PUBLIC AFFAIRS
On September 21, 2009, Croton's Village Board directed the Village Manager to accept the proposal of Tim Haahs Associates to explore the feasibility of erecting a parking garage/retail complex at the Village's parking lot at the Croton-Harmon station at a cost of $97,000. On September 23, the proposal was formally accepted by the Assistant Village Manager. No changes had been made by the Village nor was any delivery date negotiated.
This contract has never been made available on the Village's site. It is Croton Local's considered judgment that letting the sun shine in on municipal affairs never did any harm. With that in mind, we have posted a copy of the Tim Haahs Associates contract. You can find a link to it at
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28911467/Station-Parking-Garage-Contract
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Fat's in the Fire: Article 78 Documents
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
As a public service, Croton Local has posted the texts of the Article 78 Petition and Memorandum calling for the annulment of the recent changes enacted in Croton's Zoning Code.
These can be found at the following links:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28853558/Petition
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28853934/Memorandum
These are large documents. Please be patient while they load.
As a public service, Croton Local has posted the texts of the Article 78 Petition and Memorandum calling for the annulment of the recent changes enacted in Croton's Zoning Code.
These can be found at the following links:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28853558/Petition
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28853934/Memorandum
These are large documents. Please be patient while they load.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Whither Westchester? Part 2: The High Cost of Villaging
CURRENT AFFAIRS
Westchester residents pay the highest taxes of any county in the United States. That’s an incontrovertible fact. Why this is so—and why residents do nothing about it—is less easily understood. Many Westchester residents pay four levels of taxation. Croton is one of the communities that levels an extra layer of taxes as a result of having been incorporated as a village in 1898.
The impact of the four layers of taxation is acknowledged in the February 2010 Newsletter published by the Village of Croton-on-Hudson and intended to keep residents informed: “The property taxes each Village resident pays during the year are distributed to four entities--the School District, the Village (of Croton-on-Hudson), the Town (of Cortlandt), and the County (of Westchester).
“The amount of your School, Town and County tax bill is based upon the Town’s assessment of your property value. Your Village tax bill is based on the Village’s assessment of your property. Village taxes are the second largest component of your yearly taxes, with the School taxes being first and the County and Town taxes representing smaller portions.”
The most significant piece of information in the above extract is: “Village taxes are the second largest component of your yearly taxes.”
In 1788, there were twenty towns and no incorporated villages and cities in the newly constituted Westchester County. Today there are nineteen towns plus twenty villages in eight of these towns, and six cities independent of the towns. Three of the nineteen towns have organized themselves as anomalous town/villages, usually for political advantage.
One of the consequences of municipal incorporation is that every village soon acquired the appurtenances of business corporations—including an elaborate management structure. In fact, the heads of incorporated villages were originally called “President” until the title of Mayor was adopted, in part to avoid confusion.
Council-Manager GovernmentMore recently, Croton adopted the council-manager form of government, an outgrowth of government practices of the late 1800s and early 1900s. when political “machines” blighted municipalities with the abuses of the Spoils System (“to the victor belongs the spoils”). Under the council-manager system, all governmental authority rests with the board of trustees,
except for certain duties that are assigned by law to the manager. However, the manager is hired by and can be dismissed by the entire board.
Under the council-manager form of government the body called city council or village council, board of selectmen or board of trustees) is responsible for the legislative function of the municipality such as establishing policy, passing local ordinances, voting appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city, town, or county. The elected body appoints a manager to oversee the administrative operations, implement its policies, and advise it. If the position of mayor exists, the duties are usually primarily ceremonial.
Although the popularity of council-manager government has continued into the 21st century, the system as practiced has changed over time, particularly in communities that have grown more politically contentious. Their elected officials increasingly see themselves as political activists responding to a constituency and resolving civic issues rather than as trustees performing a public service and simply identifying the issues to be studied regardless of any political agenda, as in the traditional model.
The High Cost of Villaging
The chief disadvantage of municipal incorporation is that it is both expensive and duplicative. A string of villages stretches along the Hudson between Yonkers and Peekskill. Anyone driving north along the old Albany Post Road that links these villages is hard-pressed to discern where one village leaves off and the next village begins. so uniform are they in the aspect they present to a motorist driving through. Each is also top-heavy with management superstructure and identical police, fire, garbage collection departments and equipment. One of these, Croton-on-Hudson, is a typical example of the council-manager form of government. The four members of the village’s board of trustees earn $3,000 annually for their services. The mayor is paid $5,000 annually. The disparity between policy-making village board salaries and that of the policy-executing village manager is startling ($17,000 vs. $160,000). Let us now examine the true cost of managing as exemplified by the annual salaries of Croton’s village management under this system. (Please note that this study is directed solely at job titles, not individual occupants of any job.)
Village Manager $160,000
Assistant Village Manager 93,215
Village Treasurer 108,150
Village Clerk 82,400
Deputy Treasurer 77,250
Deputy Village Clerk 45,000
The total of all these salaries is $566,015--well over a half-million dollars.
Croton is a village with a population of slightly less than 8,000 persons. If we now compare these salaries to a reasonable public service salary yardstick—the salaries of the governors of the fifty states, a surprising statistic emerges The village manager of Croton-on-Hudson earns more than the governors of 44 states! Just to put this statistic in perspective, the salary of the village manager of the village of Croton-on-Hudson is larger than that of the governors of such important states as Illinois (pop. 12.9 million); Washington (6.6 million); Connecticut (3.5 million); Maryland (5.7 million); Ohio (11.5 million); Massachusetts (6.5 million); and 37 other states. (Only the governors of California, New York, Michigan, New Jersey, Virginia and Pennsylvania are paid salaries larger than Croton’s village manager.) Croton’s assistant village manager earns more than five governors in the U.S. Even Croton’s deputy treasurer makes more than the governor of the state of Maine. The following table tells the story.
Table 1: Salaries of U.S. Governors vs. Croton Management
California: $206,000
New York: $177,000
Michigan: $177,000
New Jersey: $175,000
Virginia: $175,000
Pennsylvania: $164,396
CROTON VILLAGE MANAGER: $160,000
Illinois: $155,600
Washington: $150,595
Connecticut: $150,000
Maryland: $150,000
Ohio: $144,830
Vermont: $143,957
Nevada: $141,000
Massachusetts: $140,535
Oklahoma: $140,000
Kentucky: $137,506
Wisconsin: $137,092
Georgia: $135,281
Florida: $132,932
Delaware: $132,500
North Carolina: $130,629
Iowa: $130.000
Mississippi: $122,160
Minnesota: $120,303
Missouri: $120,087
Rhode Island: $117,817
Texas: $115,345
Alabama: $112,895
Hawaii: $112,000
New Mexico: $110,000
New Hampshire: $108,890
CROTON VILLAGE TREASURER: $108,150
South Carolina: $106,078
Kansas: $105,889
Idaho: $105,560
South Dakota: $105,544
Nebraska: $105,000
Wyoming: $105,000
Utah: $104,100
Montana: $96,462
Arizona: $95,000
Indiana: $95,000
Louisiana: $95,000
West Virginia: $95,000
Oregon: $93,600
CROTON ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER: $93,215
North Dakota: $92,483
Colorado: $90,000
Tennessee: $85,000
CROTON VILLAGE CLERK: $82.400
Arkansas: $80,848
CROTON DEPUTY VILLAGE TREASURER $77,250Maine: $70,00
How does the salary paid to Croton’s village manager stack up against salaries paid by other villages for the same job? Table 2 below shows the comparison. Note that the title may vary between village manager and village administrator in these figures arranged in ascending order.
Table 2. Salaries Paid to Village Managers
Dobbs Ferry: $79,029 (VC)
Buchanan: $110,902 (VM, VC, VT)
Briarcliff Manor: 116,966 (IVM)
Tarrytown: $120,184 (VA)
Ardsley: $130,534 (VM)
Elmsford: $135,000 (VA, VC)
Irvington: ($138,000 (VA)
Pelham Village: $142,225 (VA)
Pleasantville: $144,371 (VA)
Hastings: $157,188 (VM)
Ossining: $160,000 (VM)
Croton-on-Hudson: $160,000 (VM)
-------------------------------------------------
Title Code: IVM=Interim Village Manager; VA=Village Administrator; VC= Village Clerk; VM=Village Manager; VT=Village Treasurer.
Expressed in practical terms. Croton’s village manager’s salary costs every man, woman and child in Croton $20.20 each year. In terms of the cost per household, the figure is $54.96. Interestingly, Croton (pop. 7,919) pays the same salary ($160,000) to its village manager as Ossining, where the population (23,920) is three times larger. Croton’s per capita annual cost to residents for its village manager is $20.20; Ossining’s is a mere $6.59. Neighboring Buchanan’s village manager performs the additional functions of village clerk and village treasurer for a total salary of $110.902. Croton spends $350,550 for three persons to perform these same functions.
Village vs. Hamlet or CDP?The inevitable question becomes, “What do villages offer that other communities such as unincorporated hamlets and CDPs (Census-Designated Places) do not offer?” The answer is, “Little to nothing.” The community in Westchester whose junior and senior high schools are consistently chosen as “best in Westchester” by U.S. News & World Report is not Croton but Edgemont. Before you say, “Edgemont—never heard of it,” you should know that Edgemont is an unincorporated hamlet in the town of Greenburgh, and has no top-heavy village superstructure and extra layer of village taxation.
Similarly, the community to which Croton residents most often move for its quality of life and school system is Chappaqua. Again, Chappaqua is an unincorporated hamlet, not a village--but that only increases its attractiveness as a community, and removes the layer of village taxation.
Then there’s affluent Katonah, one of three unincorporated hamlets in the town of Bedford, and a destination for those seeking more-expensive homes. According to the Coldwell Banker Home Price Comparison Index, Katonah ranked as the most expensive housing market surveyed in New York. In the tri-state area, it is only surpassed by Greenwich, Conn., and Ridgefield, N.J. As residents of a hamlet, those who live in Katonah don’t have to worry about an annoying extra layer of village taxes despite their ability to pay.
Another example of a prosperous non-village is Yorktown Heights, Its population closely matches Croton’s in size, but it is classified as a Census-Designated Place (CDP). Its residents get along very nicely without the burden—and onerous taxes—of a useless village superstructure.
What Can We Do?
The Commission on Local Government Efficiency created by the previous Governor to study ways to reduce the cost of government determined that a village is an inefficient and unnecessary form of government and should all be dissolved. Is there a way for the twenty villages of Westchester County, including Croton, to throw off the yoke of village bureaucracy and lower exorbitant village taxes? Indeed there is. Provision for the dissolution of villages is covered by New York State Law and allows them to be absorbed by the town in which they are located. Reduction of taxes by dissolution of a village will make homes more affordable and make the communuity more attractive to new businesses. Here are the steps Croton must take to accomplish dissolution of its village structure, as laid out in Village Law, Article 19:
(1) A petition signed by at least one-third of the registered voters residing in the Village must be submitted to Croton’s Board of Trustees requesting that a proposition for dissolution be put before the voters on the next general election.
(2) A public hearing must be held to discuss the proposed dissolution of the Village of Croton.
(3) In cooperation with the Town of Cortlandt, the Croton Board of Trustees must develop a plan for disposition of Croton’s assets, payment of Croton’s debts and the assumption of its services by the Town of Cortlandt. The plan will be part of the proposition of dissolution, which will go before the voters.
(4) At the next general or special election, the voters will be asked to vote on the proposition of dissolution. If approved the Village must be dissolved according to the approved plan within one year.
Reduction of taxes by dissolution of the village will make homes more affordable and make the communuity more attractive to new businesses. There’s nothing revolutionary about the concept of dissolution. It would merely mark a return to the original township plan of Westchester’s founding fathers. The Town of Cortlandt already performs for residents of Cortlandt outside the villages of Croton and Buchanan (and the city of Peekskill) many of the village services that would be transferred.
All that we get for living in the village of Croton and paying high village taxes is intrusive micromanageent and the ability to say that we live in a village. Big deal! There is little that village government does in Croton that the Town of Cortlandt does not do—and does better. Several other villages in New York State are in the process of dissolving. What is Croton waiting for? We should either start the wheels of dissolution in motion or stop complaining about high village taxes.
Westchester residents pay the highest taxes of any county in the United States. That’s an incontrovertible fact. Why this is so—and why residents do nothing about it—is less easily understood. Many Westchester residents pay four levels of taxation. Croton is one of the communities that levels an extra layer of taxes as a result of having been incorporated as a village in 1898.
The impact of the four layers of taxation is acknowledged in the February 2010 Newsletter published by the Village of Croton-on-Hudson and intended to keep residents informed: “The property taxes each Village resident pays during the year are distributed to four entities--the School District, the Village (of Croton-on-Hudson), the Town (of Cortlandt), and the County (of Westchester).
“The amount of your School, Town and County tax bill is based upon the Town’s assessment of your property value. Your Village tax bill is based on the Village’s assessment of your property. Village taxes are the second largest component of your yearly taxes, with the School taxes being first and the County and Town taxes representing smaller portions.”
The most significant piece of information in the above extract is: “Village taxes are the second largest component of your yearly taxes.”
In 1788, there were twenty towns and no incorporated villages and cities in the newly constituted Westchester County. Today there are nineteen towns plus twenty villages in eight of these towns, and six cities independent of the towns. Three of the nineteen towns have organized themselves as anomalous town/villages, usually for political advantage.
One of the consequences of municipal incorporation is that every village soon acquired the appurtenances of business corporations—including an elaborate management structure. In fact, the heads of incorporated villages were originally called “President” until the title of Mayor was adopted, in part to avoid confusion.
Council-Manager GovernmentMore recently, Croton adopted the council-manager form of government, an outgrowth of government practices of the late 1800s and early 1900s. when political “machines” blighted municipalities with the abuses of the Spoils System (“to the victor belongs the spoils”). Under the council-manager system, all governmental authority rests with the board of trustees,
except for certain duties that are assigned by law to the manager. However, the manager is hired by and can be dismissed by the entire board.
Under the council-manager form of government the body called city council or village council, board of selectmen or board of trustees) is responsible for the legislative function of the municipality such as establishing policy, passing local ordinances, voting appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city, town, or county. The elected body appoints a manager to oversee the administrative operations, implement its policies, and advise it. If the position of mayor exists, the duties are usually primarily ceremonial.
Although the popularity of council-manager government has continued into the 21st century, the system as practiced has changed over time, particularly in communities that have grown more politically contentious. Their elected officials increasingly see themselves as political activists responding to a constituency and resolving civic issues rather than as trustees performing a public service and simply identifying the issues to be studied regardless of any political agenda, as in the traditional model.
The High Cost of Villaging
The chief disadvantage of municipal incorporation is that it is both expensive and duplicative. A string of villages stretches along the Hudson between Yonkers and Peekskill. Anyone driving north along the old Albany Post Road that links these villages is hard-pressed to discern where one village leaves off and the next village begins. so uniform are they in the aspect they present to a motorist driving through. Each is also top-heavy with management superstructure and identical police, fire, garbage collection departments and equipment. One of these, Croton-on-Hudson, is a typical example of the council-manager form of government. The four members of the village’s board of trustees earn $3,000 annually for their services. The mayor is paid $5,000 annually. The disparity between policy-making village board salaries and that of the policy-executing village manager is startling ($17,000 vs. $160,000). Let us now examine the true cost of managing as exemplified by the annual salaries of Croton’s village management under this system. (Please note that this study is directed solely at job titles, not individual occupants of any job.)
Village Manager $160,000
Assistant Village Manager 93,215
Village Treasurer 108,150
Village Clerk 82,400
Deputy Treasurer 77,250
Deputy Village Clerk 45,000
The total of all these salaries is $566,015--well over a half-million dollars.
Croton is a village with a population of slightly less than 8,000 persons. If we now compare these salaries to a reasonable public service salary yardstick—the salaries of the governors of the fifty states, a surprising statistic emerges The village manager of Croton-on-Hudson earns more than the governors of 44 states! Just to put this statistic in perspective, the salary of the village manager of the village of Croton-on-Hudson is larger than that of the governors of such important states as Illinois (pop. 12.9 million); Washington (6.6 million); Connecticut (3.5 million); Maryland (5.7 million); Ohio (11.5 million); Massachusetts (6.5 million); and 37 other states. (Only the governors of California, New York, Michigan, New Jersey, Virginia and Pennsylvania are paid salaries larger than Croton’s village manager.) Croton’s assistant village manager earns more than five governors in the U.S. Even Croton’s deputy treasurer makes more than the governor of the state of Maine. The following table tells the story.
Table 1: Salaries of U.S. Governors vs. Croton Management
California: $206,000
New York: $177,000
Michigan: $177,000
New Jersey: $175,000
Virginia: $175,000
Pennsylvania: $164,396
CROTON VILLAGE MANAGER: $160,000
Illinois: $155,600
Washington: $150,595
Connecticut: $150,000
Maryland: $150,000
Ohio: $144,830
Vermont: $143,957
Nevada: $141,000
Massachusetts: $140,535
Oklahoma: $140,000
Kentucky: $137,506
Wisconsin: $137,092
Georgia: $135,281
Florida: $132,932
Delaware: $132,500
North Carolina: $130,629
Iowa: $130.000
Mississippi: $122,160
Minnesota: $120,303
Missouri: $120,087
Rhode Island: $117,817
Texas: $115,345
Alabama: $112,895
Hawaii: $112,000
New Mexico: $110,000
New Hampshire: $108,890
CROTON VILLAGE TREASURER: $108,150
South Carolina: $106,078
Kansas: $105,889
Idaho: $105,560
South Dakota: $105,544
Nebraska: $105,000
Wyoming: $105,000
Utah: $104,100
Montana: $96,462
Arizona: $95,000
Indiana: $95,000
Louisiana: $95,000
West Virginia: $95,000
Oregon: $93,600
CROTON ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER: $93,215
North Dakota: $92,483
Colorado: $90,000
Tennessee: $85,000
CROTON VILLAGE CLERK: $82.400
Arkansas: $80,848
CROTON DEPUTY VILLAGE TREASURER $77,250Maine: $70,00
How does the salary paid to Croton’s village manager stack up against salaries paid by other villages for the same job? Table 2 below shows the comparison. Note that the title may vary between village manager and village administrator in these figures arranged in ascending order.
Table 2. Salaries Paid to Village Managers
Dobbs Ferry: $79,029 (VC)
Buchanan: $110,902 (VM, VC, VT)
Briarcliff Manor: 116,966 (IVM)
Tarrytown: $120,184 (VA)
Ardsley: $130,534 (VM)
Elmsford: $135,000 (VA, VC)
Irvington: ($138,000 (VA)
Pelham Village: $142,225 (VA)
Pleasantville: $144,371 (VA)
Hastings: $157,188 (VM)
Ossining: $160,000 (VM)
Croton-on-Hudson: $160,000 (VM)
-------------------------------------------------
Title Code: IVM=Interim Village Manager; VA=Village Administrator; VC= Village Clerk; VM=Village Manager; VT=Village Treasurer.
Expressed in practical terms. Croton’s village manager’s salary costs every man, woman and child in Croton $20.20 each year. In terms of the cost per household, the figure is $54.96. Interestingly, Croton (pop. 7,919) pays the same salary ($160,000) to its village manager as Ossining, where the population (23,920) is three times larger. Croton’s per capita annual cost to residents for its village manager is $20.20; Ossining’s is a mere $6.59. Neighboring Buchanan’s village manager performs the additional functions of village clerk and village treasurer for a total salary of $110.902. Croton spends $350,550 for three persons to perform these same functions.
Village vs. Hamlet or CDP?The inevitable question becomes, “What do villages offer that other communities such as unincorporated hamlets and CDPs (Census-Designated Places) do not offer?” The answer is, “Little to nothing.” The community in Westchester whose junior and senior high schools are consistently chosen as “best in Westchester” by U.S. News & World Report is not Croton but Edgemont. Before you say, “Edgemont—never heard of it,” you should know that Edgemont is an unincorporated hamlet in the town of Greenburgh, and has no top-heavy village superstructure and extra layer of village taxation.
Similarly, the community to which Croton residents most often move for its quality of life and school system is Chappaqua. Again, Chappaqua is an unincorporated hamlet, not a village--but that only increases its attractiveness as a community, and removes the layer of village taxation.
Then there’s affluent Katonah, one of three unincorporated hamlets in the town of Bedford, and a destination for those seeking more-expensive homes. According to the Coldwell Banker Home Price Comparison Index, Katonah ranked as the most expensive housing market surveyed in New York. In the tri-state area, it is only surpassed by Greenwich, Conn., and Ridgefield, N.J. As residents of a hamlet, those who live in Katonah don’t have to worry about an annoying extra layer of village taxes despite their ability to pay.
Another example of a prosperous non-village is Yorktown Heights, Its population closely matches Croton’s in size, but it is classified as a Census-Designated Place (CDP). Its residents get along very nicely without the burden—and onerous taxes—of a useless village superstructure.
What Can We Do?
The Commission on Local Government Efficiency created by the previous Governor to study ways to reduce the cost of government determined that a village is an inefficient and unnecessary form of government and should all be dissolved. Is there a way for the twenty villages of Westchester County, including Croton, to throw off the yoke of village bureaucracy and lower exorbitant village taxes? Indeed there is. Provision for the dissolution of villages is covered by New York State Law and allows them to be absorbed by the town in which they are located. Reduction of taxes by dissolution of a village will make homes more affordable and make the communuity more attractive to new businesses. Here are the steps Croton must take to accomplish dissolution of its village structure, as laid out in Village Law, Article 19:
(1) A petition signed by at least one-third of the registered voters residing in the Village must be submitted to Croton’s Board of Trustees requesting that a proposition for dissolution be put before the voters on the next general election.
(2) A public hearing must be held to discuss the proposed dissolution of the Village of Croton.
(3) In cooperation with the Town of Cortlandt, the Croton Board of Trustees must develop a plan for disposition of Croton’s assets, payment of Croton’s debts and the assumption of its services by the Town of Cortlandt. The plan will be part of the proposition of dissolution, which will go before the voters.
(4) At the next general or special election, the voters will be asked to vote on the proposition of dissolution. If approved the Village must be dissolved according to the approved plan within one year.
Reduction of taxes by dissolution of the village will make homes more affordable and make the communuity more attractive to new businesses. There’s nothing revolutionary about the concept of dissolution. It would merely mark a return to the original township plan of Westchester’s founding fathers. The Town of Cortlandt already performs for residents of Cortlandt outside the villages of Croton and Buchanan (and the city of Peekskill) many of the village services that would be transferred.
All that we get for living in the village of Croton and paying high village taxes is intrusive micromanageent and the ability to say that we live in a village. Big deal! There is little that village government does in Croton that the Town of Cortlandt does not do—and does better. Several other villages in New York State are in the process of dissolving. What is Croton waiting for? We should either start the wheels of dissolution in motion or stop complaining about high village taxes.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Frankly, I’m puzzled . . .
OP ED
If the above phrase sounds familiar to you, it’s because you’ve seen it a thousand times in direct mail offers in your mailbox. It’s the opening of what copywriters call “the lift letter.” According to my friend, direct-mail guru Denny Hatch, the lift letter device was dreamed up by copywriter Paul Michael, who worked for Greystone Press, publishers of books on home maintenance, gardening, car repair, and the like. Their direct mail offers always included a free book with no obligation on the part of the recipient.
Along with a letter from the publisher, full-color descriptive brochures and a response card, Michael included a lift letter--a small piece of notepaper folded once. On the outside was the tantalizing message, “Read this only if you have decided NOT to respond to this offer.” Inside--in gracefully flowing script--the headline of the note led off with Frankly, I'm Puzzled . . . It went on to say that the publisher couldn’t understand why the recipient wasn’t going to send for the free book when, it was really, really free.
So-called because it was intended to “lift” (increase) response to a direct-mail offer, the lift letter succeeded beyond everyone’s wildest dreams and has become a fixture of direct mail. So, here’s a tip of the hat to Mr. Michael for providing me with an addition to my Library of Useful Words and Phrases.
Frankly, I’m puzzled why Croton is sponsoring a “workshop” on Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the purpose of which, according to a news release issued by the Village, is “to gather public input regarding the future development potential of the Village-owned parking lot at the Croton-Harmon Station, including development of a parking structure for transit patrons.” The report has not yet been delivered. Cynics may see the workshop’s purpose as a delaying tactic to keep the parking garage from being a factor in the upcoming election.
According to the same news release, the study includes “a look at (1) market demand for commuter parking, (2) geotechnical conditions under the existing surface lot, (3) financial feasibility analysis for funding and operating a structure, and (4) design concepts for a potential parking structure at the Croton-Harmon Train Station. This study will also review the overall site to produce a master parking plan addressing how future work can improve traffic flow, enhance safety, and maximize commuter services.” Laudable objectives all—but lacking in many important areas of investigation.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the timing of the elaborate session the Village of Croton is sponsoring next Wednesday, January 27. Several immediate and inevitable questions spring to mind: Why wasn’t a workshop held before the contract was signed? The Village in the person of a present board member made a big stink about a mere gasoline- station canopy blocking “the view” and even went to the extreme of bringing suit to stop it. Why would the Village now want to consider erecting a multistory parking garage? The view is still there. Why is it no longer a consideration? If aesthetics and appearances are no longer a consideration, Croton cane more easily erect and lease giant billboards along its highway,
Could the reason a preliminary workshop was not held before a contract was signed be that it might have revealed residents’ opposition to a multistory garage that would bring additional traffic to clog our streets and exhaust fumes to befoul our air? Interestingly, the initial guidelines for this study were issued on February 2, 2009, when the Schmidt administration held a 3-2 majority. One of the areas of investigation specified in the guidelines was “commercial mixed-use possibilities.” In Croton “mixed use” are fighting words in some quarters.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by a concept that envisions commercial opportunities in a multi-tiered parking garage with associated shops. Who is responsible for the unproven assumption that commercial enterprises would thrive in close association with a commuter railroad station that has two comparatively short periods of peak use, one in the morning and the other in the evening?
Passengers at major railroad terminal like Grand Central and Pennsylvania Station often have waiting time to kill between trains and are potential customers at shops that offer time-killing opportunities to buy last-minute forgotten items, to have a meal, to browse in a bookshop for a book or a magazine. But commuters at peak morning and evening periods at Croton’s station are usually in a hurry to catch a train or to beat the rush to reach a parked car.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s concentration on increasing parking facilities as a source of revenue in the face of many contraindications. What about cutting expenses of the bureaucratic behemoth we have created to govern a tiny village of less than eight thousand souls? The nation is in a recession growing so deep it is being called “The Great Recession”—but only to avoid calling it “Another Great Depression.”
Moreover, the Town of Cortlandt is expanding its parking facilities at the Cortlandt Station—and parking is cheaper there. Metro North is cooperating by having more trains stop at the Cortlandt station. Plus, Croton’s two-level discriminatory pricing (residents vs. nonresidents) makes Cortlandt’s parking even more attractive and a veritable bargain.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the lack of inclusion in the report’s specification of any study of the broader implications of enlarging our carbon footprint by encouraging automobile usage in what now may be a dying suburbia. Will the report acknowledge the planet’s peaking oil reserves, unstable fuel prices, the growing demand for oil by developing nations like China and India, steadily growing domestic and world populations that are making ever-larger demands for oil and for oil-based products, especially for oil- and gas-based fertilizers to increase crop yields to feed growing populations? How many of us will be driving if oil reaches $147 a barrel again?
The United States proportionally consumes more oil in relation to population size than any other country in the world. And 90% of transportation in the U.S. relies on oil as a primary or secondary source. Suburbia’s exclusive reliance on the automobile is both unsustainable and dangerous. Concerns about our fragile oil dependence have already caused a reverse migration from suburbs back to cities. Increased public transportation, bicycling and walking may yet become part of suburban living.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s desire to hold a workshop before the contractor renders a report. The implications are that the contractor will listen to residents’ views and then tailor their report to suit residents’ input. This smacks too much of the slogan of Chicago department store magnate Marshall Field, who built a merchandising empire by instructing employees to “give the lady what she wants.” If the experience that resulted from the infamous questionnaire of bitter memory about residents’ desires for a community center is any yardstick, a workshop held before the report is presented can only result in another wish-list disaster.
We were led to believe that Tim Haahs Associates was preeminent in their field. It is not unreasonable, therefore, for them to give us their professional opinion about feasible courses of action for Croton, and let residents decide which, if any, are advantageous and doable. Thus, it would make more sense for Croton to first make the report available to residents and then hold a workshop at which the document can be critiqued to see whether we received our money’s worth. One might put this in terms of stud poker players: “Show us your hole card (the report) before your start raking in the pot.”
One final question: If the workshop now reveals that residents have no desire for a parking garage in any way, shape or form, will we be able to get our $97,000 back? Or will a giant parking structure of one kind or another be forced upon us in the same manner as the mega-disaster known as Metro-Enviro? There has to be a limit on what this village will do for money.
If the above phrase sounds familiar to you, it’s because you’ve seen it a thousand times in direct mail offers in your mailbox. It’s the opening of what copywriters call “the lift letter.” According to my friend, direct-mail guru Denny Hatch, the lift letter device was dreamed up by copywriter Paul Michael, who worked for Greystone Press, publishers of books on home maintenance, gardening, car repair, and the like. Their direct mail offers always included a free book with no obligation on the part of the recipient.
Along with a letter from the publisher, full-color descriptive brochures and a response card, Michael included a lift letter--a small piece of notepaper folded once. On the outside was the tantalizing message, “Read this only if you have decided NOT to respond to this offer.” Inside--in gracefully flowing script--the headline of the note led off with Frankly, I'm Puzzled . . . It went on to say that the publisher couldn’t understand why the recipient wasn’t going to send for the free book when, it was really, really free.
So-called because it was intended to “lift” (increase) response to a direct-mail offer, the lift letter succeeded beyond everyone’s wildest dreams and has become a fixture of direct mail. So, here’s a tip of the hat to Mr. Michael for providing me with an addition to my Library of Useful Words and Phrases.
Frankly, I’m puzzled why Croton is sponsoring a “workshop” on Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the purpose of which, according to a news release issued by the Village, is “to gather public input regarding the future development potential of the Village-owned parking lot at the Croton-Harmon Station, including development of a parking structure for transit patrons.” The report has not yet been delivered. Cynics may see the workshop’s purpose as a delaying tactic to keep the parking garage from being a factor in the upcoming election.
According to the same news release, the study includes “a look at (1) market demand for commuter parking, (2) geotechnical conditions under the existing surface lot, (3) financial feasibility analysis for funding and operating a structure, and (4) design concepts for a potential parking structure at the Croton-Harmon Train Station. This study will also review the overall site to produce a master parking plan addressing how future work can improve traffic flow, enhance safety, and maximize commuter services.” Laudable objectives all—but lacking in many important areas of investigation.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the timing of the elaborate session the Village of Croton is sponsoring next Wednesday, January 27. Several immediate and inevitable questions spring to mind: Why wasn’t a workshop held before the contract was signed? The Village in the person of a present board member made a big stink about a mere gasoline- station canopy blocking “the view” and even went to the extreme of bringing suit to stop it. Why would the Village now want to consider erecting a multistory parking garage? The view is still there. Why is it no longer a consideration? If aesthetics and appearances are no longer a consideration, Croton cane more easily erect and lease giant billboards along its highway,
Could the reason a preliminary workshop was not held before a contract was signed be that it might have revealed residents’ opposition to a multistory garage that would bring additional traffic to clog our streets and exhaust fumes to befoul our air? Interestingly, the initial guidelines for this study were issued on February 2, 2009, when the Schmidt administration held a 3-2 majority. One of the areas of investigation specified in the guidelines was “commercial mixed-use possibilities.” In Croton “mixed use” are fighting words in some quarters.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by a concept that envisions commercial opportunities in a multi-tiered parking garage with associated shops. Who is responsible for the unproven assumption that commercial enterprises would thrive in close association with a commuter railroad station that has two comparatively short periods of peak use, one in the morning and the other in the evening?
Passengers at major railroad terminal like Grand Central and Pennsylvania Station often have waiting time to kill between trains and are potential customers at shops that offer time-killing opportunities to buy last-minute forgotten items, to have a meal, to browse in a bookshop for a book or a magazine. But commuters at peak morning and evening periods at Croton’s station are usually in a hurry to catch a train or to beat the rush to reach a parked car.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s concentration on increasing parking facilities as a source of revenue in the face of many contraindications. What about cutting expenses of the bureaucratic behemoth we have created to govern a tiny village of less than eight thousand souls? The nation is in a recession growing so deep it is being called “The Great Recession”—but only to avoid calling it “Another Great Depression.”
Moreover, the Town of Cortlandt is expanding its parking facilities at the Cortlandt Station—and parking is cheaper there. Metro North is cooperating by having more trains stop at the Cortlandt station. Plus, Croton’s two-level discriminatory pricing (residents vs. nonresidents) makes Cortlandt’s parking even more attractive and a veritable bargain.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the lack of inclusion in the report’s specification of any study of the broader implications of enlarging our carbon footprint by encouraging automobile usage in what now may be a dying suburbia. Will the report acknowledge the planet’s peaking oil reserves, unstable fuel prices, the growing demand for oil by developing nations like China and India, steadily growing domestic and world populations that are making ever-larger demands for oil and for oil-based products, especially for oil- and gas-based fertilizers to increase crop yields to feed growing populations? How many of us will be driving if oil reaches $147 a barrel again?
The United States proportionally consumes more oil in relation to population size than any other country in the world. And 90% of transportation in the U.S. relies on oil as a primary or secondary source. Suburbia’s exclusive reliance on the automobile is both unsustainable and dangerous. Concerns about our fragile oil dependence have already caused a reverse migration from suburbs back to cities. Increased public transportation, bicycling and walking may yet become part of suburban living.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s desire to hold a workshop before the contractor renders a report. The implications are that the contractor will listen to residents’ views and then tailor their report to suit residents’ input. This smacks too much of the slogan of Chicago department store magnate Marshall Field, who built a merchandising empire by instructing employees to “give the lady what she wants.” If the experience that resulted from the infamous questionnaire of bitter memory about residents’ desires for a community center is any yardstick, a workshop held before the report is presented can only result in another wish-list disaster.
We were led to believe that Tim Haahs Associates was preeminent in their field. It is not unreasonable, therefore, for them to give us their professional opinion about feasible courses of action for Croton, and let residents decide which, if any, are advantageous and doable. Thus, it would make more sense for Croton to first make the report available to residents and then hold a workshop at which the document can be critiqued to see whether we received our money’s worth. One might put this in terms of stud poker players: “Show us your hole card (the report) before your start raking in the pot.”
One final question: If the workshop now reveals that residents have no desire for a parking garage in any way, shape or form, will we be able to get our $97,000 back? Or will a giant parking structure of one kind or another be forced upon us in the same manner as the mega-disaster known as Metro-Enviro? There has to be a limit on what this village will do for money.
Frankly, I’m Puzzled . . .
OP ED
If the above phrase sounds familiar to you, it’s because you’ve seen it a thousand times in direct mail offers in your mailbox. It’s the opening of what copywriters call “the lift letter.” According to my friend, direct-mail guru Denny Hatch, the lift letter device was dreamed up by copywriter Paul Michael, who worked for Greystone Press, publishers of books on home maintenance, gardening, car repair, and the like. Their direct mail offers always included a free book with no obligation on the part of the recipient.
Along with a letter from the publisher, full-color descriptive brochures and a response card, Michael included a lift letter--a small piece of notepaper folded once. On the outside was the tantalizing message, “Read this only if you have decided NOT to respond to this offer.” Inside--in gracefully flowing script--the headline of the note led off with Frankly, I'm Puzzled . . . It went on to say that the publisher couldn’t understand why the recipient wasn’t going to send for the free book when, it was really, really free.
So-called because it was intended to “lift” (increase) response to a direct-mail offer, the lift letter succeeded beyond everyone’s wildest dreams and has become a fixture of direct mail. So, here’s a tip of the hat to Mr. Michael for providing me with an addition to my Library of Useful Words and Phrases.
Frankly, I’m puzzled why Croton is sponsoring a “workshop” on Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the purpose of which, according to a news release issued by the Village, is “to gather public input regarding the future development potential of the Village-owned parking lot at the Croton-Harmon Station, including development of a parking structure for transit patrons.” The report has not yet been delivered. Cynics may see the workshop’s purpose as a delaying tactic to keep the parking garage from being a factor in the upcoming election.
According to the same news release, the study includes “a look at (1) market demand for commuter parking, (2) geotechnical conditions under the existing surface lot, (3) financial feasibility analysis for funding and operating a structure, and (4) design concepts for a potential parking structure at the Croton-Harmon Train Station. This study will also review the overall site to produce a master parking plan addressing how future work can improve traffic flow, enhance safety, and maximize commuter services.” Laudable objectives all—but lacking in many important areas of investigation.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the timing of the elaborate session the Village of Croton is sponsoring next Wednesday, January 27. Several immediate and inevitable questions spring to mind: Why wasn’t a workshop held before the contract was signed? The Village in the person of a present board member made a big stink about a mere gasoline-station canopy blocking “the view” and even went to the extreme of bringing suit to stop it. Why would the Village now want to consider erecting a multistory parking garage? The view is still there. Why is it no longer a consideration? If aesthetics and appearances are no longer a consideration, Croton can more easily erect and lease profitable giant billboards on public land along its highways.
Could the reason a preliminary workshop was not held before a contract was signed be that it might have revealed residents’ opposition to a multistory garage that would bring additional traffic to clog our streets and exhaust fumes to befoul our air? Interestingly, the initial guidelines for this study were issued on February 2, 2009, when the Schmidt administration held a 3-2 majority. One of the areas of investigation specified in the guidelines was “commercial mixed-use possibilities.” In Croton “mixed use” are fighting words in some quarters.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by a concept that envisions commercial opportunities in a multitiered parking garage with associated shops. Who is responsible for the unproven assumption that commercial enterprises would thrive in close association with a commuter railroad station that has two comparatively short periods of peak use, one in the morning and the other in the evening?
Passengers at major railroad terminal like Grand Central and Pennsylvania Station often have waiting time to kill between trains and are potential customers at shops that offer time-killing opportunities to buy last-minute forgotten items, to have a meal, to browse in a bookshop for a book or a magazine. But commuters at peak morning and evening periods at Croton’s station are usually in a hurry to catch a train or to beat the rush to reach a parked car.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s concentration on increasing parking facilities as a source of revenue in the face of many contraindications. What about cutting expenses of the bureaucratic behemoth we have created to govern a tiny village of less than eight thousand souls? The nation is in a recession growing so deep it is being called “The Great Recession”—but only to avoid calling it “Another Great Depression.”
Moreover, the Town of Cortlandt is expanding its parking facilities at the Cortlandt Station—and parking is cheaper there. Metro North is cooperating by having more trains stop at the Cortlandt station. Plus, Croton’s two-level discriminatory pricing (residents vs. nonresidents) makes Cortlandt’s parking even more attractive and a veritable bargain.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the lack of inclusion in the report’s specification of any study of the broader implications of enlarging our carbon footprint by encouraging automobile usage in what now may be a dying suburbia. Will the report acknowledge the planet’s peaking oil reserves, unstable fuel prices, the growing demand for oil by developing nations like China and India, steadily growing domestic and world populations that are making ever-larger demands for oil and for oil-based products, especially for oil- and gas-based fertilizers to increase crop yields to feed growing populations? How many of us will be driving if oil reaches $147 a barrel again?
The United States proportionally consumes more oil in relation to population size than any other country in the world. And 90% of transportation in the U.S. relies on oil as a primary or secondary source. Suburbia’s exclusive reliance on the automobile is both unsustainable and dangerous. Concerns about our fragile oil dependence have already caused a reverse migration from suburbs back to cities. Increased public transportation, bicycling and walking may yet become part of suburban living.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s desire to hold a workshop before the contractor renders a report. The implications are that the contractor will listen to residents’ views and then tailor their report to suit residents’ input. This smacks too much of the slogan of Chicago department store magnate Marshall Field, who built a merchandising empire by instructing employees to “give the lady what she wants.” If the experience that resulted from the infamous questionnaire of bitter memory about residents’ desires for a community center is any yardstick, a workshop held before the report is presented can only result in another wish-list disaster.
We were led to believe that Tim Haahs Associates was preeminent in their field. It is not unreasonable, therefore, for them to give us their professional opinion about feasible courses of action for Croton, and let residents decide which, if any, are advantageous and doable. Thus, it would make more sense for Croton to first make the report available to residents and then hold a workshop at which the document can be critiqued to see whether we received our money’s worth. One might put this in terms of stud poker players: “Show us your hole card (the report) before your start raking in the pot.”
One final question: If the workshop now reveals that residents have no desire for a parking garage in any way, shape or form, will we be able to get our $97,000 back? Or will a giant parking structure of one kind or another be forced upon us in the same manner as the mega-disaster known as Metro-Enviro? There has to be a limit on what this village will do for money.
If the above phrase sounds familiar to you, it’s because you’ve seen it a thousand times in direct mail offers in your mailbox. It’s the opening of what copywriters call “the lift letter.” According to my friend, direct-mail guru Denny Hatch, the lift letter device was dreamed up by copywriter Paul Michael, who worked for Greystone Press, publishers of books on home maintenance, gardening, car repair, and the like. Their direct mail offers always included a free book with no obligation on the part of the recipient.
Along with a letter from the publisher, full-color descriptive brochures and a response card, Michael included a lift letter--a small piece of notepaper folded once. On the outside was the tantalizing message, “Read this only if you have decided NOT to respond to this offer.” Inside--in gracefully flowing script--the headline of the note led off with Frankly, I'm Puzzled . . . It went on to say that the publisher couldn’t understand why the recipient wasn’t going to send for the free book when, it was really, really free.
So-called because it was intended to “lift” (increase) response to a direct-mail offer, the lift letter succeeded beyond everyone’s wildest dreams and has become a fixture of direct mail. So, here’s a tip of the hat to Mr. Michael for providing me with an addition to my Library of Useful Words and Phrases.
Frankly, I’m puzzled why Croton is sponsoring a “workshop” on Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the purpose of which, according to a news release issued by the Village, is “to gather public input regarding the future development potential of the Village-owned parking lot at the Croton-Harmon Station, including development of a parking structure for transit patrons.” The report has not yet been delivered. Cynics may see the workshop’s purpose as a delaying tactic to keep the parking garage from being a factor in the upcoming election.
According to the same news release, the study includes “a look at (1) market demand for commuter parking, (2) geotechnical conditions under the existing surface lot, (3) financial feasibility analysis for funding and operating a structure, and (4) design concepts for a potential parking structure at the Croton-Harmon Train Station. This study will also review the overall site to produce a master parking plan addressing how future work can improve traffic flow, enhance safety, and maximize commuter services.” Laudable objectives all—but lacking in many important areas of investigation.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the timing of the elaborate session the Village of Croton is sponsoring next Wednesday, January 27. Several immediate and inevitable questions spring to mind: Why wasn’t a workshop held before the contract was signed? The Village in the person of a present board member made a big stink about a mere gasoline-station canopy blocking “the view” and even went to the extreme of bringing suit to stop it. Why would the Village now want to consider erecting a multistory parking garage? The view is still there. Why is it no longer a consideration? If aesthetics and appearances are no longer a consideration, Croton can more easily erect and lease profitable giant billboards on public land along its highways.
Could the reason a preliminary workshop was not held before a contract was signed be that it might have revealed residents’ opposition to a multistory garage that would bring additional traffic to clog our streets and exhaust fumes to befoul our air? Interestingly, the initial guidelines for this study were issued on February 2, 2009, when the Schmidt administration held a 3-2 majority. One of the areas of investigation specified in the guidelines was “commercial mixed-use possibilities.” In Croton “mixed use” are fighting words in some quarters.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by a concept that envisions commercial opportunities in a multitiered parking garage with associated shops. Who is responsible for the unproven assumption that commercial enterprises would thrive in close association with a commuter railroad station that has two comparatively short periods of peak use, one in the morning and the other in the evening?
Passengers at major railroad terminal like Grand Central and Pennsylvania Station often have waiting time to kill between trains and are potential customers at shops that offer time-killing opportunities to buy last-minute forgotten items, to have a meal, to browse in a bookshop for a book or a magazine. But commuters at peak morning and evening periods at Croton’s station are usually in a hurry to catch a train or to beat the rush to reach a parked car.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s concentration on increasing parking facilities as a source of revenue in the face of many contraindications. What about cutting expenses of the bureaucratic behemoth we have created to govern a tiny village of less than eight thousand souls? The nation is in a recession growing so deep it is being called “The Great Recession”—but only to avoid calling it “Another Great Depression.”
Moreover, the Town of Cortlandt is expanding its parking facilities at the Cortlandt Station—and parking is cheaper there. Metro North is cooperating by having more trains stop at the Cortlandt station. Plus, Croton’s two-level discriminatory pricing (residents vs. nonresidents) makes Cortlandt’s parking even more attractive and a veritable bargain.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by the lack of inclusion in the report’s specification of any study of the broader implications of enlarging our carbon footprint by encouraging automobile usage in what now may be a dying suburbia. Will the report acknowledge the planet’s peaking oil reserves, unstable fuel prices, the growing demand for oil by developing nations like China and India, steadily growing domestic and world populations that are making ever-larger demands for oil and for oil-based products, especially for oil- and gas-based fertilizers to increase crop yields to feed growing populations? How many of us will be driving if oil reaches $147 a barrel again?
The United States proportionally consumes more oil in relation to population size than any other country in the world. And 90% of transportation in the U.S. relies on oil as a primary or secondary source. Suburbia’s exclusive reliance on the automobile is both unsustainable and dangerous. Concerns about our fragile oil dependence have already caused a reverse migration from suburbs back to cities. Increased public transportation, bicycling and walking may yet become part of suburban living.
Frankly, I’m puzzled by Croton’s desire to hold a workshop before the contractor renders a report. The implications are that the contractor will listen to residents’ views and then tailor their report to suit residents’ input. This smacks too much of the slogan of Chicago department store magnate Marshall Field, who built a merchandising empire by instructing employees to “give the lady what she wants.” If the experience that resulted from the infamous questionnaire of bitter memory about residents’ desires for a community center is any yardstick, a workshop held before the report is presented can only result in another wish-list disaster.
We were led to believe that Tim Haahs Associates was preeminent in their field. It is not unreasonable, therefore, for them to give us their professional opinion about feasible courses of action for Croton, and let residents decide which, if any, are advantageous and doable. Thus, it would make more sense for Croton to first make the report available to residents and then hold a workshop at which the document can be critiqued to see whether we received our money’s worth. One might put this in terms of stud poker players: “Show us your hole card (the report) before your start raking in the pot.”
One final question: If the workshop now reveals that residents have no desire for a parking garage in any way, shape or form, will we be able to get our $97,000 back? Or will a giant parking structure of one kind or another be forced upon us in the same manner as the mega-disaster known as Metro-Enviro? There has to be a limit on what this village will do for money.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Of Gimmicks and Slogans
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.
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.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Nothing Gained: A Critique of the Harmon Zoning Changes
OP ED
The camel is sometimes jocularly described as a horse designed by a committee. Upon close examination, the zoning changes hastened into effect by the village board on December 7 as Local Law No. 4 turn out to be a veritable camel. Compared to the committee’s original recommendations, this addendum to the discredited Gateway Law is a miserable, mangy beast, a mere shadow of its former self. By no stretch of the imagination does this miscarriage of planning deserve the accolades heaped on it in recent congratulatory comments by supporters who obviously have not read it closely.
The third-floor of each new or remodeled building is reserved specifically for residential use, presumably to preclude any opportunistic retail discounter from renting there and advertising, “Walk up two flights and save.” Third-floor units could actually be more desirable, being farther from the odors wafting up from an exotic ethnic restaurant on the ground floor and its incessant music of cymbals, chimes and gongs. Similarly, the area behind ground-floor retail units is limited to residential use. But if living over a store is déclassé, what is living behind a store? One advantage: If you run out of sugar, you can always knock on the back door and borrow a cupful from your neighbor, the ever-smiling and obliging chef with the flashing cleaver. Can’t you see the hordes of young couples that will desert the Upper West Side and move to Croton to live in such desirable quarters? Fat chance.
The second floor may house any combination of retail and residential uses. Professional occupancy was originally an important part of the rental income formula of retail stores sharing space with professional offices and apartments. A felicitous amalgam intended to milk increased tax revenue from “revitalization,” it also conjured up images of lawyers’ clients stumbling over prams and strollers parked in the hallways. But not to worry. Such frictions will never come to pass. Professional offices are nowhere mentioned in the new law, which defines mixed use as “a combination of residential dwelling units and other permitted and/or special permit users.” I kid you not. It will be apartments and retailers plus whatever undefined “others” are able to pass muster with the Planning Board and receive special permits required from the Village Board of Trustees.
As if to emphasize Croton’s aggressive unfriendliness to commerce, the new law repeats the Gateway Law’s categories of banned legitimate businesses that are beyond the pale. In today’s hard times when we should be welcoming business of every stripe, Croton is like a panhandler insisting he will only accept a quarter if it’s a scarce collector’s commemorative coin. The recently enacted zoning changes do not represent intelligent planning; they are planning run amuck.
The earlier laughable Rube Goldberg concept of parking spaces shared between the various categories of tenants and customers has been quietly swept under the rug. In its place is a simple formula based on bedroom counts. Retailers will have to fall back on existing commercial district parking regulations—formulas that are notoriously inadequate, particularly for restaurant parking.
Advocates of the zoning change were loud in their criticism of the “dowdy” look of Harmon’s commercial area. A look I happen to like because of its quaintness and lack of pretension. In Harmon, what you see is what you get. Proponents promised that the zoning changes would alter that look, but don’t hold your breath. The committee’s original recommendations at least gave a nod to appearance in the following virtually unintelligible statement that “the third story must be designed to within the roofline and dormers, gables or other aesthetically pleasing design possibilities.”
The zoning changes say absolutely nothing about aesthetics. What they do say is, “buildings in the area shall be subject to such additional design guidelines as may be adopted by resolution of the Board of Trustees from time to time.” So, after all the fuss and bother, the vaunted zoning changes are revealed to be nothing more than a work in progress! Still to come are the inevitable onerous nit-picking regulations that are the bane of venture capital investment.
I can comfortably make a prediction: Local Law No. 4 of 2009 will bring as much new development capital to Harmon as the 2004 Gateway Law brought to Croton in almost six years—which is to say, zero, zip, zilch, nada, nothing. One year, five years, ten years from now, Harmon will look pretty much the way it does today. And we can all thank our lucky stars for that.
Readers interested in reading the text of the zoning changes adopted on December 7, 2009, as Local Law No. 4 will find it at the following link: http://www.crotononhudson-ny.gov/publicdocuments/crotonhudsonnywebdocs/2009-11-locallaw.pdf
The camel is sometimes jocularly described as a horse designed by a committee. Upon close examination, the zoning changes hastened into effect by the village board on December 7 as Local Law No. 4 turn out to be a veritable camel. Compared to the committee’s original recommendations, this addendum to the discredited Gateway Law is a miserable, mangy beast, a mere shadow of its former self. By no stretch of the imagination does this miscarriage of planning deserve the accolades heaped on it in recent congratulatory comments by supporters who obviously have not read it closely.
The third-floor of each new or remodeled building is reserved specifically for residential use, presumably to preclude any opportunistic retail discounter from renting there and advertising, “Walk up two flights and save.” Third-floor units could actually be more desirable, being farther from the odors wafting up from an exotic ethnic restaurant on the ground floor and its incessant music of cymbals, chimes and gongs. Similarly, the area behind ground-floor retail units is limited to residential use. But if living over a store is déclassé, what is living behind a store? One advantage: If you run out of sugar, you can always knock on the back door and borrow a cupful from your neighbor, the ever-smiling and obliging chef with the flashing cleaver. Can’t you see the hordes of young couples that will desert the Upper West Side and move to Croton to live in such desirable quarters? Fat chance.
The second floor may house any combination of retail and residential uses. Professional occupancy was originally an important part of the rental income formula of retail stores sharing space with professional offices and apartments. A felicitous amalgam intended to milk increased tax revenue from “revitalization,” it also conjured up images of lawyers’ clients stumbling over prams and strollers parked in the hallways. But not to worry. Such frictions will never come to pass. Professional offices are nowhere mentioned in the new law, which defines mixed use as “a combination of residential dwelling units and other permitted and/or special permit users.” I kid you not. It will be apartments and retailers plus whatever undefined “others” are able to pass muster with the Planning Board and receive special permits required from the Village Board of Trustees.
As if to emphasize Croton’s aggressive unfriendliness to commerce, the new law repeats the Gateway Law’s categories of banned legitimate businesses that are beyond the pale. In today’s hard times when we should be welcoming business of every stripe, Croton is like a panhandler insisting he will only accept a quarter if it’s a scarce collector’s commemorative coin. The recently enacted zoning changes do not represent intelligent planning; they are planning run amuck.
The earlier laughable Rube Goldberg concept of parking spaces shared between the various categories of tenants and customers has been quietly swept under the rug. In its place is a simple formula based on bedroom counts. Retailers will have to fall back on existing commercial district parking regulations—formulas that are notoriously inadequate, particularly for restaurant parking.
Advocates of the zoning change were loud in their criticism of the “dowdy” look of Harmon’s commercial area. A look I happen to like because of its quaintness and lack of pretension. In Harmon, what you see is what you get. Proponents promised that the zoning changes would alter that look, but don’t hold your breath. The committee’s original recommendations at least gave a nod to appearance in the following virtually unintelligible statement that “the third story must be designed to within the roofline and dormers, gables or other aesthetically pleasing design possibilities.”
The zoning changes say absolutely nothing about aesthetics. What they do say is, “buildings in the area shall be subject to such additional design guidelines as may be adopted by resolution of the Board of Trustees from time to time.” So, after all the fuss and bother, the vaunted zoning changes are revealed to be nothing more than a work in progress! Still to come are the inevitable onerous nit-picking regulations that are the bane of venture capital investment.
I can comfortably make a prediction: Local Law No. 4 of 2009 will bring as much new development capital to Harmon as the 2004 Gateway Law brought to Croton in almost six years—which is to say, zero, zip, zilch, nada, nothing. One year, five years, ten years from now, Harmon will look pretty much the way it does today. And we can all thank our lucky stars for that.
Readers interested in reading the text of the zoning changes adopted on December 7, 2009, as Local Law No. 4 will find it at the following link: http://www.crotononhudson-ny.gov/publicdocuments/crotonhudsonnywebdocs/2009-11-locallaw.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)