Good evening.

Please take your seats.

Welcome to the February 24th, 2026 meeting of the City of Neuroshell Planning Board.

I do have two adjournments on the agenda to announce.

The first adjournment is item 2.1, application PB 26-2023 by Guild Capital LLC for site plan approval to construct a single family dwelling on premium point road block 50 lot 1 in an R110A zone district.

That is items been adjourned until further notice.

And then also item 2.3 application PB 18-2025 by Ferdinand Martinetti for site plan approval to construct a two-family dwelling at Congress Place.

Block 976, lot 54 in an R2-7 zone district.

That item's been adjourned to the March meeting.

So if you are here for either of those items, they will not be heard this evening.

At which time we will then open up the application to comment from members of the public.

If you are here to comment on an application at that appointed time, you can raise your hand.

Weingarner begins, and I think we're going to bring back an old tradition with uh some of the DOZ applications where we walk through uh some of the elements of the case uh for everyone's awareness.

This project of 570 Main Street has frontage on Main Center in Leroy.

The app is proposing to construct a mixed use building with ground floor commercial and 504 dwelling units above.

In conformance with the city's affordable housing requirements, our baseline requirement for affordable housing is a 10 percent set aside of this project at 70 percent of the area median income.

Additionally, the applicants proposing 371 parking spaces, 104 of those are self-park and 267 are valet.

There's an additional 47 parking spaces that will be included in this project that will be reserved for public parking.

The project also includes an open space area that will be available to the public during daylight hours.

The projects in the DO2 overlay zone in this zone, a development standard three project needs to have uh minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet and a minimum lot frontage of 150 feet.

This proposal exceeds both of those as of right based on these parameters, a 24-story building is permitted.

The code also allows additional height uh through a community benefit bonus and for development standard three for this project, an additional four stories are permitted, and the applicant is seeking those four stories and proposing to achieve those floors through municipal parking and publicly accessible open space.

This project uh has gone through several iterations over the last year or so and has been reviewed through several rounds with staff, our consulting architects and planning consultant.

While we have a number of boilerplate uh conditions for this application, there are many others that have been drafted this evening uh that are specific to this particular application.

This project is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan as well as the subsequent recommended action plans for the downtown overlay zone.

The board's purview in this case is a determination on the proposed site plan regarding architecture, circulation, utilities, lighting, and things of that nature.

An environmental review was conducted for this application pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act and concluded that the proposal will not result in any adverse impact on the environment.

With that, I'll turn it over to Mr.

Weingarten for his presentation.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the board.

My name is Mark Weingarten.

I'm a partner in the law firm of Del Bello, Denell, and Weingarten Wise and Wheedaker, and it's my pleasure to be here this evening representing Crossroads Center LLC in connection with its request for site plan approval to permit the construction of a 28-story mixed-use building as uh it was uh relayed to us by uh your uh director of planning uh Kevin Kane.

I'll try not to uh repeat those things that are in there.

I know we have been before you a few times.

We have our full team behind us.

Following me will be our uh we have our full architecture team here, John Setra will speak to you from Cetra Rudy with regard to the plans and Nick Totarella will briefly summarize some of the traffic and parking information that has been requested.

We're trying tonight to be responsive to the questions that have come, et cetera, during the process, as we've been before you a number of times.

If you are familiar with the applicant, all state ventures, uh, the principals, Michael and Abraham Jeremiah, are here with us tonight.

Uh they are fully committed to the City of New Rochelle.

You are all aware that they built the uh 16-story arc at 64 Center Avenue, uh, the Altier, a fully a 40, 65 unit building, and they have fully leased at 8 Westchester Place, the Allery, uh, the 27-story residential building at 33 resident Westchester Place.

They are very committed to investing in New Rochelle.

Uh they have a great track record.

They are a uh company that uh has had much success, much more success with its retail in its mixed-use buildings than many of the others in the downtown.

And they show their continued commitment to this city by now trying to go for the next project when vote frankly representing many of the developers that have been looking at New Rochelle.

Many of them are on the fence now as to whether or not to go forward.

This company continues to go forward and believes in the market in New Rochelle.

If you look over at Westchester Place, we believe that it is an example of someone who turned the back alley into a beautiful location with wonderful retail, with affordable housing, with market rate housing, and again, they are very proud of the work that they have done here.

Uh Mr.

Kane described the uh zoning, etc.

I'm not gonna go back through that.

The application was filed all the way back on October of 2024.

Uh it required the reallocation of units from DOZ 1 to 2.

Uh we wrote, talked about the reallocation with full uh environmental reviews that were done with respect to that.

Uh since that time, we have uh, you know, we, for example, with regard to the traffic that you will hear from a moment from our traffic engineers.

There was a trip generation study that was uh from Langan Engineering from uh our group, which analyzed the traffic impact of the requested reallocation at that time.

Since that time, we have reduced the amount of the retail as well as the number of residential units, which were originally studied, and our traffic engineers at Stonefield, who you hear from shortly, have now supplemented those studies as well, and those are in the record.

After much work with administrative staff and numerous submissions, we appeared at the planning board last March.

There were a series of comments from your board and the public.

Rather than proceed with the typical 90-day approval process, which has accompanied all of the other towers built in the DOZ under the form-based zoning, Allstate felt that many of the comments were reasonable, and rather than rely on its legal rights, agreed to hire a new architectural firm to take a fresh look at the project and attempt to satisfy the stated concerns.

In addition to hiring a new architect with a new vision, Allstate met with the Halland School across the street, as well as three separate meetings with representatives from the Board of 25 LaRoy to discuss modifications to their concerns.

The main concerns voiced by the neighbors were reducing the unit count and commercial square footage if possible, enlarging the building setback from 25 LaRoy, creating public open space, reallocating some of the loading and resident parking on LaRoy to center, preventing queuing issues from our garage back out onto the public street, and helping fill the need for municipal parking in the neighborhood.

As a result, and many months of work, the building was pulled back to 30 feet from the LaRoy lot line, which created an area for a public open space and public park between the buildings.

Changes were made to reduce the visual impact of the building to its neighbors.

The unit count was reduced by 41 apartments.

A subsurface municipal parking level was added to help satisfy the existing parking demand in the neighborhood, which, in addition to our own required parking.

At our presentation to you last month, there were questions regarding the modifications to the building and its impact on rents.

Again, there is no impact on rents from these changes.

The market rate rents will reflect the market and the affordable rents are statutorily required.

The truck loading was shifted away from LaRoy, as well as much of the resident parking access and egress, which is now allocated to Center Street, and Nick will go through that with you.

The entrance into our garage on center was significantly enlarged to accommodate more cars waiting to be picked up or parked, and therefore the retail square footage was reduced by over 60 percent, so that that significant need that was talked about by the public to make sure that the queuing cars would not go back out on the road was accommodated inside off the street and inside underneath the building.

We presented this plan to the board at your last your meeting last month on January 27.

On February 13, we submitted a letter from our architects responding to comments received from city staff and the park board.

A seeker compliance and parking memo from our traffic engineers was submitted.

A wind study and a revised set of engineering and architectural plans were also submitted.

There have been some last-minute comments from members of the public criticizing the seeker review, the number of parking spaces provided, the traffic studies, the shadow studies.

We believe that all proper procedures have been followed.

All required potential impacts have been fully studied, and the Board is in position this evening to make a final determination.

I point out what may be obvious to some.

There is a difference between failing to study something and disagreeing with the conclusions drawn by the experts.

Every one of the issues that you have brought before us has been studied to this point.

And again, there can be difference of opinion on them, but there are expert opinions in the record which satisfy and supplement and talk about why this project is permitted under the laws of New Rochelle.

I will also mention we tried to meet with as many as we could.

We tried to deal with as many of the issues as were raised.

It is very difficult for us.

It is impossible to deal with those who take the position that they don't want anything built.

We have nothing to negotiate with those people as we want to build the project.

But to those who brought us issues that were rational and reasonable, we did our best to go forward.

We spent significant this project is not nearly the return it was when we brought in from a financial perspective, and we did what we could to make it reasonable before this board because that is what we were asked to do.

So our team is here to answer any of those questions that came in more recently.

We know there's been some uh things, not going to go through all of them.

There were a bunch of letters that came in.

I heard understand there were a few of them that even that came in as late as a few hours ago.

So if there is anything that is outstanding, we would be happy to answer those.

So that's my portion of the presentation.

And again, if there are any questions, we'll be happy to answer them later.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Madam Chair and other members of the board.

I'm happy to present this project uh to you all and kind of go through all the all of the issues that we've hopefully uh addressed that have been brought to our attention.

Uh as you know now that Allstate is a as a successful developer in New Rochelle, and right down the street there are three projects that they uh have developed and are occupied and are doing very, very well.

A little bit about Seth Ruddy.

Uh we are a firm uh now almost 40 years old, and one of our one of our areas of expertise is residential design, high density residential design, many, many kinds, all different kinds and and sizes and shapes, and it's something that we feel that we have a passion for, and we're always looking to do something which really responds to the context from which we find a site that we're working on.

So every one of our buildings looks a little bit different, and it's because every site is different, every site has a story, and we try to find out what that story is as we as we go through the design process.

And uh clearly this site has a lot of that, uh, but I wanted to first highlight some of the things that have already been mentioned.

The fact that we you know have pulled the tower and the building, the podium back from 25 Le Roy, because I think what we heard from uh some of the criticism from that meeting that happened over a year ago was something that we thought this makes sense.

We do we want to minimize the the impact on our neighbors, and so we thought let's work with that idea.

Let's pull the the podium back and let's create something there that can be of value.

And what we did by doing that is actually we created an open space, a public open space, which will now exist in in that part of the city where there is none.

Uh the parking was a very, very big issue.

We I think we solved that problem by studying the patterns that would uh take place on Le Roy Street, which was a very narrow street, and how we get in and out of that uh out of our building was very, very important to us.

We also uh created up, as you'll see in the plants, a port cochere off of center, which actually would took it's almost 7,000 square feet, which we took, which had one time in the earlier plan had been uh a lot of parking, a lot of uh retail space.

We've taken that out of the retail program in order to create to minimize the traffic that uh would have would exist, potentially exist with the with the earlier scheme on on Center Street.

And we did things with the building which we thought were unique and could be special because from what what we saw in the in the neighborhood and the community was very, very important.

We happened to be at a point in the city where there are many beautiful Art Deco buildings uh with terracotta facades, a lot of beautiful detailing, which is very, very hard today to re to even you know replicate.

But the materials, the masonry, the terracotta, the colors, those were things that we thought, let's see what we can do with that.

Because we're we're we have a major facade on Main Street, we have a major facade on center.

We the building has really four sides.

And and so it was very important that how we designed the building reflected some of the quality that we saw in the architecture, which is here.

Uh we see all these examples of buildings that are literally just you know a few feet away from from our site.

So here what we did was we said, let's create a building that kind of respects that, which reflects some of the scale of the some of those lower, smaller buildings, but not deny the fact that this is a tall building, 22 22 stories, and this is something that we have to deal with.

But the way that we set the patterns and the setbacks, some of which are all following the requirements for bulk controls for this particular site, was something that was very unique.

We were able to bring the tower to the corner of center and main street and let that go straight up, but it's a very narrow part.

So the building doesn't present itself as a massive structure.

It really is faceted and actually bends and sh in the shape so that you're seeing only parts of the building all the time as you as you walk around.

The other thing that we did was that instead of creating a podium and then a tower, we actually created uh a lower podium and then another setback and another setback to get to tower to sort of rise out of a base which was more in scale with some of the uh again, some of the older older buildings around it.

Uh okay.

Uh the the I think the other thing that we did is we didn't want to create a facade and massing that was very flat.

So one of the things that we love to do when we can incorporate them into the into a residential building is to create bay windows that gives the the the occupant a greater sense and more visibility out to to the street.

And it does a great thing for the architecture because it breaks up the form and it creates a lot of interesting shadows uh and reflections off of the glass.

So you'll see in the design as well, these elements that are worked into the tower from the from the bottom to to the top.

Uh as you go around the building, so now this is from the south on center.

Again, the building uh the podium and the base come to the corner, but then they gradually set back so that the tower actually turns, as you see here in this in this rendering, so it's facing more direct south, which then will create some interesting, again, some shadows that and uh reflections, which we always try to strive for.

Let me talk about the ground floor for a minute, because this was something that was very important uh to the community and also to us.

We want to make a building that doesn't create congestion, you know.

Granted, it's it's a much builder bigger building than what's there, but as you heard before, it's allowed by zoning.

So, how do you do the best that you can to try to minimize the the kinds of negative things that happen uh when you when you build a building like this?

First of all, we took the parking and we broke it actually kind of into two kinds of parking.

We have self-park, which is in the lower part of the basement.

We're going down three levels below grade in order to create self-park for both the residents of the building and also the municipal parking that we talked about.

In order to hide some of the additional parking and work it into the massing, we have a valet parking which is entered off of Center Street.

And this area is about 6,000 square feet.

So it provides adequate space for cars coming in and loading, and it will then the valley system will work with uh uh lifts three three elevators, car elevators that are going to be incorporated into the garage, so there's less waiting uh that is required.

And then the other thing is we did is that there's many in buildings like this, many, many packages get delivered to it.

Where does that where does that FedEx truck or the UPS truck go?

We created a separate space adjacent to the red at the lobby, which is parked inside the building so that those trucks could could park there while they were dropping off packages.

So that took a big portion of the center uh avenue frontage.

However, we wanted to anchor it with retail space both on the on both corners.

So on the LeRoy space, Le Roy Corner, we have a smaller uh 860 square foot space, and then on the main street and center, a larger space was about 3600 square feet.

The other thing that we were able to accomplish here is that on Leroy, in order to minimize the traffic there, there's a ramp, parking ramp, which goes down to the levels below a grade.

Uh next to that, because we've pulled the building away, we have this 30-foot uh space.

What to do with that?

We created what I think will be a beautiful outdoor space uh that'll be open to the general public uh all day, except for the evenings.

So uh now the retail frontage I think is very very important.

So we took that and we took special care to design that so the frontage would have the biggest impact that there's there's an adequate signage there and really highlight that space on the corner.

But as again, you can see that the massing, the way that it works here, it sets back twice actually uh from the fourth floor, and then again, uh, so that it opens up the views because you know, we as we were designing this and we were thinking about the people at 25 LeRoy, that if we could create more open area between that building, our podium, and our tower, this is something that we were striving to uh achieve.

Um this is now as we come around on LaRoy, you can see to the to the right, between between 25 LeRoy and our tower is the 30-foot uh uh open space that's created there.

Parking is next to that, and there's also an accessory uh area there for the short delivery short time deliveries, which you'll see in the you'll notice more in the plan.

But this space uh which will have basically it's open from from LeRoi to uh to Main Street.

We control about two thirds of that space.

So the the rest of it doesn't go all the way through.

This the volume goes through, but the space that we control is about two-thirds of that length.

Here's a close-up view of that.

And the gate will be designed.

Uh we're we're you know, still in the process of design of certain elements, but we want to create a secure place so that it can be open during the day and closed at night.

Now, the facade that faces 25 Leroy was also now we had an opportunity to do something with that facade.

So our idea was to create a decorative screen that would go uh basically worked into the structure of the building.

So that's what you're seeing here.

So this goes from the ground all the way up to the top of the podium.

Most of it is parking behind it, but it's not all vis the parking is not visible through that through that space.

So it's gonna be so there's the concern about looking into the garage, it's not gonna happen.

You know, there'll be some ventilation there, excuse me, ventilation there, but that's that's that's a minimal.

Uh the facade does change a little bit as you go through, but you can see here from the ground floor looking at that with uh 25 Leroy to the left and the new tower to the right, that we think this is going to be a major improvement for people who live in the area.

There'll be a place where you know uh young people can go with their families, uh spend some time and enjoy it.

So this is that that facade that I was referring to, uh, which is the podium, you see the tower above it with a decorative treatment with uh within uh most of it.

There was a part there to the right, which we which is actually on the lot line of the adjacent property 25 LeRoy.

We wanted to continue some of the elements of the design.

So especially during the bot the base, the two stories below uh from the ground up, and then at the very top to continue the line, uh sort of representing kind of like a cornice line above that.

Could I just ask you when you're referring to specific places in the in the renderings, if you could just use the mouse to point out or your referencing so that folks can follow along.

Yeah.

So the uh along the ground floor here, there is a there's visibility into the parking ramp.

Instead of making it a dark parking ramp, we're putting windows in that space, so there'll be some daylight that'll come through that.

This this little structure here will give us access into our building lobby from uh from the park.

This other portion that you see here and this whole area above, we what we've done is that's where the building sits just on the property line with our with our neighbor.

So there we're gonna continue the treatment on two floors from the group from the first floor to the second floor, sort of a similar, uh a kind of simplified palette there uh in the middle, and then at the very top, we continue the we continue the uh the decorative uh panels that uh that I was referring to.

Okay, so uh uh now on looking standing across the street in front of the school, uh more or less, looking toward uh the building and looking toward Main Street on the corner, you can see the the port cochere, a portion of the port cochere here, and the facade of that will also have a decorative screen, so you're not just looking into that space.

You know, it'll it'll be screened both for privacy, but also we don't want the image of the building to be all parking and vehicular, so we want to screen that.

And then next to that you see this little marquee here, which is the entrance, the residential entrance to the building, and the retail beyond that.

Um the the client here wants to create also some very special units.

So uh within this lower section here, there's actually there'll be duplex apartments with double height living rooms that will face the street.

So there'll be very, very interesting kind of uh element that we don't see a lot in New Rochelle.

Uh now I'm sorry about this, but last minute we were asked to include our shadow studies.

So this very, very light, very hard to see.

But this was included in the in the package that we've submitted to the planning uh department.

Um what I can say to you is that the shadows that are cast by this building don't impact any of the historic structures in the city of New Rochelle.

I'm sorry, can we just please allow the applicant to speak?

Yeah, thank you.

You can see, of course, the sun moves.

A 22-story building has a shadow, no question about it.

But excuse me.

But it is, but it is something that's just part of the of the city.

You know, uh buildings create shadows, and there's nothing we can do about that.

What we're trying to do is create a lighter palette of materials using the the use and the colors that of the terracotta, which are yellow and a beige and the buildings, so this more reflected light that's created by these lar this uh this lighter palette.

Uh these are some of the statistics again, which I have already gone over, so I won't I won't bother to uh repeat that.

And uh now I think we're gonna turn it over to our traffic consultants.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the board.

Uh for the record, Nick Tortorella, uh licensed professional engineer in the state of New York and a traffic engineering team lead and project manager with Stonefield Engineering and Design.

Uh so not to rehash too much, but just to run through a general overview of the project.

Our site is located within the city's district overlay zone two or the DOZ2 zone and spans the entire block width on the north side of Center Avenue between Main Street or U.S.

Route 1 to the west and Leroy or LaRoy Place to the east.

Our site is currently developed with approximately 22,268 square feet of commercial retail space and approximately 3,714 square feet of restaurant space with vehicular access currently provided via two separate curb cuts along LaRoy Place on the site's eastern frontage.

Our project obviously proposes to raise the entire site to construct a mixed-use building that will provide 504 residential dwelling units, 4,575 square feet of retail space, approximately 4,000 square feet of publicly accessible open space, and 418 total parking spaces, which will consist of 267 above grade podium level valet spaces, 104 below grade tenant self-park spaces, and 47 below grade municipal self park spaces, which will be available to the general public.

Vehicular access for the project will now be split among the frontages and provided on both Leroy Place and Center Avenue.

On LaRoy, a proposed right-in, right out only curb cut at the northeast corner of the building, will provide access to the three below grade self-park levels that contain 151 total self-parking spaces, which again is about one-third of the building's total parking supply.

The first basement level, what we would call B1, will contain the 47 municipal self-park spaces again available to the general public.

And the second and third basement levels, or B2 and B3 will contain the 104 tenant self-park spaces.

And I do want to note here that there will be a gate between levels B1 and B2 that will restrict access to those lower two levels for residents of the building only.

There will also be access on Center Avenue along this uh building's southern frontage.

Two of the three curb cuts there uh will be located approximately mid-block to provide ingress and egress for the site's valet parking facility, uh which will provide again 267 valet parking spaces in four above grade podium levels that again will be accessed by three separate vehicle lifts or elevators for lack of a better term.

Uh my office conducted a highly specialized and detailed turnover and queuing analysis for the valet parking facility that demonstrates that there will be 14 ground floor handoff spaces, and these will be more than sufficient to accommodate the peak residential parking demand generated by the valet facility during the morning rush, the evening rush when demand is the highest without the potential for a queue of those vehicles to build up where it extends outside of the building into the public right-of-way and for instance onto the sidewalk.

There will also be a third.

Before you go on, just the self park and the valet are both for residents.

Yes, they will both have residential components.

The self park has both tenant spaces and municipal spaces.

The valet is only for residents.

Okay.

And that entrance, that second entrance there on center, is for what?

So the drive drive aisle.

Here is the uh Leroy self park curb cut, right in, right out only.

These two curb cuts here, the building southern frontage on Center Avenue.

These provide ingress and egress for the valet facility only during off-peak periods.

Uh vehicles like an Amazon delivery van, for instance, will also be able to utilize this interior portico chair to access a designated loading space here.

During those off-peak periods, we won't need all 14 of the handoff spaces.

So we've kind of tried to optimize the ground floor layout.

I say we it's obviously our architecture team, not myself.

Um optimize that ground floor layout to kind of mesh the operations.

So when we don't need all the handoff spaces, let's provide an area for these delivery vans to utilize internal to the building, so they don't have to conduct those package deliveries within the public right-of-way.

In fact, nobody would really even be able to see the van at all.

And that's the loading bay on the to the right.

That third curb cut on center.

So the load, so the third curb cut is for truck loading.

That's a dedicated loading bay, like you'd see at a lot of urban facilities.

It's a location where trucks will reverse into the building so that the back of the truck has access to the elevated loading bay, which then provides direct access into the building itself.

Uh that'll be used for things like residential move-in, move out activities and the larger bulk deliveries that can be scheduled ahead of time with the building, again, only to occur during off-peak periods and obviously never to occur two at one time.

Got it.

And in fact, garbage collection and things like that as well and happening through that bay.

I think the garbage uh plan is somewhat TBD at this at this time and has not been finally approved.

But I would say that the two options currently would be to use the internal loading bay so that it would occur off-street, or uh we've actually created a dedicated curb bump out on the west side of LaRoy along our building's frontage that is south of our curb cut, so further away from any adjacent properties, where a garbage truck would actually be able to pull into the curb bump out, out of the travel lane, not disrupt southbound traffic on LaRoy, and conduct garbage pickups there.

Again, I think the final plan is to be determined in coordination with the city or a private carting service, whichever way the building chooses to go.

Can you just indicate with the pointer just where you're talking about?

This is the curbside loading zone on LaRoy here.

And then you can see obviously right next to it, we've maintained the full width travel lane where a vehicle could park in this loading zone and not block traffic directly next to it.

Thank you.

Uh so I'm just gonna I think we honestly covered most of the uh the loading aspects there.

So I'm just gonna kind of transition to the overall secro process and the traffic analysis.

Uh so my office conducted a multi-faceted uh faceted excuse me analysis of the proposed project versus what has been approved in the DOZ2 zone uh as part of the 2015, 2021, and 2024 environmental studies, basically to ensure that our project complies with the development thresholds that have been established by the city throughout these efforts.

Uh the first thing we did was conduct new traffic counts on a typical weekday and a typical Saturday when school was in session and representative of general background conditions in the area.

And those were done in close proximity to our site uh at key intersections along Center Avenue and Huguenot Street that were also analyzed as part of the previous environmental studies conducted for the DOZ2 zone.

Uh those intersections included Maine and Center, Maine and Division, Huguenot and Division, and uh Huguenot and Center as well.

And what those counts showed is that during all peak hours, the 2025 intersection volumes across the board were lower than the existing conditions volumes analyzed in the 2015 FGEIS and the 2024 supplemental FGEIS, which indicates that the baseline condition analyzed in both of those studies was somewhat conservative compared to what's actually out there today.

Uh projections for our current project versus what was approved as part of the environmental studies for the DOZ2 zone.

And what that comparison showed is that our project is expected to generate approximately 5% of the total new vehicle trips that were approved in this zone during the weekday morning peak hour, and approximately 4% during the weekday evening peak hour.

So the traffic volumes proximate to our site in 2025 are lower than the baseline condition that was analyzed as part of the three subsequent environmental studies specific to the DOZ2 zone.

And our current project is expected to generate a maximum of 5% of the entitled new vehicle trips in that zone, which is to say, again, in my opinion, that the proposed project is consistent with the traffic engineering principles in the approved rezoning studies.

Which is to say, again, in my opinion, that the proposed project is consistent with the traffic engineering principles in the approved rezoning studies.

It is not expected to significantly or adversely impact traffic operations on the adjacent roadway network, specifically or including the intersection between Main Street and Center Avenue.

And it is not expected to impact the overall findings specific to traffic engineering as document uh documented in the 2015 FGEIS, the 2021 SDG EIS, the 2024 SFGEIS, and the associated CECR finding statements for those studies, including for the planned conversion of both Main Street and Huguenot Street to two-way traffic circulation in the future.

Can I just ask in terms of the Howland School across the street?

How did you all think about the interaction with the bus and the student drop-offs and pickups there?

Yes.

So we actually were able to meet with the Halland Street at the city's office right behind us.

Outside of the travel lane.

So our proposed kind of arrangement of parking splits the trip generation in two locations.

One is on Center Avenue and obviously one is on LaRoy.

So during the morning, I would say that the peak of the Holland School and the peak of a residential project more closely align, right?

When people go to work, it's generally the same time as people go to school.

So again, those buses operate on the southern curb line.

A majority of residential traffic in the morning is exiting a development, not entering it.

So really what people are doing from the valet facility or even from the self-park facility is they're making right turns out of our site heading toward Main Street.

A right turn really doesn't conflict with the southern curb line on the opposite side of the road.

So I would say that in that sense, the two operations align relatively well.

And the valet parking port cochere, that's right in and right out as well as the No, those will be full movement.

So the curb cut for the valet facility will be full movement.

What I will say is I'm not really sure what the purpose of someone exiting the building on Center Avenue would be to make a left turn hand uh left hand turn, excuse me, out.

There's really just not a ton of destinations to the east of this project.

People will be making left turns into the project.

There's no doubt about that.

They're coming from Main Street and from Huguenot Street.

But again, when you break down the proportion of trips that are destined for the self park versus the Valet, we're talking about, you know, likely around 40 to 50 entering trips to the valet facility in a single given hour.

That's less than one a minute.

Uh and if you look at the volumes on Center Avenue again that we collected in 2025, I'm not saying that there's no traffic out there by any means, but less than one vehicle a minute can be accommodated on Center Avenue, making the left turn into our project without resulting in an unreasonable amount of buildup and where queues could extend back into Main Street or anything like that.

Yeah.

Unless there was a subsequent traffic study that provided that that addressed the concerns.

So in our study, we do talk about the proportionate breakdown.

Again, I'm talking about when you break it down between proportionally between the two parking supplies, you're talking about four let's call it 45 entering trips in a peak hour to the valet facility.

ITE or the Institute of Transportation Engineers publishes that any project that generates fewer than 50 peak hour vehicle trips on a single uh intersection approach is very unlikely to impact the operating conditions of that intersection approach.

Whether we agree or not, it is published by ITE.

That is the basis that's used in our traffic assessment uh in response to that DPW comment.

And again, I I did make the point the left turn volume out of the site, which in my opinion could be a concern of DPW, that is what was in their letter, likely to be fairly in infrequent.

That's just not really a movement that provides access to a number of destinations for residents of the building.

They're much more likely to make a right hand turn out of the building heading back towards Main Street and Huguenot Street.

Was DPW's recommendation that it be right turn out or also right turn in and right turn out?

Both.

And and what I would add to that is if you restrict it to right right in, right out only, you're not really achieving the benefit of splitting the access because then everybody has to circulate the project on LaRoy, which really brings us back to the situation that we started in.

We have designed this and split up the parking supplies to really alleviate that concern to the extent that we can.

Restricting the driveways to right in right out would almost be walking that improvement back, in my opinion.

I agree.

I mean, I think there are there are schools, uh middle school elementary schools that people could do.

There are middle school elementary schools making a left turn down center that could benefit from having that, but I would defer to the city traffic to to make a determination on that.

I wanted to ask about the trash pickup because I know it says that there is a condition that it has to be contained in the building.

So I just want to confirm that if that side pull-out on Leroy is taken for a truck to be loading with trash, that the trash is all staying inside, and it's not going to be stacked outside on the sidewalk prior to the pickup, and it will be walked out when the truck is actually there.

I'll defer to our architecture team on that, but I'm sure we can accommodate the answer is yes, it's all internal.

I'll point uh sorry.

There are three spaces here.

There is that there's uh trash compacting happening here, and there is a reservoir space adjacent to that, which would be adequate enough to keep all of the trash inside when the truck arrives, it opens up and it goes out.

I had a question about the park.

Um you were talking earlier about the fact that the building doesn't own a portion of the park that exits there on Main Street.

So, what is the maintenance responsibility associated with that portion of the park?

And have you discussed with that property owner how that portion of the park would be maintained?

That the portion that we don't own is not accessible at this current time.

So uh Mark can answer the question about the maintenance.

That's subject to the agreement with the city.

We can only maintain what is our property, so we don't have any responsibility with regard to the property that we don't own.

That's just not something we can do.

We we did have conversations with the owner, but there was no uh receptivity to uh adding it to our parkland and and increasing it when we had the conversation.

So there is no access through to Main Street, or there is?

No, there is not at this time.

There was discussion that there may be a redesign of the retail and other things for the neighboring building that might lead to that at some point, but that's not something we control.

Do you have other aspects of your presentation?

Or is that just a couple of cleanup items?

I heard some murmuring in the audience.

We do have a 28-story building.

I wanted to have that in the record if there was any confusion.

The second item I wanted to mention with regard to the parking, you did ask a question the last time, so we did get the information from our client.

We have a very small percentage utilization with respect to the buildings we have already built, which is a pretty good people are asking, do we have enough parking?

At the 64th Center Street uh project that has 144 parking spaces, we have at least 70 spots, which is a 49 percent utilization of the number of spots we built there.

Uh at the LTR, the uh fully affordable building of 65 units, we have rented 19 parking spaces for a total usage of 29 percent of the spaces that we have built.

Could you share uh the capacity of those buildings when you go through the staff?

Well, the the the uh the the eight Westchester L Tier is sixty-five apartments.

And that is that at capacity.

We have rented nineteen parking spaces.

That is a total of the is it at capacity in terms of the apartments that are rented?

100 percent.

Okay.

These are the both both of those buildings, actually, I'm sorry, is 64 100 percent or like 95 percent?

Not 95 percent, we're gonna say, but basically full.

And I'm saying they are using 49 percent and 29 percent.

The new building has had somewhat more.

We've rented the date 110 apartments, and we have parking spaces utilized of 75 have been rented.

But just to point out that even with the deductions that are in your code, the complaints that are going on, we're not nearly using the capacity of the parking spaces.

And I can tell you from an anecdotal basis, there are other buildings that have asked for permission from the city to rent their spaces to the public because they haven't been utilizing them.

Your code is currently heavier for the downtown than other municipalities, and frankly, though we're we're building spaces that are not being used.

So with regard to the parking, I wanted to bring up that last point.

So I'll just bring up one one last thing.

We talked about those who say we shouldn't build at all.

We are still in a housing crisis.

This city had the foresight some years ago to change its codes and change its laws to invite people to live in this downtown, which in my opinion, somebody who does work in numerous municipalities around this county, has been a Godsend.

And it has been a great thing for this city.

It continues to be a great thing for the city, and I hope it continues for one.

This is somebody who has participated in your program, has made tremendous investments in your city and wants to continue doing that.

I hope that momentum continues.

And just to point out as people talk about where we are in the process and what we're doing, and do you have enough parking and what about the traffic?

You haven't even built out half of what we were trying to do at the beginning when it was going on.

You have just started.

And the idea, which is starting, is to create a place for people to come and live.

We've got affordable bills, we've got affordable apartments, we have got market rate apartments, and what happens in other cities, it leads to the type of downtowns and retail and restaurants, they're all starting.

It's starting.

Please don't turn it back now.

We need to go forward so these investments can continue in your wonderful city.

So I'll close with that.

Thank you.

We're here for any questions, and of course, to listen to the public.

Thank you.

Other questions or comments from members of the board on this application?

Yes, I have a question I see on the there's another condition that says that sidewalks shall remain open and available to the public at all times.

It's a heavily trafficked uh foot trafficked area with kids going to school, um, particularly middle schoolers who are walking alone without parents.

Um I just wanted to say if there is an instance where the sidewalk on center has to be closed, if it's happening during school hours, if a crossing guard can be placed there, and I don't know that that's necessarily an issue for the city to deal with, but if Center Avenue has to be closed, and then children are gonna have like kids walking are gonna have to cross the street that a crossing guard be stationed at school times.

If the sidewalk is closed, there's a requirement in the conditions of a temporary sidewalk, and those temporary sidewalk conditions would have to be passed by your public safety officials.

So yeah, I believe that that's covered, but that's certainly not something we would have a problem as part of the conditions.

It's it's an assumption that I'm making based on the language I saw.

Yeah, it says it needs to be buttressed.

We don't have an issue with that.

Okay.

Other comments or questions from members of the board.

Okay, at this time, I'm thank you.

I'm gonna open up this application to comment from members of the public.

If you are here from the public and you would like to comment on this application, do you have a special process?

You got the case.

Yeah, I have a stack of cards here that people have uh filled out already.

If you haven't filled out a card, please know that you can still speak.

I'm just gonna go through the talk a little louder.

Sure.

Um I have a stack of cards here that people have already filled out.

I'm going to go through those.

Anyone who has not filled out a card, you are still allowed to talk, so please don't think uh that you're not going to be given your three minutes of time to speak this evening.

I'm going to go through uh we'll just go through periodically, similar to the way the mayor and council does.

I'm going to identify the first three names so you know who is up next.

The first name I have is Jim Calorin.

The next one is uh, and I please forgive me if I mispronouncing any names, Irma Garcio and then Vince Malfitano.

Thank you.

I'm just saying a prayer for the wake for the Shiva for the death of this proposal tonight.

This proposal needs to be dead.

Can we say dead?

Dead?

Hold up your signs to give me some momentum.

I am uh lived in Maine downtown.

I've been there for 35 years.

I started three tail bill three retail businesses.

I'm honored to try to help anyone in the area, and a number of you know that.

But uh and and it's a shame that, you know, I've been fortunate to talk to a number of these people before this proposal, that the amount of time they spent up here, the development department spends with developers rather than being in the downtown with the citizens and the neighbors.

That's what needs to change tonight in the city of of uh Thomas Payne.

And the new Rochelle model needs to be a model that changes that now.

That form-based zoning is dead, that the inclusion of citizens happens more than it does with developers, and that has not happened for the 11 years that I've been there.

So D to me, and I'll spell out dead for you.

D stands for dump on zone two.

DOZ too, whoever came up with those rocket science letters.

Eight DOZs.

We have had 56 percent of the units, 10,000 people put in 600 feet area in a 10.5 square mile city.

Wow, that's healthy.

Talk about dead and killing people.

E is for environmentally unjust.

Be it the kids walking from Isaac Young who will get hit by a car, by absolutely.

Well, uh, or the Howland School kids or the Leroy Place.

I live at 25 Leroy Place, and I'm president of the Sono Neuro Neighborhood Association.

It's great to see Residents Park here and Flowers Park.

This is about the people taking back the city and pilots for the people, not for the developers.

God bless them.

I hope they have billionaires.

But it's time that people in Rochelle have it.

A stands for affordable home ownership.

I'm the director of the fullest sector for housing, and I'm such a fool because we're last in the country in home ownership.

That should be the priority for Gen Z and for millennials coming through the Michelle High School who can't dream of owning a home and living here.

Unaceptable.

And the last D is dangerous.

The downtown is now dangerous.

When I go down Westchester Place and I see the rats running to Sushi Way and the and and the environmental construction that's going on with asbestos and everything that we've been breathing for 11 years.

This is dangerous.

And the fire trucks, God bless the firemen, they're going around every morning, every night.

And cars can't get through there.

This traffic study is foolish.

So this proposal needs to be dead tonight.

Can everyone say dead?

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Irma and then Vincent.

Irma Garceau, 25 Leroy, 151 Center.

It sounds like Mr.

Weingarten wants us to believe that what is planned for this area is a pocket park, but to qualify as such, that small space needs to meet the following criteria.

Be publicly accessible and welcoming, provide greenery, provide opportunity for respite through seeding, and provide an opportunity for community.

Mr.

Satcher's new design reveals that what they are calling a public open park is just a curved paved pathway from Leroy, possibly connecting to a back entrance of their building.

And it does not extend the full length to Main Street, as they said earlier.

And as you found out this evening, studies have shown that pocket parks make a huge impact in urban neighborhoods, offering much needed relief where public outdoor space is scarce, such as our DO2 zoned neighborhood.

There are many public health and environmental benefits that correlate with access to green space, such as improved mental health, improved emotional resiliency, lower depression rates, uh, lower rates of anxiety, better physical health, and stronger community bonds.

If you walk along Center Avenue, you are familiar with the site of the mostly elderly individuals who sit along the parking lot fence just getting fresh air or taking in the sun.

Can we not provide them a more dignified opportunity to do the same in this proposed park to just sit, enjoy the day, contemplate?

To Mr.

Weingarten and Satcher, we say this.

Go back to the drawing board.

You must do better with your design for this park.

Your multi-million dollar tax abatements are being subsidized by small properties like Beauchamp Gardens Co-op that have seen their taxes rise and services decline year after year.

To the planning board members, we say this.

Don't rubber stamp this design.

You must insist they do better.

The residents of this area deserve better than they've gotten, and we will not be happy with anything, anything less than what we deserve.

In the words of former New York City Parks Commissioner, Thomas Hoving, a champion of pocket parks.

To think big, we must also think small.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Vincent Malfatano, then Christine Harper and Dennis Mirnoch.

Hello, good evening.

Vince Malfutano, uh 45-year resident, an investor in this community in my little home.

Just a little bit of uh thoughts.

Uh last time we were here, I heard they didn't seem to know that uh Huguenot and Main Street were going to be two-way streets.

Um, you know.

And so now I guess they did it, they did a little update on the traffic study.

But I don't know how they did that without the actual configuration in place.

You do know that when you're not becomes one lane in each direction with a center lane for turning, it's gonna be a disaster, of course, as we've seen during snowstorms and other.

We had little hint of what the future holds for our community.

It's almost impossible now to drive from the Costco area up to North Avenue and down to Echo and not take more than 15, maybe even 20 minutes.

So I don't know.

Maybe maybe the engineer, or seems like a nice uh gentleman, can explain to me how the traffic study that they've done has any relevancy when we do not have a configuration that actually presents real world actual experience that they can actually measure.

Or is this just a guess based on some study from I don't know, Norway or I don't know where it's from.

But w that that's a concern to me.

Because right now, as people have mentioned, it's becoming almost uninhabitable as as a as a as a person to get from one part of town to another.

You do know that.

I don't know if you folks are really travel around here.

Maybe you don't.

But for those of us who live down here most many years, we experience this all the time.

It's not acceptable.

And as people have said, the original plans here were expanded.

You've had more population into these zones.

It's become incredibly overcrowded.

And now you're gonna dump another project with another 500 and something or whatever apartments.

It's I don't know where the logic comes into the thinking here.

I do understand the politics.

You have to vote differently, ladies and gentlemen.

You've been electing people who who appoint these guys.

These people are appointed by the mayor who does not have your interests at heart.

Please understand that.

So whether this is permitted by law or permitted by the actions of our council and zoning, understand it's all political, ladies and gentlemen.

These folks serve at the behest of the mayor.

And if the mayor doesn't like what you do, you're fired.

The citizens want better.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Christine Harper and then Dennis Mirnock.

Hi, my name is Christine Harper.

I live at 60 Locust Avenue.

And oh, sorry.

Um, can you hear me now?

You can adjust it down.

You can you can adjust and tilt it down, Turi.

Thank you.

Uh, my name is Christine Harper.

I live at 60 Locust Avenue.

I have been a resident of Neurochell for more than 50 years.

And um, these are some reasons why we do not need another high rise.

I also I work in Nero Shell as well, and I walk to work every day, so I walk around this neighborhood a lot.

We absolutely do not need another high rise.

I mean, we have so many people there already.

And what I currently deal with on my walk is um our sidewalks and parking lots are filled with human and dog feces.

How do I know it's human?

Because I witnessed it.

That was not a fun day.

And um, none of it gets cleaned up.

I walk past it every day, piles and piles of dog stuff everywhere.

And another humongous high rise with dog owners.

I don't think that's gonna help that situation any.

And um, you're uh uh I'm sorry.

The um rat problem from all these buildings.

I have never seen so many rats in my life.

I mean, it's getting really, really bad, and more buildings means more rats, which is not healthy for anybody.

Um the wind tunnels that are caused by all these buildings are ridiculous.

Now, I wear skirts to work.

Imagine trying to walk to work in a dress carrying an umbrella.

It's not an easy feat, and that's just going to get worse.

Um, it blocks out all the sun, all these buildings.

There's no more sun on Main Street.

It's just like a dark, dreary tunnel.

Um, you guys talk about retail.

I have yet to see any of this promised retail.

You have to go to White Plains to buy anything.

There's no place to shop around here.

It's really sad.

And um, you know, all in all, uh I think all these buildings are just turning our neighborhood into like a dark, dreary, rat-infested tunnel.

I mean, it's gotta stop.

We've done more than our share in our shelf for that housing crisis.

I don't think it's irrational to not want another humongous building here.

We just don't have the room for it.

It's not necessary.

Um, that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Appreciate it.

Next is Dennis.

After that is uh Leonard Chavez and Meg Mayo.

Who's next?

Dennis Mirnock.

I apologize if I'm pronouncing that name wrong wrong.

50 Clinton, please.

Good evening.

Uh my name is Dennis.

Uh I'm residents of New Rochelle and local business owner.

Uh I'm here to speak uh about this problem.

Um problem, sorry.

Uh I want to speak about uh parking situation in this area uh because it's disaster.

So me and my wife spend uh around uh one hour to find this parking spot to go to our home.

So who will pay for this time?

You or who?

We spent about one hour every day to find a parking spot.

Uh and we still wait in uh wait least to get uh resident permit uh around two years.

So if we build this uh building, uh what's going on?

I I don't understand.

We don't how how how many times we still wait, you know, at least two years, five years, ten years.

Uh and my second questions uh about situation uh one second.

Uh the development uh claims residence uh one block the entrance.

Uh but uh if you look to uh Charles Street, uh there is one Clinton Park, uh two Clinton Park and and the leaf.

And every day I saw uh that uh we have a traffic problem with the wallet parking.

They block every time.

Uh and I see this uh problem every day.

And uh this is Main Street, Central Street.

We have a lot of problems with this.

Nobody is thinking about it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Leonard Chavez and Meg Mayo, and then Jenny Freeman.

My name is Leonard Chavis.

Uh I am an owner and resident at 543 Main Street condominiums.

My husband and I have lived in New Rochelle since 2009.

When we purchased our home, we thought we were getting a place where we that would be ideal for retirement with nearby shops, restaurants, and a genuine sense of community.

We expected there would be some further development, but nothing like what has transpired over the last 10 years.

We certainly did not expect it to become a poor substitute for New York City, an asphalt jungle with multiple high rises like the ineptly named Clinton Park.

To be clear, we are not opposed to all development.

We think that the Madeira on Center Street is an ideal height that doesn't overwhelm the existing neighborhood or cast it into shadow.

The proposed 28-story structure at 570 Main Street is quite simply a bad idea on so many levels.

It does not fit with the current neighborhood.

It would cause major disruption for a number of years, and that would just be the construction phase.

As the latter two projects were being constructed, the developer showed little or no concern about its neighbors on Westchester Place.

From the timing of their construction noise, often before 7 a.m.

and after 6 p.m., to the street closures and the dust and cement spray that ended up on our vehicles parked in the 543 Main Street parking lot.

We were told that if we submitted a receipt for car washing, we would be reimbursed.

But the reimbursements never happened.

And giving up, we ended up purchasing a car cover.

The worst of it was the noise, the constant jackhammering, which we believe may have been, may have had a detrimental effect on our building's foundation.

Also, the street or sidewalk in front of the atelier and the ailerie has been ripped up for no fewer than 10 times over the last two years.

There was a beautifully landscaped alley walkway that connects West.

Okay.

Finishing up.

Yes.

If you have it written, you can also submit it to us.

There was a beautifully landscaped alley walkway that connects Westchester Place to Huguenot Street, which has been rendered unusable as construction on the ailery continues.

As a retired senior citizen at age 70, I am seriously concerned about quality of life issues in downtown New Rochelle.

We have entirely too many vacant storefronts, not nearly enough greenery.

If a tree or tree grate gets damaged due to negligence on the part of delivery trucks, the city does nothing to remedy the situation.

We need a much better balance to our downtown.

And unfortunately, I don't believe this developer has an interest in doing so.

Thank you.

Next is Meg Mayo, then Jenny Freeman, and then Marion Whittaker.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Good evening.

I'm Meg Mayo, and I've lived for a long time in the residence park neighborhood in New Rochelle.

I'm speaking on behalf of the board of the Ms.

Mayo.

Sorry.

I'm speaking on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Residence Park Neighborhood and Civic Association.

We have opposed and continue to oppose this unneeded building, which in our opinion will not benefit residents of New Rochelle.

However, we realize that construction is inevitable.

We want to express our continued strong concern regarding the negative impact of the construction and the building on traffic circulation, parking and traffic spillover, surrounding neighborhoods in surrounding neighborhoods, population density, wind patterns, shadows from buildings, dangerous school traffic congestion, and lack of green space.

These concerns are borne out by what has happened during the period of development in New Rochelle, in which, despite all the assurances and promises of the developers and the government with whom we have met on many occasions, there have been and continue to be major disruptions in the lives of New Rochelle residents without any apparent improvements in the quality of their lives.

We would like a moratorium on further development until these concerns can be adequately addressed.

I also have a specific question with respect to concern about traffic circulation.

We ask whether construction and completion of the new Main Street two-way circulation will be delayed until completion of this project.

As most of the ongoing building construction in the downtown area takes full or partial traffic lanes, thereby allowing only one train of traffic.

I'm very familiar with the traffic patterns.

Despite any studies that are done, I myself am familiar with the traffic patterns.

I'm very familiar with the lack of any meaningful commercial development on Main Street.

And my observation is that those conditions will not be improved and in fact will be further exacerbated by the cons by the construction of this building, unless our concerns are adequately addressed, and we ask that you please listen to our concerns and address them in your deliberations and voting.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Jenny Freeman is next, then Marion Whitaker, and then the next speaker after that will be Matthew Werner.

These make me so nervous, sorry.

Good evening, Chairperson and members of the board.

My name is Jenny Freeman, and I live at 25 Leroy Place.

We are at a critical juncture where the city's reliance on outdated planning assumptions is directly threatening our community's safety and quality of life.

This project continues to be based on a decade-old study that is simply not relevant for today.

A generic study conducted years ago cannot possibly account for the cumulative impact of the dozens of towers that have since risen.

We are being gaslet into believing that the traffic we sit in every day doesn't exist on paper.

Because of the glaring conflict between the city's internal generic data and the specific alarming findings of our own traffic consultant who presented here at the last meeting, a new site-specific environmental impact study is legally and ethically required before this project moves one inch further.

What the applicant has provided is not a full traffic study, but a compliance memo built on a chain of assumptions.

The sample size is too small.

There are inconsistencies within the document itself, and it is unbelievable for any of us here that the conditions have remained unchanged since 2015.

This week's snowstorm is a perfect example.

Whether impacts are not the same as they were 10 years ago, you cannot believe that approving a building based on data that is outdated can be justified.

I'm not a planning expert, but you can see from me and everybody here what we're living in and experiencing every day is really challenging traffic.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Marion Whitaker, then Matthew Werner, and then Serge Vector.

Hello, Mary.

Okay.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Right.

So good evening.

Um I'm Marion Whitaker.

I live at 25 Leroy Place.

I'm here to talk once again about the 570 Maine project, why this project still is problematic for the community in the DO2 zone and beyond.

First, I would like to say we congratulate New Rochelle on the announcement of Governor Hochel having restored funding for the link.

At Enough is enough group that I work with, we have supported and continue to support projects that make real contributions to the New Rochelle community, whether it be for genuine affordable housing, senior housing, or something that's substantially benefits the public.

However, this 570 Main Street project, even now with most recent design, remains what it always has been: an unnecessary 500 now 500-unit Behemoth luxury tower, with only a minimum number of affordable housing units that are not affordable to the average universal universal resident.

And by the way, also has 133 deficits in parking, which will add to our problem about parking.

Okay.

So I've lost my way a little bit here, sorry.

That this piece, this this housing is now being squeezed into a plot of land that is way too small for its size, with few benefits to the public interest at this stage of New Rochelle development.

And then instead its existence would instead pose deleterious effects on our community.

Let me go back for a minute to Governor Hochel's most recent meeting with Mayor Ramos Herbert and quote something that the mayor posted on her social media.

We talked, quote, we talked housing, growth, and doing development the right way, unquote.

Okay.

So we and 600 other people who we are representing in this meeting through our efforts with gaining petitions, uh, ask in that spirit of doing development the right way.

Why would the planning board approve a project like this?

We asked this back in March 2025, and we're asking it again today.

Almost a year later, about a project that only seems to benefit the developer and not the residents of New Rochelle.

Unlike what unlike what uh their lawyer said.

Um, why would we approve a mammoth project again in the area of DO2 where the city said in a council meeting on video in December 2025, they recognize this area of DO2 was oversaturated.

Yeah, yeah.

Where it was already known to the city in 2021 from its own traffic capacity studies and at that time that the intersections of Maine and Center were already operating in unacceptable conditions at peak hours with ratings of LOSE or F and additional development was expected to have significant negative impacts on the traffic flow in these intersections.

We all know the same conditions existed at the time of the 570 Main Street Project was first proposed for application review in 2024, and then when an attempt was made to pass this project through in early 2025.

Indeed, now our group had to push to obtain the existence of a traffic study that was estimated to be done last June 2025 by the developer chosen consultant, and we received this only on 217-26, and it does not appear to be a full-site specific study, and was done one weekday for seven hours and one weekday for three hours, apparently a total of more of just ten hours.

In the world of traffic studies, this signifies an inadequate sample size.

Even though limited, the study shows a trip generation of 82 to 137 new trips during peak hours.

Now that's that's not without the possibility of construction.

And finally, the opening of this building, uh, the generation of cars and trucks in and out of Leroy Place, trying to make a right turn, and those cars and trucks entering in and out of Center Street.

And you have generated a traffic um magnum.

I'm sorry, our mag Magadon, traffic magadon, I'm trying to use the Armageddon Armageddon.

And the park magadon.

So anyway, thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Matthew Werner, then Serge Vetcher, and then Tandy D.

Watts Jones.

Hello, everybody.

Uh Matt Werner, resident 25 Leroy Place.

Uh-oh.

And uh thank you, everyone.

Um, I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Uh so basically there is a whole bunch of things that I could talk about, but people have been hitting on that back and forth.

But I will point out one thing.

One reason to turn left on to center is to actually avoid all the traffic congestion on Maine.

And I do that all the time.

Um, to my first point, uh vibration and noise.

I mean, that's going to impact the uh the uh the health of pets.

It's gonna impact people who work at night, uh, people who work at home and the students that are across the street at the Howland, which um those students are uh special uh disabil disability students.

So there's a little bit more consideration there, and I'll hit on that in a second.

The second is the ventilation of fumes coming from the parking garage.

Uh as of 2021, New York State has a constitutional right for clean air.

And uh looking at the New Rochelle website, New Rochelle actually is a clean air champion of New York State.

So I I I failed to see how putting this 28-story building with all the construction and the garage ventilation is gonna, you know uh create clean air, a clean air environment.

Um to the actual Halland School, um, New York State Environmental Quality Review Act SECRA.

SECRA states that under SECRA, the city must take a hard look at impacts on vulnerable populations.

This development site sits less than 50 feet from a state-approved special education school serving children with autism and other disabilities.

Construction noise, vibration, dust, and blocked access points for up to two years are not minor inconveniences.

They directly interfere with educational access and safety.

If the environmental impact study did not specifically analyze impacts on a disabled students and mitigations tailored to them, then the review is legally deficient.

Also, this will create a corridor that will function as a construction trench between two large structures, emergency access for both residents and disabled school children, must be analyzed at peak construction staging, not in theory, but in real logistics.

Yes, max.

And when a city knowingly approves a project that uniquely burdens the schools serving disabled children, including those with sensory processing disorders, it must ensure reasonable accommodations are built into the mitigation plan.

For those children, two years construction is not temporary.

It's a significant portion of their developmental window.

So this is not contextual infill, it is vertical compression into an already constrained footprint.

And finally, if this project moves forward without a disability sensitive plan and a thorough construction logistics review, the city risks approving a project development that has not met its legal obligation to fully elevate impacts on one of its most vulnerable populations.

So thank you so much.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you.

Many, many have spoken at the March 25th hearing and today about all the environmental significant impacts that uh affect our daily life, whether during construction uh of the proposed 570 Maine or during the uh you know the subsequent daily life that that uh the project would entail.

Uh one thing that underpins, or one key aspect that underpins the entire environmental impact uh assessment is the concept of density.

As proposed, this project will constitute the densest building ever uh constructed downtown.

Uh as a point of comparison back in 2015, uh 2021, the city did uh evaluate the impact of density, and uh the decision was made to concentrate all the densest projects in DL1 zone.

I think many of you are on the board and heard some proposals in that zone.

Uh that's where all the the the big the biggest, the the tallest, the the most uh densest buildings were supposed to go.

Um in theory, uh 570 Maine could potentially be placed by the DOZ DOZ rules in DO2.

The location, particular location of DO2 that this zone is uh or this project is located, however, is right on the corner of the southwest corner of DO2.

Um in fact it's so far away from the downtown core that it is closer to the end of DO zone, right?

In fact, you know, we had we saw the uh slide, uh I think it was uh uh on page uh SPA uh 106 uh looking up Center Avenue.

That uh perspective is from the perspective uh by the church, and that's that that that is outside of the DO zone.

So we're placing the the tallest uh well, not the tallest, the densest building, 570 units, right, or 504 residential units with the immense garage below it in the zone that at this point stage in time no longer supports this level of density.

In fact, Commissioner Salgata was here a couple of uh months ago presenting to City Council the idea that the very zone that this location is located in subject to the residential moratorium.

That zone needs the pause.

The city council has already declared lead agency for that entire area, so I'm curious to hear how that conflict is going to be resolved.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is uh Tandy D.

Watts Jones, then Bob Viner.

Uh Itali Pizante has yielded his time time to Bob.

The next speaker is Tandy D.

Watts Jones, then Bob Viner.

Itali Pizante has yielded his time to Bob Viner, and then Raya Mallet after that.

Good evening.

My name is Tan Deeway, D.

Watts Jones.

Uh Davenport Loves New Row, Enough is Enough.

I begin as I did nearly a year ago.

We are not sardines, and we do not wish to live like we are.

Density and its derivatives are at the core of new row enough is enough objections to 570 Main Street and further building, absent evaluation, planning, and redress.

In contrast to the preceding years, developers are not urban planners.

The latter consider city land as a relational whole, anticipate needs arising from development, and create urban spaces that are ecologically sound and inviting in an aesthetic of green space and design.

570 Main Street needs a different, more spacious new Rochelle address.

The revised proposal continues its massive size, 28 stories running the entire block on center between Maine and LaRoy, parallel to division between Maine and LaRoy Place.

Within this short square block of the DOZ II, two 28-story sky rises and one medium rise have been built since 2022.

This block is a subset of a 600-foot radius area in which 56 percent of the city's new development has been stuffed.

Our extended neighborhood is primarily one of low and medium-rise buildings.

We object to another skyline, sky rise imposed on the character of our community, especially one that will usurp the sunlight and sky from smaller buildings.

Density of housing brings density of cars traffic and air pollution.

Traffic congestion along center and main streets during peak hours has increased, resulting in long backups, more idling, more fumes.

Nor can the city rely on car sharing result.

I'm sorry, I lost track here.

Nor can the city rely on car sharing or a carless downtown as significant resources anytime soon.

From 2022 to 2023, New York State monitored New Shell's air quality for various pollutants, naming associated health risks.

I quote Traffic emissions are a major source of black carbon and nitrous dioxide and represent a public health concern.

The study mapped new shell areas of persistent elevated pollutants, among them nitrous dioxide, the one most proximate, one block south and one block east to the area of concern here.

This pollutant extended over a long swath of downtown, with small areas of fine particulate matter and black carbon also persistently elevated.

In the two and a half years since the study, Clinton II and Madeira added 742 units and 791 garage spaces to the block.

And within that 600-foot radius, several other high rises, compounding construction and traffic-related pollutants.

We need an updated air quality study.

It is not a ploy for residents to seek a moratorium on downtown development in DOZs 1 through 6.

We take our health, safety, and quality of life seriously, and we want city government to do the same.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Bob Viner and Itali Pizante has yielded his time to Bob and Raya Mallet is after that, and Nicholas, I can't read this last name, but Nicholas has yielded his time to Ray as well, and then after that is Mary Velez.

Thank you.

Unlike many of my friends and colleagues here, I'm not personally opposed to development.

In fact, I've co-developed myself.

I've developed a student housing project with more than 600 beds.

I've been involved in multifamily investing and several developments.

But good architecture does not excuse poor adjacency.

After reviewing the entire application, including the site plans, elevations, zoning diagrams, one fact is now beyond dispute.

Followed immediately by a 20-story tower on top of that 90 feet.

So in other words, the developer and its design team is proposing a midrise building with a high-rise building on top of the midrise building.

If you look at this building and you measure it, it's approximately the height of a football field, and it's wider than a football field.

So residents who face south in 25 Leroy will be looking up at this mass, this incredible mass, straight up.

And if you look at the presentation that the architects have done, and I've attended all the meetings that the uh the design team and the league team said that they had to deal with our consultations, I asked continuously, give us a rendering of the building from the center of 25 Leroy looking south.

And they did produce one diagram.

I don't know if you can bring it back up.

I think it was section it was uh page 15 of the deck, which showed the north facing wall of the building that faces our building, but it looks like it was taken 500 feet away from that building.

It's completely misleading.

All the other renderings of the building, all the close-ups, if you'll notice, only show a quarter of the building.

The rest of the building, the wall, the mass that everybody is going to have to face is not shown.

And so I have a real problem with the way this has been presented.

And contrary to some of the statements of those presenting for the developer, uh they have not accommodated all our concerns.

They've ignored uh the request that that I've made that they they show what this looks like to the planning board, because you guys have to consider this and consider the impacts, and you haven't even seen it.

It hasn't been presented to you.

And so look, this is not an argument about protecting views.

We know from uh our council, we know from others that we've spoken to.

Views aren't protected uh under uh most zoning laws.

There they are in some cities, but they're we understand that they're not.

So this is not an argument about protecting views, it's about egregious shadowing.

It's egregious, a loss of daylight caused by a massing choice that maximizes the zoning envelope without meaningfully mitigating its impact on existing residents.

So I've spoken to the architect, I've I've I've made comments to the design team here, and I've presented alternatives.

I said, look, if you look at RXR's project immediately north of us, there's two towers.

One is on a podium, one is on uh a separate mini podium, but the two towers are separated by a sufficient amount of space that light comes through.

That won't happen here.

This is a block.

I want to reemphasize, it's a football field straight up from our building.

It's just unacceptable under any design principles, under any aesthetic principles, under, I mean, massing is important.

I haven't heard anybody talk about what's what's with this massing.

You haven't asked any questions about it because you haven't been presented a clear picture.

So I think the building already incorporates a transfer slab.

It allows structural loads to shift between the podium and the tower, meaning alternative massing strategies are possible.

As I said, I I've I personally suggested uh split towers on the podium.

I've also suggested a form of what's called porosity, or uh a big window in the middle of the building so that light can come through.

The design teams and and legal teams responsible, oh that's that's too expensive.

That's going to impact our our returns, our return on investments.

Clearly, the developer is making a choice, knowing that there are alternatives that they would prefer to maximize their returns than address these issues.

And you know, these are these are significant issues.

These are these are permanent and unalterable changes once they're done.

So I'd like to finish by asking for I want to make three requests to the planning board.

Number one, please, please ask the developer to produce a required a true north facing elevation and contextual rendering from Leroy Place showing actual adjacency.

Two require a building section clearly illustrating the spatial relationship between the podium, the tower, and 25 Leroy Place.

That so-called pocket park will maybe have one hour of sunlight a day, if we're lucky.

Maybe there's some rats.

Maybe there's um you know, maybe there's a jungle or something where under the shade something grows, moss grows under the bottom.

I don't know.

And finally, require at least one alternative massing study that introduces some of the vertical porosity or the tower elements above the podium.

So at least you understand what you're going to be approving, because in this form, it's it's an atrocity for the the residents of 25 Leroy.

So these are not radical requests.

They're the minimum necessary for this board to fully evaluate the reality.

If you could wrap up your comments, pardon me.

If you could wrap up your comments, please.

Yeah, I have you I don't see the time clock for Eatle.

Sorry, you had six, you had your time and then the time from that's not showing there.

Okay.

But look, growth is important.

Housing is important.

Um there is a housing crisis, but beneficial growth growth also has to be careful, contextual, and humane.

And this project has not yet met that standard.

I'll be submitting a supplemental written materials as well.

And I'd like to ask for the the board for their guidance on how to best do that.

You can how much time do I have to do that and when can I do that?

You can provide your comments at any time to the board.

In the next 24 to 48 hours, whenever you'd like.

Well, hopefully the board will take some time to review all of our comments and consider this seriously.

All these people here are not, this is not a game.

There's a lot of people here are very, very critically impacted by this project.

And despite the fact there's been a year and some consultation and some changes, which I applaud.

There have been some good changes, they haven't gotten there yet, in my view.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Next is Rhea Mallet and Nicholas.

Again, I apologize, I can't read the last name, but has yielded his time to Rea.

After that is Mary Velez, and after that is Christopher Mangello.

Um Mr.

Kane, I'm sorry.

Also, um Andrea Brown yielded her time.

I don't know if she filled out a thing.

But she I did not receive it.

Okay, thank you.

Hi.

My name is Raya Mallet.

I am an attorney with the law firm McCarthy Fingar, and I represent the board in residence at 25 LaRoy Place.

Um, Madam Chair and members of the board, thank you for the opportunity to be heard tonight.

What you're hearing tonight from everybody in this room aren't just quality of life issues.

What I'm hearing and you're hearing are the adverse, significant adverse impacts that occur with because of the disproportionate impact, which you've also heard about what's happening in this 600-foot radius in the southern historic part of New Rochelle.

Um also just heard from Bob Viner um Bob Viner of a desperate plea with all do respect Bob for mitigation.

This is what CECRA provides with all due respect to the planning department who has recommended to you that there be a negative declaration.

This project demands a positive declaration, and that's all we've been asking for since March.

And we have a submission in the records submitted to this board on March 25th, which it still remains part of the record of this application.

The reason why this board must declare a positive issue, a positive declaration is the disproportionate impact and the 423 residential units in this building that were reallocated to the DOT zoning district from the DO1 zoning district.

There has not been an environmental study of the significant impacts on the community that you're hearing tonight because the number of maximum residential units has been exceeded.

What was studied in 2021 is being blown out of the water, and nobody is paying attention to that.

And the people and residents of New Rochelle here are begging this board for a pause to hear what's happening.

In 2015, when the city first adopted the downtown overlay zoning code, it examined the potential environmental impact for a 10-year build out which projected a total of 5,500 residential units in the newly created district with only 2900 in the DOT district.

Now you know better than most that the developers had their hearts set on building in the DO2 instead, even when there were no more residential units left, and they kept getting reallocated.

So by the time of the 2021 amendments, the number of residential units approved in the DOT district was 4,512 instead of the 2900.

When the 2021 amendments were approved, there was a corresponding environmental study, which you heard about tonight, pursuant to CECRA about the again the projected build-out and the projected build out for the DO2 in 2021 was a maximum for 5,342 residential units.

And then the CECRA findings from this city say the following on page five, and I'm going to quote it.

But this proposed building at 570 Main Street will result in the threshold for this individual DOZ2 to be exceeded again, but this time by 423 units.

So let's think about that.

423 out of 504 units is 83.9% of the units in this building that you've heard accurately described as the densest to be built in New Rochelle are beyond the maximum threshold study in the 2021 environmental statement.

Approving this by a negative declaration as business as usual would explicitly contradict the city's 2021 secret findings.

As you know, one of CECRA's basic principles is public transparation and transparency.

It is not online, it's violating the public open meetings law to not have it posted 24 hours before this meeting.

Nobody in the public, has anybody here seen the entire meeting?

Uh, the entire application, it's not to be found.

But it's there, you have it.

We haven't had it.

So I'm basing my comments on the slides that I saw a month ago and the information tonight.

And that shadow study demonstrates that 25 Roy Place will be cast in permanent shadow at what appears to be 1 p.m.

every single day of the year.

That is enough of a significant adverse impact to demand a positive secret declaration, in addition to the disproportionate impact, so you can evaluate what mitigation is possible.

It also seems from the slide presentation, I know we heard an outburst earlier that because it seems that a number of the historic buildings or sensitive sites will also frequently be cast in shadow.

Again, I don't know if I've seen the whole study, but I would request a map where instead of having a list of the sensitive sites to the side, they're actually numbered so you can see where they fall when the shadows go on the page.

I I could not find that.

And this is really important because as you also heard from Mr.

Viner, we really can't understand the adverse impacts of a 28-story building, which is three football fields high and a block long, what that's going to do to the surrounding community.

Real briefly, because we didn't we don't have the traffic study, I don't think in its entirety, we have yet to re-engage our traffic engineers, but we would like them to review it.

From what I saw on Thursday, I can't imagine this is a whole traffic study.

It's the memo from Stonefield from that nice man who seemed to um speak tonight.

But our engineers, Michael Morris Associates testified last year, which you also heard by Marion Whitker tonight, that the capacity analyses for the four studied intersections along Main Street are already operating at unacceptable levels of service of ERF.

And that's during the AM and PM hours, but the applicant's memo that I looked at seems to indicate an even higher adjusted trip generation for the peak morning hours than the original proposal.

So there is something here, plus the Department of Transportation that in the state required a full traffic study for this building, and I don't know that it's been done.

That was required, I think, in 2024.

The seeker review done by the applicant's traffic engineer also does not take into account, he calls it a secret review, but it doesn't take into account the actual number of residential units that will exist in the DO2 district.

Similar to what we talked about earlier about the disproportionate impact on page five of this, it only cites the projected development of 5,342 from the 2021 plan.

It's not looking at actually what's gonna happen.

You may also recall, I will be very fast, that our traffic engineers' conclusion included that since the residential units in the DO2 were increased beyond what was expected, and that the complementary uses such as retail and office space were decreased.

This decrease in complementary uses may force residents to travel farther, making alternate travel modes such as trains and buses between various uses less attractive and less likely to be used.

All of this needs to be studied.

Before concluding, I just want to highlight that the applicant is also seeking zoning variances, which I didn't see discussed.

It seems that it wants zoning variances in order that it can build all the way to the property line on all three streets that it's fronting, even though it's going to be the biggest building in the area.

The reason it gives in the application, unless I was mistaken, is that it says that it's quote, in keeping with the existing structures to be demolished.

So if they're gonna build this huge building at minimum, they should be following the current code and not ask for variances to take up more sidewalk space that the public needs.

Thank you.

Next is Mary Velez.

I'm just gonna say my final sentence.

I'm so sorry.

I just didn't want to repeat anything that's been said.

The applicants themselves have highlighted that the number of landmarked historic and Art Deco buildings in this area.

Um they they showed a slide earlier that illustrated that 11 of these buildings are in the area.

If you look at that slide, they are all within one block of the site.

At the same time where we have 11 buildings that are so significant they were highlighted by the applicant.

At the same time, the majority of all new residential units as a result of the downtown overlay zoning district are also built in that one block area.

There have been 10 new buildings, all within 600 feet, essentially two blocks or so of that area.

The downtown overlay zoning was meant to create a thriving community, not disproportionately negatively impact one selected neighborhood in all of Newarchell.

It is no longer working as it should, and it is incumbent upon this board because you have the power to do this as lead agency to pause and evaluate the significant adverse impacts of this of this project and mitigate those impacts as you're required to do under secret to the greatest extent possible.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Mary Velez, then Christopher Mangello, and then Paul Michelli.

Hello, everyone.

My name is Mary Velez, and I live on the city um sorry.

On 168 Under Avenue.

I am I do not have anything prepared.

I'm not someone here that has any statistics readily available.

I'm just a mom.

I'm a working mom, and I'm here because of my son.

I'm here because instead of spending time with him right now, I'm fighting for him.

And I'm sorry, I'm getting emotional.

I'm here because I think about his future.

I came here from New York City because they want a better life.

And instead I come and all these buildings are popping up left and right.

And I think about how is the schooling gonna be in the future.

It's gonna be with overcrowded classrooms where he can't get the education that he needs.

Is it gonna be so hard for him to be outside and have fun?

We need more parks, we need more uh after school programs.

We need things that help our community.

We don't have that.

I can't even walk to a park for him other than the library because any playground is too far.

It's not right.

I feel like granted, it's a beautiful building, but it needs to be somewhere else.

And it could be in their many words, not ours.

We have way too many buildings, and it's just too much.

Enough is enough.

It's just too much.

I think that we need to take an account of people that actually live here on a regular basis and travel and walk.

We need to think about that because for my life to change because more quantity uh uh in the in the neighborhood than quality, it's not fair.

I worked hard to invest and get an apartment here in New Rochelle, and instead of getting rentals that just turn people around and you know, from fast money.

We need more home ownership, and that's not right.

That's all I gotta say before I start crying again.

Thank you so much for your comments.

Next is Christopher Mangello, then Paul Michelli, and then uh Jeremy Scheer.

Good evening.

Thank you, Chairman and the board.

My name's Christopher Mangello.

I lived and operated a business in Neurochell for approximately 25 years.

Good evening.

My name is Christopher Mangello.

I lived and operated a business in Neurochell for approximately 25 years.

I want to acknowledge that many residents have already spoken about traffic, parking, air quality, shadows, and density.

Those are all real serious concerns.

But I'd like to offer different perspective.

One based on a long-term lived experience in this city.

Explain why this board's independent oversight matters so much on a project of this scale.

In 2009, I personally met with then Mayor Noam Bramson and manager Chuck Strome.

They called a meeting for me to stop a church on Main Street in this exact location.

It was about stopping the project.

Noam Bramson begged me.

Please help us stop this.

The major what stayed with me is a major decision was already being discussed privately long before the public had any input.

Earlier in 2006, my music studio on Webster Avenue was burglarized.

The investigation was minimal.

That was my first lesson in how difficult it could be for ordinary residents and small business owners to receive meaningful accountability.

More recently, in 2024, I became involved in a federal litigation against the city and the marshal's office.

After the officers asked if the marshal's office entered the building without proper legal authority.

But here's why I raise it.

Each of these experiences taught me the same thing.

Process matters, oversight matters.

And when procedures break down, residents are left vulnerable.

That's why 570 Main Street and all other projects concern me.

This is not a minor project.

It proposes hundreds of units on a very small parcel.

The densest area of the city, it involves parking variances, increased trip generation, construction directly adjacent to historic structures and long-term quality life of impacts.

When projects reach the scale, informal decision making cannot substitute for rigorous review.

You are the last independent checkpoint.

Many residents don't have the resources to hire attorneys, file lawsuits, or challenge decisions after the fact.

They depend on the board to insist on complete studies, enforcing conditions, genuine transparency before approvals are granted.

Once this building is constructed, it cannot be undone.

So I am respectfully ask you slow this process down, require missing analysis.

Hold the applicant to the highest possible standard.

Not just for those of us who are here tonight, but for everyone who will live with the consequences.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Paul McCelley, then Jeremy Scheer, and then Ogeneff.

Good evening, everyone.

I'm actually born and raised in this city and uh actually on Center Avenue, so I've seen a lot of changes in the last few years, but the changes are not for the better.

Um first of all, this is a suburb, not a major city to be building something as massively big as this as this building that's proposed.

As many people have stated already, it's it's it's it's overkill.

And uh it might be downtown New Rochelle, but the area that it's in is one lane going in each direction.

There's not enough, there's not enough for anything any of this.

And I'm gonna keep it short and sweet.

I don't need the whole three minutes.

Um if this is such a housing crisis, then please build this somewhere else.

Build it in your own communities, cities developers.

We don't want it, we don't need it.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Jeremy, and then Olga and then Michael Yellen.

Hi guys, I'll be brief.

Good evening.

My name is Jeremy Sher.

I represent ownership of uh and management of retail space uh adjacent to this building in the condominium directly next door to the proposed development.

We support smart growth, new residence and new investment can strengthen a neighborhood and help all businesses thrive, but development must be responsible to the neighbors who have been there for years.

There's three issues that must be addressed.

First, parking.

Retail cannot survive without adequate access.

If onsite parking is insufficient, we need a clear plan for additional municipal parking nearby.

Without it, both existing and future retail future retail will struggle.

Second, the shared alley in Pocket Park and the adjoining wall must be properly looked at and repaired and maintained.

We need to have sufficient lighting, it needs to be clearly looked at.

We need to look at that wall, make sure that the building is finished all the way through so that it's proper for the tenants who live in the building.

We want this area in this corner to succeed, but it must work for the whole block, not create new burdens.

Responsible planning today will protect long-term economic vitality for everyone.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comments.

Olga is next, then Michael Yellen, and then Kelly Gill after that.

Olga here, 25 Leroy, please.

Whereas I'm kind of coming in really with only a few personal comments.

My husband and I have been driving around New Rochelle and walking around New Rochelle.

It has a lovely community here.

The people are great.

And I'd kind of, when we moved here, I kind of wanted to keep it that way.

And I'm afraid that with all the building that's going on, it's going to become another New York.

Now, I love New York in my time, but we moved.

So we did come here from New York.

So you can kind of get the idea that I prefer it here.

But driving around New Rochelle has been a fabulous problem.

Very entertaining.

We wind up going in circles.

You know, and you get stuck on Center Street.

You come out, we come out of Leeroy Place, we go out into Center Street, and it takes us about 20 minutes some days to get to be able to make that right-hand turn onto Main Street.

And coming in and trying to park our car in the Prospect Street Park.

It's hard.

Okay.

But I also very much, I'm an ex-teacher.

And uh maybe that part of me dies hard.

But I look at the Halen School and I look at what happens, how difficult the traffic situation on Center Street is when they kids are coming out and going in.

It's going to happen when you double the amount of traffic going out there.

I really think that's going to be a major problem.

But most of all, once you build this high rise, you cannot take it back.

If you approve it, they start building, we're stuck with it for life.

Not that I'm going to live that long, but you know.

Okay.

Thank you very much for listening.

Thank you so much for your comments.

Appreciate it.

Next up is Michael Yellen, then Kelly Gill, and then Shelley Berlincourt after that.

Good evening, Michael Yellen, 38 Lakeside Drive, and thank you for this opportunity to speak this evening, and thank you for your service.

Once again, you're an in in an slide of that.

He's gonna help.

Thank you, Mr.

Kane.

Can people hear me?

Yes.

Okay, I'll speak more loudly.

Once again, you're in an uncomfortable position because the city's planning policy put developers' interests before all others.

Even as it threatens our health and safety and denies us the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of the redevelopment.

Can you hear me okay?

Not real loud.

Not really.

Don't touch the mic, just speak loud.

Okay.

There you go.

Yelling.

Please stop the clock, Kevin.

Concerning the availability of truly affordable.

Well, actually, let me back it up.

With this hearing and potentially your ex your vote today, a chapter of the redevelopment comes to a close.

You've been asked to approve the construction of 500 more units at a time when the city council has voted to pause development in order to reflect on whether or not the promises made by the previous City Council and previous administration have been fulfilled.

Concerning the availability of truly affordable housing, creation of family supporting jobs, green space, and the opportunities for residents to enjoy the fruits of the redevelopment.

Most of the development downtown is done by low road contractors who don't hire local residents, pay poverty wages, provide no benefits, and put workers and the public at risk.

The applicant before you tonight exemplifies this.

The employment figures provided by Allstate for its three projects, with people which people have mentioned tonight, including including the developer and their attorney, the employment figures that they provide are dismal.

Less than 3% of the work.

The city's goal is to have residents perform 20% of the work.

The city also has a goal of having apprentices work 1,000 hours for every 20,000 hours worked.

In 2023, All State reported 177,206 hours worked on their projects without a single apprentice being hired.

To meet the city's goals, there would be nine new apprentices apprentices working today.

There would be nine Neurochell residents who would benefit from all that comes with a union career in construction.

Voting to approve the plans before you will add fuel to this race to the bottom.

Although your powers are limited, you can help ensure the goals of the city are upheld.

You have the power, you have the responsibility, and now is the time for you to take action to ensure the benefits of the redevelopment are shared equitably among residents.

You can say no to the 570 Main Street developers because of traffic, parking, public safety, and other legitimate concerns, many of which have been spelled out here this evening.

Let them challenge your decision in court.

Step into your courage and your power and say no.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is thank you.

Next is Kelly Gill, followed by Shelley Berlincourt.

And then Sean Wyowatsky.

Okay.

Thank you.

Good evening, Shelley Berlin Court 39 Davenport Avenue.

I I just would like to um say that I agree with the previous speakers today.

We'd like to see good development in New Rochelle.

Consider please some of the mitigations that were offered before by Bob.

And I'd like to yield the rest of my time to another resident, if that's all right.

Yep.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Good evening, all.

Um, my name is Deanna Fuller.

Um this is actually the first time me being in a space like this, so I just I didn't know how it worked.

Um, and with me sitting here, someone actually told me.

So what kind of brought me actually to here is I know that there was I happened to be reading an article in regards to how Governor Kathy Hokel had came in, and then she did the whole grant and trying to connect um basically Lincoln Avenue, Memorial Highway, all of that.

And I started to gauge an interest with being born and raised in a Rochelle my entire life.

I'm still here, um, educated through the school system.

I work for the city school district for 10 years.

Um, I'm now a teacher.

I bet it myself, I now work for New York City DOE.

But I'm sitting here and I what forced me to come is that I feel like I need to be more involved.

Um, I'm currently living in 111 Center Avenue Moldara, um, so I'm going to put that out there in an affordable unit.

Um, and I think what concerns me is that with all of the buildings going up, because I had literally recently put up a post and I said, Oh my gosh, I feel like Neurochell is turning into a borough.

And not to say I have anything against the boroughs.

I work in one.

Um I love New York City.

I love the art, I love the culture.

Um, any given day you may catch me and my daughter out in New York City enjoying it, but there was something growing up in Neurochell special that I enjoyed being here that just made things a little bit different, and I feel like we're changing.

Is change good?

Absolutely.

But I feel like it's too much.

Um, to say that we don't have traffic is like completely ridiculous.

I'm now like detouring out of Center Avenue.

I go around Pellin, what is it, Pelham Road to go to a grocery store or to get to a CVS or to get to a shop, right?

So we are we're definitely out of overcrowded.

Um, and I'm gonna try to be quick because now that I'm getting the hang of this and seeing what's going on in the community, this will definitely not be the last time that I'm gonna be here.

I'm gonna be more involved.

But um, and especially at my age, because when I think about this about home ownership and all these things, do we have a housing crisis?

Absolutely.

Absolutely have a housing crisis.

Is affordable units necessarily going to fix that and buildings coming in to Neurochell?

I don't think so.

I think the conversation needs to be around affordable home ownership, right?

How we're going to provide resources to people who want to own homes, like we want to create general wealth for our children, our children's children.

Um, that we may not have to continue to be going through a revolving circle.

Now that I see where this building is even getting ready to be placed on the corner, so that means that the poetry, if I if I'm right, that means it's the poetry, the po the poetry the poetry corner, right?

We have the bagel shop who has serviced the community for some years now.

A Chinese buffet used to be in the middle there.

So I'm so I'm thinking like, how are you sticking another building?

Right.

How are we going to do that?

It's just going to continue to just be congested.

And this is nothing against the developers.

I think this needs to be a conversation.

Does this make sense?

Some sometimes we do things and it just doesn't make sense.

It doesn't, it does it just doesn't make sense.

And that doesn't say that we can't maybe another part of Neurochell bills something, right?

Um, when it comes down to seniors, they they should be taken care of.

There should be affordable units.

When it comes down to, I consider myself middle class, I have a master's degree, I'm a teacher, and I still can't afford to buy, I would like to purchase a home one day.

And you know what?

Everyone's saying, Well, you're gonna have to go out of never shell.

I love living here.

I can't I can really be honest with saying that.

41 years of my life, this is my home.

My parents graduated Nourish High School.

I went from Barnard to Webster to Ward to Alba Lennar to Neurushell High School graduated out of here.

Why should I be forced to have to leave leave out of Neurochell if I don't want to to go buy home in Connecticut further up, further up state?

Like I don't want to do that.

So I I really feel like we need to start having conversations, right?

That makes sense.

And not and not only within our our com our community, because that doesn't mean that we can't service people who are coming into NeuroShell.

I it's that's that's not an issue.

Do we have a problem with housing?

Yes, but I feel like things need to start making sense.

And I feel like sometimes we do stuff that just doesn't make sense.

It is congested over there.

That there's no way possible that you're telling me if we're driving through neurochell, if you live here, it's not a lie.

It's not we're not pulling this out of thin air, that there's no space and that there's no room, it's not congested, is congested.

The traffic going down Main Street is congested.

North Avenue is congested, and it's congested because we're building these buildings, there are more people coming in.

A lot of them, you don't even have three bedrooms, so it's studios, one bedrooms, and two bedrooms.

Some have three bedrooms.

You're in a two-bedroom with four or five people in it, like keep keep it a hundred.

You look on the paperwork, it tells you who can go in here.

Like, let's have this honest conversation.

We're becoming overpopulated for a town that was not supposed to be not to say overpopulated, but overpopulated.

Which is then's gonna return to I heard a young woman, I think she left.

She's talking about the quality of education.

And again, this is no no offense to people who want to come in.

I feel like this the world is a melting pot.

We should be thinking about that.

But it needs to be strategically done, and it needs to be a conversation.

And it also needs to be a benefit of how is this also supporting the people, I'm sorry, who want to still be here, if that makes sense.

Good night, I gotta go lesson plan.

Thank you.

Appreciate the comment.

Ma'am.

Ma'am, can I ask you to fill out one of the white forms?

I'm sorry, ma'am.

Ma'am, can you please just title one of those slips up here?

Just there's a white slip over there on the table.

Thank you.

Uh next is Sean Wayowatsky and then Nicole Jebinowski, and that's the last I have for the cards.

Of course, anyone else here that's wants to speak on it that they don't fell out of form is it will be welcome to come up.

Good evening, planning board members.

My name is Sean Waywatsky, and I live at 25 Leroy Place.

I want to speak about two things tonight.

Number one, just very quickly, a wind study was requested by you, madam chair, at the March meeting.

We heard it briefly grazed over earlier, but we haven't seen it, whether in the uh presentation materials or in document form, so we can't critique it.

We'd really like to see that.

That was something that was important at the last meeting.

Number two, Ms.

O'Connell, you brought up an important topic in your line of questions at the January presentation of this project, affordability.

When asked, the developer stated the affordable units would be to code or statutory, as said earlier.

To me, that means this building will be the base requirements, 10% affordable units at 80% AMI.

But what does that actually translate to?

AMI is area median income, and it is defined at the county level, so the wealthy areas of Westchester bring up the AMI that we are beholden to.

And that means that these affordable 80% AMI units that are so common throughout downtown require an individual to earn an annual income of $95,000 to afford.

As Mr.

Weingarden mentioned last month, they don't know what the rents will be when this building is completed.

But if the weighted average rents in their alley building are any indication, there'll be 114% of AMI.

So once again, unaffordable for the average New Rochelle resident.

So you may say, but that's a problem with the development code.

That's county HUD concerns, right?

What does this have to do with the issue at hand tonight?

This application.

I'm gonna tell you.

So my question to you is why was this project with the bare minimum of affordable units at the max allowable AMI percentage granted a unit transfer?

Another another project that was granted a transfer was 26 Garden Phase 3.

This project is all affordable, with some units as low as 40% AMI.

A project like this makes sense for prioritization under the transfer criteria, but this project does not.

Bottom line is not only is this project inappropriate for the already overburdened area, it's also invalid since the unit transfer should never have been granted in the first place.

Please vote accordingly.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

The last registered speaker I have here is Nicole Jabinowski.

Hi, I'm Nicole Jabanowski.

I live at 35 Clinton Place.

Um good evening.

I'm here to voice my strongest opposition to this proposal and the general pace of development in downtown.

I'm an educator in New York City.

I moved to New Rochelle in an older building four years ago, and my neighborhood already feels unrecognizable.

I'm concerned about safety, affordability, and quality of life.

First, I have serious safety concerns.

My building's parking lot exits onto Church Street as it reaches Main Street and turns into Memorial Highway.

In the past year, both the second Clinton Park building and the Leaf have opened, turning this narrow two-way street into a nightmare.

The Leaf is a large high rise with no curb space in front for unloading.

As a result, any trash pickup deliveries, moving trucks, emergency vehicles, or double park cars waiting for valet can cause a backup.

The street is often down to one lane, and it's a two-way street, with drivers having a hard time seeing around obstacles, which compromises safety.

Children walk to and from school on this street as it leads toward the elementary middle schools.

It's a danger to pedestrians and drivers and a major traffic accident waiting to happen.

Church and Center Street are very similar, and despite design intentions, more drivers come in and people don't always use the designated spaces due to inconvenience, high cost, and frequent issues with broken garage elevators and other new buildings.

Congestion still occurs.

While public green space sounds great, there needs to be a more thorough analysis of how multiple new buildings will alter the volume of traffic on Main Street.

I'm afraid any new great green space will be impacted by vehicle fumes from increased traffic.

I have seen this happen in the Bronx where I used to teach, uh, where road diets were made without a decrease in traffic volume heading to 95, and now students breathe in the extra fumes on their walk to and from school every day.

The severe congestion is mirrored on Main Street, which will be impacted by the proposed new building.

There's already an active project with Stella 2 that is interrupting traffic and impairing visibility just a few blocks away.

Main Street can be even worse given that car dealerships often have vehicle transporters idling outside, taking up lanes of traffic and blocking visibility.

Congestion here is a challenge for pedestrians accessing the Westchester bus lines as well as students at Monroe College.

Backups in one area contribute to backups further along Main Street.

As for affordability, I will say all of the new buildings are far outside of my price range.

Many are rental only, which leaves little space for people looking to buy and stay long term.

This situation also affects community and quality of life.

I have made friends since moving here who then had to move themselves due to finances.

Many lived in newer buildings, including the ARC.

This doesn't help create community, and it feels like we are a district of transient renters who may have to leave at the first financial setback, of which there are many right now.

I've heard downtown referred to as a walkable city with nowhere to walk to, and that's what it feels like.

Stores have closed without replacements, parking is a nightmare for visitors and potential customers.

Pedestrian safety is a gamble, and construction noise doesn't help.

Enough is enough.

We need to listen to the serious concerns of people who actually live on these blocks.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is Paul Martin, then Chloe Erickson, and then Samantha Sanchez Coano.

Thank you all.

Paul Martin, uh 55 Decatur Road.

Um good evening, board members.

Unlike many here, I don't live in the direct area of the proposed development, but I do go there frequently.

And I've seen the last hearing, I continue to see many of the what the residents here that they've made in other city council meetings, a lot of which makes sense to me.

And so I hope the board takes the concerns of my fellow New Rochelle residents here seriously and takes those concerns when you vote.

And this seems like yet another example of that.

I would also like to challenge a point that the uh gentleman from the project made earlier regarding the parking.

Um he seemed to suggest that the lower uptake of parking spots in recent buildings is a source of lower impact.

And but correct me if I'm wrong, the city council has been talking at least on more than one occasion about the dilemma of residents in new buildings, not actually parking those buildings and parking elsewhere.

And so I guess I what the gentleman is actually suggesting is that the parking deficit is not lower than anticipated, but higher, and it's being spread elsewhere.

And so I think when we think about the impact, um we should consider that, especially uh to those that have ballet services.

Secondly, I would also say isn't the fact that the city council is considering a moratorium in this very area, a tacit acknowledgement that the bit this building and others have an outsized uh impact beyond what was originally studied.

That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is Chloe Erickson and then Samantha Sanchez Kwano.

Hi, good evening.

Uh, my name is Chloe.

And I live sorry.

I don't know what happened with that.

I live at five Prospect Street, and I'm deeply concerned with the new development of the 28 story building, which when I was first introduced to this, what was happening, I didn't even realize it was going to be 28 stories, which just it feels insane.

Um but my apartment, it sits on the second floor next to one of next to um two Clinton, two Clinton, that apartment, and next to my windows is the garage ventilation system.

So I am hearing a constant sound of humming whenever my window is open.

In addition to that, the traffic that drives on Division Street, usually the exhaust fumes from the cars.

I notice after I have my window open, there is like some sort of dirt pollution on my windowsill.

So it makes it hard to want to keep my windows open because of that.

And I'm concerned with a new building, there being even more traffic.

So that kind of takes into account all the stats have been shared about the environmental concerns, which I am very concerned about.

And I work with kids.

I'm going to school for psychology, and the mental health and well-being of children, especially at the Highland School, that is also very concerning for me.

The constant noise is that's a problem.

That is not going to be giving children this sort of education that they deserve to have.

If there's this constant noise, and I yeah, I'm just very I'm very opposed to it.

So I think that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Uh that's the last card I have.

No, I'll also fill out the call.

No, I don't have a phone.

You want my call?

I'll fill it out.

Ma'am, if you could just fill out one of the white.

Okay, you can fill it out after you're done.

All right.

So good evening, everyone, and uh, my name is Crystal Doherty.

I live at 155 Center and to the board.

I am from New York City, born and raised in Brooklyn, New York.

I came up here.

Um, unfortunately, my husband passed away.

But we came because we like New Road Show.

He was from West Chester.

My daughter now attends law school, right?

She's here, raised, we went to Thornton Donovan.

I can go on.

Actually, attorneys are right here.

I live in a co-op and they represented me.

And I'm speaking from the heart from the real.

Because at the end of the day, you talk about quality of life.

You talk about making sure that you come to a neighborhood, a city where you can afford to become an owner.

But we're losing that.

And it's nothing against anyone who wants to come here and have a better life.

But we also need to create a balance.

And this new development, it really frightens me.

You know why?

Because I have been for years asking for just a simple traffic light.

Can you imagine another high rise?

We only have one light.

Am I right?

One light.

And that traffic light is where Main Street.

There's nothing in between.

So what do they do?

We have not even a stop sign.

The stop sign is at Shea Place.

That's it.

So we talk about traffic.

We talk about a school that basically primarily serves those children who have disabilities.

And we also have our seniors.

We have a blended community.

And that is going to really dissipate once this new high-rise building already, we already just overcramped overcrowded.

It's going to take away something that has really made new New Road Shell unique.

But it is becoming so much like New York City.

And it's taking away the quality of life for everyone.

Everyone.

Why?

Because it's becoming so overcrowded.

Someone spoke about the conditions.

The dog poop.

It has to stop.

I can't even find parking in Prospect Street parking.

I have a permit with the rest of my residents here because of the fact that we can't find parking.

We pay for parking.

You know why?

It's underutilized.

Because those individuals who are now renting, they can't afford the parking in those rentals.

They can't afford it.

So what do they do?

They'd rather pay the meter at Prospect Street.

And yet I come home, I work two jobs and 9 31 a.m.

in the morning.

I can't find parking.

And I pay a permit.

So we need to really create a common sense solutions.

Have a conversation before we start to talk about giving someone a permit or authorization to build bigger.

We need to preserve the community.

And New Road Shell is unique, and we need to maintain it and retain it.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chief President.

Oh, I didn't.

And then you and then hi.

I filled out a card.

My name is Samantha Sanchez Cowano.

Do you see it?

My apologies.

Yes, I have it.

I apologize.

Okay.

I'm inside to start.

Yes.

Okay.

So hi everyone.

My name is Samantha.

This is my first time doing this, so I'm sorry if it's a little bit.

Thank you.

I'm sorry if it's a little bit off.

But I live in Prospect Street with my husband.

I grew up in New Road.

I attended Isaac Young Middle School.

I graduated from New York High School, and I eventually moved back after college.

And I just wanted to give you an insight of what our life looks like since moving back.

Um when one and two Clinton Park were being constructed.

I came home to debris on my steps on windy days.

I wake up congested every morning, probably from the pollution in the air that I heard about today, and I failed to see how another luxury tower that'll perpetuate these conditions in the area is serving us.

I won an apartment lottery in 2024 in downtown Nero, and I was so elated because I thought, oh my gosh, finally affordable.

But turns out this affordable parking, I mean unit was actually a thousand nine hundred and ninety a month, and that's before the 400 monthly parking fee, the 100 amenity fee.

That is mandatory, the building-wide water bill that's split amongst the tenants, and the $50 per pet fee.

And I have two cats.

That's not affordable.

That's just a marketing term that's being used to mislead residents.

And if that's how these luxury buildings operate based on the car occupancy number that we heard earlier, it's no wonder that people are choosing to not park in those places and park at the prospect parking lot where me and my husband have a pass.

So speaking of parking, a lot of people have said already, I waited six months for a spot at the prospect municipal lot.

Six months, and today we deal with overcrowding on Sundays, but frankly, any time, risking parking tickets because we can't park in a spot that we pay for monthly.

And during snowstorms, we have to walk to New Rock to park.

I walk in the cold, my elderly parents walk in the cold, and they fell last night during their walk.

And on top of that, they stepped on poop.

And they had to dig up a spot in the municipal parking lot just to park their car again.

So that's what we're living with today.

And you want to add more people and make no improvements to parking and forces to keep parking at New Rock when it snows.

This morning when I was walking on church street towards Main Street to get my car from the neuroshale parking lot.

Um I actively searched for sunlight to stand in just so I can be warm.

Um I actively searched for sunlight to stand in just so I can be warm, and I couldn't find any.

So I ask you sincerely, do we really need more high races?

Well, we are simultaneously celebrating the reconnection of the Lincoln neighborhood to downtown, a community that was devastated by racist urban renewal policies.

We are aggressively gentrifying downtown with units priced entirely out of reach for people who already live here.

The irony is not lost on me, and it should not be lost on you either.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Good evening.

Let's make clear density isn't just about looks, it's about making smarter use of the land we already have.

A single parcel downtown can either hold a few few stories of apartments or it can rise higher, creating hundreds of homes.

Studies show that every 100 new housing units generates over 1 million dollars in additional local tax revenue recurring annually.

This means revenue for schools, infrastructure, and public services without raising taxes on existing homeowners.

Density is a fiscally responsible choice.

And it ensures that Neurochale can remain vibrant, welcoming, and sustainable for decades to come.

The developers have done more than enough due diligence to ensure that they're acting responsibly.

Approve the site plan, and let's continue to build the housing supply our families, our workers, and our children deserve.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Sir, can you just fill out one of the white slips?

Up here.

Thank you.

Yes, if you could just fill out a slip after you speak.

Very happy to.

Thank you.

Um I've heard lots of really good things tonight, and I wasn't gonna talk because there were so many other better things than what I'm gonna say, but I don't want that to be the last word.

I've heard a lot of good reasons to not build I'm sorry, could you just state your name?

I'm Michael Cammer, I live at Nine Vaughn Avenue.

Thank you.

Um I've met a lot of people downtown who I really like, which is a testament to the good part of development.

And and actually I kind of like this building, but as one of the speakers said, it's misplaced.

The plan for a new high-density building downtown comes following years of development fraught with problems, and this building appears to typify them.

Years ago, I thought it was a good idea to bring more people downtown to Nour Shell, and actually it has.

But I also thought it would be a good idea to use union labor and encourage local labor.

Missing from the development we've had is enforcement of union or local labor.

Missing from development is responsibility to neighbors during the construction.

Missing from development has been adequate parking.

People avoid visiting downtown because of the tight parking situation.

And we also heard the problem that it's not affordable when you add it to the rent.

This is a lost opportunity to capture more spending downtown.

This is lost opportunity to create a greater social scene or buzz downtown, as we heard in the presentation.

This is important.

I didn't mention inadequate public transportation.

I just don't see how this would be developed.

So we need more parking.

Please do not approve more construction that would have inadequate available and affordable parking for both residents and visitors.

The presentation says there's plenty of parking.

So why can't I find a park parking space downtown?

The message I get listening to other people is that a grand view for downtown development has broken down.

For instance, too many rentals and not enough ownership opportunities.

The big view needs to be addressed before any new construction is approved.

I was not aware that the city council was considering a moratorium.

If they really are, then I think that this board here has a responsibility to wait until they get a cue from the city council about what to do.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Just fill out a white slip when you're done, please.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh my name is Sharon Footz, Clinton Avenue.

Um, I'm not gonna repeat the there's no need to build this building in this fashion.

Um, I want to address the board and your lack of transparency, um, your dishonesty to this community, um, not only on this issue, but all the other issues in um the development, the overdevelopment, which seems very intentional at this rapid rate that does not consider the people in the city of Neurochell.

I don't know if we're if we think that we're going to somehow be a New York City or if we're trying to outshine the other things that are happening in Westchester.

But this plan and plans like this, we shouldn't we shouldn't even be talking about and um some missteps.

Property 162 Clinton Avenue.

Um I heard someone say, uh one of the lawyers say, um, talking about space and and and the interest of expanding the current footprint from the developers, um, which is about 600 feet, right?

Which would clearly push you into a very, very narrow sidewalk, right, in terms of walkability.

What bothers me is that at 162 Clinton Avenue, where I live and own a home, we have um kind of uh single families and multifamilies.

So I have a 14,500 square foot secondary lot to a house that has 18,000 square feet, and you all are giving me so many dare gone problems about building a multifamily house on my 14,500 square foot lot because of a 500-foot egress.

Now, mind you, the property has 14,500 square feet on an additional lot.

It bothers me when I turn around and I look at these fine young gentlemen in their beautiful suits, and you give them all these allowances to just come and rape and pillage our community in a way that takes away from the wholesomeness of the city of Neurochell that doesn't allow the people, whether they're rentals or to buy to continue to live in the city of Neurochell.

It baffles me that these meetings to you all just seem like checkpoints.

Like we have you all we know that you have to do this.

You have to have community engagement.

But it seems that no matter what, no matter what the community says, you will continue to do the thing that you want to do in the interest of not the community, not the community that pays your salaries, not the community that puts you in office.

You continue to appease big business.

And once they're out of here, after their tax abatements that we never see.

You're we're left holding the bag.

The common person who has to walk around and step over dog poop, who has to, I remember um Aragon before he left in his arrogance, said, I will ensure that you do not see the light.

And I don't know how many of you were here for that comment when he talked about building on top of the library, but if you all are not looking at this in the same way, this city is ensuring that we do not see the light with this over development.

Not only does it need to stop, it needs to stop now.

Search your conscience, look at the people in the audience.

This is not okay.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Are there other members of the public who would like to comment on this application?

Okay.

Hearing none, I will close the public comment and invite the applicant back to the podium to address the comments.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Again, Mark Weingarten for the record.

Um I'm gonna start by saying I've been at this a long time, and we appreciate the genuine concerns that have been stated by the people in the neighborhood today.

We've tried hard here.

It's ironic that this developer is the one who is bearing the brunt right now, when it's the only one in all the years that has made the changes over a period of months and years and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars changing the architecture on this building.

Pulling away from the line from 25 LaRoy, that was such a big thing in the meeting that we had.

They don't tell you that LaRoy was built with a variance right up to the property line, self-creating the issue of the problem of the of the of why there was no setback there.

But they did it.

But now we have to deal with it.

And this particular developer has to deal with it.

We came to you a year and a half ago with a project that complied with the laws of the City of Neurochelle.

And contrary to the comments that have been made this evening, the policy of this city is not made by this board.

It's their obligation to enforce those policies and to carry them out.

Those policies are made by the City Council.

And those City Council brought on this form-based zoning, invited developers to come here and make investment because they believe this was right for the City of Neurochelle.

I heard a lot of comments tonight about comparing this to Brooklyn, comparing this to Manhattan.

I have a better analogy.

My situation, for me, I've worked for 40 years in an office in the City of White Plains.

We have 40-story buildings.

It's thriving.

We're a little bit ahead of Neurochelle as far as when the building started.

But is there a thriving downtown?

Yes, there is.

Is there more development coming behind it?

Yes, there is.

Are there office buildings being built right now that haven't been built in years?

Yes, there is, because they followed a plan and they followed a policy which is adopted by a city council.

And it worked.

And it would be a shame if we turned back.

I am going to have a couple of things for the record that are very important to clarify, because there were a lot of misstatements tonight.

I can't go through all of them.

Number one, there are no variances sought with respect to this project.

I know you heard that from a number of people.

I will say it again.

This is a conforming project, and there are no variances being sought by this project.

What does that mean?

We comply with the laws of the City of Neurochell.

Second, there were comments made, tremendous amounts of misinformation with what SEECER is and what SECAR requires.

The law was followed.

It was stated that you should make a POSDEC.

It's being ignored that there was an environmental impact statement that was done here with respect to all of this development in the beginning.

And it was supplemented some years later when there were changes.

And the requirement now is to go back and identify those impacts and then supplement and give you the studies on the issues.

So what are those issues?

The traffic, you have our traffic information.

You have it on top of the other studies that have been made.

And again, we're nowhere near the full build-out at this point.

Seeker has been followed.

I'd appreciate I gave you all your time.

I didn't say anything.

Please allow me to talk.

I hear a lot of people in the background talking.

I apologize.

This is the one project where Seeker actually worked.

It can't be questioned.

We went through it, we gave you the information, we had a series of hearings with you.

We gave you all of the information you asked for.

We gave you the parking studies, we gave you the traffic that you asked for.

And then, when there were issues identified by the public of concern, we modified our project.

We created a public park.

Some people want greens, some people don't want greens.

And by the way, if there are people who think it should be different, I'm sure there could be some flexibility with regard to that.

But there's a beautiful public park there that's going to live on beyond this by on this project.

I am going to close.

I can't go through all the information.

It's not really necessary.

I find it very distressing to me that my client who has worked very hard in this city and has invested in this city, and it's quite a message being sent to him that he spent all this time and energy trying to make the changes to satisfy and being sat here and being accused of being the villain.

It's just not appropriate.

The good news for us and for my client, this is not a popularity contest.

There are laws in the City of Neurochelle.

They are required to be followed until they are changed.

We submit to you that the record is uncontroverted, that we have a conforming project that is ready to be approved, and we would appreciate if the planning board does the job that it is these members have an obligation to do so when they took their oath and came to take this office.

Thank you.

Thank you for your response.

I I do want to say that I appreciate very much the members of the public who take time out of their busy schedules and their lives to come down and present their perspective and be heard.

And as the chair of the planning board, I think I speak on behalf of all the planning board members when I say that we value your perspectives and we appreciate the contribution that you are making to the future of the city.

So I don't know that it's a fair characterization that your applicant is taking the brunt.

I think we heard a lot of comments uh tonight about the direction of the city overall.

Um that's feedback for staff, that's feedback for our elected officials.

So the comments and the statements that you've made tonight have not been made in vain.

And I do want you to know that city staff and others have heard what you've had to say and take it seriously.

So I just want to add that overlay because it it is about you and the applicant, but it also is about more than you and the applicants.

I agree 100%.

I don't want to discount anything that anyone has contributed here tonight.

With what you said.

I was reacting to the comments that suggested that people will rate.

Totally understand.

And there's going to be a range of perspectives, and we can agree to disagree on a number of those things.

Um there were some things that I think would be helpful if you could address more specifically.

I've taken some notes, maybe other members of the board have taken some notes, we can go through them together.

So you talked a little bit about the park and there being some flexibility around the design of the park.

You know, there may be some opportunities to work with city staff on more greenery or whatever, seeding other types of things in the park to make it something that would be a valuable addition to the community.

It sounds like applicant is open to that.

Yeah, and I believe there will also be an agreement between us with the city regarding the maintenance and the rest of it that's going to be worked out after uh after this process is over.

Very helpful.

Um there was a rendering that you showed that showed the perspective of the building from 25 Leroy.

So I saw that, and yes, it was pulled back and it showed a full picture, but I do believe you had that rendering.

Is that correct?

You it was it was shown tonight, yes.

Yeah.

So I just wanted to confirm that that you did have that rendering and that that was shown.

Um you went through the plan and you talked about the screening that the decorative screening on that portion of the building.

I think your architect um pointed that out and talked about it and did indicate that there was also, I guess the screening is dual function.

It also provides ventilation for the parking.

I wondered if you could maybe come back and just address ventilation for the parking area, whether that would vent into the park area, and how you all have thought about that.

Um, and maybe you can just pull that rendering picture back up while you're speaking.

Sure.

This was the elevation that shows that that entire side of the of the of the building.

And the the decorative doesn't show the entire side.

Let's see it right up to the top.

I'm sorry, sir.

Can you let the applicant finish speaking?

Thank you.

I'll correct what I just said.

It shows the entire uh podium level, which includes the parking.

You can see uh elements of the tower above it.

But this drawing was done specifically because it was requested by our neighbors to show an elevation of this part of the of the structure.

So that's there it is.

Uh there are decorative grills, and I'll go to some of these uh this lower view shows the glass at the first floor.

Then above that, it shows the decorative grills.

I'll go to another one.

This shows more of that elevation of that portion which is in the part which is the parking.

And so you can see the decorative grills there.

There will be some ventilation of the garage that will go through those grills, but it is not entirely open garage.

It is an enclosed garage, and that will have some ventilation going through there.

It hasn't been it has not been finalized.

I will admit that it's not been finalized.

But the idea was that it would be it would be shielded with this with this decorative grill, so you're not looking and not hearing uh the sounds of fans running, running constantly for ventilation.

I'm sorry, this is not a public comment period.

Um I want to just go and then also some of that ventilation would you see here on this elevation here, the entrance to the garage above that is the uh is the the valet parking portion.

Some of the ventilation could also will also be incorporated into some of these vents in the in the facade here.

The idea is that it doesn't look like a garage.

We don't want it to appear as a garage or apartment building sitting on top of a garage.

We're trying to blend it in so it's really concealed.

And so is the ventilation that you are referring to effectively passive ventilation that will take place through those screens, or are there going to be fans or units that direct ventilation into that alleyway area?

Quite honestly, that hasn't been finalized.

But I would I believe there will be some both.

There will be both some passive and some mechanical.

Okay.

Um the ramping, can you just maybe there's an elevation that shows where the actual parking levels begin?

Is it and versus the ramp into the garage?

Okay.

There is the ramp goes to the three levels below grade.

So you're not seeing any of that, you know, in any of the elevations because it's all basically below the low grade.

The elevators that are part of the valet are buried within.

Uh let's see if I can go to this plan.

You see these three elevators here in the middle that I'm pointing to.

Those are the garage elevators.

So the building has four sides.

All of the street sides are protected and it looks like a residential building.

You don't see, you're not seeing large louvres or anything like that.

And I can just go through the elevations one more time.

Here uh on center, if you're looking north toward that corner, you're seeing that you're seeing all glass.

You're not seeing, and as a matter of fact, in this view, there is no garage behind that behind that wall.

There is the the parking is basically like in a doughnut.

So three sides have apartments, and there's only parking in the center.

And the municipal parking, the 47 spaces, um that is fee parking?

No, that will be transient.

Parking.

That'll be one.

The answer to that is yes.

It's municipal parking, it will be controlled in an agreement with the city, and it will be fees paid for the and the city will collect those fees.

Yeah.

Okay.

And while we're on the topic of parking, so you all in your application shared some stats on the parking uptake in your other buildings.

Um, what is the average cost associated with that parking and how did you assess the impact of the cost to the uptake versus need or demand?

They're currently charging the other buildings 225 a month for parking.

At the other location.

Yes, at the other locations that we mentioned the parking ratios on.

Okay.

And then you also talked about the traffic study and the impact of the additional trips from this building not being more than, I think it was like 5% of the overall capacity.

And I guess my question was what's the baseline?

Um, what's the baseline circumstance that you're basing that off of?

And does it take into account the other developments that have been completed in the area?

Yeah.

So what I was referring to is the project-specific site-specific, I will say, for this project.

The trip generation we projected, which again is a member of the public actually said, is a bit higher than the original trip generation that was submitted to this board as part of the original application.

There have been, you know, recent uh data sets published that actually made those numbers go up a little bit.

Our trip generation is a maximum of 5% of the overall trip generation projections for this zone in the latest environmental study, inclusive of residential units, retail, office, public services, community facilities, every single use across the board.

This residential development at a maximum is only 5% of that total.

And one last clarification from a lot of the comments.

Not at any time during the original presentation, not at any point in the report that was submitted, and certainly not now.

I would not misrepresent the conditions on Main Street, on Huguenot, really anywhere in the downtown core, as there not being congestion.

The point of the assessment, the site-specific assessment folding into a larger environmental study is that the trip generation or the magnitude of new trips generated by this project do not materially impact what is out there today or what is reported in that environmental study.

It's not saying that there will not be congestion in the future, because we already know there is some level of congestion today.

It's that it will not be materially impacted by the project given the analysis and data sets and really thresholds that are established by engineering professionals across the country, but also in this region specifically.

So effectively you're saying that it'll be five percent worse than whatever it is today.

No.

Not not and I don't mean to cut you off or correct you.

There are two separate concepts, right?

What was entitled in the environmental studies is one bucket, right?

Let's say a hundred trips were entitled in that study.

What I'm saying is that at a maximum in one, any one given peak hour, we are at five trips, right?

We are five percent of what was approved.

Then you you take a different uh kind of approach to it in terms of the impacts.

And what I'm saying is that out there today there is level of congestion X.

And given the amount of traffic that this project generates, improving the access plan by splitting the driveways onto two frontages so that the circulation is in multiple pathways, not just one.

That level of trip generation will not materially impact level of congestion X.

So it's it's two separate concepts.

Yeah, I guess my question, which maybe you can't answer, is of the hundred that of capacity of which your site specific assess uh study only represents five trips.

Where are we in that 100 from the other development projects already?

I I can't answer that with 100% accuracy.

Yeah.

And just to confirm, uh there was a there was a comment that the application and materials were not posted or publicly available.

Do you want to address that?

We uh submitted our application our it's not the application was that we we submitted our materials on time for this meeting.

I can't speak to what the city did as far as publishing.

I mean, they've they've been here in City Hall that it was noticed, and the materials have been available and they've they've been distributed with you know members of the community already as well.

So I we've received letters, but I I don't think I've had any anyone anyone aside from a certain couple of members that were here tonight um reach out and request them.

But they've been available.

And can we I'm sorry, we're the public comment periods not open right now.

Um can we um just have an overview or or can you address the reallocation of units from DO1?

Yeah, I just want to jump in on that first.

Uh there was a reallocation when this application initially came in.

Umce the time that the applicant submitted the application, there was a uh a large project that had units reserved in DO2, and those units are no longer reserved.

So those over it's about roughly 250 units are back in the pot.

So the um transfer of units is substantially lower than what the applicant had previously requested.

What is it?

What is the transfer of units?

Do we know I'll have to try to pull those numbers together.

It's it's somewhere around 100.

Okay.

And were there any uh additional part comments that came from their last review on the revised plans?

I believe the the they provided their initial comments, the revised drawings, there weren't any substantial changes from the initial in terms of park uh and and they were satisfied with the revisions.

And I thought maybe if you could just address some of the comments around the massing and some of the discussions that you had with neighbors around massing.

I wanted to address a comment that was made about the inaccuracy of these drawings.

I will guarantee that they are accurate.

So everything that you're seeing here is correct in terms of relationships of buildings to other buildings adjacent or across the street or whatever, these are I stand by them.

And the integrity of those these images are a hundred percent.

What was your other question?

So so I took the comment to be more about not being able to see the full context or impact of the building because the renderings are a portion that sort of centers on the podium and doesn't necessarily reflect the next door view of a 28-story building versus them there not being accurate.

I'm sorry if you've you heard that comment that way.

Um but my question was actually about the there was a there was a comment made about potential suggestions for changes to the massing to allow for more to less shadowing.

And so my question was did you all consider massing in your redesign and what was the thought process around that?

Sure.

When in some of the meetings that we had with some the the neighbors, they could they brought up this question about creating two towers, creating an opening between the two, and there was no way for us to accommodate that.

The site, although it's as big, is not that big.

It's not as big as the RXR sites that were discussed where the two towers can sit substantial distance from one another.

It's not that it's just not that big.

What we did though is that we in when we started to examine the massing, and I'm sorry the screen is frozen on on me here.

I wanted to I wanted to show how we thought about those issues.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Okay, good.

So it's very interesting that this block has very unique uh attributes that were given in the bulk regulations, and the corner of of center and main was considered a significant corner, which allowed for a skinny portion of the tower to go straight up from the street.

So what you're seeing here is that portion, which is allowed by the bulk regulations for the block.

Beyond that, then there was a series of setbacks that were required.

And you see you see this this example in other buildings as well that have been built in NeuroShell where there's a podium.

So we took that, we took that and then also kind of augmented that with additional setbacks above that.

So the tower does not jump from the from the podium straight up, but it has a series of setbacks that build out.

That was done for some practical reasons as well, because we needed to go vertical to get all of the all of the valet parking in.

So we didn't want to have the parking exposed on Main Street or on center or even on LaRoy.

So apartments wrap that.

So what you see here, what I'm pointing to with the pointer, is that that portion of the building which sets back required setbacks, however, but then have those are apartments.

And so when you're looking at this building, you're not looking at a parking garage.

You're looking at a residential building with a series of setbacks.

And the towers which go up.

Now we instead of creating a tower which was uh simply you know, massed uh in one way, we actually took the idea of the building and shaped each section of it to respond more to environmentally what was happening.

We had the significant corner on main and center, uh which I talked about, but then as you came uh let's say south uh toward uh LeRoy, the podium needed to be at the street wall.

There that's required by by the zoning bulk.

But then as the tower went up, instead of it being square to the corner, we we chamfered it and cut it back again.

So that's what you're seeing here.

So this portion of the building is actually creating another setback.

Um sorry, I don't have another good image of that to show you, but uh I think it was something which was very significant and a change in from what the other buildings that have been built in Neuroshell are doing.

Now you're seeing this side.

However, the tower is kind of like a zigzag.

So even the side that faces 25 LeRoy is doing the same thing.

It's just reversed.

There was a view, a top-down view, a drawing view.

Maybe you can just show with the pointer, like the there was actually a top, it's not 3D, it's not three.

It was literally your top-down view.

But if you could show the setbacks and the massing.

There's a little plan view here.

There was a bigger one.

You have a bigger one in there.

You yeah, that one.

Isn't can't doesn't it show there?

Or not really?

Not really.

This is the oh, let's see.

I see.

Eric, do we have the other other plans in here?

Do we have any of the other plans in here?

Okay, let's see.

I think we have plans.

Yes, keep going.

Yeah, okay.

So here, this is what I was talking about before, where the residential units are wrapping the garage.

Okay.

Then you go through, you go as you go up, the the building sets back again.

So you can see some of the setback, additional setbacks here and here, which are I think pretty clear on the renderings.

Yep.

Then they keep going, and then the tower actually takes this shape.

So there's not a what at what floor is that?

This is about the eighth floor.

Yeah, starts at the eighth floor, eight to twenty-six.

So this is so 25 Leroy is back here.

Okay.

So the tower is not going straight up the entire three-foot ball fields that people were talking about.

It actually actually transitions so that it leaves this large open corner above the eighth floor, and then there's also a recessed courtyard here.

So we may we did this intentionally to try to not have long continuous walls facing in one direction.

That would have been which is like 25 Leroy, basically, it is the full length and it goes straight up from the from LeRoy to Main Street.

And then, you know, this this form continues, and then at the top there's a logia, uh two-story loggia that sets back again, and then above that is a uh green roof with amenities.

Right.

Okay.

Do you have other questions?

Yeah.

You mentioned earlier in the um presentation that some wind studies have been accomplished.

Winds come from different directions.

They could either be between buildings and speed up as they go between buildings, or flat against the face of the building, and then uh forced down.

I'm wondering whether there's anything in the design of the project or that that considers those type of uh effects.

I've I've designed many very tall towers.

And uh the thing that is critical is try to break up the wind.

If you break up the wind, that goes a long way in and achieving a better experience uh at the street level.

The building itself, the tower itself will have a series of facets which I mentioned before, which are these bay windows on the facade itself.

That breaks up the wind.

The shape of the tower, as well as breaking up the wind, and it's not necessarily all creating a downdraft.

The the additionally, the two cutouts that are basically this one which is facing uh center and the other one which is facing 25 uh LaRoy, as well as this one, is doing is all doing the same thing.

It's breaking up the pattern of wind, so it's not just going straight down.

You can see that 40-story buildings which are coming straight down to the ground.

This is doing what you're saying, where the wind can get so strong at the bottom that it will push the doors open.

So we don't have that situation here.

And that would also minimize the impact potential of emissions coming from the um from the parking facilities?

Right.

We're going to do everything in our power not to have any exhaust ventilation facing 25 LeRoy.

A different question.

There has been several comments about noise and vibration during construction.

Right.

Vulnerable uh populations nearby.

Written comments we received indicated, given the depth of the structures, uh foundation work that you'd have to perhaps have on-site vibration monitoring during construction, giving the sensitivity of nearby buildings.

Just wondering what your response would be on that.

Excuse me.

Yes.

All of those monitors will be provided.

However, we also in designing those levels below grade did not go right up to the property line against uh 25 Leroy.

So we're stepping back.

We're actually excavating a little bit less to have some more cushion between their foundation, their structure, and our structure.

You have enough geotechnical information to feel pretty certain about this would work.

I mean, in this most simple fashion.

It's pretty effective.

And during construction, what limits, and I think you are going to be working with the city on this, but just for the public's use and for my own information, how are you going to reduce other types of noise and vibration on that vulnerable population which is nearby?

I think that was an excellent point, and I think that is going to have to be looked into further.

I don't have an answer for you on that, but certainly, you know, we understand the population nearby.

We understand that construction does create dust, does create noise.

There are certain hours which are during construction is allowed.

Sometimes the city may give permits to builders outside of those hours.

If they want to limit it, though, the city has the power to do that.

We were very concerned about the school across the street.

That is why we had meetings with them to understand what their schedules were and how we could be a good neighbor and work with them during during the process, during the time that the building will be built, as well as later when it is done.

Other questions from members of the board?

Hi.

Good evening.

Thank you for the presentation and thank you to the public for all of your comments.

I wanted to ask a couple of follow-up questions.

One about the hiring plan to meet the 20 percent requirement and all the also the apprenticeship requirement, which I know are in the code.

But if if there is a struggle to meet those requirements on an existing project, which I was raised, but I'm not certain, how are you planning to address that on this particular project?

Well, I am not aware of any of the past projects and how the how it was met or wasn't met.

So I'm not can't really comment on that.

But I think that having worked with this with this client now for a year and a half, that I think they want to do the best they can for the city.

And if there are requirements for them to hire certain people in the in the in the city of New Rochelle, they will do it.

Is there a plan in place?

And is that plan applicable on the other project?

And how is that carrying over onto this project?

Again, I can't speak to the accuracy of the comments that were made earlier in the hearing.

What I can say is that we followed the rules of the city, and that when there were issues with not reaching the goals or the goals of the city and the policies, we had requirements to communicate with the city and go back and forth with the city as to what we were going to do and how, and why, what was the reason we weren't meeting them, and then what would be the what would be permitted as far as not meeting the particular goal if there was a particular reason.

So there is a process for that, and it has to be followed by anybody who is building here in the city.

Thank you.

And the reason may be because the cost to rent a parking space within within their home property is too is too costly.

So you mentioned that at the other building it's 245 a month, and I understand there's 225.

225, thank you.

That there is financing involved, and so you are putting together estimates on what these costs are and what the revenue is going to be and how you are going to repay it.

But if if you're not getting the subscription rate on the parking requirement on the parking available because it is too cost prohibitive, and people are finding other other resources to park for cheaper.

How are how are you going to manage that?

I am just going to say that I'm not sure I agree with the assumption.

I'm not sure that's ever been studied or had approved it.

We believe that the people who are coming into the downtown, and I represent a number of the developers in the other projects that are out there from what I have been hearing as well.

Is that there are people who use trains, there are people now who use Uber, there are people now who use ride chair, and that there is just in these newer buildings less people who have cars.

And while we understand that there is an existing condition currently in the city where there are issues with people who have multiple cars, where they live, they don't have a place to put them in the municipal lot.

Remind you that this is a project that is going to add to the municipal parking stock, not take away from it.

And we are meeting all of the requirements of the zoning, which we believe is actually heavier than use, and we will likely come back to you again and ask for relief from that to maybe even be able to rent those spaces out and make them more municipal spaces and go through.

We won't know that until the building is finished.

We are certainly allowed to do it.

I can tell you that I've heard from my client before to tell you that that 225 that they are spending, they lose money on the spaces.

That's how expensive it is to build underground parking, structured parking.

It's an enormous expense and it keeps growing, but we do it, it is a requirement, and that 225 doesn't even cover it.

It's just trying to balance out what can people pay for their apartments, what can they pay for their parking and putting it there so people can use it.

But uh that's just the situation.

Again, I understand that there are people who have a position and they say we think this is what is happening, and it may very well.

I just don't I don't think anybody has any proof of that.

Is there an affordability adjustment on that 225 for the affordable AMI units?

I don't I don't have exact numbers.

There is a level of discount that goes to the affordable unit.

I just don't know what the number is.

Yes, there was a few comments about the left making left turns onto Center Avenue coming out of the parking garage.

I know the city had sort of stated that it would be better to have a write-in right out, but I think after hearing some of the comments from the people from the public and also that it would create this kind of circulation around South Division onto Leroy and then back onto center just to get into the garage.

Is that something the city can revisit um and potentially looking at allowing the the left-hand turn?

Absolutely.

That the spirit of the comment was exactly that.

Yeah.

Um are you planning to allow dogs in this building?

The answer is yes.

Okay.

And I I think that's a really attractive thing for renters.

Um, but with that comes some responsibility.

Do you have any sort of registration process for the pets that you are having?

And is there any kind of like waste uh dog waste um tracking system that you are going to have in the building?

It's an interesting thought.

We have not we have not gotten to that point yet.

Okay.

Uh with the hopes that residents will be responsible dog owners and clean up after their dogs.

Do you have staff on site who is kind of looking at the sidewalks on any kind of regular basis to providing bags clean up?

Yeah, providing bags, things like that to help because I know there is a lot of dog poop in the downtown.

I do see it.

Um it's something that I I think you should consider allowing, you know, having trash cans or you know, bags around for the dogs.

I am sorry, I at one point was even discussed that this park could be a dog park.

Uh that idea was shelved for a while, but uh, you know, anything is possible.

I think uh enjoyment for all people would be great.

I think it's I think it would be more appropriate.

Yes, agreed.

Yeah.

I could I make can I make uh one more comment about shadows and daylight?

Please.

As a part of the as a part of the package that was to submit it to the city, there was a detailed shadow study that was done.

And I made a comment about that the shadows from this building are not falling on any of the historic buildings or the ones that were pointed out as a part of that study.

I stand by that.

If you look at our proposal and you see that map that's on the same page as the as the rest of the shadow studies, and I'm sorry they were so lights very hard to see.

You can pull it back up to reference why you are making that point, actually.

Here.

So you can use the pointer just to indicate.

This this map here is the is a map that shows a significant buildings where there was concern about shadows.

Our building does not project a shadow on any of those buildings.

Just given its orientation where it is relative to all the others.

So that's the point that I wanted to make.

The other point is that buildings create shadows.

And I think the residents of 25 LeRoy for 25 or 30 years, or whatever it is, had the benefit of windows on a lot line facing south, southeast.

Buildings get built and shadows are created.

However, this building is not creating shadows on the sidewalks where it's going to get built.

It will move around.

And this in the morning, the sun will be on LaRoy.

And during the day, it will be on center.

In the afternoon, it's going to be on Maine.

That's the that's the nature of sun.

It moves around.

And there will be light that will go into the open space as well.

But it was going to it's going to be limited.

Does your shadow study reflect that space between the buildings?

It does.

So I'm sorry, this is so small.

You can use the pointer.

Okay.

Thank you.

So this is showing three.

That's actually showing four seasons.

Spring and fall are the same.

So that's one, and then summer and winter.

So this one on top.

I'm sorry, I'm trying to read it myself.

This is spring.

So this is the this is the our site here shown at 9 a.m., 12 and 3.

So you can see that, of course, the sun is moving, and you can see how the all of the shadows that are in the morning are projected west.

At 12 o'clock, it's pretty much even.

And then at 3 o'clock and later, it's projected east.

And of course, at this and during the summer, it's the it's the least in shadow that's created.

And as you would expect, you can see by how much of an area is dark that the winter shadows are going to be the most significant.

However, all of these shadows are not created by our one building.

It's a combination of all the buildings that are there, whether they are five stories or 25 stories.

Understood.

I think in in some previous applications, we have talked about construction staging.

Can you talk about the construction staging for this project?

And what in what regard?

Where material delivery of materials, where materials will be kind of held off-site until they come onto site.

We don't have a specific plan laid out yet, but I think that our developers and builders would be happy to work that out with the city.

And I think because of the proximity of the school, we also want to be sensitive to that.

There is a requirement of a construction mitigation plan that has to be created after this process that the city and the DPW and everybody has to sign off on.

All of those issues are taking place.

That goes on with all developments.

It's a requirement.

And I think we have spoken before about not having drop-off delivery of materials.

Are you able to work with the school to get those hours?

That will be part of the plan, and that is part of the discussion we had with the Halland School when we met.

And we're going to be working with them on their, particularly because they are across the street as to timing of those things so it doesn't interfere with their pickup and drop-off.

Okay.

Thank you.

When do you think construction would begin and when do you think construction would end?

Well, I think our client thought it was going to start a couple of years ago.

But uh probably it's going to take another year for the construction.

It would be another year or so for the construction drawings to come in and get approved and go through and get up at least at least a year, could be as much as 18 months.

And then from there, you're probably in a what, about a two-year, two-year period to construct the building.

So, you know, three, three and a half years from now for full full uh completion?

You recognizing that time period and context, I don't know whether you can answer this question or not, but there's been a lack of new retail coming into the city with some of these new buildings.

Any thoughts about how you are going to do better for the city?

Firstly, I think they have already done better, this particular developer.

As I said, they had sushi by bow.

The Gray's craze is going to start.

There is a cafe that uh in 33 Westchester that's waiting for an approval through the city to go in.

They have got an art gap public art gallery that they created.

There's an art gallery in front of Sushi by Bao.

I can tell you right now that this particular group has done better than almost all of the other developers in the city.

With that said, because of the changes that were required for the traffic, the queuing, and the rest, there's only 4,500 square feet of retail, almost nothing.

We have offered the bagel store to relocate.

We don't know whether they will or they won't.

But it's up to them.

There's been talk that they might want to retire, but that's that would be up to them.

But there's 4,500 feet.

Uh, and that that's not going to be hard to that.

That's that's really probably one or two tenants at most.

Yeah.

Again, uh, so from our standpoint, from the retail in that area, our position, one, we're putting 47 municipal spaces into this building that will be able to service retail.

You will come out of an elevator up to the street and be able to go to the retail.

And we're putting 504 apartments with customers down in that location.

We believe this will significantly help the retail in that area.

Yeah, well, certainly a comment I get as a member of the planning board.

Yeah, well, certainly a comment I get as a member of the planning board, what's going on with retail, hospitality, those types of issues come up all the time.

And all I hear is you uh approving a bunch of apartments.

That's what I hear.

I'm just saying that common talk to a member of the planning board me.

I hear that.

I think if you look at some extent that some of the other developments in the Rochelle, what you are seeing is that service retail, restaurants, those things are continuing to go.

And they are places that you, you know, you have tenants that are out there and available.

But you have heard tonight and other ones, there's nowhere to shop, there's nowhere to get closed.

It's true.

Those places are more and more very limited in what they rent, even if they come into your city because they mostly are selling online, and where they do, they have a much lesser inventory and they require lesser space.

They just don't, those tenants are not generally out there.

We desperately want to, and we talked to the neighboring building about potentially a market that could go into theirs.

It's needed in the downtown, some kind of a specialty market.

I was associated with the projects that brought in the shop, stop and shops, et cetera.

You know, I was also part of the negotiations where we tried desperately to get target into New Rock City, and they we went out to Minnesota, they just wouldn't come.

You the market is what the market is, and you try to make it occur.

We think that this will lead to it, but you know, the it the market has changed dramatically in the last 10, 15 years, and we're going to have to adjust to it as we go as we go forward.

Yeah, I know the old maximum is residential before retail, right?

Because you need that base.

So I appreciate that and understand it.

But uh to the extent you can be working in the city even more, we appreciate it.

Right.

Well, this particular developer, this goes forward, is going to have four buildings in that area.

And we're going to want people, remember, these aren't people buying the renting, and every year or two, we need them to rent again.

We need to make this a better place, and we're going to work towards that.

This is going to be the largest investor in that portion of the city, and he's going to do what he can to cooperate to make that the best place to live, you know, in the entire county.

Any other questions from members of the planning board?

Um Yeah, there's a a long queue of electric vehicles looking to charge in places around the city.

So are you planning to add any electric vehicle charging stations into your parking lot in the event that somebody has them?

Absolutely.

Do you know how many?

Do we have a number?

Yeah.

We're going to look it up.

But I wonder, could I also go back to the issue of retail?

I think what we're doing here in this building is that with the way that we have this municipal parking, and we have an elevator.

If I could go to the plan.

And this corner on Main Street is an elevator that goes directly down to this to the municipal parking level.

So people could, when they come to New Rochelle, they want to go downtown.

If they park in this building, they can come directly out onto Main Street.

So again, trying to, you know, make the thing is that with residential buildings today, especially and rental or condominium, service is a major element of the design.

You know, we talk about amenities in buildings getting bigger and bigger and more elaborate.

That's because it's really it's really about service.

It's not just have having the biggest gym or or spa or anything like that.

It's really providing level of service.

And there have already been discussions with some companies that provide that kind of service that would want to come into this building.

So it's going to, you know, I think every every other, every new building that will be built in New Rochelle or White Plains, but especially here, it's going to, there's going to be this demand for service, and it's and having the ability to have a h uh, you know, top-rated facility here, retail in this building is going to be, I think it's going to be very desirable because we we're creating a community with 504 apartments.

That's probably at least 750 people.

You know, so it's going to, it's going to get occupied.

And I think it will have a ripple effect on a lot of the other stores that are that are now on Main Street that are that are not rented.

The elevator will come out to Main Street.

Is there also a stairwell there that from the case?

Yes, there is.

Yes.

Okay.

Other questions or comments?

Members of the board?

Um I don't want to interrupt, but I just I had a couple points to make as well, if that's right.

It's a good time.

Sure.

Just for the record.

Typically there are and we believe there are EV space requirements for specifically not only the tenant spaces, but also municipal self-park in terms of make ready, like wired for conduit for the chargers, and then a certain number that need to have electric vehicles, supply equipment installed prior to actually opening in order to receive a CO.

Just want to put on the record we will comply with all code requirements in terms of make ready and EV spaces upon opening.

If yeah, if I could just make a couple points.

So one I just wanted to note that the I I think I mentioned it earlier that our standard for affordability, the basis is at 70% AMI.

So I just wanted to note that uh to correct that.

Um I just wanted to go back on what I said about the parking.

I had noted transient, and then Mr.

Weingarten got up and said that they're open to either, and I just want to correct myself that's true.

I think we want to have the flexibility on that issue.

So that could be either or um the retail, I think it was actually mentioned recently that um we should do another development update for the board.

We we had done those in the past and it's been a while.

And I think we can do that, absolutely do that, and maybe do a strong strong focus on economic development.

We can you know update the board on our vanguard initiative.

Um part of that will be updating, you know, the businesses that we've seen open.

We've had 58 businesses open in the downtown since 2020, city uh 70 citywide, and just since 2025, we've had actually 17 new businesses open downtown.

So uh we can give you an update on on what we're working on and the progress that we're making in terms of economic development.

And I do want to um echo what they said earlier, what was said earlier about this particular developer, which I think um has been had has had greater success than other developers on the retail front.

So I uh you know I think in that regard we should should certainly be pleased with how they performed compared to others.

Thank you.

Um so I would like the planning board to confer briefly with corporation council.

Can I have a motion for executive session?

Aye.

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

I we're gonna take a brief recess.

We'll be back in a few minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for your patience.

Uh we're calling the planning board meeting back to order.

Um the applicant can come back to the podium.

Um so as we move this process um forward, there were some additional conditions that we would like to propose, uh, including that the applicant provide a plan for how you plan to comply with workforce participation requirements uh to city staff.

Uh in addition, garbage is to be picked up within the property.

So I know you talked about the garbage plan and some different alternatives, but the condition would be that the garbage be picked up within the property.

My understanding was that the DPW was requesting that we do a roll out to the curb.

It is within the property, but that it would be a rollout to the curb, which I'm not sure that's on our property.

It's on the sidewalk that goes to the curb side.

But I think that's what they were asking for because they didn't want to have to pull back the truck in and come out.

They wanted us to bring it out to the curb.

So if that's what they're seeking, we'll comply with what the city wants us to comply with, whatever that is, but I that's my understanding of their request.

If it's private, then it needs to be within.

If it's public, we will not come on to their property to take the garbage.

So it would then need to be rolled out.

So would it need that determination yet?

We we're I think we're determining I think I think the plan is for it to be public and it was gonna be a roll out to the curb.

That's that'd be unusual with these buildings.

I'm not aware of any other building that does that.

Yeah, they're required to have a private private hall there.

My understanding is that the it's a private requirement.

Then we will comply with whatever what we will comply with the law.

So to the extent that you're using a private hauler that the garbage needs to be picked up within the property.

So we'll we'll work on the wording of that, Kevin.

But that's the effect of the condition.

Um additionally, that you would provide a pet waste station and supplies for your residents, and that there'll be no mechanical fan ventilation from the parking garage into the park area.

Okay.

Uh the final one is that the construction plan needs to provide reasonable accommodations for students of the Howland School, and that you will work with the Howland School and submit a plan to say staff for approval.

No objection.

Okay.

So Kevin, um, can you go through are there other conditions for approval that you can go through?

Yeah, I think we have about um 63 other conditions of approval.

Yes.

Uh we have a substantial number, uh, just over 60 conditions of approval in addition to what the chair just uh mentioned.

These conditions uh address uh traffic, parking, engineering, civil engineering issues, fire sustainability, and and notably construction.

And I do want to note, and we've talked a bit about construction, um, that some of the earlier projects that were approved in the downtown overlay zone, we did not focus as much on the construction element, and we have learned from that, and we now have I think a number of uh very substantive conditions in terms of construction to mitigate impacts from uh construction that would take place from this project.

That's a summary.

Okay.

So I will note again to thank the members of the public for their time and for their candor in their comments here tonight.

Um there was uh reference to city council action, and um I would like to note for the record that city council in their discussions have talked about this area of downtown and noted uh the congested conditions and are looking at future development, but that those discussions exclude this project and another project that's already in the DOZ pipeline.

So I don't want you to think that we didn't hear the comment and the concern that was expressed here tonight, but um acting in accordance with what city council has contemplated with regard to this application.

We believe is appropriate.

So with that, uh this board has three votes.

Can I have a motion to declare?

I'm sorry, are the conditions as enumerated acceptable to the applicant?

They are acceptable.

Okay, thank you.

Can I have a motion to declare a lead agency?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Can I have a motion for negative declaration?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Can I have a motion for site plan approval?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Thank you for the extra work that you have done to address the comments of the community over the last year.

Thank you for your appreciate it.

And your hard work.

Thank you.

Okay.

We are moving to item 2.4, application PB 1-2026 by Iona Preparatory School for site plan approval to construct bleachers with a press box, bathrooms, concession, and ticketing stand at an existing athletic field at 255 Wilmont Road, block 3001, lot one in an R1-20 zoned district.

This was such a joke.

I could speak up.

This is unbelievable that the number of people that came to speak against their own neighborhood in the flawling.

Can you go in the back room with a public meeting?

Okay.

We have to continue with a meeting.

Thank you.

Unexcepted.

And this is the question.

Thank you for your participation in the process, sir.

Thank you.

That is against sunshine.

What did you say?

She said she said we have gut salaries apparently.

Good morning or good evening.

Almost, almost 40 minutes.

For the record, my name is Tony Joffrey.

I'm a member of the law firm Cuddy and Fader here this evening on behalf of Iona Preparatory School for premises located at 255 Wilmot Road.

I'm joined by Brother Leto, president of Iona Prep, Mark Hogan, Chief Advancement Officer, my colleague Heli Pelcano, and Gary Zimberg project manager.

Apologies that our architect is not here this evening.

I thought his flight might have landed in time, but he's uh stranded somewhere and could not be here.

So if you bear with me, I'm going to try to play architect uh as well for for the purposes of this application.

Um I'm gonna give them the lateness of the hour.

Uh we've submitted uh written application to you.

We've appeared before you uh previously in November on the planning board referral to the zoning board of appeals.

Um so I'll just abbreviate my uh remarks, but if there's anything in detail you'd like me to specifically focus on, I'd be happy to do so.

Um but as you know, I own a prep uh has been in existence for over 100 years and been located uh on this campus since 1967, uh, which premises is uh comprised of 26 acres classified in the R 120 district, which is improved with a school athletic fields uh related parking and amenities.

Uh this application is proposing to renovate and provide uh improvements to the athletic facility that currently exists on the property.

Um what's on the screen right now is the survey of the property uh which has uh all of the current improvements, and you'll see the existing uh athletic fields uh that are towards the front of the property on the western side closest uh to Wilmot.

Um we uh appear before the zoning board of appeals.

Part of the application did receive a variance for the height of the proposed lightings uh replacement lights that we're gonna provide for the field.

Uh I'll go through that in a little bit more detail uh shortly.

But since we uh obtained the variance approval from the zoning board of appeals, uh we did conduct a town hall at the premises.

We sent uh a letter out to all of the neighbors uh that are on our public notice list, invited them to the island of prep campus uh to have a more opportunity to have a dialogue and present information in a more um collegial manner in a way that we get to speak to them.

And I I'm happy to say that we believe a success.

I do see um uh two of the residents that did appear uh at the town hall as well.

One of the things that we highlighted uh which changed since we last appeared before you is that we've made the determination and we did reach out to uh development department as well as uh to the building department, uh, that we've committed to hire three off-duty police officers uh to uh provide and help uh direct traffic away from the three streets that did experience quality of life issues on uh football home game days.

So we uh will be coordinating this summer with the police department, assuming that we're approved uh to hire three to off-duty police officers.

Uh we'll post them at Northwood Circle, Van Eck, and Regal uh to direct traffic away so that no parking will be allowed to happen on those roads that we directed back into the campus.

Um included in the materials we submitted the these are some existing photos of the facilities.

Uh importantly, this sheet I think is important to note that in addition to uh the replacement, we are going to be removing some trees as part of the application process.

They will be replaced uh uh with trees as required by the code.

But importantly, you'll see here these are some of the existing uh arbor vite's that have been provided and planted over the last over the last 10 years around the perimeter uh of the property.

Over 100 trees, and that's really important because that is going to provide visual mitigation and buffers for uh the proposal that is before you.

Um this is an aerial rendering uh of the uh facility location.

Um you'll see this uh in this location.

So we're proposing to replace the turf field as well as the track that goes around it.

Um the we're gonna be providing bleachers uh along this uh uh side of the field on the Wilmot side.

Here you can see the two light stanchions on this side of the field uh and two on this side.

Those will be replacing uh 20 uh temporary lighting that is currently used.

Uh 20 uh lights are wheeled in.

They have uh diesel generators, so that will be eliminated with this professional lighting, um, which is an overall improvement in this location here.

We're providing concession stands as well as a uh relocated scoreboard and bathroom facilities.

Um currently, right now uh anybody that attends the any uh events have to walk from the field either up this path or through the parking lot, all the way to the main entrance and into the main building in order to use the utilize facilities.

Uh currently concession stands are operated in the general location here uh on the can on the uh in the parking lot, which takes up approximately 30 parking spaces by uh relocating the concessions uh to this location.

We'll be able to gain about 30 more spaces uh parking spaces uh for events as well.

Um this is an over aerial uh an overhead view.

Uh importantly, uh, in meeting with staff early on in the process, we've identified an area that we're gonna provide 25 additional parking spaces in this location here.

That is not necessary for the for the need uh needs of the games.

Um right now, effectively there are some students that are parking on Van Eck or Regal.

We are proposing permanent spaces on the campus in order to address that.

So, regardless of what happens with game day situation, we are adding those additional spaces.

Um but it's important for me to just go through and highlight some of the benefits uh through this proposal.

We are going to be providing bleachers as was shown in the aerial, those bleachers are in this location.

Currently, right now, there are no seating opportunities at games.

Uh anybody, any patrons attending games usually sit on this hill, which is not ADA compliant.

There's no ADA spaces, there's no seating opportunities, and particularly in inclement weather, it provides a not nice experience, and people could slip and fall, creating safety and health uh issues potentially.

Uh so we will be able to provide the ADA seating and access on game days.

We will provide uh approximately 407 spaces on campus that will be provided in the various parking locations uh that you can see in this general parking lot.

You can see here, parking here, the 25 spaces adding here, spaces here.

Uh, we'll be able to add some spaces here, and then also on the freshman football field in this location as well.

Um our parking consultant has identified that for uh the events 407 parking spaces are more than adequate uh in order to satisfy it again.

We are trying to direct all of traffic onto campus so that there will not be the overflow parking, and a lot of the concerns that we did hear from the neighbors were with regard to parking on the roads, blocking driveways in driveways, leaving garbage.

So by hiring those off-duty police officers, we're hoping to uh address those concerns.

Um, in the location of the new 25 additional parking spaces that we're providing, we'll be able to provide four EV charging stations as well as one ADA space in that location.

Again, improvements over what currently exists right now.

Uh it's important to note, and I really want to stress this that there will be no change to the use of the sports field.

That includes the number and the schedule of the events, the nature of the field use, or the expected number of attendees.

This is really to upgrade the facilities, provide a more uh more beneficial experience.

I mentioned the ADA compliance before, um, but there this is not to uh attract more spectators to games, it's not to add more games.

We're basically saying whatever's happening today is going to happen today.

We're able to provide bleachers, we're able to provide a press box, concession stands, uh laboratory facilities to enhance the overhaul game day experience.

Uh the new bleachers provide safe dedicated spectator seating, as I mentioned, which will mitigate the risk of spectator standing on the existing grass and slipping and falling, particularly in inclement weather.

Um I mentioned ADA compliant access which we currently do not have right now.

Uh the press box will be replaced with a new structure that upgrades the existing outdated press box as well as uh includes a safe vertical access via stairs and as opposed to the current stepladder, which uh is utilized right now.

Um we have the new restrooms with direct access to the field immediately adjacent to the field so that people don't have to walk up the hill through the parking lot all the way to the building inside to the building, and again enhances the overall experience.

Uh the concession uh concessions will be located again in this area right in this location, immediately adjacent uh to the field and adjacent to the parking areas, uh which is an improvement.

And as I indicated before, again, we'll be recovering 30 parking spaces where the concession stands are currently taking up in the parking lot.

Uh temporary sports field lighting will be replaced as I mentioned before.

It's new and approved.

It will be professional lighting, it provides superior light spill control, would eliminate the noise from generators.

Uh one of the comments that we did receive from staff when we provided uh an update in response is that we'll be able to uh enhance the lighting and direct the lighting down and provide zero foot candles at all property lines so that we no spillage uh beyond the property lines.

Um I mentioned the 25 parking spaces along Stratton Road, and that's again not to address game day experience, but that will help on game days as well, but that's to uh enhance and provide additional parking uh for everyday uh use during uh school session.

Are you gonna be replacing the track or where is the concession stand related to the truck?

Let me just go so um so the concession stand is here in this location right here and the track got it.

It runs around and in front of the concession stand in this location right here.

Uh and again, I mentioned the mature perimeter landscape screening that's been uh provided on the perimeter of the campus.

Uh and again, you can see the again a long way here, the significant landscaping that has been done along the perimeter of the property.

Um chair, I think it's uh 1130.

I'm gonna pause there.

I'd be happy to get anything in in more detail uh address any comments, but we did uh try to respond uh to the comments that we did receive from staff uh last week.

I don't know if you had the opportunity to take a look at that yet.

Any questions or comments?

Members of the board.

Okay.

Are there any members of the public here who would like to comment on this application?

Yes, please.

Come on down.

There's just two here, obviously, but they were kind enough to fill out the forms in advance.

But uh obviously in whatever whatever order you prefer.

Hi, good evening.

Uh, my name is Joseph Nista.

I live at 10 Van Neck Drive, which is adjacent to Iona Prep.

Um, we have an issue with some of the plans that Iona Prep has drawn up, and I know they've tried to address some of these issues, but I still have concerns.

Um in the last two years, uh the theater was built at Iona Prep, and as part of that construction, there was a curb cut that was placed onto Stratton Road.

And I've lived at this address now for approximately 18 years.

I'm a 30-year resident of Nurishell.

And in the past two years, that's when we noticed that students were parking on our street and using that as an entrance.

I've been trying to get an answer from the City of Nurishell as to whether Iona Prep can use that curb cut as a vehicular entrance and a pedestrian entrance, and I'm unable to get that answer from the city, and that's really bothersome to me.

Um as residents, we had to start a petition in order to just get no parking 8 to 12.

And while I understand Iona Prep's um willingness to to hire two off-duty police officers, I don't know what their enforcement policy can be because there are there is no signage on Van Neck Drive that prohibits parking specifically.

And if they're challenged by people attending the game as to whether or not they can park there or not, would, for example, temporary no parking signs have to be placed?

And suppose that we as residents were having a function that day, would the officers be allowed to allow our visitors to park on our own street in front of our houses?

Furthermore, there's a second entrance to Van Neck Drive, which is up the street on Stratton Road, and it's a horseshoe.

And so potentially people could pull in that way, pull in behind the officers, and then start crossing the street.

I would urge Iona prep not only to hire those officers, but also to allow no pedestrian traffic through that entrance on Stratton Road.

There's no crosswalk there, for example, and at night it would be particularly dangerous for people crossing the street as cars are coming up Stratton Road.

Um I have another uh a few other points here as well that I'd like to make.

Um they're saying that they're gonna put another 25 spaces in, which would potentially help our situation.

But are they going to allow people to exit the campus through the curb cut onto Stratton Road?

There's no stop sign there.

There's no traffic enforcement there, and the intersection of Wilmont and Stratton is already a very crowded and narrow intersection, which I think needs to be addressed, especially at night.

You potentially have people who are walking up Wilmont Road towards Eastchester.

There's not a sidewalk after Stratton Road there.

And I don't think any traffic study has been done to assess that situation.

I also believe that Lakeshore Drive is impacted by this as well.

During a recent championship game, I saw cars parked all the way up Lakeshore Drive into the town of Eastchester.

So a second municipality is also affected.

And if these things are occurring at night, I believe that they need to address that in in a greater fashion.

I think it's good what they've offered, but I think there's more to be done here.

I I I don't want the board to interpret the lack of people here tonight as well as that means that everybody in our neighborhood is for this.

They certainly aren't.

The hour is late.

We've tried to do our best to hang in here and and get our voices heard.

So we do hope that you don't think that just the two of us being here is any indication of the concerns that we have.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much for your comments.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the board.

My name is Antoinette Nista, and I listen live also at 10 Venek Drive.

Just as a follow-up to things that my husband was saying, um, well, before I say that, I I know they sent letters to the neighbors, but they only sent letters to those people who live within 150 feet of the property.

They didn't send letters to everybody on Van Eck.

They didn't send letters to everyone on Regal.

So I I don't I think that's a misrepresentation of them saying that they invited the neighbors because only limited number of neighbors were invited.

And at the last meeting, the only reason why the neighbors knew about it is because I went around and told them about the meeting.

Um I didn't do that this time because we have a lot of neighbors who are elderly, and we figured with this weather, it wouldn't be a good idea for them to travel.

So that's why it's just my husband and and and myself here representing you know the area.

By the way, um they're saying they won't add any football games.

Well, that's not your doing, that's the league's doing.

So we know no additional football games can be made.

Um my question also would be well, if you're doing this for football games, why aren't you doing it for track meets?

Why aren't you doing it for soccer games?

I know they also have, I think the the Fathers Guild runs like an automobile show sometime in the spring.

Um, what about that?

There'll be parking on our streets then.

Will there be police officers for those events?

I don't think they are.

I think it's just for football.

Um taxes be collected for food or merchandise ice uh from the sales at the concession stands.

As it stands now, um we pay taxes, but Iona Prep doesn't.

And I feel that based on what happened at the last decision, you're not listening to, with all due respect, you're not listening to the people who pay taxes.

And we should have a voice too.

That's not fair.

Um the only thing that I see that Iona Prep is going to be adding to our community will be traffic and more cars and safety issues.

And I I just am against this, and I see my time is running out, so thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments and for hanging in as late as you did.

I know that's a long night for you.

Uh like to are there any other members of the public here who would like to comment on this application.

Okay, hearing that, I'm going to close the public comment and invite the applicant back to address the comments.

Sure.

Uh thank you.

And we had the opportunity to speak with the NISTAs uh on a few occasions, so certainly appreciate you coming out.

Um as it relates to the the curb cut on Stratton Road, I understand that uh there were comments from uh city staff, and there's a contemplated condition of approval that would uh limit the uh and ensure the use of the existing proposed parking near Stratton Ruby via the main entrance on Wilmot Road, as well as the installation of a fence uh along that curb cut uh to address that issue.

Um with regard to the off-duty police officers, um, we did speak with staff uh more directed that uh it would be we would be speaking with the police officers uh as we get closer to uh the season, probably in August sometime, so we will certainly coordinate with them on what their jurisdiction, the things that we can do.

But our intent is to work with them, hire uh three off-duty police officers uh to address uh and try to limit the uh parking on those roads uh at at all events or only at the end of the year.

At the home football games.

That's really when this is needed.

The other events uh there's no overflow parking that happens on adjacent streets to the Okay, that's not what we just heard from the members of the public who commented that other athletic events also created those conditions.

My my understanding is that the that the time where the police officers are needed are the home football games, which is when that overflow parking is required.

There's the ability to have 407 parking spaces on campus, so there will be no need for overflow parking uh at any other time.

Um we know a while back there was a private school that had some events on Quaker Ridge Road, and there was um some public outcry about people parking on their block, just like we heard at the zoning hearing over and over and over again.

So there was a town hall meeting that was held between the institution and the public on the block that they were parking on.

And the condition that was ratified as part of their approval was that they would hire off-duty police officers to close that block only to local traffic for those events.

Umce that approval took place, I have not heard back from those folks with any kind of complaints with relative relative to parking on the streets for overflow parking for events since that was put into place, and that was put into place I think 14 years ago.

Um so we didn't just invent this for this application.

Uh we used the best practices that we already had in place for another approval and tried to move that forward for this organization to try to quell the outcry that we heard during the last public hearing with respect to the lighting, and to try to, you know, have some calming on those blocks, and in case there were emergency vehicles that needed to get up the block, that they could actually access those areas.

Now, uh you are right.

One of those blocks is a horseshoe.

So I would leave the condition a little open-ended so that if we have to hire one more police officer during those events, that we do that to ensure that the intent of the condition is satisfied.

That's my opinion.

Um I know you guys didn't ask for it, but I wanted to give you the matrix of how that condition was developed and where we took it from.

We'd we'd commit to that flexibility, and I would also offer that uh Brother Leto uh gave his phone number at the town hall to all the residents, so if there are any issues or complaints, they can call him directly.

And I'd be happy to give my phone number as well.

And as Mr.

Vaco will recognize there was a prior application in the city many, many years ago uh with CVS, and uh I still get phone calls to this day and or emails that if there's an issue and we resolve those issues immediately.

Thank you.

Um and the I think the last uh comment that I need to address is with regard to public notice.

Um we provided all public notices required.

We provided that, submitted that uh previously to the city, is done in accordance the list is generated by the city given to us, and we mailed the public notice, which we have done uh Ms.

Paticano has copies of that.

We did provide that to the city, and that was the same uh those are the same addressees that we sent the notice for the town hall meeting as well.

And assuming that you do collect taxes for sales at concession, I don't believe we do for the uh because it's a tax accept ordinance.

Run by the school.

The concession stands run by the school.

And the existing concession stands are run by the school as well.

Can you just talk about the the gate, the six-foot gate, um, because I do see that as a condition.

Um and is it gonna completely block off any pedestrian access or can they walk around it?

Well, we haven't sourced the gate yet.

We just received the uh comment from staff last week.

So we are sourcing that, but the intent is to if we're looking at the.

Oh, sorry, would you want to come up to the mic and just state your name for the record so we have it and we can people at home can hear?

Thank you.

My apologies, Brother Thomas Leto, uh, President Iona Prep.

And uh we have uh fencing and and and arm provides all along that uh that roadway along uh Stratton Road, and once we do get the gate in, it'll close it up so that we cannot hopefully the kids won't climb over the six-foot uh fence.

So that that's the hope.

Okay, and you'll post signage prohibiting access that way.

And and the proposed condition number four um does indicate that minimum six-foot high fence.

Yeah, so I do think we need to add something on the on the off-duty officers.

Kevin, I don't unsay that one lesson that Paul referenced.

Yeah, I'm just uh curious.

Maybe it's the late hour exactly how we want to word that I I mean I understand the intent, but we can work on it.

And and the proposed condition number four um does indicate that minimum six foot high fence yeah so I do think we need to add something on the on the off-duty officers Kevin and unsay that one listed that Paul referenced Yeah I'm just uh curious maybe it's the late hour exactly how we want to word that I I mean I understand the intent but we can work on it I we're looking at three off-duty police officers um to direct traffic away from neighboring streets for the purposes of parking such that parking takes place on site uh for home games and other events as necessary as necessary yeah okay is that acceptable to the applicant so we we commit right the the right so uh biblically just pointing out that we've committed to three Mr.

Vac has suggested if necessary a four three or four we three or four on the flexibility as appropriate okay Kevin are there other conditions of approval that you want to review uh yes and some of them we've already talked about but I'll just go through all of them anyway um number one all work within the city of New York Shell right of way shall conform to the Department of Public Works standard details and we'll will require TBW permits TBW permits may include but are not limited to street openings curb cuts concrete sidewalks drop curbs and driveway aprons entry removals number two any damage to the city right of way during construction shall be remedied to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works number three the applicant shall coordinate with the Westchester County Department of Environmental Facilities for connection to their infrastructure street street opening permit will be will be required for the City of Nurshale Department of Public Works prior to connection number four the applicant shall include a minimum six foot high gate across Stratton Road driveway to address the issue of student pickup drop off and parking on adjacent residential streets number five the app shall ensure the use of the existing and proposed parking near Stratton Road will be via the main entrance on Wilmot Road and then as we just mentioned three to four uh off-duty police officers uh shall be provided to direct traffic away from uh neighboring streets for the purposes of parking such that parking takes place on site uh for home games and other events as necessary are those conditions acceptable to the applicant yes okay okay we have three votes can I have a motion to declare a lead agency so moved is there a second second all in favor aye aye any opposed motion passes can I have a motion uh for negative declaration so moved is there a second second all in favor aye aye any opposed motion passes can I have a motion for site plan approval so moved is there a second second all in favor aye aye any opposed motion passes thank you very much best of luck to you with the project thank you so much thank you goodnight can I have a sport can I have a motion to adjourn so so moved is there a second second all in favor aye aye we are adjourned thank you