HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991_05_08 Town Board Regular Minutes N3NUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TOWN BOARD AND BOARD OF
FIRE COMDIISSIONER.S OF TEE TOWN OF
MMMONECK, FIEF ON THE 8TH DAY
OF MAY 1991 IN THE COURT ROOM OF
THE TOWN CEN'T'ER, 740 WEST BOSTON
POST ROAD, MUMONECK, NEW YORK
CONVENE REGULAR MEETING
The Regular Meeting of the Town Board was called to order by
Supervisor Silverstone at 7:00 p.m., at which time the Board recessed
into Executive Session.
The Executive Session held in Conference Roam A to discuss litigation,
personnel and contracts was, on motion duly made and seconded,
unanimously declared adjourned into a Work Session at 8:10 p.m.
The Work Session was held in Conference Roan A to discuss the DGEIS
Country Club properties and, on motion duly made and seconded, was
unanimously declared adjourned at 8:19 p.m.
RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING
The Regular Meeting of the Town Board was called to order by
Supervisor Silverstone at 8:23 p.m.
Present were the following members of the Board:
Supervisor Caroline Silverstone
Councilwanan Elaine Price
Councilman John McGarr
Councilwoman Kathleen Tracy O'Flinn
Councilman Paul Ryan
._..__ Also present were:
Carol A. Acocella, Deputy Town Clerk
Stephen V. Altieri, Town Administrator
Steven M. Silverberg, Town Counsel
Paulette Gabbriellini, Assistant to the
Town Administrator
CALL TO ATTENTION
Supervisor Silverstone pointed out to those assembled the locations of
exits as required by law for public gatherings.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Proposed Amendment to Urban Renewal Plan
- Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance
- Regulate Parking on Palmer Avenue
May 8, 1991
i
PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Amendment to Urban Renewal. Plan
Supervisor Silverstone requested a motion to open the Public Hearing
on the proposed amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan and on motion by
Couneilwamman Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr, it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing
be, and hereby is declared open.
The Deputy Town Clerk presented for the record the Affidavits of
Publication and Posting of the Notice of Hearing.
Town Counsel, Steve Silverberg, explained that in October of 1989, the
Town Board adopted an urban renewal plan for the four corners of the
Post Road and Weaver Street, which included the former Larchmont
Motel. He stated that, at the time, there were proposals for certain
zoning for land use within that urban renewal district, but as the
Town progressed with a study of these properties, particularly with
regard to the motel, it became clear that the proposals as contained
in the urban renewal plan would not adequately address certain needs.
He concluded that tonight's proposal merely consists of amending the
proposed zoning permitted, and tonight's second public hearing, if the
first proposal is adopted, will address the proposed amendment to the
zoning ordinance.
The Supervisor announced that before opening the Hearing for comments,
there would be brief presentations by a number of people from, the
community who have worked on the Affordable Housing Task Force.
Joel Negrin stated that the Affordable Housing Task Force was formed
in January 1989, was broad based in age, sex, experience, attitudes
and orientation, and consisted of about ten people. He noted that
meetings were well attended and participants diligent, doing an
enormous amount of ground work and reviewing master plans and county
and local laws. He went on to say that they addressed the problem
primarily by looking at four target groups: seniors, singles, young
families and municipal and school employees and emergency service
volunteers. He explained that they inventoried every parcel of land
in Town, other governmental units, utilities and not-for-profit
corporations, to see what available resources there may be. He added
that they surveyed municipal employees, on an anonymous basis, as to
their housing needs, attitudes toward local housing, financial
abilities and similar matters. Mr. Negrin said that by August 89,
because of development of the urban renewal plan, their efforts began
to focus on the motel property in particular, since it had the
advantage of being the largest site available, and able to accommodate
as many or more than all the sites put together. He added further
that a feasability study was prepared and reviewed, with a dual focus
on apartment houses and congregate elderly care, both being researched
and analyzed in same detail. He explained that Town officials, though
anxious to became actively involved, determined as a political and
practical matter that the Town did not wish to engage in real estate
business or management and did not want to show their excessive
capital costs. Mr. Negrin stated additionally that, within those
guidelines, Town officials were very active throughout the process,
both in leading the committee and in making Town resources available.
He stated further that several members inspected one of the few
examples of affordable housing recently built in Jefferson Valley,
numerous meetings were held with subcommittees on different areas and
with different proponents for other kinds of development and,
eventually, at conclusion of the process, they voted to pursue
apartment housing rather than congregate care for a variety of
reasons. He noted that it was a fairly close decision, but as a
oonsamas the om mittee was Strong in its determination.
2
May 8, 1991
Mr. Negrin went on to speak about how, throughout the discussion of
apartments, they looked at various configurations including the
u-shape and rectangular shape, whether the motel property itself could
be used physically and expanded, whether it needed to be raised
completely, a hi rise option, and every practical use of the limited
site that they could think of. He said that they eventaully came to a
consensus on the basic elements that they thought appropriate, which
included density in terms of number of people,, number of apartments,
amount of parking spaces, range of oonstruction costs deemed
reasonable and, based on this, range of rental rates likely. He made
note of the disappointments in non available federal, state and county
money as well as other types of funds, including low-interest loans
and guarantees, either because the existing source was used up and not
replenished, or simply not available for this type project. He told
of how this disappointment was significant in their thinking in terms
of the ability to deliver what they had hoped they would be able to
and still hope to be able to.
Mr. Negrin reported that a request for proposal was prepared by Steve
Altieri and a very active subcommittee of the Affordable Housing
group, and was sent to dozens of developers and builders in the area.
He reported further that of all who expressed interest, and quite a
few had been sought out and found, complete responses came from about
seven or eight, were narrowed down to a very few, then to two, and
they then voted between those two and selected one developer who the
Town is now dealing with exclusively. He explained that during the
process they spoke of the possibility of co-ops or condos with a very
low down payment, purchased apartments as opposed to rentals, which
may still be a viable option.
In conclusion, Mr. Negrin stated that, as a result, the Town has a
developer with a good understanding of the grant process, an excellent
building track record and excellent references, as well as a
demonstrated ability to be flexible and easy to work with. He
acknowledged that it has been a very satisfying experience, which
began with a goal to provide affordable housing of maybe six units and
became an opportunity to provide several dozen units, which had a
blighted building in an area that needed something done to it and now
has' a proposal to accomplish that goal. He added that, overall, when
balanced with two rather difficult goals, this was a pretty good fit,
and from his perspective as Chairman of the Zoning Board, this
certainly appears to be the right kind of land use in the right place.
Former Town Supervisor, Dolores Battalia, backed up Joel Negrin,s
comments, saying that in her capacity as Supervisor, this was a
wonderful committee to work with and they have been very thorough.
She commended the Board and the Staff, saying that tonight is the
culmination of long and hard work. She recommended to the Board and,
hopefully, the community to endorse the Board's actions, that they
take the legal steps involved because it is a socially responsible
thing to do, it is also good government, and it is good government for
some very practical reasons. She noted that the way the budget is at
present, and with the need for municipal employees, it is very clear
that we have to offer opportunities for people to remain within the
cone mity in order for them to serve both in the volunteer capacity
and as employees on staff, adding that it is also socially healthful
that our parents can remain here and our children can be cared for.
Mrs. Battalia then alluded to cases in the County concerning conmmity
zoning laws which must provide for a variety of housing opportunities,
noting that the time for affordable housing is upon us and if the
community does not initiate and design what it wants, there will be a
time in the very near future when the courts will tell each and every
community what it must do and possibly how it will do it.
3
May 8, 1991
The Supervisor then called on Dan Shuster, a long-time consultant to
the Town in its Master Plan and its Local Waterfront Revitalization
Plan, who had also worked on the basis for the designation of urban
renewal. Mr. Shuster indicated that the subject of this Hearing is an
amendment to the previously adopted urban renewal plan dealing with
only one parcel in the entire urban renewal area, which is all four
quadrants of the Weaver Street Post Road intersection. He indicated
further that the original plan designated the area, based on its
characteristics and the need for remedial action and proposed a zoning
and land-use plan for the area which, on the three corners other than
the motel site, continued the business zoning that was then in effect
as the basic land-use control. He said the plan recommended that the
fourth quadrant of the intersection, the motel site, be designated as
an option of residential or business use, with business use remaining
as previously prevailing, and with residential in accordance with the
RTA district which exists elsewhere in Town but at a slightly lower
density than the REA normally permits. He went on to explain that
normally the density is one unit for each 1750 square feet of lot
area, but the amendment before the Board tonight would allow the urban
renewal plan to reduce the area per square foot or increase the
density so that only 1200 square feet of lot area per unit are needed.
Mr. Shuster went on to address two aspects of the change. He
described how under the present urban renewal designation it would be
possible to create a maximum of 44 dwelling units while tonight,s
change would allow a maximum of 65, but the important aspect
mitigating this increase is that under present zoning there is no
limitation on number of bedrooms so on an average of 3 bedrooms per
unit, there would be 128 bedrooms. He explained that the proposed
amendment includes a provision that would limit the number of bedrooms
to an average of 2 per unit, so if there were a 3-bedroom, there would
have to be a 1-bedroom to average it out, hence only more units are
possible, but the maximum. number of bedrooms would remain at 128, so
that in terms of density, or number of people, there is no increase.
He then addressed traffic implications which, he noted, under present
business zoning, using moderate analysis, would generate 180 trips
during evening peak hour while even the maximum number of 65 units at
a high range per unit would only generate about one third that amount
of traffic. He went on to say that, despite that reduction, at the
request of the Zoning Board to evaluate how traffic would function
following development of 60 units and the proposed addition to Finast,
they found that the traffic flow based on accepted traffic engineering
standards, would generate at well below capacity. Mr. Shuster stated
that, based on analysis of both density and traffic impact, they
concluded that the proposed amendment to the urban renewal plan would
have beneficial impacts and certainly no negative impacts,
The Supervisor acknowledged other members of the Affordable Housing
Task Force present tonight, namely Margaret Shultz, Bob Immer►an ,
Mary Carlson, a member who had been most faithful, David Bogdanoff and
Muriel Bogdanoff, who lent her knowledge as well. She asked David
Bogdanoff to give a run down on how the current plan of 60 units was
arrived at.
Mr. Bogdanoff told ,of the wonderful experience and revelation it was
for him, as a County person, to work with the Town Board and Housing
Task Force, and of their combination of good sense and social
ideology, as well as their constant understanding that it is the
responsibility of leadership to care about the needs of its people.
He went on to say that he was impressed, having worked in the County
since 1946, with some nice experiences, but to be invited by a Town to
help put together a program dedicated to the needs of its people was
something he was tremendously happy to be a part of. He then
enumerated the tasks they undertook as follows: They had to design
4
May 8, 1991
housing to the recognized needs that existed right here in the Town of
Mamaroneck, one being a young family looking for its first housing
facility, another being elderly people looking to leave larger homes
and find something in keeping with reduction in income and, finally,
affordable living for other groups working in Town and for the
community instead of having them live in what was once called the
approach to the Catskills. He added that another responsibility
undertaken was to utilize this particular project as proof positive to
the entire County of Westchester that in the cooperative effort
between town, village and city government, and the County government
and Housing Commission, work could be accomplished and projects could
be developed at virtually no cost to the political community.
Mr. Bogdanoff explained how the situation was one of a going motel
making tremendous amounts of money for its use as a homeless facility,
with the County paying exhorbitant rental fees for it. He told how
the Towns decision to take over the motel was extremely expensive
since it was a high profit property, and that the Town incurs further
expense in maintenance until a replacement project takes place and, he
noted, it was in the interest of the Housing Commission as well as
that of the Town leadership to work out a program which would recover
all of the Towns expenses. He then went into a very detailed
explanation of the costs of the 40-unit program and concluded that the
Town, at the finish, will have accomplished all the goals it set for
itself without any financial loss to the community should the decision
be on the 60-unit plan, which he highly recommends.
Supervisor Silverstone requested that Mr. Bogdanoff's complete memo of
this feasibility study be entered into the record. She then mentioned
a written communication by Mr. Alkan Oral of Hommocks Road to be
entered into the record, noting that he was also present tonight and
would have a chance to give his own presentation. The Supervisor then
asked if anyone wished to comment in favor of or in opposition to the
proposed change.
Regina Barrenback, representing the League of Women Voters, stated
that they had selected affordable housing as an issue for study at its
annual meeting in 1986 and, over a period of two years, various
options for creating more affordable housing were identified, with
local public officials and representatives of various non-profit
institutions questioned with regard to practical possibilities for
implementation. She then read a brief letter of support from the
Larchmont League of Women Voters.
Ned Ryan asked if this proposal had been referred to the Traffic
Committee and if so, what their position was on the proposal. He was
informed by Town Counsel and the Supervisor that it has not yet been
referred to the Traffic Committee and will not be until it becomes a
site specific since the plan has not been submitted to public hearing
as yet, there being no actual specific plan but only a schematic at
this point.
Phyllis Wittner commented that the proposal has been referred to the
Coastal Zone Management Commission, which supports this amendment and
believes that affordable housing is a better use for that corner than
other possibilities.
Andrew Skerritt, a reporter, asked about a timetable of steps to be
taken before reaching a site review, to which Town Counsel responded
that there are steps to be cleared first, such as financing, legal
agreements and property management, and details will begin as soon as
the Town Board adopts the proposal.
5
May 8, 1991
Councilwcman Price emphasized that this process is not site specific
and that when the site plan is available, there will be further
opportunity to ooamment at Planning Board, Coastal Zone Management,
Traffic, Board of Architectural Review and again at Town Board
meetings, with the details finely tuned by then.
Alkan Oral then questioned the height and density of this proposal,
and stated that he does not feel the traffic study is correct. He
spoke about traffic problems between 7:45 and 8:15 a.m. and problems
in the evenings, noting that Blockbuster did not enhance the situation
either. He felt the parking study was much too generalized, and that
the layout from the Post Road would give a vision of a large parking
lot, not a housing project. He asked that they please study his
written proposals as entered for the record.
Dan Shuster then reiterated the basis on which the traffic analysis
was performed for the benefit of Mr. Oral, noting that the groundwork
was done in 1986-87 when the Master Plan update was prepared, and
generated traffic estimates were brought up to 1991, as well as being
generated far into the future.
Supervisor Silverstone then asked if anyone else wished to camment.
There being no further cmx ents from the Board or from the floor, she
requested a motion to close the Hearing. On motion by Councilwoman
O,Flinn, seconded by Councilman McGarr, the Public Hearing was
unanimously declared closed.
RE: New -Development at the . site
Of former Larchmont Motel
April 30, 1991
Dear Mr. Altieri,
I sincerely appreciate the time you were able to spare to
discuss the referenced matter with me last month. I also
appreciate Ms. Elaine Price's attention to the matter and
forwarding me a copy of the proposed development layout.
However, I am disappointed by the fact that there was no
Proposal File open for the inspection of the public. Thus, I
was not able to fully understand the details of the proposal
and my comments below are based on the partial information
afforded to me, and what I was able to gather at the Planning
Board meeting on March 13, 1991
Maybe I should first summarize my qualifications. We live at
5 Hommocks Road. I am a citizen, taxpayer and registered
, voter. I have lived in this country (Texas, Louisiana,
California, and New York) over 20 years. I hold a Ph.D.
degree in Civil/Structural Engineering and am a registered
Professional Engineer in Texas and California. I am about to
be licensed in New York also. I work for a Development and
Construction company in New York City.
This background should indicate that my comments are not
unfounded.
The subject development proposal does not seem to be fully
studied yet, with the only apparent goal of maximizing the
developer's profit and thus allowing the return of the Town's
__ _investment on the property-.
If the Town were not involved with this project, I doubt that
this proposal, as it stands today, would ever be considered
at this level. It would have been killed long ago.
I do appreciate the efforts of creating "Affordable" housing
; for the eligible people I do agree with the building height
selection. However, I oppose to the fact that a very high
density, with insufficient parking of commercial layout and
minimal green areas, development is being considered.
May 8, 1991
The traffic study does not seem to fit the current and future
conditions, but more importantly the traffic pattern to be
created with this project has not been studied properly.
All over the county when a population center is created
without proper parking provisions, I have observed that
people start to park in unauthorized areas, blocking each
other and general traffic, and create accidents.
It is obvious that with the cramped parking indicated on the
drawing, the future residents will be parking on the side
streets in addition to requesting parking on Boston Post Road
and School/Ice Rink area. ( I noted that the Architect calls
for a total parking lot width of 72 ft. on the drawing, but
drew that out of scale, trying to minimize the huge size of
the parking "LOT" of the project, and that no parking for
visitors have been allowed) . If the Town is not prepared to
accept such parking overflow, it will be the Town's
responsibility to police the same, which will require great
expenditures by the taxpayers.
The 2 % growth rate of vehicular traffic based on the 1986-87
study would hardly reflect the true picture of the current
conditions. When the Hommocks School traffic hours are
considered, it should become obvious that, especially between
7:45 and 8:15 a.m. , there will be great gridlock around the
area. The traffic due to Ice Rink, Blockbuster and Swimming
Pool were not considered either.
The proposed location of ingress/egress to the project
parking lot has apparently not studied and will cause traffic
snarls.
The proposed parking layout adjacent to Boston Post Road and
Hommocks Road will give the project a pure commercial look.
The cramped parking and the asphalt will be an eye-sore, even
if the townhouses were to be architecturally perfect. The
greenery mentioned will not be visible to the passerby.
The green area will not be all green, due to walkways
required to the entrances of the townhouses. It seems like
the Architect intentionally left out such walkways.
The distances between the buildings seem to be very little,
the minimum required at best.
All these seem to be resulting to force 60 units on a tight
site by changing the required lot size from the original
1750 sq.ft. per unit (which is stated to allow for only 44
units) to 1200 sq. ft. per unit, in order to increase the
income from the project.
Enclosed please find layout of the proposed development and a
layout I suggest to be considered for application.
You will observe that with such a layout, more parking per
unit may be available, with the parking area hidden from the
major roads, more greenery outside and inside the building
layout, and even a playground for the residents' children.
I am not claiming this to be the perfect solution, however
it could be improved further and will be far superior than
the developer's layout.
I urge you and all the decision makers to reconsider the
proposal and keep the number of units at or below that
is allowed by the 1750 sq.ft. limit and to consider new
development plans for the best of our beautiful Town.
Sincerely Yours,
Alkan Oral
7
r
r �<
n
lo 75
I L
I \•- 75 r.-�_;;. i 3 .r•-J L �vwt r s.. �' ,,..;& �' '"L'i'• f
L
Yf
�` F I76 � a�',�•.i'{, {.4, s r 4"zFf`1 � �. �, � • ,....� r M', l
1 Lry 1 r ��,'r I "'G 4��•fE' Z f t �d.'- C 1i_ J Y / / wl. /
I� I •��-- ,H {-y � L.o.vL+&wt. � _ �s�_ri Y r 3n l
---'_'� � L• "Y3X .P W a -. � Yf�� A�►�S/i�NT CIS
c� l Ica Lm (,I
l S, _ 7s, / s sp ertI s tAtr
� �• �I�.a � bC'i
- fit• L� ��
16 co
y„ L� "x-„3 i
Vi
y l
` �: ——`• I �;.,'�° U_.u.°7�t it�k�J,t r �.,��vg �"",.%f i � 1 �_ 6i�;-���7� � � I
2.: *I 14`L e�r.'x ��k�-„a t r } � a v�•,cus�'e�S .+�, r l.. ,(r��� i '%,�''^�6r«a �x� ,
PROPOSED SITE PIAU f0[ AFFOCPAH
rb[Mt6 sA&"MOrr MOM SItT
6o V W ITS q 10 PAenuua
t ��a�i� 1 y.�• ` �— �.. � _a���d r�r i w y ,y i*':` t 7 ' �"s � �i
ftb
OrA
co
U.
r�' i`: � v � � � t{`'y.�',:-.� .E�s'1':,,,,, ,prs r .-y,.•' r--
ye
x-
- - 1
� r 4tR�x�- C t` ♦) 1 r� �r'1'r. ,,,�..r:.•, ;�r'r r E � , � �,� T f�. ...�...n�t4 ���,�
IA
Ky}
L _
. '�' Y,` '=� 'xz�' +4 �:`�.na,� i,r*� b+�+ �:= Y�" t ,-•� r.'" �x......4t"� c .s'' '+wti•5.. � V 1
� � �. � � v�_ *-� � ->.Tx*v.,�°�id'a�'v �•.'�ro,{�, 9- 4 >� ( f.f � `'� - �-�•" •�"`Tig��-� � F� -�,r�"�.' 1 I
- 8 ►.Sy17Ewgl.1C_ �c HI�b�N,
F}-O M M 0 GC-T Ilo I�YJ
May 1 , 1991 - - May 8, 1991
Corrected May 7, j991 - -- —
TOWN OF MA1KARONECK
Study to determine feasibility of developing an
affordable rental program, of only 40 Units.
Suggested Apartment Distribution:
2 - 2 .BR Sharing Units 5 Rooms 10 Rooms
19 - 1 BR 3 . 5 " 66 . 5 "
19 - 2 BR 4 . 5 85. 5 "
40 Apts . Average 4 . 05 Rmns . 162 Rooms
Amount of Habitable Space:
2 - 2 BR Sharing Apts . @ 945 sq. ft . 1 ,890 sq. ft .
19 - 1 Br Apts . @ 663 " " 12 , 597
19 - 2 13R Apts . C 833 115, 827
40 Apts . Average 758 sq.ft . 30 , 314 sq. ft .
Projected Site Deve± rrent :
--Construction Costs including all
soft costs - 3 , 730 - 60 x 40 x 1 . 10 = $1 , 735 , 333
-Average Cost = $68 , 383
-Site Acquisition Cost $65, 500 $2 , 620 , 000
Total Developrr!ent CoSt = $5 , 355 , 333 i
Average Cost Per Apt. $133,883
Potential Income :
------ — Apt . Total Total
Monthly Monthly Annual
2 - 2 BR Sharing $1 , 100 $2 , 200 $26 . 400
1 - 2 BR Super --- ---
18 - 2 BR Market $950 $17 , 100 $205 , 200
11 - 1 BR Market $780 $8, 580 $102 ,960
8 - 1 BR Low Income $633 $5 , 064 $60, 768 .
*Income from Laundry & Coin Machine 139. 33 $1 , 672
40 Apts . w/Potential Gross Income $33, 083 • $397 , 000
H. F.A. Criteria Allowance for.. Low of Rent .5$ $19,.850
H. F.A. Effective Income $377 , 150
10
- - May 8, 1991
Mamaroneck 40 Unit
Feasibility Study
Corrected May 7, 1991
[;ethod of Compensating ( wn for Casts
of Land Acquisition - $2 , 620, 000 :
1 ) H. F.A. Allowable Land Cost
25% of Total Dev. Cost of
$5, 355 , 333 a $1 , 339, 000
2 ) payment to Town by Developer who
added this amount to his $2 , 735 , :333
construction cost which is then set
at .$2 , 935, 331, = $200 , 000
3 ) Land Lease $1, 081 , 000
'Total $2 , 620, 000
Carr}ping Casts - H. F.A�Effective Income $377, 150
-Real Estate Taxes - 40 Apts x x:750 = $30, 000
-Maintenance & Management - 40 Apts x 2000 = $80, 000
-Annual Lease Payment @ 1081 x6. 33 x 12 = 82, 113
Subtotal Before Cost of Debt Service $192 , 113
-Available for Debt Service & Profit $185, 037
-Sufficient for an H, F.A. 8% 40 yr.
mortgage in the amount of $2 , 215, 481
-Which at H. F.A. coverage ration of 1 .04% $2 , 127 , 000
Source of Financing of 'r. D.C. $4 , 443 , 556
1 ) H. F.A. Mo-rtgage $2 , 127, 000
2 ) H. F.A. IDDP Grant $200, 000
3 ) Westch.Cty, Town of Mamaroneck Grant $578 , 000
4 ) Builder's Fee 51 , 209, 333
5 } Sale Low Income Tax Credits $160, 000
6 ) Land Lease Town of Mamaroneck $1 , 081, 000
Total $5, 355 , 333
May 8, 1991
Mamaroneck 40 Unit
Feasibility Study
Corrected May 7, 1991
Conclusions: No developer or investment ar•oup can be found to invest
$1 , 228 , 333 in this 40 Unit project from which annual anticipated cash
flow return would only be in the neighborhood of $20, 000 -
A different approach to source of financing could then
be studied:
I -- The Town could accept a site cost recovery $1 , 000, 000
less than suggested above :
Scheme ##II Revised Source of Financings
1 ) H. F. A. Mortgage $2 , 127 , 000
2 ) H. F.A. IDDP Grant 200 , 000
3 ) Westchester Cty. to Town
of Mamaroneck Grant in Aid - 578, 000
4 ) Builder 's Fee $200, 000
5 ) Sale of Low Income `i'aa Credits $160, 000
6 ) Land Lease own of Mamaroneck $1 , 081 , 000
7 ) Additional Town of Mamaroneck
contribution to Project of $1 , 009, 333
Total $5 , 355, 333
I certainly cannot suggest such a d.-antic increase in Token
contribution to the project .
Submitted by :
David 13ogdanoff
May 7 , 1991
12
May 8, 1991
May 1, 1991 - - -- - -
LARCHMOUT MOTEL - AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
( Further Revi3i(,:15 of Ule MarCh ?0 , 1991 ,Proposal)
( 1 ) Current Apartment schedule. :
6 - 2 BR, 2 Batt Sharing d Rooms 30 Room$
27 - 2 BR, 1 Bath y . 5 121 .5 "
27 - 1 BR Apts . 3 . 5 94 .5
60 Apts . 246 Rooms
( 2 ) Calculation as to Habitable Space :
6 - 2 SR Sharing @ 945 sq.ft . 5670 sq.ft .
s
27 — 2 BR @ 833 sq. ft. 224 . 91
; 27 - 1 BR @ 663 17 , 901
60 Apts. Average 768 sq- 2ft . 465, 062 sq. ft .
( 3 ) Gross Potential Income.-
Monthly Total Total
per Apt . Month1y Annual.
6 - 2 BR, 2 Bath Shading C $1,L00 $6 , 600 $79, 200
26 - ..2 BR, 1 Bath Market Rate @ $950 ,24 , 700 $296, 400
1 - 2 BR Super --- ----
15 -- 1 BR Market Rate @ $780 $11 , 700 $140, 400
r
12 -- 1 ,BR Low Income @ $6:13 $7 , 596 $91 , 152
60 Apts . $50 , 546 $607 , 152
Income from Laundry & Coin Machines $2 , 848
Gross Potential Income $610, 000
H. F.A. Criteria - Allowance for
Vacancies & Bad Dents -5Q ( 30 , 500 )
H. F.A. Net Effective Income $579 , 500
( 4 ) Estimated Total Development Cos' :
-Cost of Site Work & Building Cans t-u.tion
including all soft costs (Architecture,
Engineerip.g, Tees, Legal and financing). $3, 730, 000
average. cost $62, 167 .
-Town of Mamaroneck Site Acquisition.
Cost (costs of Town ) . .'Average $43 , 567 $2 , 620, 000 f�
Total Estimated Development Cost $6, 350, 000
Average - $105 . 833
13
May 8, 1991
Larchmont Motel - -- - _-- _
Further Revision of *larch 20 - --- - - -- -�
May 1 , 1991
t5)
Method of Compensatilig Town for Costs Jf Land ACquisition:
1 ) H.F.A. Allowable Land Cost
25$ of $6, 350, 000 = $1, 587 ,000
2) Land ;cease 30 yr. self
Liquidating arrangement at
6.54 interest rate = $800, 000
3) Payment to Town by developer
who added this amount to his
$3, 730, 000 cost figure,
increasing it to $3 , 963 , 000 _ $233;000
Total $2 , 620 , 000
Item-1 will be paid at initial mortgage closing, Item 3 as work
progresses .
M. F.A. Net Effective Income $579 , 500
( 6)
Carrying Costs :
1) Taxes - 60 Apts x $750 = $45 , 000
2) Mgt. & Maint - 60 Apts x 1800 108, 000
3 ) sand Lease Payment @ 6�%
. .30 .yr. self liquidating = $60__,__768
Subtotal before Cost of Debt Service $213 , 76A
$213,768
.Available for Debt Service & Profit $365, 732
Sufficient to support an H. F,A. 8%
40 yr. mortgage in the amount of $4 , 378 , 975
Reduced to produce H. F.A. 1 . 04%
. coverage ratio to $4 , 2p3 , 000
( 7)
Sources of Financing to_cover
Total Development cost of $6, 350, 000:
1 ) H.F.A. Mortgage $4 , 203 , 000
! 2 ) H.F.A. IDDP Grant $300, 000
3) Town of Mamaroneck Grant 578 , 000
4 ) Builder's Fee $229 . 000
5 ) Town of Mamaroneck Tease $800, 000
6) Sale Low Income Tax Credits X240, 000
Total $6, 350, 000
14 -
May 8, 1991
Larchmont Motel
Further Revision of March 20
May 1 ' '1991
_Operatin Profit Study:
-Gross Income $610, 000
-Realistic Effective -Income 98% $597 , 800
-Operating Expenses -
a) Taxes & Maintenance $153 , 000
b) Land Lease $601768
c) Debt Service $351 ,435
5564 , 80 3
Cash Flow Profit $32, 997.
*Tax- Free as result of building depreciation.
The source of financing is , in our opinion available for the
project based on this last revised study. It would take little time
to firm up with the State f•lousing Finance Agency. a definitive amount
of their longterm mortgage. The Town of Mamaroneck has already
received the $578, 000 as Grants from Westchester County, to be used
for tha.s projeet. The Cush Flow Profit of approximately $33 , 000 is a
excellent return for a Builder 's Fee left in the project of $229 , 000.
since if handled correctly, this project would be tax free over an
extended period of time . because the actual Cash Flow Profit would be
more than covered by the amount of property depreciation. Further, a
Management Fee of approximately $24 , 000 _Js available for whatever
entity would- be carrying out the day-to-day and long-term Management
of the project.
David Bogdanoft
May 1 , 1991
15
May 8, 1991
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Proposed Amendment to.Zoning Ordinance
Supervisor Silverstone requested a notion to open the second Public
Hearing on the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and on
notion by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr, it was
unanimously
RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing
be, and hereby is declared open.
The Deputy Town Clerk presented for the record the Affidavits of
Publication and Posting of the Notice of Hearing.
Town Counsel, Steve Silverberg, briefly explained that the amendment
to the zoning Ordinance basically mirrors the amendment to the Urban
Renewal Plan and it is required, in order to implement the urban
renewal plan, that the zoning ordinance be amended to include the
language that is set forth in the amendment to the urban renewal plan,
that is, allowing zoned districts as outlined and also indicating on
the Town Zoning Map those parcels and properties which are designated
to be included. He noted that, essentially, as long as the general
urban renewal district and the zoning map would be the same as
discussed by the Towns urban renewal plan, the property designated
for the affordable housing option would be the motel property as
Previously discussed. He suggested that, to save time and effort, it
be indicated in the record of this Hearing that all comments made
previously at the earlier Hearing be incorporated into this Hearing,
with only additional comments made as necessary.
The Supervisor then asked if anyone wished to comment in any way with
regard to the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
Councilwoman Price stated that she wished to address the comments
relating to the traffic pattern, saying that this is not yet site
specific and although you see and ingress and an egress on the plan,
that is subject to and will be subjected to intense review by the
Planning Board. She added that many of the Planning Board members
have children that attend Homtocks and they are acutely aware of
traffic patterns, especially at certain periods during the day.
Ned Ryan commented that obviously traffic is a major factor and it
seems that, perhaps, it should be considered first by the Traffic
Committee instead of waiting until the urban renewal plan is adopted
before it is referred to the Traffic Committee. He emphasized,
however, that he likes what is being done, feels the Town should be
commanded for the steps taken, and is not in anyway opposed.
Councilman McGarr stated that these two Hearings are just another
continuation on the journey of this project and there will continue to
be more hearings as they move further along, noting that the Board
appreciates the input and time, especially the amount of time the
Affordable Housing Task Force Committee has invested in this.
The Supervisor then asked if anyone wished to comment further. There
being no further comment she requested a motion to close and on motion
by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilwoman O'Flinn, the Public
Hearing was unanimously declared closed.
Thereafter, on motion by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman
McGarr, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Mamaroneck adopted
an Urban Renewal Plan for the Poet Road/Weaver Street
intersection on October 25, 1989; and
16
May 8, 1991
WHEREAS, it has been determined that in order to implement
the Urban Renewal Plan it is necessary and appropriate to
amend the zoning for the area encompassing the Urban
Renewal District; and
WHEREAS, in order to first amend the zoning for the Urban
Renewal District it is necessary and appropriate to amend
the Urban Renewal Plan to reflect the alternative land
uses which should be permitted in the Urban Renewal
District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XV of the General Municipal
Law a proposed amended plan was referred to the Planning
Board of the Town of Mamaroneck; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck,
pursuant to Article XV of the General Municipal Law made
its report to the Town Board; and
WHEREAS, a notice of Public Hearing was duly published; and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing on the proposed Urban Renewal
Plan amendment was duly held on May 8, 1991;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the area previously designated Urban
Renewal has been found by this Board to be substandard or
insanitary or in danger of becoming substandard or
insanitary which tended to impair or arrest the sound
growth and development of the municipality, and
financial aid, if any to be provided to the municipality
is necessary to enable the project to be undertaken in
accordance with the plan, and the plan affords maximum
opportunity for private enterprise consistent with
sound needs of,the municipality as a whole for the
undertaking of an Urban Renewal program, and the plan
conforms to the comprehensive community plan for the
development of the municipality as a whole, and there is
no requirement for relocation of families or individuals;
and it is further
RESOLVED, that the proposed Urban Renewal Plan as amended
is hereby adopted.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution.was
duly put to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows:
Caroline Silverstone VOTING aye
Elaine Price 1;1 Il aye
John McGarr VOTING aye
Kathleen Tracy O'Flinn VOTING aye
Paul Ryan —VarM aye
The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted.
17
May 8, 1991
At this time, on motion by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman
McGarr, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
LOCAL LAW NO. 4-1991
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck
1. Purpose
The purpose of this local law is to implement the Urban
Renewal Plan for the Town of Mamaroneck adopted on
October 25, 1989
2. Zoning Ordinance Amended
The following provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the
Town of Mamaroneck are amended as follows:
A. Section 89-4 "Establishment" is amended to include
the UR Urban Renewal District.
B. Section 89-5 entitled "Zoning Map" is amended to include
the area designated on the attached map as Urban Renewal.
C. Section 89-47.1 is added and reads as follows:
Land Use Opt ions in Areas Designated Under
Article XV of General Municipal Law
In any area determined by the Town Board to be appropriate for
designation under Article XV of General Municipal Law as an urban
renewal area, one or more of the following uses shall be
permitted in accord with the provisions of an adopted Urban
Renewal Plan.
A. Any permitted use in the Business District-B, in accord with
the construction requirements therefor set forth in S89-41.
B. Multi-family dwellings as permitted in the Tower Apartment
District-R7A, in accord with the construction requirements
therefor set forth in S89-39, except that building height
shall not exceed four stories or 44 feet and there shall be
at least 1,750 square feet of lot area for each dwelling
unit on the site.
C. Affordable multi-family dwellings, where all units comply
with the definition of "affordable units" as adopted by
resolution by the Town Board of the Town of Mamaroneck,
shall be permitted in accord with the following construction
requirements to the extent they differ from those of the RTA
District, on sites designated on the zoning map:
1. Lot Requirements
a. Minimum lot area: 40,000 square feet
b. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit: 1,200 square feet
c. Minimum depth of lot: one hundred (100) feet
d. Maximum coverage of lot: thirty percent (30%)
2. Yards, Courts and Open Spaces
a. Minimum front yard: fifteen (15) feet. On a corner
lot, a front yard shall be provided on each street.
b. Minimum. side yards: ten (10) feet each provided,
however unattached accessory buildings not over one
(1) story or fifteen (15) feet in height and located
on the rear one-third (1/3) of the lot may be placed
at a minimum distance of five (5) feet frown the
property line. On a corner lot such accessory
building shall not be located nearer to the street
line than the required minimum front yard setback for
the zoning district.
18
May 8, 1991
c. Minimum rear yard: fifteen (15) feet. On a corner
lot, one yard shall be designated a rear yard at the
discretion of the owner.
d. Usable open space (in quare feet per dwelling unit) :
one hundred (100) .
e. A five (5) foot wide landscaped buffer strip shall be
provided along all public streets which may only be
interrupted for necessary driveways and sidewalks.
3. Dwelling Unit Size
a. The average size of all dwelling units on any site
shall not exceed two bedrooms per unit.
b. No dwelling unit shall have more than three bedrooms.
4. Maximum Heights
a. In stories: four (4)
b. In feet: forty-four (44)
S. Off-street Parking: 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit.
6. This amendment shall take effect immediately;
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
put to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows:
Caroline Silverstone VOTING aye
Elaine Price VOTING aye
John McGarr VOTING aye
Kathleen Tracy O'Fli.nn VOTING Ue
Paul Ryan VOTING aye
The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Regulate Parking on Palmer Avenue
Supervisor Silverstone requested a motion to open the Public Hearing
on a proposed local law to regulate parking on Palmer Avenue and on
motion by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr, it was
unanimously
RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing
be, and hereby is declared open.
The Deputy Town Clerk presented for the record the Affidavits of
Publication and Posting of the Notice of Hearing.
Town Administrator, Stephen Altieri, briefly explained that the
Traffic Committee recommended that the no parking ordinance at the
corner of Burton Road and Palmer Avenue be expanded due to a visual
obstruction caused when exiting Burton onto Palmer.
The Supervisor asked if anyone wished to comment in favor of or in
opposition to this proposed local law.
Ned Ryan, a former member of the Traffic Committee, stated that he
happens to be familiar with this problem and thinks it is an
appropriate and responsible recommendation by the Traffic Committee.
There being no further comments made, on motion by Councilwoman
01Flinn, seconded by Councilman McGarr, the Public Hearing was
unanimously declared closed.
19
May 8, 1991
Thereafter, on motion by Councilwoman O'Flinn, seconded by Councilman
McGarr, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
LOCAL LAW NO. 5-1991
A Local Law to Regulate Parking on Palmer Avenue
1. Purpose
The purpose of this Local Law is to regulate parking on
Palmer Avenue in order to eliminate conditions which pose
a danger to traffic entering and exiting Burton Road from
Palmer Avenue.
2. The current sixty-foot No Parking area on Palmer Avenue
at the southwestern corner of the intersection of Burton
Road and Palmer Avenue shall be extended twenty feet to
the Southwest.
3. This Local Law shall take effect immediately.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
put to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows:
Caroline Silverstone VOTING aye
Elaine Price —VO'T'ING aye
John McGarr VOTING aye
Kathleen Tracy O'Flinn VOTING aye
Paul Ryan -VMM4G aye
The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted.
BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS
The Meeting was called to order by Commissioner Silverstone- at 9:45
p.m. in the Court Roan
Present were the following members of the Commission:
Commissioner Caroline Silverstone
Commissioner Elaine Price
Commissioner John Mcgarr
Commissioner Kathleen Tracy O'Flinn
Commissioner Paul Ryan
1. Fire Claims
Commissioner McGarr presented fire claims for authorization of
payment and upon his motion, seconded by Commissioner Ryan, it
was unanimously
RESOLVED, that this Commission
hereby authorizes payment of the
following Fire Department claims
as approved by the Fire Chief and
audited by the Comptrollers Office:
20
May 8, 1991
Coastal Oil New York, Inc. $ 366.44
Communication Channels, Inc. 62.00
Coyne Textile Services 31.67
Dri-Chen Extinguisher Co. 1,017.25
E S C O 27.25
Excelsior Garage & Machine Works, Inc. 78.98
Fire House Magazine 37.97
Henry, John E. 89.10
Lawrence Heat and Power Corp. 519.97
Lawrence Heat and Power Corp. 100.18
New Rochelle Water Company 146.56
NUM Information Resources 9.00
Olson and Gordon 101.37
Rickert Lock and Safe Company 6.60
Robert's 667.00
Technical Electronics, Inc. 189.00
Town of Mamk. Prof. FF Assn. Local 898 94.32
Van Ness, Walter 59.00
$3,603.66
There being no further business to crane before this Commission, on
motion by Commissioner Price, seconded by commissioner McGarr, the
meeting was unanimously declared adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
At this time the order of the Agenda was changed and the following two
items not on the Agenda were taken up:
Report on Monroe Nursery School
Paulette GaUbriellini stated that Michelle Washington signed a
contract to lease the Monroe property for use as a day care center
called Beginnings, and that brochures and applications are now being
sent out since the operation will begin the first week after Labor
Day. She went on to say that Carino Contractors have begun work and
the architect reports that progess is going very well. She noted that
floors have been cut for the stairwell and the stairs are almost
complete, the handicap ramp is ready and the kitchen has been
enclosed. The Supervisor interjected that Michelle Washington is the
Director of Day Care, and that the Town is not running day care but
has leased the Monroe property to an outside proprietor, with first
preference given to Town residents. She pointed out, however, that
the Child Care Advisory Committee for the Town had chosen this
particular operator, following interviews with many potential
operators, and given its stamp of approval. A brief discussion ensued
with regard to traffic on Weaver when day care begins next Fall.
Request of the Volunteer Ambulance Corps.
Jeffrey Wilson, Captain of VAC, reported that on Monday, May 13, at
7:15 p.m. VAC will be sponsoring a drill, together with the Town Fire
Department and the Village of Larchmont Fire Department. He stated
that the first part of the drill will consist of a one and one-half
hour lecture on safety procedures with regard to usage of AEIOMED, A
helicopter, which is the newest means of emergency medical care as it
provides air support to ground units upon request. He went on to
explain that this would take place at the Hammocks Park Ice Rink and
the helicopter would land and take off just once, and the drill will
give members of the three organizations a good understanding of
AEFDMED in the event it is actually needed.
21
May 8, 1991
Phyllis Wittner objected to the area as a landing site, stating that
it is a critical environmental area and she was concerned with the
noise as well as the danger of the approach in the area of a school,
and felt it would be better if it were moved to the High school
field. A discussion followed with regard to various concerns and
problems after which, on motion by Councilman McGarr, seconded by
Councilman Ryan, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
-WHEREAS, the Town of Mamaroneck,/
Village of Larchmont Ambulance Corps
(VAC) has requested permission to
land a helicopter on the parking lot
of the He mxocks field on May 13, 1991
for the purposes of conducting training
for emergency medical evacuation; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the
public health, safety and welfare that
such emergency evacuation facilities
be available and that the Towns
Volunteer Ambulance Corps be trained
in the utilization of such services;
W9, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that VAC shall be permitted
to land a helicopter once during the
evening of May 13, 1991 at the Ho[mocks
field parking lot for the purposes of
emergency medical training.
At this time the regular order of the Agenda was resumed and the item
AFFAIRS OF THE TOWN was taken up.
1. Resignation - Conservation Advisory Commission
supervisor silverstone announced that Kevin Ryan, who has been
appointed to the Larchmont Village Board has resigned as
chairperson from the conservation Advisory commission and,
although the Town will expect a recommendation from Larchmont,
the appointment of the Chair is by the Town.
2. Authorization - Sale of Real Property
The Administrator reminded the Board that during preparation of
the 1991 budget, the sale of certain Town parcels which are of no
use to the Town had been considered for sale. He explained that
they would be sold at public auction, and that the assessor has
prepared the upset prices. Following brief discussion, on motion
by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman Ryan it was
unanimously
RESOLVED, that this Board hereby
declares the following real property
of the Town as surplus and authorizes
the Town Administrator to implement
the sale of such at public auction=
22
May 8, 1991
Sec: 1 Bl: 105 Lot: 124 End of Locust Ridge Road 1 Acre
Sec: 1 B1: 105 Lot: 579 End of Locust Ridge Road .35 Acre
Sec: 2 B1: 207 Lot: 470 Jason Lane 10,400 square feet
Sec: 2 B1: 125 Lot: 63 Myrtle Boulevard 226 feet by 90 feet
Sec: 5 Bl: 505 Lot: 487 Boston Post Road 25 feet by 75 feet
3. Authorization - Telephone System Improvements
The Administrator explained that since 1985, New York Telephone
upgrade facilities at the local central office and they now offer
a cost-effective option which is recommended to upgrade the
current telephone system in the Town Center building. Following
some discussion, on motion by Councilman McGarr, seconded by
Councilwanan Price, it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that this Board hereby
authorizes the Town Administrator
to execute a contract with A T & T
for a telephone System 75 upgrade.
4. Renewal of Retainer Agreements - Edward M. Lieberman
- Rains & Pogrebin
The renewal of retainer agreement with Edward M. Lieberman was
held over to the next meeting.
The Administrator clarified that Rains & Pogrebin serves as the
Towns special counsel for matters relating to personnel and
labor, a very specialized field of law. He then detailed the
contractual agreement, after which, on motion by Councilwoman
Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr, it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that this Board hereby
authorizes the Town Administrator
to execute the retainer contract
with Rains & Pogrebin of Mineola,
New York as special labor counsel
for the Town for a period of two
years in the amount of $5,000 per
annum.
5. Change in Polling Place
Deputy Town Clerk, Carol Acocella, asked that District #18 be
moved to the VAC building since it is well lit, accessible to the
handicapped, has ample parking, phones, clean conditions, and
will be more beneficial for both voters and election inspectors.
The Supervisor remarked how there have been requests for years to
move the polling place out of the Town garage because of the
dangers and inconveniences involved. On motion by Councilwoman
O'Flinn, seconded by Councilman Ryan, it was unanimously
23
May 8, 1991
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of
the Town of Mamaroneck does hereby
approve a change in polling place,
whereby Town District #18 be changed
from the Town Garage, Maxwell Street,
to the Volunteer Ambulance Corps (VAC)
building, 155 Weaver Street, Larchmont,
effective immediately.
6. Salary Authorization - Recreation
- Conservation
on motion by Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr,
it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that as provided for in
the 1991 Town Budget, authorization
is hereby granted for payment of
salaries to Melvin Seigel, Tennis
Instructor, $27/hour, effective to
4/29/91;
and be it further
RESOLVED, that this Board hereby
authorizes payment of $8.50 per
hour to Mary F. Farrell of White
Plains for part-time work in the
Conservation Department, effective
5/6/91.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Supervisor Silverstone reported that she has a written communication
from the New York State Town Clerks Association, Inc. congratulating
the Town on the honor brought by Town Clerk, Patricia DiCioccio, who
has been elected to serve a three-year team as District Director of
the NYSTCA. She noted that the letter states the following: There
are 932 towns in NYS and 765 member towns and nine districts, with two
dirctors each. It is a very real honor to have your Town Clerk
elected as one of the eighteen State-wide directors of the State
Association. Your Town Clerk will be the State contact person with
all the Town Clerks in several counties in your area, and will be
expected to attend several meetings of the State Executive C:anmLittee.
Again, you should be proud that your Town Clerk has brought such an
honor to your town. Margaret J. Orrange, Secretary, NYSTCA.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Bill Burns recounted a 21 month program for improved safety on Weaver
Street at Sts. John & Paul School as follows: "In August 1989, it was
requested by letter to Supervisor Battalia that safety on Weaver
Street be improved; on the perimeter streets of Murray Avenue School
there are 13 crosswalks, on Weaver Street there are none, there are
none on Heather Lane, there are none on Maple Hill Drive; In
September of 1989 Dolores Battalia wrote a letter, copies to the Town
24
May 8, 1991
Administrator and Police commissioner to investigate this; as far as I
am aware nothing was accomplished, nothing was done; in March 1990 I
wrote Supervisor Silverstone and brought this to her attention; 225
children school 5 days a week, 400 registered released time students
that came usually once a week, it is a very dangerous street and
everybody admits it; I was then invited to a May 23, 1990 meeting of
the Traffic Committee and there it was discussed and carried over to
the next meeting of June 26, 1990; at that time they passed a
resolution that a school zone be designated in front of Sts. John &
Paul School; all through the Fall we had comments from the
Administrator that this was being done, that the Police Commissioner
had currently met and verbally asked this of the State; in October it
was said this was momentarily coming through by the Administrator and
also the Supervisor said it takes time but it will occur; I probably
wrote twenty different letters over this period of time and what we
really found out was that the State was not doing anything because
nothing had been done from June 26th by letter to the State requesting
a school zone in front of Sts. John & Paul; and there are all kinds
of letters in the file saying that this was done, I requested those
letters, they were never done; On January 23rd at the Town Board
Meeting a resolution was passed to declare a school zone in front of
Sts. John & Paul, now this is something like eighteen months after
this was requested; it was also stated that the Town Board had
created a school zone, the school zone existed, it was just never
designated, the Town Board didn't create it, it was there; all
through December, January, it was stated that signs would be put up
and the school speed would be 20 mph; on February 6th, the day of the
Town meeting, the signs were put up and it was stated then that within
a month in March, a crosswalk would be put in by the state, on Weaver
street; nothing was ever said about the Town having the
responsibility for a crosswalk on Heather Lane and a crosswalk on
Maple Hill and, to me, it is just unbelievable that this cannot be
accomplished; it is now May 8th and Mrs. Price had told me that we
would have this done in March, in April and in May, and hit has never
been accomplished; and I really think you have been a disservice to
Sts. John & Paul School, to the children, to safety in not completing
this job because the Police Department cannot enforce the 20 mph zone
because there is no crosswalk, and if you do not believe me, paragraph
212.4 says that a school speed limit can be enforced if there is a
sign, if there is a mph speed, if there is a painted crosswalk, if the
crosswalk is supervised, if there is no traffic control signal, or if
there is no pedestrian overpass; I would like to know why this cant
be accomplished and I've heard 'well its the States responsibility,'
it,s the Towns responsibility to put in a crosswalk on Heather Lane
and on Maple Hill Drive, and while your at it if the State cannot do
something, I think a crosswalk deserves to be put in; thank you.-H
Councilwoman Price informed Mr. Burns that it is unfortunate that he
did not relay all the communications to her in January. She reassured
him that the State has written that it would handle this as soon as
possible and that the season begins in March and April although,
unfortunately, the State is in chaos right now and they are
responsible for that particular crosswalk. she told him she had not
addressed the other crosswalk issues with him but believed they were
working together on this. She asked him to again call Joe Naval at
the DOT since things are backed up by one year because of Cuomols
budget cuts, which cut out contracts already signed for last year.
councilwoman O,Flinn commented that she had asked Steve Altieri a few
days back to contact the State and find out if this item is on their
agenda and, if it is not, to find out if the Town can proceed to paint
the crosswalk.
25
May 8, 1991
Mr. Burns reiterated that this issue has been going on for two years
and school ends in two weeks. He noted that at the meeting of the
26th the Traffic Committee recommended that the Town declare a school
zone at Sts. John & Paul. The Administrator responded that the Town
Board can only ask this of the State since these are traffic control
devices on State roads. Mr. Burns asked why the Town had not written
to ask the State to do this until January 23, 1991, six or seven
months later. Mr. Altieri pointed out that there are notes of
meetings between the police commissioner and Mr. Noval during the
interim and that Mr. Naval made certain representations to the police
commissioner, which maybe we should not have relied upon, but we did,
and we ended up with this long delay. He stated that the bottom line
is that two people had a meeting and the Town relied on
representations at the meeting, not a bad way to do business, but
maybe it backfired and we should have written a letter sooner, at this
point he could not disagree with Mr. Burns.
Ned Ryan told the Board that he lives around the corner from Sts. John
& Paul, and had been on the Traffic Committee during the first
presentation of this issue, strongly supporting it. He added that he
feels this illustrates what is wrong with traffic planning in the
Town, that this function should be handled by the Traffic committee,
without requiring a liaison to bring the message to the Town Board,
which he gathered frown what was heard tonight, had not been done for
many months. He stated that this has been a top problem of the
Traffic Committee for a long time, that he and others were told when
recruited to it that it would be turned into a decision-making body
with limited authority, but this was never done and it was argued and
there was even a resolution made, in fact, he resigned in protest. He
noted that what he has heard tonight only serves to underline the
problem. A somewhat lengthy discussion ensued among the Board, Mr.
Ryan and Mr. Burns.
Bill O'Gorman of the Larchmont Gardens Association noted that he had
missed the work session on the DGEIS and is under the impression that
there will be a public hearing on the rezoning ordinance, but wished
to know what progress was made and if he could get a written copy of
the report by R & A Associates. Town Counsel responded that the
Towns planning consultants made a draft for the Board members to
review and it will be accepted and made available sometime in the
coming week, copies will be available and a public hearing will be
scheduled. A brief discussion followed. Ned Ryan remarked that a
resolution was passed unanimously by the Larchmont Gardens Association
stating that it is very much against residential use of Bonnie Briar
and that the Town Board rezone the golf course so there can be
absolutely no housing development on it. He inquired as to whether
anyone could attend the work session and was assured that they could.
Ned Ryan then asked the Board, as president of the Larchmont Gardens
Association, about a problem they have regarding use of the Weaver
Street Fire House Council Rom,.,. He said the Association has signed a
petition in which they request the policy of the Town with respect to
the Fire House should be the same as it is with respect to the Town
Center, namely that neighborhood community groups be able to use the
facility without having to pay anything for it. He told the Board
that with over 200 members, they need a sizable meeting place and when
they first met there, a past chief suggested that if they were using
the place on a regular basis, there should be no reason why the fee
26
May 8, 1991
could not be waived. He went on to say that two checks had been paid,
a $10.00 check which was returned and a $15.00 check which was cashed
for custodial purposes. He asked Steve Altierits help and got the
impression that it could be used for no fee, now there is a situation
where, after being informed that he could reserve it, twice he was
told he could not have it on those particular nights since it was
being used. He stated that on his way to attend the meeting
elsewhere, he checked the Council Roam and on both occasions found it
was not being used. He then tried to reserve for tomorrow night and
was told they could not use it.
Supervisor Silverstone stated that they have worked out a definite
policy for the Town Center, which was that if the building is in use
on the particular evening when it is needed so that there is custodial
service at the time, then a community group could have the fee waived,
but if the building is required on an evening when the custodian would
have to come in especially, then there would be a fee. Mr. Ryan
stated that there is no custodian at the Firehouse and no reason to
pay $15.00. The Supervisor remarked that she feels it is time for the
Fire Council to set a new policy for the use of the building and she
will work with then and try to work out a policy. A great deal of
further discussion took place.
TOWN CLERK
The Town Clerk presented the Report of the Building & Plumbing
Inspector for the year 1990.
ADIOUMQUOT
There being no further business to come before the Board, on motion by
Councilwoman Price, seconded by Councilman McGarr, the meeting was
unanimously declared adjourned into a work session to further discuss
the DGEIS country Club properties at 11:40 p.m.
Carol A. Acocella
Deputy Town Clerk
27