Mayor Carolyn Stevens Comments on the Comprehensive Village Plan

Below please find remarks from Mayor Carolyn Stevens given at the Scarsdale Village Board meeting on Tuesday night February 23rd when the Board received comments on the Village Center component of the Comprehensive Plan:

Tonight we have the second Public Hearing on the Update to the Comprehensive Plan for the Village Center. Based on some of the comments we had at the last meeting I would like to provide an overview. The purpose of a comprehensive plan is to provide some guidance to property holders and future Village and Land Use Boards – it provides a policy foundation for future planning, zoning and development action. There are no mandates in the plan – only a menu of possible amenities that might be traded for zoning changes should some property owner wish to change what is on their property. The Plan carefully reiterates the features of the Village center that the residents and other stakeholders wish to preserve – attempts to determine what residents and other users of the Village Center would like to see improved – and tries to lay out what some of the tradeoffs are for those improvements. The purpose is not to make those choices now…but to provide a framework for later discussions.

We heard from several folks at the last meeting who are concerned for our local gas stations – I use one of them and have so for many years – would I like to see it remain…yes. But that is my personal view and preference…that needs to be weighed along with all the other opinions – including that of the property owner; because nothing will change if the owner of the property doesn’t seek a change. Do I personally think whatever is eventually built on the Freightway lot should be built to the maximum considered…probably not. But then I don’t know what the options or how it could be massed (I am not an architect – much less one with vision) but I have learned over the years of being on the Board that sometimes good ideas come along – and we shouldn’t preclude them if they meet the vision and goals laid out in the Plan.

For those concerned about process – this plan took the Planning Board two and a half years of work to produce. To refer to only one of the surveys that was done, as if that was all that the report is based on, is misleading. There were other surveys and numerous public sessions and interviews with SNAP, Friends of the Parks, the Overhill Neighborhood Association, the Fox Meadow Neighborhood Association, Old Scarsdale, the TVCC and other groups were all sought out for input – there were numerous public meetings and long and seemingly endless public work sessions where the Planning Board members (this covered three Boards) discuss, debated and deliberated on the underlying principles and philosophy of this document and whether the items included worked to move those principles forward. I sat in on some of those sessions – some went until 1:00 AM…because the Planning Board wanted to accurately reflect in this document what they had heard – they sought to balance the competing goals from all of the stakeholders and fashion a document that reflects our basic values and vision for the Village Center.

So while I am at this – let me thank the recent Planning Board and all of the past iterations of the Planning Board that have worked on this document – especially the chairs – Bill Miller, Jonathan Drescher, and David Karp for the careful and thoughtful job – and time consuming job - that was done. Please accept my thanks on behalf of the Village Board.

Let me add one thing with respect to the Planning Board --It has recently come to my attention that some individuals have sought to have a private meeting with the Planning Board about a project that is not yet before the Planning Board. Such a meeting would be improper and illegal.

For those who don’t understand the Planning Board’s role let me take a moment to explain. The Planning Board sits as a quasi- judicial body when it is reviewing projects – and just as it would be improper for a party to a lawsuit to ask for a private meeting with a judge so to it is improper for the Bd. to have such a meeting. Any discussions with regard to a project need to be in public, on the record and with the Applicant present. Nor are telephone calls to individual members to discuss the merits of any project or applicant proper.

I would also add that there seems to be some confusion in general on the role of the Planning Board. The Planning Board is required by state law and receives its powers from state law. It is not a creature of Village Law and it does not answer to the Village Board although the members are appointed by the Village Board. The Planning Board duties are codified and they are charged with making sure that a project complies with all environmental laws, zoning laws, and other codes that might apply such as health code, clean water acts, etc. It is their charge under state law to work with a property owner to make sure that any project that is built is in compliance with all applicable laws and codes. It is not their job to determine what should be built – but only to determine if what is being proposed meets all legal requirements and if not, to work with the property owner to bring it into compliance. Yes, it can recommend variances if it believes that the trade-offs are worth it, but these must be granted by the Board of Appeals. They don’t chose the project… it is the landowners choice. I hope this acts as a bit of primer.

Again thanks to the Planning Board for all of its hard work on the Plan and all the other hard work they do.