Environmental Real Estate

The Rockville Centre Planning Board effectively denied Chase Partners' proposal to build a 349-unit apartment complex on Banks Avenue last Wednesday, when it issued a statement of findings saying the developers could build a smaller 230-condo complex, or nothing.

The final decision of the Planning Board will not be made until the case is reviewed by the Nassau County Planning Commission.

The board found during its environmental review of the project that the apartment complex was just too dense for the land, and would exacerbate current traffic problems.

Michael Faltischek, the developer's attorney, said his clients were "disappointed, to say the least." He said there is nothing in the record to "objectively" support the Planning Board's findings. "I don't know what it is that they think they're doing," he said.

Chase Partners sued the village and planning boards in September because the developers thought the case, which has been before the Planning Board since April 2003, was moving too slowly. The suit calls for the judge to find the village at fault for the delays and allow the developer to build. The village has filed a motion to dismiss the case, which was scheduled to be heard in New York Supreme Court on Friday.

It took more than six hours of deliberations during two sessions for the Planning Board to develop its statement of findings, which has been referred to the Nassau County Planning Commission for review. The commission is expected to render its own findings on the plan soon, which may allow the RVC Planning Board to render its final decision at its Oct. 19 meeting.

Planning Board member Bill Croutier voted against the statement of findings, saying he felt the developers have failed to adequately answer many questions about the project. He was especially angry that the applicant did not reveal the details of its cleanup plan for chemical contamination at the site. But he praised his fellow board members for doing an "excellent job" of coming up with a proposal that would have the least intrusive effect on the village.

Fellow board member Catherine Pucciarelli said she was against the project from the very beginning, and criticized the Village Board for putting the Planning Board in a difficult position by passing a zone-change law in 2003 that allows apartment complexes to be built in the proposed area. She said she voted for the statement of findings, which allows for a 230-unit condo project, because it is "the lesser of two evils."

Residents, who have been against the project from the beginning, said they were gratified by the results. Andrew P. Karamouzis, a resident and an attorney for the opposition, said he shared Croutier's criticism of the developers for not answering "many of the serious concerns raised by the Planning Board or village residents. Rather, the developer and his representatives exhibited an 'entitlement' mentality throughout the process, with little, if any, regard for the overall welfare of the village or its residents."

Karamouzis called on Mayor Eugene Murray and the rest of the Village Board to repeal the zone-change law. "Otherwise, there will be many other ill-conceived projects just like this one in the near future threatening the quality of life in our village," he said.

Most of the Planning Board members thanked residents for their input, but at least one found their participation troublesome. Ed Oppenheimer said some of the residents were "ill behaved," and that they "hindered the process."

The developer had included a 275-unit condo alternative in its final environmental impact statement, but said it really didn't want to go that route.

In its statement, the Planning Board said a reduced-scale condo alternative was preferable for many reasons. It would generate less traffic; condo owners' school taxes would be in the same payment class as homeowners', thus reducing any financial impact on residents caused by the need to expand a school or hire more teachers; and it would help abate the noise of air conditioning units and other ventilation elements, because there would be fewer of them.

The statement also calls for the developer to pay for an expert, chosen by the village, to monitor the cleanup of contamination at the site. Chase has volunteered to do the cleanup as a participant in the state's Brownfield Cleanup Program, which allows the public to participate in hearings to decide on the best approach to getting rid of the chemicals.

Faltischek said he still believes the judge hearing Chase's suit will rule in his client's favor, and that the apartment complex will be built as proposed. "Reducing the size of the project isn't supportable by any set of objective facts," he said.

by Angela Marshall

Herald Newspapers Online

It's condos or nothing: Planning Board calls apartment complex too dense

2004-10-14

03:35:16 pm It's condos or nothing: Planning Board calls apartment complex too dense

Pingbacks: