On Tuesday evening, March 17, Croton’s Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) continued deliberations and a public hearing on the request of Dobbs Ferry based developer Andrew Cortese for a zoning variance that would allow him to build a second house on property he recently purchased at 52 Mt. Airy Road.
In an earlier story on the controversy, we reported on the first installment of the public hearing, which took place on February 17 and was attended by several dozen local residents opposed to the variance. That public hearing was adjourned pending a site visit to the property at 52 Mt. Airy Road by the members of the ZBA. However, it emerged at this second meeting that due to continuing wet conditions at the property, it had not yet been possible for the site visit to be scheduled.
Nevertheless, Cortese, along with his attorney and the engineer for the project, returned to this second meeting with some modifications to their original plan, in hopes that they might meet some of the objections that both ZBA members and neighbors had raised to the zoning variance. Those objections revolved to a great extent around the significant number of trees that would need to be removed for the second house and driveway to be built, and the environmental, drainage, and other possible consequences of that removal.
James Tuman, the ZBA’s chair, remained skeptical about the need to remove so many trees—possibly around 25 or more in addition to an estimated 30 that the developer had already removed—and suggested that the location of the second house be moved forward closer to the street, so the driveway did not have to be so long.
The public hearing then reopened, this time attended by even more residents than last time, and all speaking against the variance. More than ten neighbors addressed the ZBA with their concerns. Many of them emphasized the historic nature of the neighborhood, once known as “Red Hill” because of the many political activists, along with artists and other creative individuals, who lived here during the first half of the 20th century. (For some of the history of the area and the houses along Mt. Airy Road, see our earlier story, “A Tour of Mount Airy Road and ‘Red Hill.’”)
A recurring theme of the comments was that the developer, Cortese, required a variance because of his own decision to purchase the property for the purpose of developing it and then selling it at a profit. (Cortese has made no representations that he intends to live there himself.)
“Wanting to build more houses and maximizing profit is not a hardship,” commented Gabriella Mirabelli, a local artist, concluding that “the default [decision] here is no.”
Other residents argued that they had moved to this wooded area not only because they wanted to live in a semi-rural environment, but also with a mission to protect it from harm, including to its wildlife. Several residents, some of whom are birders, described the myriad species of wildlife that live in these hills above Croton’s Upper Village which might be threatened if flooding patterns were altered and trees were removed.
Orit Daly, another local artist who lives across from 52 Mt. Airy Road, told the board that the earlier cutting down of trees had removed the shade from the front of her house, which now receives full sunlight. And Dan Cayer, who lives just down Mt. Airy Road at its intersection with King Street, asked why local residents should be the ones to take the risks of the changes that the development might bring.
But even before these public comments were made, the board members had decided to refer the outstanding questions about the variance application to Croton’s Planning Board, which Tuman said was “better equipped” to deal with some of the more technical issues. Once the Planning Board had considered the project, the variance application would then go back to the ZBA for a final decision. (If he variance is granted, the Planning Board would likely become involved later in the site plan and other issues related to the project.)
We had pointed out in our earlier coverage that developer Andrew Cortese—whose projects in other communities have sometimes also met opposition— is the co-owner of the property at 425 South Riverside Avenue, across from ShopRite, where he and a partner want to build a 49 unit apartment building. This project has been on hold for well over a year, and the partners have not yet submitted a formal proposal to the village.
We had speculated that they were awaiting the outcome of last November’s village elections, in which housing development was a major issue. While Cortese kept the Chronicle updated on their plans for a number of months, our more recent and repeated queries to him about when they expect to submit the proposal have gone unanswered.
We will follow the progress of the variance application as the Planning Board takes it up and provide updates as appropriate.
***********************************************************************************************************
To share this post, or to share The Croton Chronicle, please click on these links.
Comments policy: No personal attacks or trolling. Please be polite and respectful at all times.
Thank you for covering this story. The residents showcased a strong and moving “Spirit of Place” for their natural environment/area, describing its unique character & identity with cherished and loved qualities. Collectively, they gave the area and its natural geography, trees and animals incredibly deep meaning including historical value…vital to spiritual wellbeing and the ecosystem which surrounds it.
Thank you for covering this! My husband and I had looked at this home/property when we were homebuying in Croton a couple of years ago, and it was SO wooded and on a steep hill. Since his purchase, the developer has already cut down many trees (as noted in these articles). I hope that he is not allowed to cut down the additional mature trees in the neighborhood--I am sure that would create a huge erosion problem and necessitate an ugly retaining wall. Not to mention potential flooding issues for the homes that are downhill from the property. I am so glad he is that our community showed so much strength and advocacy for nature, peace, and historical value! Clearly, the advocacy needs to continue--I will be keeping an eye on the planning board meetings schedule.