development, including job creation.

"As to affordable housing, if anyone thinks we can build our way out of unaffordable housing prices, they are in la-la land. We need to be looking to the other half of the affordability equation - raising people's incomes. Impact fees will not make housing less affordable. The fees just redistribute the costs of infrastructure. If we don't have impact fees, property and sales taxes have to go up to pay for that infrastructure and that makes living in Flagstaff less affordable.

"As for building on the outskirts, the building I see right now is on McMillen Mesa, at 4^th Street, at Butler and Lone Tree, and near the Gore Westside plant.

"Finally, if there had not been the fight over Wal-Mart, would Wal-Mart have built the eco-friendly store they are building? I was not on the side of banning Wal-Mart, but I'm glad that viewpoint was well-represented and the issues were raised.

"Seems to me, "sustainability" is not a bad "mantra" for a city to have."

Here is my letter online as published by the Sun on October 18: Development,Sustainabilty Coexisit

Here's the editorial I was responding to: Hiring Makes Policy Statement

Ann Heitland, RE/MAX Peak Properties

Flagstaff Real Estate and Community News