NOTE: This is not intended as a news report on the condition of the Open Space. This is a first reaction as someone who last week voiced concern about park usage by the Cherry Festival to provide parking.
Of issue this week, is that the film festival organizers are voicing strong concern about the condition of the Open Space post-Cherry Festival. To the extent that they are considering not utilizing the space for the free movies in this year’s festival. There’s a report on 7&4 that covers the basics (“Film Festival reacts to Cherry Festival effects“). My suspicion is that this will not be the only media coverage. Apparently earlier this spring the Traverse City Film Festival contributed $4000 worth of seed and collaborated with the Cherry Festival to ensure that the Open Space did have green grass for the two events in July. The images provided by Film Festival co-founder John Robert Williams do not reflect that it worked out so well.
Every year the impact of 10 days of continuous human traffic and all the service vehicles leaves a scar. Some years seem worse than others; with a little love (and water) the big green lawn returns. It’s seen as a trade off for bringing thousands of tourists into town.
What’s different, from my experience, is that this year it isn’t just matted down brown grass. There are real issues that show some very heavy impact and which lead me to question how the city handles park usage. The current issue between the two-festivals is one thing, but the long-term planning and protection of the parkland is something that additional stakeholders will continue to be concerned about.
Personally, as a commissioner on the Traverse City parks and recreation, I didn’t realize the extent that oversight was needed in regards to prevention and remediation of environmental impact. When we advice the city commission to accept applications for park usage, there was an assumed understanding that proper planning and oversight of the impact existed. To be honest, I also believed there was more sensitivity on part of the Cherry Festival to the condition they left the park. The above image to me reflects poorly on the planning and oversight of the Cherry Festival organizers, but I’m just seeing these images now and look forward to further enlightenment on the issue.
A key question I have is if there is a need for a ramped-up impact prevention and remediation check-list to be implemented for future events, and if so, who is responsible for drafting it. It’s an urban park and wear-and-tear is to be expected. Still, where can we use better infrastructure, policy and planning to control and prevent needless impact. And, what level of impact is acceptable?
Have you been down to the Open Space or looked at the images?
What are your initial reactions?
What questions need to be asked and answered?
Making the Leap – Going Carless
Guest Contributor Bill Palladino, Part 1 of 2 Going Carless
On July 17, 2009 I made a commitment to myself and my community. On that day, I picked up my nephew Kevin at the Cherry Capital Airport in my 2002 Saturn Vue, gave him the keys and the title, and walked away from car ownership. It was a small but radical gesture, especially in Michigan where many people think that act makes me the bicycling equivalent of Euell Gibbons… oddly righteous but odd just the same.
I’ll admit I’d already begun to use my car less and less. The price of gas, and moreover our addiction to it, had been worrying me for a while. But, even considering a slow ramp-down of use, the impacts personally have been significant.
Frankly, I’m ready to celebrate!
A lot of people assume that I’m someone who needs a car. I’m a business owner after all, a meeting go-er, wearer of suits and ties, and carrier of laptops and other trappings of the trade. Somewhere in there, I’d pondered the practicality of it all. At least in my case, car ownership had minimal and only peripheral benefits to my community. My thinking was that I wouldn’t put anyone out of a job by getting rid of my Saturn. And the money I would save from not having the car would allow me to play a more active role in directing where those funds would go.
I’ll cover this past year’s lessons in two parts. The first will look at the financial considerations and the second part will look at the intangibles that are more difficult to measure.
PART ONE: The Cost in Dollars
In my work researching public transportation for the Bay Area Transportation Authority (BATA) , I discovered some very eye-opening realities; this was the driving element for me giving away my car a year ago. In most cases individual vehicle ownership has a negative net effect on local economies. This means that on average more vehicle-related expenses leave the community than stay locally. The math is simple, but difficult to swallow for many. I’ve made some estimates as to how much of the face-value of various goods and services remain in our local economy. Where possible I’ve also provided the references for my calculations.
I’ve listed here my vehicle related expenses for the twelve-month period between July 15, 2008 and July 14, 2009… my last year of car ownership….and this past year of going carless. You can use this cost of car ownership calculator to calculate your own expenses.
Car Payments: Most automobile financing is done by large regional or national banking institutions with token representation in communities (unless you use a small bank or credit union and they don’t broker the loans out.) The check you write typically goes to some faceless PO box in some Midwest city far from here. My lease payments from a car purchased at a Traverse City dealership went to Chase Auto Finance in Fort Worth, Texas. ($260.00 /mo. – $3120/yr. Chase Financial) (Local value of $156.00 based on a generous 2.5% dealer reserve). It’s a powerful lobby as well, recently exempted from new financial regulation despite the fact that car loans are the second largest source of American debt.<
Insurance: one of the largest ongoing vehicle expenses (while mandatory) reserves only a very small percentage of its fees for the local economy (unless a claim is made). And these are mainly sales commissions. My policy was with Auto-Owners based in Lansing, through a local agent. $70/mo. $840.00/yr (Local value $84.00 This assumes a 10% ongoing commission.)
Fuel: Fuel is another piece of the puzzle that astounds. According to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics only 3 to 5 cents from every dollar you spend on gasoline or diesel fuel for your car stays in the local community. That’s why the place we get fuel is no longer called a gas station. They’re called convenience stores, because it’s that convenience that makes them the bulk of their profits. They can make more profit selling you a 12 pack of beer than in selling $30 worth of gas. (10,000 miles at 27.5mpg 363.6 gallons @2.50/gal = $909.10. That’s using very conservative numbers. Assuming I purchased all of that in my home community (which isn’t correct), that’s a local value of $45.46.
Even the hyper conservative jocularity of Steven Colbert jumps on this data-set.
Repairs and Maintenance: depending upon the age of your vehicle, the brand, and the type of driving you do, this can vary greatly. In my case, my warranty had expired and these expenses represent new tires, brakes, and some tune-ups. Arguably, this section has the greatest impact on the local economy as much of the money spent went to local labor. But even then, the total economic impact on my community was small. Total expenses of $1299.00 for an approximate local value $700 in labor.
Parking: in a downtown area like Traverse City, vehicle parking is the constant burr in the sides of residents and businesses. I’m lucky enough to have free parking in my condo association’s lot, but I do travel quite a bit and thus used the paid parking lot at the Cherry Capital Airport frequently. In 2008/2009 I spent 78 days out-of-town, leaving my car in the lot at a cost of $6.50/day. $526.50 (Most of that staying in town.)
These are the same numbers from the table above. Featuring my actual expenses for auto and bicycle use in 2008-2010. The left-hand pie chart represents auto expenses from 08/09, and the right-hand chart the translated expenses for using my bicycles instead after dumping the car.
Plainly, this shows significant savings after getting rid of the car. It’s important to note that I gave the car away. Had I sold it, I could’ve easily netted another $4500. What I’d like you to focus on however is the graph below.
It shows that for the year of car ownership approximately 23% of my expenses stayed in the local community. In the following year, riding my bikes, 41% of expenses stayed local.
>This scale of local value retention is an assumption you can make anytime you choose to purchase something with a smaller carbon footprint. If it took a lot of fuel to get it here, and/or it takes a lot of fuel to keep in running, the majority of money you spend on it will leave the community and never return.
Finally, when you factor in the savings from one year to the next, it’s easy to see that I pocketed well over $5600 by not owning a car.
My conscious choice was to find ways to spend that money where more of it would remain in the local economy.
And I’ll cover how I did that in the Part Two.