To the Editor:
Jane Jacobs, Robert Moses, and …. Fonzie? The fad of the moment in Croton is New Urbanism, but our village leadership continues with the Old Condescension.
Residents were invited to a webinar to discuss the oncoming surge in “accessory dwelling units” throughout the village. It is a serious topic, and residents deserve a serious presentation. I have long given up hope that our village leadership will listen to resident concerns, but last week we jumped the shark.
In response to a question from Croton Chronicle reporter Michael Balter about concerns regarding density, parking, and aesthetics, the webinar presenter said that we were a wealthy county and are concerned that ADUs will bring in “undesirables” and “low income people.” The webinar moderator then added that “These are the kinds of units the Fonz lived at in Happy Days.”
“Fonzie” was a fictional character in a television sitcom that ran from 1974-84, portraying an idealized version of 1950s Milwaukee. Leaving aside the dated pop culture reference, it was a flippant conclusion to an insulting answer. But since Croton’s leadership does not know the difference between fantasy and reality, I will point out that Milwaukee of the ‘50s or ‘70s is not an example we want to emulate. I have family from that city and that era, and Fonzie’s attitude toward race relations was not what actually happened in the 50s. Not to mention the (real) Milwaukee police chief Harold Breier (1964-84) who was racist, misogynistic, and even by the standards of his day a rabidly extremist homophobe (beloved by most Milwaukee residents, but that is another story).
The webinar moderator said ADUs are not creating greater density, since homes used to have five people per household and that ADUs “grow the population of a home back to the original” size. The presenter added that ADUs normally won’t change the view from the street and so “the neighborhood is going to look the same.” For the neighbors who have to look out their bedroom window at an ADU, the street view is the least of their problems.
Even assuming the premise of a historical past where five people lived in a home, the ADUs are not in most instances growing the population of the “home.” Rather, there is another structure being built or converted to residential use. That is a very different thing, and one which most municipalities have recognized by regulating the footprint, street and property line setbacks, and allowable floor area ratio. There are going to be multiple households, living in multiple homes, on the same plot of land that used to accommodate a single house.
Another concern about jamming more households onto the existing land area is the number of automobiles. That is particularly true if the ADU is a garage or carport conversion. To put this in a way that Croton’s leadership will understand, let me use the example of the Brady Bunch. All eight of them (plus sometimes, Alice) fit in that single Plymouth Satellite wagon. And it was not till near the end of the series that Greg Brady was allowed to buy his Chevy Bel Air.
People in Croton need a car to get around. That is why many Croton households have two cars already. An ADU for a non-relative likely means that there will be another car (or two) at that same address.
This brings up a key point: will the ADU occupants be relatives (parents, in-laws, siblings) or strangers? The impact of non-relatives occupying an ADU is likely to be greater than in a traditional “mother-in-law” unit. Are the ADU occupants going to be retirees, or working-age people who need their own car? The questions raised by the Chronicle reporter are valid ones, and relying on a fictional Milwaukee resident from a sitcom that went off the air 41 years ago is a poor substitute for data from the non-fictional world of Croton residents.
With the exception of a downtick during the 1970s, the population of Croton has gradually increased. It is true that housing cost is a problem and that ADUs might be one part of the solution. I am supportive of ADUs as a general principle; unfettered erection of structures on tiny residential plots is a different story.
In the end it really does not matter what Croton residents are concerned about: at least since the days when David Kane, Esq. took it one day at a time as chair of the Croton Dems, the people whose opinion matters in Croton have pushed for zoning which will increase the population, the households, and the number of vehicles on Croton streets. The only exceptions were for the golf course and the wealthy north edge of the village where powerful people such as David Kane, Ann Gallelli, and Laurel Gouveia lived. By contrast, areas such as Harmon have been treated with the same disdain demonstrated at the village ADU webinar last month.
New Urbanism is a rebranding of ideas which have been around for some time, and those ideas include accessory units and transit-oriented development—the conclusion being not to worry about over-development. New Urbanism is also a rose-colored look in the rearview mirror. Joanie eloped with Chachi but then she found out he was a MAGA lunatic. The lesson for our village board is to take advice from their constituents and take their concerns seriously.
At very least, don’t talk down to us.
--Paul Steinberg, Croton-on-Hudson
No comments:
Post a Comment