Photos by Paul EricsonGinny Maier’s home sits on a double lot in Fairport. She and her husband would like to continue living in the village, but they feel somewhat trapped.“We know we could sell it for a lot of money, but we wouldn’t be able to buy something that was suitable for a retired couple in Fairport,” Maier says. “It’s nearly impossible to find. I mean, it’s nearly impossible to find anything but something that’s sort of equivalent to a starter home. We’re competing with young families for the smaller homes.”Barry Childs, another Fairport resident, has a different view of housing in the village. He would like Fairport to retain its character where single-family homes dominate the landscape.“My concern is that having a whole lot more of people living in Fairport will change the character of it,” he says.Maier and Childs are on opposite sides of the debate that is brewing in Fairport as the village revisits zoning regulations to meet goals outlined in its Comprehensive Plan. The process is still in its early stages; it kicked off in January, and a draft plan for the zoning update has yet to be created.“There’s no ‘there’ there,” says Fairport Mayor Julie Domaratz. “I’m frustrated that members of this community put rumors out there that have no basis.”Critics fear a move to diversify housing stock would trigger an influx of new residents. Proponents believe it would offer more options for people considering a move to Fairport, and village residents who would like to age in Fairport in a smaller space.The impetus behind these possible changes is the village’s 2021 Comprehensive Plan, whose goals include providing diverse housing choices across the affordability spectrum, among them multiple building types with ownership alternatives. It also calls for land being designated for both single-family and multifamily homes.In addition, the plan states that Fairport’s government should promote the growth of medium-density housing, including townhouses, row houses, and apartment buildings, particularly on and around Main Street and downtown. Finally, the village should consider being more flexible about the locations in which accessory dwelling units can be located. ADUs, which have stirred controversy in New York suburbs, are smaller residences that are attached to a house, or stand separately. Under Fairport’s current zoning regulations, ADUs that are separate from the original homes can only be in a specific district.Near the center of the village, a retail business in a converted home, a multifamily residence and a historic church stand side by side.“Once you have a comprehensive plan, the role is to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning code are documents that live together, make sense,” says Village Planner Jill M. Wiedrick, who is facilitating the Zoning Code Update project. “The current code dates back to 1992, and doesn’t really match up to what we have, or what, I would argue, we even had at the time of its creation.”An online survey, part of community engagement for the Comprehensive Plan, found that more than 85 percent of respondents currently lived in single-family homes. But when asked about planning for future housing/residential development, a plurality of 50 percent noted that the village should prioritize a “mix of housing types and price points to attract and accommodate individuals and families with a variety of income levels.”Thirty percent placed “low density residential development of single-family housing” higher, while others (14 percent) would like to see a priority on accessory dwelling units and 6 percent picked the “other” option. (According to U.S. Census data, 65 percent of the village’s housing is single-unit.)Roughly two-thirds of Fairport residences are owner-occupied, with many homes dating to the early 20th century or before.Zoning detailsThe zoning update project is guided by a working group with representatives from Fairport’s Zoning Board of Appeals and other land use boards, Village Manager Bryan White and other officials, and a representative of the Genesee Transportation Council, which provided $75,000 in federal funds to help finance the project.Once the Zoning Code Update project is finished, Fairport should have what is called Character-Based Code on its books.“The reason that we chose that name for this process is because we’re looking to capture the character of the village of Fairport,” Wiedrick says.CBCs differ from traditional zoning codes in important ways, according to the Zoning Code Update’s website. While the village’s current codes limit how the land in each of its zoning district can be used, CBCs would focus upon the character of each of its various neighborhoods.That focus would foster a more holistic view of shaping those neighborhoods, and the use of more advanced design standards. Those standards would ensure that the areas are developed in a manner that’s compatible with the village’s historic fabric. CBCs would also offer better mechanisms for handling the effects of development, such as an increase in traffic.In a neighborhood of single-family homes, the former Fairport High School building on West Avenue has been a residential building since its conversion to condos in 1983.Fairport hired Fisher Associates to execute the update project and create the new zoning codes. The contractor reviewed information on the village, including that which is contained in the Comprehensive Plan. It then assessed Fairport’s current zoning codes, and suggested changes to them. One result is a map that depicts possible changes to Fairport’s current housing regulations.Under Fairport’s current zoning scheme, six districts are zoned residential. The largest, R-A and R-B, are zoned for single-family residences. Each of the remaining residential districts is also zoned for single-family residences but can be home to other types of dwellings as well.Depending upon the district, they might also include two-family dwellings, multifamily dwellings that can house three or more separate families, boarding houses and garden apartments and developments. As you go alphabetically from R-A to R-E, each district allows the kinds of residential structures as the ones before it, plus new ones.Though the R-B district is zoned for single-family homes, 10 percent of the residences in the district are two- and three-family homes that were there before the current zoning regulations took effect, according to Wiedrick.Fisher Associates’ suggested zoning map, which is available online, differs from Fairport’s in some ways. The sections of the map that are designated as CD2, which correspond to Fairport’s R-B district, are zoned for “a mix of single-family and other housing typologies” that may include two- and three-family structures.The areas designated as CD3 would allow the presence of townhomes and smaller-scale multifamily structures and be the densest residential areas. The areas designated as CD1 correspond to Fairport’s R-A districts and, Wiedrick says, are also zoned only for single-family residences.Reasons for changeIn addition to creating a diverse housing community, the Comprehensive Plan also suggests adding flexibility into the mix with ADUs, including carriages and garages, which would need to meet standards for design, density, parking, and neighborhood context.It also encourages the growth of “missing middle housing”—townhouses, row houses, small apartment buildings and the like—on Main Street and in the downtown area.“Promote a full range of ownership options potentially to include more rental housing. Base housing priorities on changing demographics, including the Millennial and Generation Z markets,” the plan recommends. “Focus on Downtown mixed-use area and transitional areas between the downtown and intact single family neighborhoods.”Maier, who stresses that single-family housing is not the only way to develop attractive housing, also notes that it doesn’t create an environmentally sustainable future.“We need to make it so that it’s easy for people to get to transit, that it’s easy for people to get to the shops that they need without using a car, and in a more efficient space,” she says.Future generations, she adds, will be glad Fairport made such changes.“Right now, we’re on an unsustainable path,” Maier says. “So, I think that’s probably my primary motivation in thinking about changing things. When people talk about the character, I just think the character that we have now is a character that is leading us down a path of climate chaos. I don’t feel like we have to preserve that particular character; we can still have a nice place to live, but one that is more sustainable and more equitable and more welcoming to a wider variety of people.”Fairport, like the town of Perinton in which it’s located, has an aging population. (Roughly 5,500 of the town’s nearly 47,000 residents live in the village.) The Comprehensive Plan notes the proportion of people over 65 is just over 21.4 percent, which is higher than the county as a whole (18 percent). The number of people over 65 is expected to increase, eventually accounting for 25 percent to 30 percent of the population.This trend is occurring nationwide, and communities are looking for ways to be more accessible and livable for an aging population, which means more services, accessible sidewalks, transportation options and different types of housing.Some multifamily properties have been built in recent years on the edge of Fairport’s downtown, but the village’s Comprehensive Plan calls for additional diverse housing options.“Love the idea of tiny houses for elders, singles, people who want to pare down from larger single family homes but still live in or close to the village,” commented Nancy Hessler in a public input survey conducted this spring for the zoning update.“I lived in a cottage cluster for a few years, it was a lovely experience!” wrote Allyson Lubimir.And then there’s a need for diversity of age and race. David Steitz believes village officials may support the Zoning Code Update project to bring about demographic changes in the village.“Individuals in office now have run on platforms where they want to create equity and diversity in the village and have attempted to change how we look racially,” he says. “Essentially, our Democratic Party has run on that platform.”Though Domaratz and all the village’s Trustees are Democrats, she says that none of them ran for office to make Fairport more racially diverse.“I did not run on a platform of that, nor do I know anyone that I’ve run with who ran on a platform of that,” she says.Matthew Brown, who spent four years on the Village Board, three of them as deputy mayor, says Fairport’s lack of diversity in its population is evident.“We have under 1 percent of people of African descent who live in the village of Fairport, as compared to Monroe County, which I believe is 14 percent,” he says. “That’s a pretty big disparity.”In fact, according to the 2020 US Census, 16.5 percent of Monroe County’s residents identify as Black or African American.Built on a former Fairport Department of Public Works site, the Residences at Canalside is a 48-unit condominium community along the Erie Canal on the edge of Fairport’s downtown. While it initially faced opposition, the project earned a 2019 Silver Level Award from the National Association of Home Builders.Brown says Fairport’s current zoning regulations, which he believes favor single-family homes, have helped create that situation. An increase in the number or multifamily residences in the village could make it more attractive to members of minority groups and reduce the racial disparity.“If you are a person of African descent or a minority of any kind, you are more likely to be in a lower socioeconomic status,” Brown says. “I think they would be much more likely to afford an apartment or a fraction of a house, rather than purchasing an entire house.”He’s willing to accept the additional traffic or other strains on Fairport’s infrastructure that might occur if additional people decide to call the village home.“Making Fairport a more welcoming place is absolutely worth any cost we have to pay for that,” Brown says.“We already know (that) there’s a gross inequity between the suburbs and the city, and it seems like it’s somewhat our responsibility to make sure that there is housing for everybody or for a range of people,” Maier says. “I do not believe in the principle that people who have less money are less trustworthy or less good neighbors, necessarily. In fact, I think we want to give people an opportunity to own and build equity and have ownership.”In 2021, officials agreed to sell the Potter House, a village-owned historic mansion in need of extensive repairs, to a developer who planned to convert the structure to apartments. After a group of residents sued to block the sale, the deal fell through. The property was sold last year as a single-family residence.Lower-priced homes, apartments and townhouses could also bring in younger people to Fairport.Shevah Faber, a survey respondent, wrote: “More housing is good for our community especially lower priced housing. Before the housing boom my parents moved to Fairport and they would be priced out of the market now. The timing was right for us, want others to have the same opportunities.”Though Steitz believes that Fairport needs to become more diverse, he thinks the changes in zoning codes that are being considered would not bring that about. Instead, they would benefit developers and Realtors.“It’s going to be a small handful of the usual individuals who are going to buy the properties, put accessory dwelling units on them, turn them into apartment buildings, and then charge the exorbitant apartment rental rates, rental rates, lease rates,” he says.Engaging residentsDomaratz, Wiedrick and other village officials have discussed the Zoning Code Update project with Fairport residents at five face-to-face meetings that took place around the village, one virtual online session and at meetings of the Village Board.The village has also posted flyers on the project around Fairport, mailed postcards about it to residents, held walking tours to solicit feedback, placed an information booth at the Fairport Farmers’ Market, and solicited residents’ opinions in the online survey.Opponents of the Zoning Code Update aren’t satisfied with village officials’ explanations of the project, and its possible results.“Most of Fairport is zoned as single-family,” says Fairport homeowner Dewey Jackson. “This plan would remove most single-family zoning, replace it with code that would permit up to three units per parcel.”Though the plan hasn’t reached a draft stage yet, critics are concerned that the possible changes they’ve heard of would bring new people to Fairport, crowding its roads and streets.“One of the big problems of Fairport right now is parking,” Jackson says.As part of outreach efforts, walking tours focused on zoning in Fairport’s downtown were led by representatives from consultant Fisher Associates.Bob Cantwell, who lives in a two-story home on a double lot, ran for mayor in 2022 and for a seat on the Village Board last year. Cantwell says the zoning changes that have been suggested could allow him to turn his detached garage into an ADU and build another duplex on his property.“We could become a landlord, so to speak, with five units in the village of Fairport,” he says.Cantwell worries that more multifamily homes would burden the village’s infrastructure.“There’s additional needs for the infrastructure of the village itself, such as sewer and electric,” he says. “There’s more dogs, there’s more traffic, not only automobile but pedestrian.”Cantwell also believes that the additional multifamily residences could negatively affect the character and culture of the village, where just over 66 percent of Fairport’s residences are owner-occupied.“There’s an owner-occupied culture, where people are very much engaged in the neighborhood,” he says.Fairport’s downtown district has undergone substantial redevelopment in recent years. Its increasing popularity has led to parking problems, some residents believe.In addition to being concerned about the Zoning Code Update project’s potential effects, some of its opponents are critical of the way it’s being communicated. Though village officials say they’ve taken pains to inform the public of the project and its progress, Jackson says he had to check Fisher Associates’ map to learn of the zoning changes that the project could produce.Childs also thinks Fairport officials have not done enough to inform the public about the update project.“The communication is not good,” he says. “A lot of residents are very suspicious, and skeptical about what the board does and doesn’t want to do because of their lack of communication.”Steitz, Jackson, Childs and Cantwell have presented their concerns about the Zoning Code Update project to Fairport officials. In addition, Jackson, Childs and other like-minded Fairport residents described their reasons for opposing the project in a letter, and distributed 1,450 copies around the village this summer. Jackson says that most of the people he encountered were unaware of the update, and “expressed sympathy for the cause” of opposing it.Brown was probably not one of them.“I think we should be making it a lot easier for people to have ADUs on their property … and also to make it easier for multifamily homes to be developed,” he says.Fairport officials point out that the Zoning Code Update project is very much in the early stages.“At this point in time, there is nothing that’s been changed, written or proposed to the board for us to consider,” Domaratz says. “The only place that we’ve been is getting public comments.”Fisher Associates’ map was created and presented to spur village residents to think about potential changes to the codes.“When you’re talking to a community, if you don’t give them something to look at and consider, they don’t know what you want them to comment on,” Domaratz says.She added that Fairport’s Zoning Code Update project has been “as transparent as we can possibly make it,” and that some who view the project with suspicion may just have difficulty accepting change.“They choose to, one, believe that we’re trying to do something nefarious, which we’re not, and, two, they are stuck about any change in our community being bad,” Domaratz says.Wiedrick has described the zoning update as a “fluid process.” Though a final draft of the update was initially scheduled to be ready for the Village Board around November, she believes that it won’t be completed by then, and could not say when it will be presented to the board.The zoning update is likely to continue to fuel discussion and debate among Fairport residents about the village’s character and culture, and its future in a changing environment.“The message I’ve been trying to say to people is that I can’t promise that you will like these changes,” Maier says. “I can’t promise that you’ll always feel like they’re comfortable, but I think I can promise that, 50 years from now, people will look back and say, ‘Thank you for doing everything you could to reduce your fossil fuel emissions, and this is one of the things that everybody tells us we have to do … change how we spread ourselves across the suburbs.”Says Childs: “If the village government decides that they want to be magnanimous and open up the village to all sorts of people, that’s fine, but they need to consult with the residents, and us residents need to decide if that’s what we want.”Mike Costanza is a Rochester Beacon contributing writer. Smriti Jacob is Beacon managing editor. The Beacon welcomes comments and letters from readers who adhere to our comment policy including use of their full, real name. Submissions to the Letters page should be sent to Letters@RochesterBeacon.com. The post The code that divides Fairport appeared first on Rochester Beacon.