When I first arrived in Potsdam, I thought I had once seen it on a post card. There were beautifully kept older houses and businesses, a perfect little “all- American” town. On the first day of school I walked into town to see all Potsdam had to offer. I strolled down Market Street past The Bagelry and Strawberry Fields Music and continued down toward Little Italy Pizza when something caught my eye.
My eyes fell upon a plot of land with sunflowers planted in rows of old toilets. There were urinals placed on a shed wall with a massive big green plastic turtle placed in the center pointed toward the traffic of Market Street. I was intrigued and taken aback. My only reaction was laughter. I wondered to myself, how do the people of Potsdam feel about the “Toilet Garden”? I wondered why such a display would exist. I wondered what archaeologists in the future would think of us if they came across the Toilet Garden.
The Toilet Garden, I’ve come to find out is a protest against the town by owner Hank Robar. In late 2005, Hank Robar looked to rezone the plot of land for potential sale to Dunkin Donuts. Robar had hoped to have the property rezoned from residential to commercial but the Potsdam Zoning Board of Appeals would not grant Robar a special permit to do so (“How A Toilet…”). Following the denial of rezoning, Robar painted a shed on the property a combination of white, orange, red and purple, we assume, to protest the Potsdam Zoning Board (Jacobs, “Potsdam: toilet display flushes image down drain”). It is from then on Potsdam witnesses the growth of the property into Toilet Garden.
Former Village Board of Trustees member Helen H. Brouwer shared her thoughts in a 2008 Watertown Daily Times article, calling the Toilet Garden both “offensive and funny at the same time”. Brouwer also referred to Robar as the “chief vandal” in wake of reports of vandalism against the Toilet Garden. Brouwer goes on “I know its offensive to people, and that was his intent. It’s unfortunate he can’t be more positive to the community” (Jacobs, “Bulky waste’ case in court next week”). Robar has also drawn criticism from Mayor Tischler who stated, "It's just not an appropriate thing. It's not a good reflection on the village” (Jacobs, “Potsdam: toilet display flushes image down drain”).
In 2008, Robar’s Toilet Garden was targeted by Code Enforcement Officer John F. Hill calling the Toilet Garden “bulky waste” and “garbage”. Hill reported shards of broken glass from toilets were apparent throughout the Toilet Garden that could result in a fine for Mr. Robar. The village prohibits “garbage and bulky waste” from being left on a property for more than five days. Hill commented saying “If somebody got hurt there- if they got impaled- it wouldn’t just be Mr. Robar they’d be going after, it’d be me too for allowing it” (Jacobs, “ Bulky waste’ case in court next week”). I am unsure why anyone would be on Mr. Robar’s land long enough to be impaled, the Toilet Garden is private property. Last time I checked, Mr. Robar’s land was not a football field or a playground.
Robar claims that the Toilet Garden has been vandalized a variety of times and very little has been done to stop such actions. He believes that vandalism is chiefly responsible for the shards that Hill was concerned about. Robar insists that he keeps the toilets “good- looking”. Robar has stated that he has reported vandalism up to five times, a concern that he feels could warrant a surrounding of barbed wire around the Toilet Garden. He even went as far to offer a three hundred dollar award to anyone who could provide information about the vandalism (Jacobs, “Potsdam: toilet display flushes image down drain”). I am sympathetic to Robar and his issues with vandalism. It is Robar’s property.
Robar obviously feels that he has been singled out by the Village of Potsdam or else such a display would not exist. As the years have gone by, Robar’s display has intensified steadily but never faded, why is it that Robar has been so heated for so long? One would imagine that an initial protest would exist on the plot if it was simply unable to be rezoned but the display has stayed for years. An anonymous Toilet Garden supporter explained to me that Robar may feel that there was a protection of business interests that plagued the rezoning of his property. I am still unsure or how much validity this claims holds. I had heard the Village Zoning Board had specific problems with the plot.
I sat down with former Mayor and now Deputy Mayor Ruth Garner who explained to the zoning issues associated with Robar’s land and the potential construction of a Dunkin Donuts. The area that Robar had hoped to sell was an already congested area with two gas stations that already caused heavy traffic flow. The construction of a Dunkin’ Donuts not only posed issues for the Village of Potsdam but also the Department of Transportation. The DOT owns the sidewalks and curbs in the Village of Potsdam therefore they are subject to the codes the DOT outlines. The DOT could not allow anymore curb cuts in the area that Robar hoped to build on. Curb cuts are simply ramps that allow people to transition smoothly from sidewalk to road in cars, wheelchairs, or on bikes.
Another issue the Village Zoning Board had was the size of the plot. According to Village code the lot was appropriate for the construction of a doctor’s office, a small apartment complex, or a small business. The construction of an establishment such as a Dunkin Donuts or any similar establishment was prohibited under zoning code. Garner also questions if Dunkin Donuts ever had any real interest in the plot (Garner).
Robar has continuously called the Toilet Garden a piece of “art” while Village Code Enforcement officer has called the Toilet Garden an “accumulation of junk”. To clarify exactly what junk is, I turned to Webster’s Dictionary to find out.
Junk: discarded material or anything that is regarded as worthless (Webster’s).Robar’s toilets fall into neither category. The toilets are not in dumpsters or appear to be discarded in any form. They are neatly arranged in rows. The toilets also do not fall into the category of “worthless”; they are, as Robar calls them, “artwork”. The toilets must have some meaning. Could Robar be some kind of artistic genius rebelling against the ways of traditional art to create a new form of contemporary art?
Robar could have been inspired by other “toilet artists”. Alamo Heights, Texas is home to “Potty Time”, a successful toilet seat museum. “Potty Time” displays over eight hundred decorated toilet seats and attracts over 1,000 visitors a year (“Photos: Trip Adviser…”). America’s growing interest in toilet- art could have influenced the creation of the Toilet Garden.
It is also completely possible that Robar could simply be environmentally friendly. Every year over seven million toilets end up in landfills across America. To combat wasting these toilets many have begun to use them to create works of art, a form of art known as eco- art. Toilets are often painted or made into flower pots much like the Toilet Garden (“Eco Art Day”). Should we be thanking Mr. Robar for being environmentally conscious?
Although Robar has continuously called the Toilet Garden a piece of art, it is to many residents an “eyesore”. I understand why many residents are unhappy and so are town officials. Eyesores commonly have been known to drive housing prices down in areas like Potsdam. Let’s say a neighbor of the Toilet Garden was trying to sell their house. How many of the potential buyers do you think would ask about the Toilet Garden? How many people would second guess buying a house next door? My guess is all of them would. In tough financial times like today, the last thing Potsdam needs is what some would consider an eyesore to drive housing prices down.
One could also argue that a Dunkin’ Donuts could also be considered an eyesore. Small towns like Potsdam pride themselves on small “mom and pop shops” and seem to shy away from corporate America (it seems only within villages). Once you go past Market Street, Potsdam has all the corporate American business you could think of like Wal- Mart, Subway. McDonald’s, Burger King and let me see… oh yeah, a Dunkin’ Donuts. It seems clear to me now that “Dunkin” was going to make its way into Potsdam regardless of what land it was to be built upon.
As referred to earlier, one anonymous source who has followed the story suggested that I look into competitors who might have influenced the village because they wanted to keep Dunkin out. The hard feelings from the Zoning Board’s decision in 2005 have obviously not died. Let it be known I am not passing judgment on any of the actions or motives of the Zoning Board or making claims of “injustices” against Robar. There are two sides to every story. Also, I am not suggesting that any one person or organization had any involvement in the downfall of Robar’s sale. I am simply establishing evidence of both sides so that readers can establish their own opinion on the matter.
I myself am still unsure of what to think about the Toilet Garden. In many ways I feel that the “Toilet Garden” is an expression of American ideals we cherish each and every day. As Americans we have the right to protest and free speech. What makes the “Toilet Garden” any different? I appreciate his passion.
When I first heard of Robar’s story, I was a strong supporter. I felt that Robar should have been able to sell the land if he had wanted. It is Robar’s land. He should be able to do what he wants with it. As I learned more of the facts about zoning, I began to become critical of Robar’s motives behind the Toilet Garden.
Zoning guidelines are put into effect to protect surrounding houses and establishments and to preserve residential areas from becoming overly commercial. The construction of a Dunkin Donuts would have affected multiple houses and caused even heavier traffic flow in an already congested area. I myself would not enjoy living next to a Dunkin Donuts. It is critically important to preserve small- town America and I support the Zoning Board’s decision. However, I will continue to enjoy the Toilet Garden for all it is worth. It truly is a work of art. I respect Mr. Robar’s passion and exuberance.
Sources
Booth, Sarah A.. "Potsdam, N.Y., economic developer to open coffee shop, wine bar. ". Watertown Daily Times. 11- 20- 09
Jacobs, Alex. "'Bulky waste' case in court next week". Watertown Daily Times. 11-20-09
Jacobs, Alex. "Potsdam: toilet display flushes image down drain". Watertown Daily Times. 11-20-09
Webster's New Pocket Dictionary. Cleveland: Wiley Publishing, 2000.
“Photos: TripAdvisor Marvels at America’s Wackiest Attractions”. Finance Yahoo. 10/19/09
“Eco Art Day”. CaptainOzone. 10/19/09 < http://www.captainozone.com/3/3home.HTML>.
Garner, Ruth. Personal interview. November 23, 2009.