(Below is a copy of a letter from the group Chappaqua For Responsible Affordable Housing. It has been edited for formatting but not for content.)
July 18, 2013
Ms. Susan Carpenter, Supervisor & Town Board Members
Find out what's happening in Chappaqua-Mount Kiscowith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Town of New Castle
200 North Greeley Avenue
Find out what's happening in Chappaqua-Mount Kiscowith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Chappaqua, NY 10514
Dear Ms. Carpenter & Members of the Town Board:
We, the members of Chappaqua For Responsible Affordable Housing (CFRAH), have been closely monitoring the Special Permit review for the proposed Conifer affordable housing development at Hunts Lane. We continue to believe that this location is inappropriate for housing of any kind, and particularly affordable housing, and that there remain significant environmental issues with this site that have not been addressed by the Board or Conifer.
Given the number of these outstanding issues, we were shocked to hear at the last Town Board meeting on July 14 that a motion was made by Ms. Carpenter to close the public hearings on the Special Permit review and Zoning Text Amendment concerning this project. The shock comes from the fact that, not only was additional financial information requested from Conifer at that meeting, but there is also a detailed memo by the Town Planner, dated June 11, 2013, that identifies many outstanding issues, to which there has been no response from Conifer. We are perplexed that the Board is ignoring the need to obtain this information and is instead looking to prematurely end the review and push this project forward.
For the benefit of the Board and the public, we list below some of the significant issues from the Planner’s memo that remain un-addressed at this date:
Environmental Contamination of the Site: the Town’s Environmental Coordinator indicates that contamination on the site may have spread to groundwater & affected the Saw Mill River, and requested a copy of the Remedial Action Plan that must be submitted to the NYS DEC. This has not yet been provided;
Zoning Compliance: The Code Enforcement Officer lists at least 4 variances that are required from the ZBA - height (stories & feet), setback and parking. The memo incorrectly indicates that the Town Board can address these. These should be reviewed and approved by the ZBA prior to any further consideration of the Special Permit;
MTA & DOT Easements: Conifer has not provided any requested information that they are able to obtain the easements required from the MTA & the NYS DOT.
Hunts Lane Dead End: The memo requested alternative plans regarding the use of this public-owned property, and an easement agreement for the sewer line, which have not been provided. The Town Board has provided no justification for the benefits of transferring this property to Conifer, or by what mechanism it would propose to do so.
Stormwater Management soils data: Documentation that the MTA & NYS DOT are accepting Conifer’s solution for stormwater conveyance over MTA & NYS DOT property has not been provided. The Town has also rejected Conifer’s test report for soils data, on which the Stormwater Analysis was based. No revised report has been submitted;
Connection to County Sewer Trunk Line: No status on this permit has been provided;
Noise Analysis: Issues raised about the noise analysis are identified as “addressed”, but no further information has been provided to the public. The Cerami & Associates analysis did not address the frequency and noise level of southbound trains having to blow their horns directly in front of the property as the train approaches the station;
Air Quality Analysis: The memo identifies the need for further information regarding air quality in this location, but no further information or testing has been provided. The applicant has stated that there is no traffic congestion at the Saw Mill Parkway exit ramp, but in fact there are times where the traffic backs up onto the Parkway;
Visual Impact Analysis: The original visual analysis was deemed inadequate by the Town’s consultant, but no new analysis has been provided, even though the architectural design has changed. When Conifer displays a photomontage of the project, it is always in a view with significant numbers of trees blocking the building, which is from only very specific viewpoints. This was considered an unacceptable technique by the Town’s consultant. In addition, the latest rendering of the building deceptively represents the surrounding areas of the building as lawn & trees;
Parking: The Junior Town Engineer identified several significant inadequacies regarding vehicular & pedestrian movement in & around the property, and the potential loss of 12 (actually 14) parking spaces in the Municipal Parking Lot. In addition, the memo states that “the site shall be self-sufficient in handling all parking needs” and that “use of municipal parking lots is not feasible”, yet this plan is not self-sufficient for parking and is relying on the municipal lots. These issues have not been addressed;
School Bus Stop: The President of Chappaqua Transportation has said that this is a dangerous intersection. No specific solution has been provided by Conifer as to how this dangerous condition would be mitigated;
Traffic stopping on the King Street bridge: there is no solution as yet as to how traffic will be prevented from stopping on the bridge in front of the building, or how pedestrians will be prevented from directly crossing the bridge at this point;
Parking spaces: the memo indicates that 3 parking spaces needed to be removed from the plan. There is no indication of a response to this request, or the final tally of parking spaces, and the number of spaces by which the project is short;
Emergency response details: there is no information as to how traffic on the Saw Mill Parkway or on the Railroad tracks will be stopped in the event of a fire emergency. A reference is made to meetings between the emergency response agencies (fire, police, ambulance) but no information is provided. There is also no information regarding contact with the State DOT (Parkway) and Metro-North. In addition, the Building Inspector indicates that he will not approve the location until these issues have been satisfactorily addressed. This information has not been provided;
Open Space & Recreation: The project provides one small hard surface exterior play area on the 3rd floor of the building, overlooking the train tracks 24 feet down (with a 3-foot high fence). The Police Chief and Planning Board have indicated that play areas and parks are not easily or safely accessible to young children, yet Conifer responds that there will be a “limited number of children”. The conclusion is that it’s OK to risk the lives of children, as long as there are not too many.
Financial Information: Requested at the July 14 meeting, nothing submitted to date;
These are just a few of the outstanding issues regarding this project, and does not include a number of issues raised by the Planning Board and the Architectural Review Board in their own memos to your Board concerning this project. In addition, this site specifically violates several of the best practices criteria proffered by the Federal Monitor for avoiding sites that would produce isolated and stigmatized housing.
We believe that the preponderance of these issues indicate the fundamental flaw of this proposal - that the site is unsuitable for residential development of any kind, and certainly for affordable housing. This was the conclusion made by the Planning Board in 2007 in reviewing a proposed market-rate multi-family project on this site: "We concluded that the site proposed for that development was not suitable for residential use."
What was therefore not suitable for market-rate housing on this site in 2007, is still not suitable for affordable housing in 2013, and no twist of logic can change that fact. There are far more appropriate sites for affordable housing in our town - sites that are integrated into the community, not isolated - and we should be focusing our efforts on those sites.
We certainly expect that the Public Hearings will remain open while you and we await this information from Conifer, and that no determination can be made on whether to proceed with this project until all of these issues are addressed.
Respectfully Submitted by CFRAH:
William Spade, Architect
Ted Anderson
Matt Egan
Will Wedge
Keiko Sasaki-Spade, Architect
Sigrid Sperzel
John Sabalja
Don Roane
Wallace Toscano, Architect
Peter Davidson
Joe Cipriani
Shelah Bosch
Shaun Gotterbarn, Designer
Robin Murphy
Victor Martinez
Joan Corwin
Stanley Wong, Architect
Peter Davidson, Jr.
Jim McCauley, Jr.
Miri Dainson
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.
