Decision affecting new condos postponed

Residents have until March 20 to deliver written comments on proposed zoning changes


Make text smaller Make text larger



Photos



  • Pictured are sketches of the townhouses BT Holdings plans to build. The Village of Chester has added a definition of townhouses to a proposed zoning revision that some residents say will unfairly burden single-family homeowners.



Some proposed zoning changes

Multiple family dwelling (definition) — A detached building containing three or more residential dwelling units, which may include apartments, cooperatives, condominiums and townhouses.
Townhouse (definition) — Each dwelling unit should be held in separate ownership and may be located on commonly held land with other townhouses, or on a separate tax lot.
Height exceptions — A range of structures, from flagpoles to cooling towers to solar panels, would be exempt from height limitations.
“Land-banked” parking — Up to 25 percent of off-street parking spaces required with new development may be left open space to be converted to parking later, if needed. Within three years, if 85 percent of existing parking spaces are used during “peak hours” over several days, the village board may ask the developer for more spaces. Developers would have to provide 1.5 parking spaces for efficiency and one bedroom senior units, and 2 spaces per two-bedroom senior units, with a 0.25 space reduction granted for affordable units.
Units per building — No building will have more than 24 dwelling units except for projects having 60 or more units. The maximum units per building may be 40.
For complete changes see http://bit.ly/1fwX9Yf.


By Ginny Privitar

— Chester village trustees agreed to postpone voting on controversial new zoning changes after two trustees and some members of the public expressed concern about the rushed nature of the proceedings.

Some trustees after a public hearing Monday night were willing to vote immediately on the zoning changes that will affect the newly annexed 61-acre site of the proposed BT Holdings development and other future development village-wide. But Trustee Tommy Bell said concerns expressed by the public during the hearing should be looked into. He said if he had to vote that night, he would vote no.

The public now has until March 20 to send their comments to village hall.

Trustee Betty Jo Bono also said she would say no if the vote were held that night. Holding up a sheet of paper that contained the village’s latest changes to recommendations made by the planning board, she asked Rick Ramsdell, the planning board chair, if he had a copy of it. He said he'd just received it only that day. His answer set off a buzz in the audience, already upset about the short notice given of the public hearing itself.

Bono said she would be guided by the planning board’s recommendations.

Mayor Philip Valastro said he was responsible for getting the information to Ramsdell late.

Developer Frank Nussbaum's property, known as BT Holdings, spans the town-village border. The lion's share was in the town, which does not have the water resources or infrastructure needed to support 240 townhouse-style condominiums and 100 senior citizen rental units. The village does.

The town agreed, only after a court injunction, to let its acres go. Town officials preferred that the site retain town zoning, not the high-density development proposed in the BT Holdings site plan.

But Supreme Court in late 2012 cautioned the town "to proceed henceforth in a timely manner to avoid any improper deferrals or delays."

Changes questioned

Some members of the audience said the proposed zoning changes seemed designed to accommodate BT Holdings. Some board members denied this.

Nussbaum was at the hearing with his planner, Ann Cutignola. The village’s planner, Kristen O’Donnell, and village attorneys, Ian Schlanger and Randy Baum, were also on hand.

The hearing was a last-minute surprise to many, some of whom only found out that day. According to Mayor Valastro, the village board posted a notice about the hearing in The Times Herald Record on March 6. Many in the audience said they do not subscribe to the Record, the only paper the village uses for public notices. A notice is usually posted five days ahead. The hearing notice was posted four days ahead.

Owners of single-family houses in the audience complained they would be subsidizing townhouse owners if the proposed changes were made. The "townhouse" definition proposed says "each dwelling unit should be held in separate ownership and may be located on commonly held land with other townhouses, or on a separate tax lot." The owners of units on commonly held land are usually taxed at a lower rate.

Audience members also said the number of parking spaces a developer would be required to provide is not enough, and that the section on how many residential units a building could have lacks clarity.

For more about the suggested changes, see the related article and visit this village link online: http://bit.ly/1fwX9Yf.

Editor's note: A correction was made to the original article to regarding the public notice requirement. Additional corrections were made to a version of this story that appeared briefly online Thursday morning.




Make text smaller Make text larger

Comments

Pool Rules



MUST READ NEWS

Sussman is Green Party’s pick for NYS attorney general
BY ERIKA NORTON
The Green Party announced that Chester civil rights attorney Michael Sussman is the party’s nominee for...

Read more »
Image

Foodie845 2018
The Chronicle brings you information and menus from local restaurants.
Image

First responders pay tribute to Lisa Scheuermann
tribute to Lisa Scheuerman
Read more »
Image

The verdict is in: Goshen High School's mock trial team is best in the state
— A team from Goshen High School has won the 2017-18 state mock trial tournament, edging out Brooklyn Technical High School in an...
Read more »
Image

VIDEOS



Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Community Newspapers


MOST COMMENTED



Find more about Weather in Chester, NY