Trustees Diffuse Heathcote Coalition's Objections to Village Land Sale

In the words of former Planning Board Chair Beverly Sved it was déjà vu at Village Hall on Thursday 4/14 when Village Trustees, developer Stephen Oder, Village staff and concerned residents including the leadership of the Heathcote Five Corners Coalition assembled to review development plans for 2-4 Weaver Street.

In March, the Planning Board had invited the developer to resubmit his proposal to purchase a strip of Village Land adjacent to the Heathcote Tavern that now serves as the driveway to the parking lot for the restaurant.

Last year, a hotly debated argument ended when Trustees bowed to pressure from residents and denied the developer the strip of land to incorporate into the residential building they plan to build above the parking lot. As Fish and Oder own the property they have the right to develop it, and therefore requested a pre-application meeting with the Planning Board in early March, 2011 to review their plans. At that time, based on the assumption that they could not utilize the Village-owned land, they proposed a 10-unit, 46-foot high building, that was taller and closer to Weaver Street than the original building they had planned incorporating the Village owned land.

Realizing that the addition of the Village land to the project would allow the developer to scale back the height of the building and move the curb cuts away from the intersection at the Five Corners, Sved urged Oder to try again to purchase the land. Remembering the bitter, divisive fights last year, Oder agreed to give it one more try with the condition that the decision be made quickly. He requested a decision by April 24 and said if they could not come to an agreement by that date they would move forward with the 10-unit development.

At the 4-14 meeting, Trustees and the Village Planner were able to diffuse community opposition by addressing each of the Coalition’s concerns in a measured approach. As liaison to the Lane Use Committee, Trustee Jonathan Mark asked Oder, Sved and Marinnan to explain why the incorporation of the Village-owned land would allow for a better project. The Trustees had received a letter from the Heathcote Five Corners Coalition on April 8 posing a lengthy list of question about the land sale, project, parking, traffic, setbacks, zoning requirements and more. Many of these same questions had been asked in 2009 when the Village considered the land sale. This time the Trustees and the Village had their answers prepared.

Oder listed the following benefits to building on the expanded property:

• Better visual impact.
• Elimination of odd shaped parcel
• Addition of a landscaped area in front of the building.
• Building would be 38 feet in height, rather than 46 feet (a half story lower)
• Curb cuts further down Weaver Street away from the Five Corners intersection.
• Bigger distance between the new building and the Tavern building (20 feet, rather than 10 feet)

Oder also explained that with the addition of the Village land they would have the right to build up to 16 units on the property. Twelve could be housed in the new building and four more in the Tavern building which they would convert to housing in the future if they fail to retain a restaurant tenant. They would “substantially “ retain the façade of the Tavern building, but wanted flexibility in case they need to add windows if the building was converted to residential units.   Unlike the previous deal, the building would no longer include units designated for seniors as Oder said that they could not get financing from the banks for restricted housing.

Sved addressed the audience concurring with Oder on the benefits of including the Village-owned strip in the project. She confirmed that she had invited him to come back and reapply to purchase the land. She added the following two points:

• The Trustees could use the land sale as a bargaining chip to require the developer to include an affordable housing unit in the project
• In recommending the sale, the Planning Board did not intend for the extra land to allow the developer to increase the project’s bulk or density.

Village Planner Liz Marrinan explained that the Village has conditioned prior land sales on aesthetic improvements. For example, at Christie Place, landscaping and new sidewalks were required.

Speaking on behalf of the Conservation Advisory Council, Lena Crandall urged the Trustees to consider open space, storm water drainage and the current use of the land by SVAC to accommodate additional vehicles. She called for further environmental studies and consideration of community character.

Martin Kaufman of the Coalition said that Oder’s proposal is “replete with generalities” and said the letter from the developer contained “no specific commitments.” Saying that “the devil is in the details,” he urged the Trustees to impose conditions on the deal “to make sure that the building height and bulk is not increased due to the sale of the village owned land.”

Larry Bell arrived an hour into the meeting and asked many questions that had already been answered. He challenged the calculation of the building size, inquired about the building height, number of parking spaces, parking waivers, sideyard and rear variances, and impact on Weaver Street traffic.

Finally Peter Gordon, also of the Coalition spoke and indicated that they had changed their position on the project. He thanked the committee for having the hearing and said, “We are not against all development. We support the premise that its in the best interest of the community to sell the land to build a better project.”

Mayor Flisser posed an interesting question at the end of the meeting, asking “what would be the advantage of retaining the Village land?“ The only answer to that question was that the Village now receives $15,000 a year for the rent of the property – but after a sale it would be added to the Village tax rolls and there revenue from the property would continue be received.

Cognizant that many of the specific questions could not be answered without a rendering of the proposed property, Mark asked Oder to produce some drawings and agreed to convene another meeting when these are available.

From the tone of the meeting, it appeared that the Trustees want to come to an agreement with Oder on the land sale and will attempt to structure the sale agreement to the benefit of the Village. It also appeared that this divisive issue has now been largely resolved. According to many, the desire to halt development at the Five Corners swayed both the nominating process for Village Trustees and Mayors and impacted the recent election. Now just weeks later, the new Village Board seems to be moving toward a fast resolution on the development of 2-4 Weaver Street.