Yorktown: Do You Want Random One Acre Parcels Rezoned To Multi-Family?

Maybe you do.  There is a need for such housing and some Zoning Districts allow for it.  Not the single family zones (the R-1 districts), but the multi family zones (R2, and R3).  Also, the Commercial Zoning Districts.

The Yorktown Planning Board Director and the Town Board seem poised to rezone a one acre parcel in the center of a single family zoning district, right next to George Washington Elementary School.  It would set a dangerous, dangerous precedent and you should be concerned about the value of your home.  Live on a busy road in a residential zone?  Near a school, or church, or daycare, or doctor's office, etc...?  Those seem to be the two criteria they are using to justify this rezoning.

It's very close to Cortlandt (across the street, literally).  You might think that is R-2 or R-3, but you'd be wrong.  It's all single family zoning there.

There will be a public hearing on this re-zoning application very soon.  It's important to pay attention to the Town's business.  Here's what we know so far (video excerpt of the last public hearing below):

• The Planning Director is terribly confused.  He said that the "parcels immediately adjacent [the subject 1 acre parcel] underwent significant "up-zoning'" and he references GWES and the Islamic Center "and all the way east to route 6."  Nope, no up-zoning there.  See the marked up zoning map below.  He also said there was up-zoning on the Hunterbrook.  Pfffft. 
• We, to date, have not seen an "as of right" plan, meaning a plan that does not require any variances. The developer presented something that fit within the setbacks, but didn't comply with building code so it was not a feasible design--as noted by the Planning Director in the video; somehow he arrives at the conclusion that the plan requiring elimination of over 50% of the side yards to build the building was "the best plan."  Whoa there.  What we should be presented with is a scheme that complies with code and zoning as of right because--as Councilman Bernard reminds us--the board is not considering the site plan or parking plan or building code--they are only considering the rezoning.  Soooooooo, if that's true, show us what would be allowed without requiring any variances whatsoever.  Isn't that a reasonable request?

That's enough for today, but--please--do pay attention to this application.  Maybe re-zoning random one acre parcels is the way to "move Yorktown forward."

If you live in the light yellow zone, be afraid. Be very afraid.  Or, in the alternative, petition the Yorktown Town Board for a re-zone of your single family house to R-3, cash out, and buy a house in a normal town. 

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.

If you're not up to speed on Mohegan Lake's residential community's struggle to reign in the massive new development proposed for Faith Bible Church, you can get some background information here. 

We're not against the church and don't oppose the use, it's a practical opposition to the site's deficiencies relative to the proposed enlarged occupant load.  Specifically that they have already enlarged the church, illegally, and seem to have done so to the limits of the area they can adequately provide legal parking spaces for.

At the last public hearing in May for variances the church is seeking, I correctly noted that the building inspector had unequivocally noted that the two residences they church owns were converted to church use without approval or permit.  

After nearly 5 years the Faith Bible application has been before both the planning and zoning boards, the church and their attorney--Al Capellini--have never contested the documents in the planning and zoning files that clearly demonstrate that they have already enlarged the legal occupancy and parking exponentially.  The building inspector's memo in both board files correctly notes that the church has already enlarged "without approval or permit," which is a nice way of saying illegally.

But wait! Acting chairman of the zoning board Gregg Bucci (because the actual chairman of the board has to recuse himself because he has a "counsel relationship" with--wait for it...--Al Capellini) has an argument to make for the applicant.  Just because there is no "record" of an application, approval or permit for the change to church use and increase the parking load since 2005, when the applicant took title of the premises, that doesn't mean the records weren't lost or stolen or misplaced. 

Dear reader, the video below is not theater of the absurd.  This is our Zoning Board of Appeals in action.  According to Mr. Bucci's reasoning, your neighbor can legitimately--it would seem--claim that they didn't illegal convert or build the structure next to your house.  The problem is that the approval and permit was lost, or stolen, or misplaced.  The onus of proof of existing occupancy, use and parking conditions is not placed on the applicant; Yorktown places the onus on neighbors of the applicant to prove that Yorktown records are complete?  The landowner making application and the planning department, planning and zoning boards can just invent their own narrative--arbitrarily?!

Last note: at the end of the video, please note that I literally LOL at Mr. Bucci's assertion that perhaps they didn't do it illegally.  Perhaps I stole the records and perhaps there's no collective memory of any such conversion in the neighborhood and perhaps Yorktown governmental records.  Perhaps.

I encourage you to watch the whole hearing (a couple hours) on TV.  This link is the schedule and the ZBA hearing will be replayed until 8/8/13

Be afraid.