Croton Planning Board plans to recommend downsizing of Lot A project and other changes and conditions before approval.
The Planning Board will be meeting on Tuesday August 20 to further discuss this 100% affordable condo project, but its recommendations are already drafted.
Editor’s note: The Chronicle thanks Croton resident John McKeon for alerting us and others to the Planning Board’s draft recommendations.
Close watchers of Croton policies and politics know that when an agenda for an official meeting is sent out by email to those on the village distribution list, it is not the last word on what is going to be discussed. This coming Tuesday, August 20, the Planning Board will hold its second session on the Lot A condominium proposal by WBP Development LLC. Although the village is currently in contract with WBP to sell Lot A to the developer, that sale is dependent on the Board of Trustees giving final approval of the project, and the developer accepting any conditions or revisions the Board might decide upon.
Since the agenda was emailed to residents on August 15, a new document has been added to the Lot A section: A memo from Planning Board chair Robert Luntz to Mayor Brian Pugh and the trustees. Opponents to this project, who have been out in considerable numbers at both Board of Trustees and Planning Board meetings, might take some satisfaction that Luntz and the PB appear to have listened to some of their concerns, even if board members seem to be clearly leaning towards recommending that the project go ahead.
(We will leave it to others to comment that Luntz has already drafted a detailed recommendation to the Board of Trustees days before the Planning Board is scheduled to have what will be only its second public discussion of the issues.)
Readers can, and should, read the memo themselves, but we will highlight a few excerpts here:
Concerns about fire safety and accessibility of the building to our volunteer fire department:
“The Planning Board recommends that the application be referred to the Croton on Hudson Fire Department to review. The Planning Board would also like to hear about safety measures for the potential storage of E-bikes in the bicycle storage area. The building will have a fire alarm and fire sprinkler system.
Improvements to the Village’s water distribution system were discussed in order to achieve the required fire flows. if this could not be achieved other onsite fire safety improvements would be required.”
[Editor’s note: Water pressure problems proved to be a serious issue in Peekskill last year during a massive condo fire that destroyed 16 homes.]
Concerns about traffic and parking:
“The Planning Board recommends a more in depth traffic study be conducted and would also like to hear how commuter traffic would be mitigated during construction. The Planning Board is concerned about the impact of the increase in traffic and questioned if 103 parking spots is sufficient for resident parking for the proposed 100 residential units. The proposed 103 parking spots may not be sufficient for the residents. While it's hoped that this being a Transit Oriented Zone would offset the needs of residents having two cars, it may not be a realistic expectation. Therefore, a development with only 80 or preferably 60 units would be better serviced with only 103 parking spaces.”
Need for a fiscal analysis and a way to give Croton residents some kind of priority:
“The Planning Board recommends that a Fiscal Analysis be conducted to understand the impact on taxes and the local economy.
The Planning Board feels that it would be greatly beneficial if there was some way to prioritize Croton families into the mix of potential residents who might qualify for residency in the proposed building. Much of the perceived need for affordable units is coming from Croton residents that would like an alternative to their current living situation. Empty nester opportunities, opportunities for our grown children to remain in town, etc. If all the units are forced to go to a lottery system, this goal is completely undermined. Market rate units, first available to Croton residents, with some inclusion of affordable, no more than 50 %, seems like a better way to accommodate Croton residents.”
Planning Board recommends a smaller building:
“Overall, the Planning Board thinks that this is a good location and design for the apartment building, but the project (100 units), as proposed, is too large for the Village when you factor in the potential increased traffic, increased number of school children, and concern that this proposed project, being all affordable, would not prioritize Croton residents. A smaller building with 60-80 units, both affordable and market rate, should be considered.”
If the recommendations of the Planning Board are accepted by the Board of Trustees, especially the call for a smaller building, the ball will be back in WBP’s court. As we wrote some time back, this developer has been known to pull out of a proposed project if it could not come to agreement with a municipality over the details. So the Board will not be able to defer to any great extent to the wishes of those villagers organizing to stop or limit the project, and at the same time give WBP most of everything it wants. That battle is worth watching.
We also received some comment from Croton resident John McKeon, who has been outspoken at meetings of both the Board of Trustees and the Planning Board. John has shared these comments with a number of people and we thank him for letting us reproduce them below. We note that these comments are his personal opinion and have not been factchecked by the Chronicle. For an alternative view, please see this recent Guest Editorial by Croton Mayor Brian Pugh.
John McKeon writes:
“The planning board continues to fail to review the proposal within the context of the rezoned area, oblivious to the future development of high-rises immediately adjacent to the parking lot three site. They see the 6 inch water-main infrastructure shortfall as solvable through the use of on site engineering that would involve the construction of roof holding tanks for water fire suppression use. Their failure to recognize the infrastructure shortfall at the site, kicks the obvious problem down the road to become a taxpayer issue for the village without any cost analysis demanded from the developer.
The existence of water towers on the structure will de facto create an additional Visual story for the building for code demands these structures, be fully integrated into the architectural façade of the building.
The planning board repeats the same error on the issue, raised concerning impact on our volunteer fire departments , staffing, and capability to address the looming reality of multiple high-rise structures in the village. We are hurling towards the need to include professional firefighters in our villages currently totally volunteer firefighting services.
Unfortunately, the general public in the village does not comprehend the cost impact of such a requirement to properly staff a fire department like ours with professional firefighters 24 hours a day 365 days a year would be. A professional firefighting capability insertion in the volunteer mix would predictively cost the village $5 million a year. The $21 million per year current budget for all village services will increase by 25%.
The revenue stream of the village to pay for services consists of only 40% property tax, the rest of the revenue is our portion of New York State sales taxes and fees. These last two revenue sources are relatively fixed amounts . Your annual property taxes will have to be increased geometrically to pay for the professional fire fighting capability, our annual property taxes will increase geometrically not arithmetically by
Approximately 45% are you ready for that?”
**************************************************************************************************
Publishing the Chronicle requires a lot of work and resources. Please support this local journalistic effort by taking out a paid subscription. It’s a bargain for keeping well informed about what goes on in Croton.
To share this post, or to share The Croton Chronicle, please click on these links:
Comments policy: No personal attacks, please be polite and respectful.
Thank you to Chronicle and Mr. Mckeon, for this deep-dive analysis.
Interesting to see that this weeks Planning Board meeting announcement via email did not include the draft minutes of the August 6 board meeting. So far no response from the board secretary when the omission was pointed out via email.