.jpg)
THE FOLLOWING LETTER APPEARED IN A RECENT GAZETTE
To the Editor:
At its October 23rd meeting, the Board of Trustees passed a change to our village code that amounts to a giveback to the potential developer of Lot A (1 Croton Point Avenue) in the amount of $708,000. That’s quite a large sum of money to exempt a developer from paying, and it should raise concerns among Croton residents.
When WBP Development declared its intention, in a cover letter for their special permit application received by the board on July 17th, "for this Development to be a 100% affordable condominium [...] in accordance with Section 230-48 of the Village Code," it took many residents by surprise. Prior to that, the community had been told that the developer was seeking to build 80% market-rate units and 20% affordable.
But our Mayor, Village Manager, and Village Attorney were seemingly not surprised. The following day, at the July 18th work session of the board, a change to the village code was introduced that included complete exemption from the "fees in lieu of parkland" for affordable housing units (as defined in the section of the code referenced in the developer's letter). At the time, and in subsequent communications from the Manager, Attorney, and Mayor, the board and residents were told that the changes were necessary to "clean up the language" of the existing code. No mention of the new exemption for affordable housing was made in the Manager's letter to the board describing the changes on September 13th, or in comments introducing the public hearing for the law on October 9th.
The question should be asked: by what logic is affordable housing less deserving of playgrounds and green space, or its residents potentially less impactful on our existing park infrastructure, such that its developers should be exempt from the requirement to either provide such parkland in their site plan or pay toward the maintenance and development of parks and recreation in our village? A growing community like ours will have burdens on its infrastructure and its leaders should not preemptively exclude a broad category of residential construction from the incentives and fees meant to maintain and expand that infrastructure.
The answer, unfortunately, seems to be that, for the current administration, increasing the number of housing units in Croton – through subsidies, overlay zoning, and at any cost to existing residents -- takes precedence over all other concerns. To give one example, I am a member of the Telecommunications Advisory Committee. Despite the fact that we concluded work on code updates to enable the improvement of cell phone service in the village months ago -- changes that were widely agreed upon by the committee and protect the village from liability in its existing code -- the board has neglected to finish the process. When asked about the reason for inaction, our Mayor and Trustee Liaison informed the Chair that, in his summarization, "nothing is happening and nothing [is] likely to happen anytime soon," due, we all know, to the board being preoccupied by housing development.
What kind of village do we want to live in? One so consumed by growth that it can't tend to its own needs, or one that plans more carefully and fully considers the fiscal and environmental impacts of changes occurring now and in the future? These building projects -- the largest ever in the history of our village -- are being debated one at a time, but there is a bigger picture that needs to be considered. The Board of Trustees is treating each project in isolation and kicking these larger issues down the road. I endorse a change. Please write in Gary Eisinger and Nigel Ravelo for Village Trustee.
Chris Roose
Croton-on-Hudson
At its October 23rd meeting, the Board of Trustees passed a change to our village code that amounts to a giveback to the potential developer of Lot A (1 Croton Point Avenue) in the amount of $708,000. That’s quite a large sum of money to exempt a developer from paying, and it should raise concerns among Croton residents.
When WBP Development declared its intention, in a cover letter for their special permit application received by the board on July 17th, "for this Development to be a 100% affordable condominium [...] in accordance with Section 230-48 of the Village Code," it took many residents by surprise. Prior to that, the community had been told that the developer was seeking to build 80% market-rate units and 20% affordable.
But our Mayor, Village Manager, and Village Attorney were seemingly not surprised. The following day, at the July 18th work session of the board, a change to the village code was introduced that included complete exemption from the "fees in lieu of parkland" for affordable housing units (as defined in the section of the code referenced in the developer's letter). At the time, and in subsequent communications from the Manager, Attorney, and Mayor, the board and residents were told that the changes were necessary to "clean up the language" of the existing code. No mention of the new exemption for affordable housing was made in the Manager's letter to the board describing the changes on September 13th, or in comments introducing the public hearing for the law on October 9th.
The question should be asked: by what logic is affordable housing less deserving of playgrounds and green space, or its residents potentially less impactful on our existing park infrastructure, such that its developers should be exempt from the requirement to either provide such parkland in their site plan or pay toward the maintenance and development of parks and recreation in our village? A growing community like ours will have burdens on its infrastructure and its leaders should not preemptively exclude a broad category of residential construction from the incentives and fees meant to maintain and expand that infrastructure.
The answer, unfortunately, seems to be that, for the current administration, increasing the number of housing units in Croton – through subsidies, overlay zoning, and at any cost to existing residents -- takes precedence over all other concerns. To give one example, I am a member of the Telecommunications Advisory Committee. Despite the fact that we concluded work on code updates to enable the improvement of cell phone service in the village months ago -- changes that were widely agreed upon by the committee and protect the village from liability in its existing code -- the board has neglected to finish the process. When asked about the reason for inaction, our Mayor and Trustee Liaison informed the Chair that, in his summarization, "nothing is happening and nothing [is] likely to happen anytime soon," due, we all know, to the board being preoccupied by housing development.
What kind of village do we want to live in? One so consumed by growth that it can't tend to its own needs, or one that plans more carefully and fully considers the fiscal and environmental impacts of changes occurring now and in the future? These building projects -- the largest ever in the history of our village -- are being debated one at a time, but there is a bigger picture that needs to be considered. The Board of Trustees is treating each project in isolation and kicking these larger issues down the road. I endorse a change. Please write in Gary Eisinger and Nigel Ravelo for Village Trustee.
Chris Roose
Croton-on-Hudson
No comments:
Post a Comment