PLANNING
Let’s pause and review: The mantra of the Harmon committee, most of whose members live in Harmon, is “Build it and they will come.” Opponents say it should be “Build it and they won’t come.” Proponents of the divisive Harmon proposal admit they’re greedy for the bigger tax revenues new properties will bring. Fearing a depression is coming, critics say the concept slights other struggling areas of Croton.
Moreover, they point out, every Harmon property, occupied or unoccupied, is still yielding tax revenue. The proposal focuses on the former Dodge and Nappy’s properties. It foresees a developer purchasing them, demolishing the buildings (including a Harmon landmark) and erecting mixed-occupancy structures with ground-floor stores and an indefinite number of apartments on two floors above.
The fly in the ointment is the existing zoning law that must be changed. Opponents of the plan, including this writer, have pointed out that such spot zoning is illegal in New York. Why is the Village getting into the real-estate business and accommodating developers anyway? The Harmon committee cannot guarantee that tenants will show up. One of its members, Jeremy Ezra, 31, currently employed by a New York City real estate firm specializing in large commercial properties, has offered to assist in finding tenants. What the owners of barely profitable businesses elsewhere in Croton will think of this one-sided favoritism to Harmon is anybody’s guess.
With the first phase of new buildings nearing completion, the committee predicts individual property owners will begin to erect matching structures. The scenario goes something like this: I am the debt-free owner of a thriving store on South Riverside Avenue in Harmon, and I live above my store. Succumbing to the committee’s hype, I scrounge for credit and contract for a new building. Next, I close the store, sell off inventory and fixtures at a loss, lay off my two employees, move my household furniture to a storage facility, and rent a furnished apartment.
Fast-forward to the time when the replacement building is ready. After being without income for almost a year. I move into a new upstairs apartment, restock the store and try to entice former customers to return. It’s not easy. Because of my heavy debt load, I must charge higher prices. Kicking myself for ending up with a struggling business, massive mortgage, two empty high-rent apartments above mine, staggeringly higher tax bills—and a view of the new empty stores and apartments of the bankrupt developer across the street.
I have just one question for the Harmon committee: What planet do you people come from?
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 8
PLANNING
In 2004 Croton declared war on business. Not all businesses, just businesses certain people arbitrarily decided they didn’t want here. The attack weapon was the Gateway Law. Zoning laws usually specify permitted businesses or occupations. Croton turned common practice upside down. It designated five categories of undesirable businesses that any community wanting tax revenue would have gladly welcomed. Croton’s message: “Keep out!”
This 2004 law’s ban on parking lots was probably intended to prevent competition with the Village’s own lucrative station parking lot. Other exclusions foolishly targeted existing businesses—two local automobile dealerships and their storage lots. When the owner of the Dodge dealership discovered that if a fire destroyed more than 50% of his business, it could not be rebuilt, he moved his operation to the former Kayson property.
It turned out that Croton had shot itself in the foot by becoming a business-unfriendly community. Its punitive action actually created the empty Dodge dealership. Planners now call it an eyesore, and are pushing hard to eradicate it. For five years, Croton discouraged tax-paying businesses from coming here. Advocates of the Harmon scheme would have you believe that they can magically attract tenants to new apartments and storefronts in Harmon when existing facilities there are empty.
Other 2004 law prohibitions targeted businesses wanting to come to Croton. Its ban on drive-through windows was initially aimed at the Eckerd pharmacy chain. Eckerd wanted to buy the undeveloped Katz property, but the village said no to a planned drive-through window for prescription pickup. When the village attorney cautioned that it was unwise during negotiations to write a law solely directed at Eckerd, planners added fast-food restaurants to the list of banned businesses as cover.
Thoroughly disgusted, Eckerd decided it didn’t want to come to a community so openly hostile, and withdrew its offer for the Katz property. As TV hucksters say, “Wait, there’s more.” Another shot in the foot. After the Eckerd deal evaporated, the owner of the Katz property sued Croton, charging that the village had, by its actions, caused the purchase to fall through. Croton settled the suit by buying the property, thus taking it off the tax rolls.
Taxpayers are now the unwitting owners of a million-dollar white elephant yielding no taxes and worth less than what we paid for it. The village still doesn’t have a clue about what to do with its unintended acquisition. Such debacles are called “planning.” Meanwhile, we are being offered a snake-oil scheme that would destroy Harmon’s first and oldest surviving building.
In 2004 Croton declared war on business. Not all businesses, just businesses certain people arbitrarily decided they didn’t want here. The attack weapon was the Gateway Law. Zoning laws usually specify permitted businesses or occupations. Croton turned common practice upside down. It designated five categories of undesirable businesses that any community wanting tax revenue would have gladly welcomed. Croton’s message: “Keep out!”
This 2004 law’s ban on parking lots was probably intended to prevent competition with the Village’s own lucrative station parking lot. Other exclusions foolishly targeted existing businesses—two local automobile dealerships and their storage lots. When the owner of the Dodge dealership discovered that if a fire destroyed more than 50% of his business, it could not be rebuilt, he moved his operation to the former Kayson property.
It turned out that Croton had shot itself in the foot by becoming a business-unfriendly community. Its punitive action actually created the empty Dodge dealership. Planners now call it an eyesore, and are pushing hard to eradicate it. For five years, Croton discouraged tax-paying businesses from coming here. Advocates of the Harmon scheme would have you believe that they can magically attract tenants to new apartments and storefronts in Harmon when existing facilities there are empty.
Other 2004 law prohibitions targeted businesses wanting to come to Croton. Its ban on drive-through windows was initially aimed at the Eckerd pharmacy chain. Eckerd wanted to buy the undeveloped Katz property, but the village said no to a planned drive-through window for prescription pickup. When the village attorney cautioned that it was unwise during negotiations to write a law solely directed at Eckerd, planners added fast-food restaurants to the list of banned businesses as cover.
Thoroughly disgusted, Eckerd decided it didn’t want to come to a community so openly hostile, and withdrew its offer for the Katz property. As TV hucksters say, “Wait, there’s more.” Another shot in the foot. After the Eckerd deal evaporated, the owner of the Katz property sued Croton, charging that the village had, by its actions, caused the purchase to fall through. Croton settled the suit by buying the property, thus taking it off the tax rolls.
Taxpayers are now the unwitting owners of a million-dollar white elephant yielding no taxes and worth less than what we paid for it. The village still doesn’t have a clue about what to do with its unintended acquisition. Such debacles are called “planning.” Meanwhile, we are being offered a snake-oil scheme that would destroy Harmon’s first and oldest surviving building.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 7
PLANNING
My wife and I have lived in Croton for almost a half-century. In 1963, having returned from living in Turkey and tired of coping in a New York hotel, we bought the first house we were shown. It was in Harmon. We’re still in that house. Over the years I fell in love with Croton’s history and wrote extensively about it for The Gazette and in my own blog, Postscripts.
The Harmon Committee’s proposal has many faults. Chief among them is their intention to destroy a historic building. At the northeast corner of Benedict Boulevard and South Riverside Avenue stands a nondescript structure housing a nail salon. Under the Harmon Committee’s plan, it's slated for destruction. How sad if that were to happen. What stories it could tell. It was the very first building constructed in Harmon. It was the sales office from which Clifford Harmon peddled his lots to city dwellers seeking inexpensive homes in the country. It was once the Harmon post office. Some villages would have already restored it, and it would be serving as a visitors' center.
In the mistaken notion that a building spree during an economic downturn will cause customers and tenants to flock magically to Harmon, this committee that doesn’t give a damn about history wants to raze Harmon’s first building, erect a three-story monstrosity, pave the remaining area and make it a parking lot. What’s next? The Van Cortlandt Manor House?
The time has come to put a stop to this nonsense. Any village that forgets its past cannot have much of a future. I call on all who love Croton’s rich history to rise up in protest. I also have a message for the Harmon Committee. Its membership includes self-appointed chairman Kieran Murray, a developer hell-bent on remaking Harmon for his own purposes, and members Joe Biber, Jeremy Ezra, Julie Evans, Doug Wehrle, and Leo Wiegman. By their passivity and silence, members have given tacit approval to Mr. Murray’s frequent spontaneous outbursts of irrational rants and rages.
Those who love Croton’s history are not going to stand idly by and let this committee destroy Harmon’s oldest building through irresponsible planning. Our response is taken from the film The Searchers, now a classic in the Western genre. It’s John Wayne’s laconic line, “That’ll be the day.”
My wife and I have lived in Croton for almost a half-century. In 1963, having returned from living in Turkey and tired of coping in a New York hotel, we bought the first house we were shown. It was in Harmon. We’re still in that house. Over the years I fell in love with Croton’s history and wrote extensively about it for The Gazette and in my own blog, Postscripts.
The Harmon Committee’s proposal has many faults. Chief among them is their intention to destroy a historic building. At the northeast corner of Benedict Boulevard and South Riverside Avenue stands a nondescript structure housing a nail salon. Under the Harmon Committee’s plan, it's slated for destruction. How sad if that were to happen. What stories it could tell. It was the very first building constructed in Harmon. It was the sales office from which Clifford Harmon peddled his lots to city dwellers seeking inexpensive homes in the country. It was once the Harmon post office. Some villages would have already restored it, and it would be serving as a visitors' center.
In the mistaken notion that a building spree during an economic downturn will cause customers and tenants to flock magically to Harmon, this committee that doesn’t give a damn about history wants to raze Harmon’s first building, erect a three-story monstrosity, pave the remaining area and make it a parking lot. What’s next? The Van Cortlandt Manor House?
The time has come to put a stop to this nonsense. Any village that forgets its past cannot have much of a future. I call on all who love Croton’s rich history to rise up in protest. I also have a message for the Harmon Committee. Its membership includes self-appointed chairman Kieran Murray, a developer hell-bent on remaking Harmon for his own purposes, and members Joe Biber, Jeremy Ezra, Julie Evans, Doug Wehrle, and Leo Wiegman. By their passivity and silence, members have given tacit approval to Mr. Murray’s frequent spontaneous outbursts of irrational rants and rages.
Those who love Croton’s history are not going to stand idly by and let this committee destroy Harmon’s oldest building through irresponsible planning. Our response is taken from the film The Searchers, now a classic in the Western genre. It’s John Wayne’s laconic line, “That’ll be the day.”
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 6
PLANNING
Imagine a situation in which two members of a jury in a high-profile trial announce that they had made their minds up even before the trial opens. Next, imagine these same two jurors trying to convince the public of the rightness of their premature verdict by advocating for it at every opportunity. A similar troubling ethical problem is on display in Croton right now.
Two trustees who have each sworn to keep an open mind before voting on any law have been advocating changes to an existing law even before the new legislation has been framed. Of even greater concern is that the two trustees, Ann Gallelli, whose relationship to the Harmon Committee was only to be as liaison, and Richard Olver, are now actively lobbying for their premature support of the Committee’s unilateral recommendations. They do this despite evidence that all of Croton is in economic doldrums.
It is interesting to note that both Ms. Gallelli and Mr. Olver live far from Harmon and from any personal consequences of their hasty decision-making. A case in point is Mr. Olver’s recent letter to The Gazette. After two patronizing paragraphs in which he tries to scare residents with exaggerated rumors and then knocks down the straw men he has erected, Mr. Olver offers such gems of wisdom as: “The experts tell us the current zoning is not attractive for business investment and vacancies and empty lots in Harmon confirm this. The zoning change would make Harmon more attractive for the smaller businesses and professional offices we need to revive the area.” He concludes with, “The Harmon proposals would encourage private development of new, tax-paying commercial and professional space. Now isn't that something that we all want?”
When I voted for Mr. Olver last year, I never thought he would turn into a snake-oil salesman. It was experts, Mr. Olver, who gave us those three ugly gigantic parking lots in downtown Croton. The inadequate current zoning to which you refer happens to be the disastrous Gateway Law of 2004 that Ms. Gallelli pushed so hard on--the law that has not attracted a single new business investor to Croton in five years. Who’s going to take the fall for that?
Moreover, Harmon is not unique in vacancies. And Realtor Dick Albert would dispute that Croton needs more professional space; he owns plenty of such empty space. Finally, if you think that high-rent stores and high-rent apartments in Harmon will be Croton’s salvation, I’ve got a big dam I’d like to sell to you.
Imagine a situation in which two members of a jury in a high-profile trial announce that they had made their minds up even before the trial opens. Next, imagine these same two jurors trying to convince the public of the rightness of their premature verdict by advocating for it at every opportunity. A similar troubling ethical problem is on display in Croton right now.
Two trustees who have each sworn to keep an open mind before voting on any law have been advocating changes to an existing law even before the new legislation has been framed. Of even greater concern is that the two trustees, Ann Gallelli, whose relationship to the Harmon Committee was only to be as liaison, and Richard Olver, are now actively lobbying for their premature support of the Committee’s unilateral recommendations. They do this despite evidence that all of Croton is in economic doldrums.
It is interesting to note that both Ms. Gallelli and Mr. Olver live far from Harmon and from any personal consequences of their hasty decision-making. A case in point is Mr. Olver’s recent letter to The Gazette. After two patronizing paragraphs in which he tries to scare residents with exaggerated rumors and then knocks down the straw men he has erected, Mr. Olver offers such gems of wisdom as: “The experts tell us the current zoning is not attractive for business investment and vacancies and empty lots in Harmon confirm this. The zoning change would make Harmon more attractive for the smaller businesses and professional offices we need to revive the area.” He concludes with, “The Harmon proposals would encourage private development of new, tax-paying commercial and professional space. Now isn't that something that we all want?”
When I voted for Mr. Olver last year, I never thought he would turn into a snake-oil salesman. It was experts, Mr. Olver, who gave us those three ugly gigantic parking lots in downtown Croton. The inadequate current zoning to which you refer happens to be the disastrous Gateway Law of 2004 that Ms. Gallelli pushed so hard on--the law that has not attracted a single new business investor to Croton in five years. Who’s going to take the fall for that?
Moreover, Harmon is not unique in vacancies. And Realtor Dick Albert would dispute that Croton needs more professional space; he owns plenty of such empty space. Finally, if you think that high-rent stores and high-rent apartments in Harmon will be Croton’s salvation, I’ve got a big dam I’d like to sell to you.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 5
PLANNING
Continuing the short history of Croton retailing: In the 1950s, the lower end of Route 129 (Maple Street) became home to the Van Wyck shopping complex, anchored by a Grand Union supermarket. The 1960s brought a competing A&P supermarket complex immediately opposite. Opening a new Croton post office next to the Grand Union in 1966 added to the parking problems of that complex. After the A&P decamped, the building was divided into small shops and called Croton Commons. This marked Phase 4 of Croton’s retail development.
In the fifth and final phase, the area south of Croton Point Avenue became the site of the most ambitious retail development in Croton history. Anchored by a ShopRite supermarket, it was built in the early 1970s, occupying space that previously had been a drive-in movie and a bowling alley. This latest supermarket complex and its massive parking lot only compounded the problems caused in Croton by the two competing shopping complexes facing one another across Maple Street. Eventually, it hastened their demise.
This village made a fatal planning mistake by shortsightedly adopting zoning that allowed supermarkets to be built in the very center of Croton, instead of at its periphery. Hard to believe, but at one time three giant supermarkets and their unsightly parking lots occupied the vibrant heart of the village. Add the giant station parking lot to the mix, and you have an example of what can happen when planning runs amuck: acres upon acres of parked automobiles, the ultimate malignant Automobile Age eyesore. Misguided planners took a workaday village whose richly layered architectural history from Early Georgian to Modern could easily be explored on a short walking tour and converted it into a planning nightmare, a disaster from which we may never recover.
By making automobile parking so central and accessible, planners not only caused congestive traffic problems, they effectively destroyed the “butchers, bakers and candlestick makers” in each of Croton’s original shopping areas. I call it “sudden death by supermarket.” As readers can deduce from these comments, I do not worship at the altar of the Great God of Planning. Hasty, ill-considered planning and zoning changes like those described above have caused more problems in Croton than they have solved. Those worried about the Harmon project should remember the havoc wrought by the Gateway zoning changes and the adage, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Continuing the short history of Croton retailing: In the 1950s, the lower end of Route 129 (Maple Street) became home to the Van Wyck shopping complex, anchored by a Grand Union supermarket. The 1960s brought a competing A&P supermarket complex immediately opposite. Opening a new Croton post office next to the Grand Union in 1966 added to the parking problems of that complex. After the A&P decamped, the building was divided into small shops and called Croton Commons. This marked Phase 4 of Croton’s retail development.
In the fifth and final phase, the area south of Croton Point Avenue became the site of the most ambitious retail development in Croton history. Anchored by a ShopRite supermarket, it was built in the early 1970s, occupying space that previously had been a drive-in movie and a bowling alley. This latest supermarket complex and its massive parking lot only compounded the problems caused in Croton by the two competing shopping complexes facing one another across Maple Street. Eventually, it hastened their demise.
This village made a fatal planning mistake by shortsightedly adopting zoning that allowed supermarkets to be built in the very center of Croton, instead of at its periphery. Hard to believe, but at one time three giant supermarkets and their unsightly parking lots occupied the vibrant heart of the village. Add the giant station parking lot to the mix, and you have an example of what can happen when planning runs amuck: acres upon acres of parked automobiles, the ultimate malignant Automobile Age eyesore. Misguided planners took a workaday village whose richly layered architectural history from Early Georgian to Modern could easily be explored on a short walking tour and converted it into a planning nightmare, a disaster from which we may never recover.
By making automobile parking so central and accessible, planners not only caused congestive traffic problems, they effectively destroyed the “butchers, bakers and candlestick makers” in each of Croton’s original shopping areas. I call it “sudden death by supermarket.” As readers can deduce from these comments, I do not worship at the altar of the Great God of Planning. Hasty, ill-considered planning and zoning changes like those described above have caused more problems in Croton than they have solved. Those worried about the Harmon project should remember the havoc wrought by the Gateway zoning changes and the adage, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 4
PLANNING
It is almost impossible to understand Croton’s intractable planning and retailing problems without first understanding its retailing history. Croton has five separate, non-contiguous retailing areas, best described as “nodes.” The five areas, in the order of their creation, are (1) North Riverside Avenue, (2) Grand Street, (3) Harmon, (4) the lower end of Route 129, and (5) the retailing complex below Croton Point Avenue.
The first three of these developed to serve the basic needs of their surrounding residential neighborhoods. River travel antedated road travel in the Hudson Valley. Two “landings” (i.e., docks) at the foot of Grand Street and Brook Street attracted settlement. Successively called Collabaugh Landing, Cortlandt Town and Croton Landing, the area later became known as Croton’s “Lower Village.”
This first phase of Croton’s development thrived first on market sloops, then on steamboat commerce on the Hudson, and was augmented by railroad passenger and freight service after 1849, centered on what later would become Croton North station. Long before the Expressway opened in 1967, condemnation and construction essentially destroyed the Lower Village, leaving only an anemic remnant on the east side of North Riverside Avenue.
Another settlement, later called the Upper Village, came into being after stagecoach and mail service began on the Albany Post Road. It eventually became a regular stage stop, complete with inn and stables for horses. Residences and retail shops clustered nearby to supply basic goods. This marked the second phase of Croton’s development. Two steep roads, Upper Landing Road (now Brook Street) and Lower Landing Road (now Grand Street) connected the Upper Village to the Lower Village.
The third phase came after 1903, when real estate developer Clifford B. Harmon bought from the surviving Van Cortlandt heirs the land that became Harmon-on-Hudson, the original name of the new community he platted on the steep hills. Using advertising campaigns in New York City newspapers, he began selling building lots in 1907. Because Harmon was not within easy walking distance of Croton’s two original retail areas, shops opened along South Riverside Avenue to supply basic amenities to new arrivals who built homes in the growing community. Similarly, the Chapel of the Good Shepherd opened to take care the religious needs of Harmon’s Catholic residents.
Although the community of Harmon was absorbed by Croton in 1932, the Post Office Department continued to maintain a Harmon post office until the mid-1960s. So insular is Harmon, a few die-hard old-timers still insist that they live in Harmon, not Croton.
It is almost impossible to understand Croton’s intractable planning and retailing problems without first understanding its retailing history. Croton has five separate, non-contiguous retailing areas, best described as “nodes.” The five areas, in the order of their creation, are (1) North Riverside Avenue, (2) Grand Street, (3) Harmon, (4) the lower end of Route 129, and (5) the retailing complex below Croton Point Avenue.
The first three of these developed to serve the basic needs of their surrounding residential neighborhoods. River travel antedated road travel in the Hudson Valley. Two “landings” (i.e., docks) at the foot of Grand Street and Brook Street attracted settlement. Successively called Collabaugh Landing, Cortlandt Town and Croton Landing, the area later became known as Croton’s “Lower Village.”
This first phase of Croton’s development thrived first on market sloops, then on steamboat commerce on the Hudson, and was augmented by railroad passenger and freight service after 1849, centered on what later would become Croton North station. Long before the Expressway opened in 1967, condemnation and construction essentially destroyed the Lower Village, leaving only an anemic remnant on the east side of North Riverside Avenue.
Another settlement, later called the Upper Village, came into being after stagecoach and mail service began on the Albany Post Road. It eventually became a regular stage stop, complete with inn and stables for horses. Residences and retail shops clustered nearby to supply basic goods. This marked the second phase of Croton’s development. Two steep roads, Upper Landing Road (now Brook Street) and Lower Landing Road (now Grand Street) connected the Upper Village to the Lower Village.
The third phase came after 1903, when real estate developer Clifford B. Harmon bought from the surviving Van Cortlandt heirs the land that became Harmon-on-Hudson, the original name of the new community he platted on the steep hills. Using advertising campaigns in New York City newspapers, he began selling building lots in 1907. Because Harmon was not within easy walking distance of Croton’s two original retail areas, shops opened along South Riverside Avenue to supply basic amenities to new arrivals who built homes in the growing community. Similarly, the Chapel of the Good Shepherd opened to take care the religious needs of Harmon’s Catholic residents.
Although the community of Harmon was absorbed by Croton in 1932, the Post Office Department continued to maintain a Harmon post office until the mid-1960s. So insular is Harmon, a few die-hard old-timers still insist that they live in Harmon, not Croton.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Backing Into Zoning Change 3
PLANNING
Unfortunately, Croton is not what entrepreneurs consider a hot prospect for retail investment. Since the Croton Expressway opened, our village has been a backwater, bypassed by a 12.9-mile stub of limited-access highway. Originally intended to be part of a superhighway along the east bank of the Hudson connecting the Tappan Zee Bridge with the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge, its purpose was to take traffic pressure off the Saw Mill and Taconic parkways.
The Croton Expressway was the only portion built. Unlike many other Hudson Valley post-industrial communities, Croton was suddenly relieved of the north-south traffic that once passed through on Riverside Avenue (formerly Route 9, now 9A). Motorists on the Expressway bypassing Croton at better than 55 miles an hour are oblivious to what its shops have to offer—or that it even has shops. With the Expressway’s diversion of through traffic a reality, Croton’s retail customer base was diminished, leaving Croton’s population as its shops’ principal customers.
This has had a significant effect on the kind and number of retail establishments that can start up and flourish here. It’s also the reason we should all shop locally lest more shops fail. Croton welcomed the Expressway, but paid dearly for the tradeoff in reduced retail business. Even in times of prosperity, total occupancy of Croton’s existing retail space has been difficult to achieve. According to the New York State Department of Transportation, the Expressway handles approximately 40,000 motor vehicles per day. Had they been traveling on Riverside Avenue, a fraction of these potential customers might have been inclined to stop and make purchases in shops along Riverside Avenue, including in Harmon.
In creating three gateways with the idea of welcoming motorists exiting the Expressway to shop in Croton, planners made a fatal error. They neglected to gather marketing data by stationing one person with a clipboard at each “gateway” for a day or two to ask motorists, “Are you coming to Croton to shop?” Had they done this they would have discovered that few cars exit the Expressway for the purpose of shopping. Wishful planning created imaginary gateways on paper to accommodate phantom motorcades of shoppers that will never appear. Proponents of zoning change and a revamped Harmon are simply closing their eyes to the existence of the Expressway and its attenuating effect on retail trade in Croton.
Unfortunately, Croton is not what entrepreneurs consider a hot prospect for retail investment. Since the Croton Expressway opened, our village has been a backwater, bypassed by a 12.9-mile stub of limited-access highway. Originally intended to be part of a superhighway along the east bank of the Hudson connecting the Tappan Zee Bridge with the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge, its purpose was to take traffic pressure off the Saw Mill and Taconic parkways.
The Croton Expressway was the only portion built. Unlike many other Hudson Valley post-industrial communities, Croton was suddenly relieved of the north-south traffic that once passed through on Riverside Avenue (formerly Route 9, now 9A). Motorists on the Expressway bypassing Croton at better than 55 miles an hour are oblivious to what its shops have to offer—or that it even has shops. With the Expressway’s diversion of through traffic a reality, Croton’s retail customer base was diminished, leaving Croton’s population as its shops’ principal customers.
This has had a significant effect on the kind and number of retail establishments that can start up and flourish here. It’s also the reason we should all shop locally lest more shops fail. Croton welcomed the Expressway, but paid dearly for the tradeoff in reduced retail business. Even in times of prosperity, total occupancy of Croton’s existing retail space has been difficult to achieve. According to the New York State Department of Transportation, the Expressway handles approximately 40,000 motor vehicles per day. Had they been traveling on Riverside Avenue, a fraction of these potential customers might have been inclined to stop and make purchases in shops along Riverside Avenue, including in Harmon.
In creating three gateways with the idea of welcoming motorists exiting the Expressway to shop in Croton, planners made a fatal error. They neglected to gather marketing data by stationing one person with a clipboard at each “gateway” for a day or two to ask motorists, “Are you coming to Croton to shop?” Had they done this they would have discovered that few cars exit the Expressway for the purpose of shopping. Wishful planning created imaginary gateways on paper to accommodate phantom motorcades of shoppers that will never appear. Proponents of zoning change and a revamped Harmon are simply closing their eyes to the existence of the Expressway and its attenuating effect on retail trade in Croton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)