There is a story that when Henry Ford visited the
Mercer Museum in Doylestown, he offered to purchase the entire museum
and move it back to Dearborn, Michigan where he was creating his
own historical museum. Henry Mercer, so the story goes, refused,
wishing to keep the historical treasure right here in Bucks County.
In the end, though, Ford was still able to take much away from Bucks
County (namely, the peace and serenity of the farming communities
that had long existed there) with his invention, the mass-produced
automobile.
With the boom in automobile production came an equal need for better
roads and highways. The original Office of Road Inquiry, founded
in 1893 with an annual budget of $10,000 evolved in 1967 to become
the Federal Highway Administration, with a budget today of over
$26 billion! Back in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson created the
Federal-aid highway program, which allowed for federal funding to
assist in road building projects. Thus the groundwork was being
laid for roads to leave the cities and invade the pastoral country
side. (Doylestown, PA was made much more accesible to Philadelphia
in 1963 when US Route 611 was widened from Doylestown to Montgomery
County, which had already been widened to Philadelphia).
Early freeway in Massachusettes, circa 1935 |
With the boom in automobile production came an equal need
for better roads and highways. The original Office of Road Inquiry,
founded in 1893 with an annual budget of $10,000 evolved in
1967 to become the Federal Highway Administration, with a budget
today of over $26 billion! Back in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson
created the Federal-aid highway program, which allowed for federal
funding to assist in road building projects. Thus the groundwork
was being laid for roads to leave the cities and invade the
pastoral country side. (Doylestown, PA was made much more accesible
to Philadelphia in 1963 when US Route 611 was widened from Doylestown
to Montgomery County, which had already been widened to Philadelphia).
|
The population boom after World War II further encouraged people to
leave cities which, combined with the automobile and the beginnings
of a national highway system, set the stage for the final big step
in the beginnings of suburban sprawl: the sprawling housing subdivision.
Ironically, Bucks County was to play an early part in what was to
eventually become a scourge of the nation.
| But before Bucks County is brought
into the story, it is first necessary to mention what happened
out on an inconspicous piece of farmland on Long Island. It
was there that the beginnings of suburban sprawl were about
to take shape, and the man behind the big change was William
J. Levitt. William Levitt did for houses what Henry Ford did
for automobiles. He developed a system for mass production that
was affordable to the masses. Levitt's first sprawling creation
started in Long Island in 1947 as 2000 monotonously similar-looking
homes and developed by 1951 into a sprawling complex of over
17,000 homes. This complex still serves as an archetype for
sprawl. |
 |
William Levitt |
|
|
Levittown, NY before the sprawl |
Levittown, NY after the sprawl |
Levittown, Bucks County, PA |
With the success of the Long Island sprawl known as Levittown,
William Levitt looked elsewhere to build other profitable housing
developments. And one of those places was right in Bucks County,
PA. It is ironic that even back in the 1950's sprawl was becoming
a problem in Bucks County, albeit not necessarily recognized as
a problem. Perhaps back then few realized how relentless and overwhelming
it would become. But the warning signs were there, especially as
Levitt's new town in the county was described at the time as "the
fastest-growing city in the world." An article in a 1952 Reader's
Digest describes the situation quite well, and ironically it applies
with great precision to the same troubles occuring today. But interestingly,
the article portrays this growth in a rather positive manner, a
major change from how such growth is usually described today. Certainly
it is no longer a "miracle":
This miracle is a routine spectacle for the first residents of
Levittown, the fastest-growing city in the world. Four thousand
homes will be completed by the end of 1952; in the next two years
12,000 more. In ten short years it is expected to be the size
of Norfolk, Va., one of the 50 largest cities in the country.
Its creators, Levitt & Sons, have singlehandedly built a metropolis
overnight.
The article goes on to describe other interesting points about
the development at Levittown and, although it is from fifty years
ago, it still remains applicable to the issues going on today. Farmers
are still having a hard time making ends meet and the lure of quick,
easy money from a developer is difficult to resist compared to the
many years of toiling over the land for virtually no profit at all.
Compare the quote from the Reader's Digest article to a modern day
quote from an article in the Daily Intelligencer:
Reader's Digest, 1952 |
Daily Intelligencer, 2000 |
| The Levitts started buying land
for their city in April 1952, six months after U.S. Steel had
started its plant on the Delaware River. Acreage prices, already
rising, soon skyrocketed from $400 to $2000. Farmers who had
eked out a moderate living all their lives suddenly found themselves
wealthy and retired to Florida. Levitt's highest price was paid
when one man held on to two acres in the middle of Levittown,
asserting that he had promised the land to his tenant. He sold
it for $7500 to the tenant, who promptly resold it to Levitt
for $48,000. |
After more than 50 years of working
their 37-acre plot in Warrington, the McNaneys have agreed to
sell 30 acres to a developer... The developer's proposal is
not the first the McNaneys have seen. During the last several
years, many developers have knocked on their door, eyes gleaming
with the possibilities presented by the vast acreage before
them. But the McNaneys, a hardworking lot used to the vigorous,
long hours of running a farm, were not easily swayed. |
It is interesting to note that even back in the 1950s there were
those rare people who were willing to stand up against the developers
and try to protect the farmland from the bulldozer. Back then, though,
they were portrayed in a rather negative manner (e.g. "crotchety
old farmer", "run-down acres") by the press:
Probably the only man untouched by the surging interplay of forces
between the new city and the once-quiescent countryside is a crotchety
old farmer with 70 run-down acres on the edge of Levittown. His
property has long been sought by Levitt's agents. But the old
man keeps putting them off. "I grow the finest patch of weeds
in Bucks County," he tells them. "No hard feelings, mister, but
I just aim to sit here." And there--despite the fastest-growing
city in the world--he sits.
As sad as it is, little has changed in all that time. The question
is, fifty years after the beginnings of sprawl in Bucks County,
where are we at today? Levittown is still there, and a historical
marker now marks the location with the words:
| This fully planned, six-home style residential
community was conceived by the builder William J. Levitt. The
first family moved in, June 23, 1952. When completed in 1957,
Levittown containted 17,311 homes on 5,750 acres, designed for
a population of 70,000. It expanded on the pattern set by Levittown,
N.Y. (built 1947-51) and was a landmark in the development of
suburban housing in the United States. |
These days it might be more appropriate to have a marker next to
one of the few remaining farms and describe what the area once was
like. In fact, such markers do exist, at least in a twisted sense.
It doesn't take much looking to find hints at what the housing developments
have replaced. One need simply read the name of each new development
or road being created to find out what once was there. As was stated
in the New York Times Magazine in April 2000, "Whenever 'farm' (or
'forest' or 'fairground' or anything venerably rural) is honored
in a suburban place name, you can bet the thing is history..." One
is more likely to run into one of these signs recollecting an idyllic
setting, rather than the real thing these days. There just isn't
a lot of farmland left in the county. According to U.S. Department
of Agriculture statistics, Bucks County lost almost 70% of its farmland
between 1950 and 1997, a drop in acreage from over 260,000 to less
than 84,000.
|
|
|
What does suburban sprawl
look like today? This example, from a Doylestown Township
booklet, demonstrates the nature of the sprawl. The fertile
fields are rapidly being converted into home after home after
home. You won't find this on the cover of any Bucks County
advertisement, but this is how Bucks should truly be represented
today. |
Although the county now looks vastly different today from the past,
all hope is not lost (yet). While slow to action, the residents
of Bucks County have become much more aware of the environmental
onslaught that is occuring around them. Organizations now exist
to try to help preserve land. Fundraisers take place to increase
awareness and raise money for land preservation. Townships have
been purchasing land to try to stave off at least a little of the
development. And residents have recently become more willing to
depart with their money in the form of increased taxes in order
to help purchase land.
|
SAVED: This farm has been saved from
development. |
Several options exist to preserve land. Land can be purchased outright
from farmers, but this is often an expensive venture and not much
land can reasonably be saved in this manner. For example, Warrington
recently spent about $2,000,000 to purchase "42 acres of open space
in an area of Warrington where developers are vying for every acre,"
as was described in a February 1999 article in the Daily Intelligencer.
Another option is to buy the development rights to the land, known
as a conservation easement. Once a farmer sells his or her development
rights, he or she is still allowed to live on and farm the land
and even sell the land. But the right to ever develop it is lost
in the sale. This is a more cost-effective approach but it is still
too costly to preserve much land. (A 48-acre tract of farmland was
preserved in Solebury in 1999 at a cost of $384,000 for the development
rights. That comes out to about $8,000 per acre).
 |
SAVED: Stables on the
Paxson Farm |
Perhaps the best, although least often utilized, method of land
acquisition is through donations of conservation easements. The
late Adele Warden Paxson, a Buckingham landowner and throughbred
breeder, made an extremely generous donation of conservation easements
on more than 300 acres of farmland. That donation was estimated
to be worth about $10 million. In December 2001, Seena and Dick
Rosenberger generously cut $150,000 off of the appraised value of
their land so that Milford Township could afford to buy their 89
acres of forests and open fields. Others have done the same and
they should be thanked for their kindness and thoughtfulness.
 |
SAVED: Open fields of the Paxson Farm |
Although all of these solutions are working to stave off the problem
at least partially, time is a critical element here. Once the land
is bought and developed, it is gone forever. And the ones with the
most money and power are, unfortunately, the developers. Many of
the developers seem to have only dollar-signs in their line of sight.
Few seem to care that they are destroying an area that was known
for its peacefulness and lack of congestion. They seem to disregard
the will of those living there in pursuit of more profits. (See
"It took an act of congress to stop a developer" further down this
page.) They certainly represent a powerful force that is difficult,
if not impossible, to stop. The developers have many tools at their
disposal to get their way, leaving residents often helpless to stop
the destruction of their surrounding community.
 |
Photo by Mitch Bunkin
The new Bucks County landscape
|
Townships in Pennsylvania face the difficulty of dealing with arcane
laws which favor developers. Such laws include ones that require
townships, no matter of what size, to provide for housing of every
income level. This allows for developers to sue townships for changes
in the zoning laws, known as "substantiative challenges" or "curative
amendments." Often these lawsuits result in the zoning rules being
re-written in favor of the developers, allowing them to build high-density
developments in areas that were not intended to contain such housing.
|
LOST: What were recently open fields has
become yet another
development |
The Pennsylvania Builders Association, representing the interests
of developers, is a very powerful lobbying organization in the state.
"[A] memo from the builders' trade association
detailed a series of changes it would like to see made to the
highly popular programs. One policy point went so far as to
call for ending state funding of farmland preservation, and
others advocated changes local officials said would cripple
preservation programs."
--Quoted from the Daily Intelligencer, 2002 |
The group has fought vigorously to prevent communities from placing
boundaries on the growth that they will experience, described by
the building group as a violation of "free-market principles."
Builders themselves have vast amounts of cash, both to entice farmers
to sell their land and, in what seems like an act of pure malevolence,
to sue the townships to get what they want, such as changes in the
zoning to allow them to build more houses. It must be remembered
that townships are made of the people who live in the community,
and thus the developers are indirectly suing the residents. Indeed,
tax money must be used for the townships to fight the developers'
lawsuits and only limited money is available--certainly not enough
in comparison to the large cash reserves of the wealthy developers.
Bedminster Township, representing the community who lives there,
recently (May 2003) lost a 7-year court battle against C&M Developers
trying to defend the zoning ordinance which protected farmland from
development. Over $100,000 of Township money--taxpayers' money,
township residents' money--was spent fighting the developer. An
October, 1998 article in the Daily Intelligencer describes it well:
"Battered by years of costly lawsuits against mega-developers
with bottomless pockets, local leaders say they've had enough of
a system that they believe allows the region's builders to run roughshod
over their zoning regulations. " Recently lawmakers in Harrisburg
have sought to change the balance of power, although some have described
the new laws as inneffective and "toothless," and some
have actually suggested that the new laws may benefit the developers
even more.
 |
| SAVED: A farm located along Bristol Road |
Still the fight goes on and more can certainly be done. A good
example of successful control of growth can be found across the
continent in Oregon. Years ago, Oregon instituted growth boundaries
around cities, placing a clearly defined line on the map that delineated
areas where growth could occur and areas where development was off-limits.
Although these boundaries proved to be both effective and popular,
they do not exist in Pennsylvania. Another possibility for controlling
growth which is underutilized is the concept of concurrency. This
means that building can't take place in an area until it has the
appropriate infrastucture to handle the growth, such as roads, sewers,
and water.
"We're losing not only our agricultural and natural heritage,
but the very reason why people want to move here and stay here
and raise their children here in Bucks County."
--Kevin Corrigan of Buckingham, 2002, running for state representative.
Quoted in Daily Intelligencer |
By controlling where these necessities are placed, growth can be
controlled. Concurrency is such a good idea, it's amazing that it
isn't used more often. When development occurs without regard for
the infrastructure needed to serve it everyone loses, both old and
new home owners. For example, fresh water is still obtained by many
homes from on-site wells. More and more these days existing wells
are drying up and need to be dug deeper to find water, and every
year less open land is available to allow for rainwater to seep
into the ground to replenish the natural aquifiers. As stated in
a 2002 Daily Intelligencer article, "The frequency of drought in
recent years combined with the poulation growth in Bucks...is a
dangerous combination."
 |
GOING, GOING... Open vistas such as
this are rapidly disappearing in Bucks County |
It is clear that while steps are being taken to control growth,
much more could be done. What do we have to lose? The loss that
occurs due to all of the development is manifold. One need only
look back to the original model for sprawl, Levittown, New York,
and the surrounding communities on Long Island for a glimpse of
what might be coming. A 2004 article in the New York Times cited
a study of Long Island done by a non-profit group and summarized
it by stating, "Average pay from Long Island employers has dropped
in recent years, little land is left to develop, taxes are high,
cars are multiplying faster than people, commuting times are longer
and people are being priced out of the housing market...". Another
article in The New York Times stated, "Long Island, whose Levittown
developments are shorthand for postwar suburbia, is a petri dish
for the problem....the soaring housing prices, high taxes and monochrome
of suburban life." But it is not too late for Bucks County. The
County is still a beautiful place to live and play. In fact, Bucks
county now has the second largest park system in the state, second
only to Philadelphia. Undoubtedly tourists will come less often
to drive through the countryside when there is little of it left.
But even more important is a loss of quality of life for those who
have chosen Bucks County as a peacful and uncongested place to live.
The many narrow, winding streets cannot accomodate the increased
traffic load, and cars can often be backed up in huge lines during
rush hour and on weekends. The air and water quality will diminish.
Wildlife habitat will be destroyed. There is also the increased
costs associated with the building boom, such as a larger police
and fire-fighting force, more schools, and higher taxes to pay for
it all.
Photo by Richard Hanauer |
|
Without open space, hot air balloons will have nowhere to
land |
A few analysts have demonstrated that the cost of purchasing land
that is slated for development can pay for itself in just a few
years by the savings in costs which otherwise would have been necessary
to educate more students and build more schools to accomodate them.
As of 2001, the Central Bucks School District was looking into building
a new high school and a new elementary school to accomodate the
new students that have accompanied the growth in population and
housing. The estimated cost of building these two schools was over
$100 million! That does not include the ongoing costs of maintenance
and salaries for staff. Had this amount of money been used to buy
land or development rights instead, hundreds, if not thousands,
of acres of beautiful land would have been saved, congestion would
have been decreased, and money would have been saved in the long-run.
This growing problem exists throughout our region. A 2002 New York
Times article stated that in one New Jersey township, "many residents
were dismayed, because when they moved into the township's proliferating
new subdivisions they had no idea that the surge in school enrollment
would drive-up their taxes.
"It is less expensive, in the long term,
to preserve land than to permit it to be developed."
--Bucks County Commissioner Mike Fitzpatrick, Quoted from the
Daily Intelligencer, 2003 |
" And at recent (spring, 2002) public discussion in Bucks County,
Charles Baker, president of the Central Bucks School Board, stated
"We're looking at the biggest tax increase just about anyone has
ever seen: 19.9 mills this year, and 32 planned for next year. That's
going to affect everyone moving into the community." But, unfortunately,
because most people are short-sighted, and want to hold on to their
money instead of paying higher taxes to buy land (a one-time necessity),
they will instead pay higher school taxes for the rest of their
lives. A primary election in 1997 found that "a sizable minority
of Bucks voters did not want to spend tax dollars on open space
preservation," according to a Daily Intelligencer article.
Photo by Richard Hanauer |
| As open space disappears, wild turkeys such as
this one will becoming increasingly rare |
Buying land for preservation is actually inexpensive. In fact,
compared to all of the costs associated with the concurrent growth
it's a bargain, but relatively little is being spent on saving the
remaining land. As opposed to the $100 million expected to pay for
two new schools (mentioned above) to accomodate the new students
from all of the growth, only $60 million has been allocated by the
county to preserve open space.
 |
Five cents. This is the daily cost to
the average Bucks County homeowner for land preservation.
Shouldn't we be spending more? |
It has been estimated that the average Bucks County home owner
will pay about $20 per year in additional taxes to pay for this
open space preservation program--that comes out to about 5 cents
per day! How much would you be willing to spend to avoid increased
traffic, a decreased quality of life, and a loss of the natural
beauty of the area? More than a nickel per day? As money runs out
for the original open space program, a new open space referendum
will be put forward in the near future, and it will be up to the
voters--the citizens of Bucks County--to decide if they are willing
to spend more money to preserve the area and, if so, how much can
be spent. Any investment now will surely pay off later. As of May
2003, there were 60 farms still on the waiting list to be purchased
and preserved. One thing is certain, if the county doesn't grab
the land, the developers surely will. So it is up to the citizens
to decide the future of the remaining open space: preservation or
destruction through construction.
Time is crucial. The battles must be fought on the local, state,
and even national levels. The forces faced are formidable, but if
everyone does their part to stop the endless development, some of
the beautiful landscapes that are disappearing before our eyes may
yet be preserved. It is the will of the people, not the developers,
that should prevail. We all must act now and do more than ever to
make a difference. For once the land is gone so will have gone the
singular quaintness of this beautiful Bucks County.
|
The residents of Bucks County have a choice.
Either they can sit back and let the remaining farm land become
housing developments or they can fight to preserve what remains
of the county's open space. |
"I absolutely don't want this. I like the county and
I want it to stay that way," said one resident who wouldn't
give her name. "Traffic is difficult..already. They can't
tell me traffic won't increase." -Daily Intelligencer,
March 6, 2003.
"There is nothing in which the birds differ more from
man than the way in which they can build and yet leave a landscape
as it was before." -Robert Lynd
"When land is developed, it ceases being land. It
becomes covered, sealed, its own grave." -Joy Williams,
'One Acre', Harper's Magazine
|
|
|
LOST: Another unisightly, sprawling subdivision goes up near
New Hope |
|
| Houses are continuing to invade the land where wildlife used
to run free |
 |
Endangered Species: A Bucks County Farm |
 |
 |
Changing views: These two
photos were taken from almost identical locations |
 |
 |
Telltale signs of impending
development: Stakes in the ground where crops are growing
and a large mound, almost a sure sign that houses will soon
be sprouting. This farm is located on Swamp Road (route 413)
near Old York Road (Route 263) |
 |
 |
The slow disappearance of
the farm. The two photos were taken a little under a year
apart. The arrow points to a tree for reference in the two
photos. |
 |
 |
Appearing with jaws open like
a monster from a child's nightmare, this machine was standing
idle, its job completed--tearing up the trees to make way
for development. Note the telltale mound in the background.
This despoiled land was found along Bristol road. |
|
|
Another beautiful piece of
open land preserved |
 |
 |
This view could be found as
of 2003 near the intersection of Forest Grove and Dark Hollow
roads. How much longer will such views remain? |
 |
 |
Lost: Land that is being bulldozed
to become "Buckingham Forest", developed by Toll Brothers. |
 |
 |
Where did the forest go? These
views of "Buckingham Forest" are taken from virtually the
same vantage point as the pictures above. |
 |
Enjoy this view while you can. It is going
to become part of Toll Brothers' "Buckingham Forest" development. |
 |
A rare bird? Perhaps, if the farms keep
disappearing. |
|
It took an act of congress to stop a developer
Toll Brothers are one of the largest builders
of luxury homes in the nation, and have taken a very active
part in building homes on previously open land in Bucks County.
The company, publicy traded on the New York Stock Exchange,
had over $2 billion in assets and made a profit of over $145
million in 2000. Recently, the developer was involved in a major
controversy over their desire to build homes on the grounds
of a national park.
Valley Forge, Pennsylvania is home to a national historic
park, site of the revolutionary war campground where George
Washington and his soldiers struggled for survival during
the winter of 1777-1778. Recently, the park itself struggled
for survival.
Within the actual borders of this national park there existed
some privately owned land which the National Park Service
could not afford to purchase. Toll Brothers, however, did
purchase the land. As a result of this purchase, within the
borders of the national park, Toll Brothers attempted to build
a 62-home development named "Valley Forge Overlook." In response
to a large public outcry, in early 2003 Congress appropriated
millions of dollars to buy the land from Toll Brothers to
prevent it from being developed.
This was not the first time that Toll Brothers had been accused
trying to build on a historic site.
In 1988 Toll Brothers purchased the Naval Asylum and 24 acres
of adjoining land for $1.2 million. Located in Southwest Philadelphia,
the Naval Asylum is designated a National Historic Landmark
and is listed on the National Register of Historic places
and for good reason: it was built in 1833 and was designed
by William Strickland who also design the first United States
mint in addition to the Tennesee State Capitol and the cuploa
for Independence Hall. Additionally, it served until 1846
as the first Naval Academy in the United States.
Over the years, Toll Brothers allowed the historic site to
fall into disrepair. After the historic structure was found
to be covered in graffiti and vandalized both inside and out,
the city department of Licensing and Inspections accused Toll
Brothers of "demolition by neglect," according to a report
in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Unfortunately, in February 2003,
the structure suffered severe fire damage in what was determined
to be arson according to the Philadelphia fire marshal.
The damage was not severe enough to raze the building, although
the roof required replacement. The city eventually had to
take Toll Brothers to court (costing yet more taxpayer money)
due to Toll Brothers' delays in undertaking repairs and securing
the site from further damage.
According to a web site that has been chronicling the events,
recent plans that Toll Brothers had for the site were rejected
by the Park Service in 2000 for several reasons, namely "Toll's
plan to demolish the servants' wing of the Surgeon's and Governor's
residences; the encroachment of townhomes too closely on the
Surgeon's and Governon's residences; and the proposed use
of the historic parade ground as a parking lot."
To find out more about this tragic loss of history visit
the following links for more information:
SouthPhillyBlocks
The South of South Neighborhood Association
Hallwatch.org
Outside of Pennsylvania, Toll Brothers has also been involved
in a lot of controversy over their building practices. Some
of these are described below:
A Boston Globe expose on the
company's practices had this to say:
...in Florida, the company level-cut environmentally
sensitive land for a luxury development it named, ironically,
''The Preserve.''
In several communities, Toll Brothers has ignored or paid
little attention to the environment and local environmental
regulations in its rush to build new homes and maximize
profits, according to local officials and court documents.
In a lawsuit filed by Schuylkill Township, Pa., the town
said Toll flouted environmental rules ''all for the purpose
of enhancing their profits.''
A website, the Sustainable
Loudoun Network from Loudoun County, Virginia describes
their own troubles with Toll Brothers:
Toll Brothers made it very clear that they
intend to fully develop the land to maximize their profits,
as that is more important than making environmental or "good
neighbor" concessions. Doing the right thing by the environment
and the community does not bring in obscene profits and
therefore has no part in their business plan.
David has created an absolutely marvelous
site that contains a wealth of images and historical information
related to Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Please be sure to visit
it at:
http://www.davidhanauer.com/buckscounty/ |
|