After more than twenty years of discussion, resolutions, and community advocacy, a specific proposal for affordable housing on the 2.08-acre property on Theodore Fremd Avenue near North Street was presented at a public hearing at the February 26 City Council meeting.
By Bill Lawyer
After more than twenty years of discussion, resolutions, and community advocacy, a specific proposal for affordable housing on the 2.08-acre property on Theodore Fremd Avenue near North Street was presented at a public hearing at the February 26 City Council meeting.
While only four residents of neighboring properties spoke during the hearing, they raised a wide range of concerns regarding all aspects of the project.
The proposal, submitted by petitioner Lazz Development/Pawling Holdings, is for two buildings with approximately 27 rental units each, along with approximately 90 parking spaces. Some of the parking spaces will be open, and others will be on the ground level beneath the buildings.
The proposal also includes the stipulation that the units will be restricted to seniors 55 years of age and older. And, they are proposing that no one under the age of 18 will be able to live in the units. (This will require a waiver by the New York State Commission on Human Rights.)
The specific purpose of the hearings is to determine whether or not the Council should vote to change the current zoning for the property – B1 and B6 (both business) – to senior affordable housing — RA5. The RA5 category was initially established for the Rye Manor units on Theall Road.
While the property address site is listed as 150 North Street, if developed its entrance and address would be on Theodore Fremd.
Councilmember Laura Brett opened the hearing by providing some background on the project. She encouraged the public to use the hearing to voice their views regarding the proposal.
The proposal was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission, reported City Planner Christian Miller. Their one stipulation was regarding determination of environmental quality conditions of the site, which are still being reviewed.
Also at the meeting were petitioner Lou Larizza, his attorney John Colangelo, and Westchester County Deputy Planning Commissioner for Housing and Community Development, Norma Drummond.
Colangelo noted that the project could not move forward until the proposed zoning change is approved. He stressed that it calls for significantly fewer units and parking spaces than could be developed under the terms of the RA5 zone. He referred the public to the ten-page memo from the Planning Commission to the Council prepared by Miller, which provides details of the project.
Another layer of the project’s complexity is that the County is seeking to include at least some of the units as part of the County’s required federal government settlement over past failures to promote affordable housing.
Drummond noted that the settlement includes a “ticking clock” in that only some senior units can be included, and at least one other community is striving to acquire them in its development plans.
Before the public remarks began, Mayor Joe Sack noted that the hearing would be kept open at least until the March 12 Council meeting. And, as part of the hearing process, there will be a site visit on Saturday, March 8 at 10 a.m. Due to limited parking a shuttle bus will be available to transport those who cannot walk to the property. Residents must sign up for the service by phoning 967-7404.
Among the nearby residents who spoke was John Shoemaker, whose .64-acre property is located directly across Theodore Fremd from the proposed entrance to. He and his wife and four children moved into their home in March 2013.
He started by asking about the excavation and noxious odors coming from the gas station on the corner. He expressed concern about whether the site and the surrounding gas stations could ever be environmentally safe enough for residential use.
He then brought up his concerns about the traffic and safety – having an additional entrance/exit onto what he termed a “heavily travelled road” would be dangerous for cars and pedestrians.
Shoemaker and other speakers pointed out what they see as the similarity between this affordable housing proposal and the Sustainable Playland proposal: County projects being forced on non-supporting Rye residents. He suggested that a compromise might be found by limiting the project to just the units that would be eligible for the lawsuit settlement. He also expressed concern that the restrictions of age and eligibility would be hard to enforce and likely to be violated.
As noted in the City Planner’s report: A simple majority vote is required for the adoption of the local law. A super majority vote (three-fourths of members) of the Council is required if 20 percent or more of property owners subject to the zoning change or within 100 feet therefrom submit a written protest to the request. Based on a preliminary review it appears that a written objection by just three property owners within 100 feet of the site would trigger a super majority vote (six of the seven City Council members) to approve the zoning request.
Other speakers stressed the fact that the County Health Department’s finding of toxic levels of benzene and their recommendation that no living space be on the ground floor constitute proof that residential use would be too great an environmental hazard.
They also raised the issue of a stormwater drainpipe that comes onto the property from under the west side of I95 and the railroad tracks could cause flooding issues.
And, the speakers raised economic concerns, that the project would not be economically viable –due to the subsidized rents the tax generated from the project would not cover the municipal services costs. Douglas Maclaury, who lives at 60 North Street, said that there was no need to build large numbers of units for “economy of scale.”
In response to questions regarding who would pay for tests, surveys, reports or remediation, Miller said that all those costs would be paid for by the petitioner or the County.
Drummond stated that the DEC had determined the site was “clean,” but the County would continue to carry out tests. She also said that once the zoning change is approved the City of Rye would have complete control over the site plan details.
The only stipulation, she added, is that the units will be open to everyone who is eligible, not just Rye residents, as per the Federal Monitor requirements.
After the hearing, Zyg Rachwal, who owns a .35-acre property at 90-92 Central Avenue, said that he felt many residents no longer support low-income housing if priority can’t be given to Rye residents.
The next “indoor” hearing will be at the March 12 City Council meeting.
