OP ED
The December 8th informational meeting for commercial property and business owners was an evening of gimmicks and slogans that began on a sour note. After a brief contretemps over the propriety of a citizen recording the proceedings, the Mayor cautioned those present that the meeting was being recorded. It was all downhill from there.
Of the thirty-odd invitees who were sent formal invitational letters, only a handful showed up with an understandable “What’s in it for me?” attitude. The attending skeptical public expected to learn how ambitious developmental miracles would be wrought at a time when investment capital is virtually nonexistent.
Instead of a hearty meal to satisfy those hungers, both groups were served a thin broth so transparent you could read a newspaper through it. In his introductory remarks, Mayor Wiegman offered two concepts never before voiced in Croton: “Green Tape” and “Smart Growth.” These are not new ideas. Both have been tried in various U.S. urban areas. Silver Spring, Maryland (pop. 76,540), is a poster city for both theories.
A prominently displayed roll of green duct tape symbolized Croton’s intention to cut bureaucratic red tape and speed up its traditionally glacier-paced permit processes--a laudable objective. “Green tape” programs work in cities because cities have departments specifically charged with issuing permits. In Silver Spring, for example, the target is to issue a permit within two weeks of application. Whether Croton’s volunteer boards, some meeting only once a month, could be galvanized into quick action is problematical.
Maryland was so enamored with smart growth, an urban planning concept that concentrates growth in the center of a city, it enacted it into law a decade ago. To avoid suburban sprawl, smart growth limits development to dense, urban settlements near train and bus stations, envisions neighborhood schools, streets for use by pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices. Whether such big-city objectives could be met in Croton--a tiny suburban village of commuters in single-family homes--is equally problematical.
A recent study by scholars writing in the September 2009 issue of the Journal of the American Planning Association flatly called Maryland’s smart-growth policies a failure. After ten years, the authors concluded there was no evidence that smart-growth laws had any effect on development patterns. Lacking incentives to redevelop older neighborhoods with high-density projects, builders preferred more lucrative low-density developments in fringe areas. Not only is smart growth complicated and expensive, residents tend to oppose high-density developments near their homes. Paradoxically, my political party is belatedly embracing smart growth as the salvation of Harmon.
Meanwhile, back at the meeting, the slide show continued, largely devoted to proposed nit-picking architectural standards sure to run up building costs. So cluttered with legalistic and architectural jargon were the 31 slides that eyes quickly glazed over. At 9:30, the meeting was abruptly declared to be over, leaving skeptical public attendees still hungry for answers. The property and business owners left quickly, also still hungry for incentives and unimpressed by jazzy gimmicks and breezy slogans.
