On Tuesday August 11 the City Council will be presented with the report for the North Avenue Rezoning.
Here are some facts identified by residents that need to be addressed:
The Consultant’s proposal is to rezone all of North Avenue from Burling Lane to Eastchester Road to a new mixed use zoning category (North Avenue-NA) permitting a reasonable height of 4 floors but a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 3.0. Compare this 3.0 to the Neighborhood Business zoning which allows a FAR of only 0.5. The proposed “as of right” FAR would increase six times! Even the Downtown Business district (DB) does NOT allow a Floor Area Ratio greater than 2.0 without Council’s review of the project and its approval. In the Downtown Business District along Main Street and most other downtown streets there is a FAR of 4.0, but public benefits,must be provided such as providing publicly accessible open space, achieving a LEED environmental certification, historic preservation or historic renovation, outstanding architecture, etc.
The Consultant’s proposal is to rezone all of North Avenue from Burling Lane to Eastchester Road to a new mixed use zoning category (North Avenue-NA) permitting a reasonable height of 4 floors but a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 3.0. Compare this 3.0 to the Neighborhood Business zoning which allows a FAR of only 0.5. The proposed “as of right” FAR would increase six times! Even the Downtown Business district (DB) does NOT allow a Floor Area Ratio greater than 2.0 without Council’s review of the project and its approval. In the Downtown Business District along Main Street and most other downtown streets there is a FAR of 4.0, but public benefits,must be provided such as providing publicly accessible open space, achieving a LEED environmental certification, historic preservation or historic renovation, outstanding architecture, etc.
So why is 3.0 being allowed on North Avenue “as of right”, without discretionary approval by the Council or Planning Board and without public benefits similar to those downtown. The proposed 3.0 FAR also is just a little less than the FAR or 3.5 that was originally proposed as an incentive zoning on North Avenue. A developer could go to the Zoning Board and ask for a 0.5 variance to get to the highest density that was previously proposed by the Consultant and Commissioner. Getting the Zoning Board to approve a FAR of 3.5 when a base zoning of FAR 3.0 is permitted as of right is a whole lot easier than getting to 3.5 from an as of right FAR of 2.0.
In addition, all five of the residential lots on Fifth Avenue, right across the street from the Rochelle Park Historic District, are now proposed to be rezoned to this new high density North Avenue zoning, allowing a 4 floor high commercial/office/residential building or parking garage to be built as close as 6 feet away from somebody’s bedroom window “as of right” The Council-adopted Comprehensive Plan specifically recommended that these 5 lots be rezoned to two family residential. Bob Young owns a couple of these residential lots, so maybe that explains something to you. So the logic is that the Comprehensive Plan needs to be changed rather than to change the zoning to be consistent with the previously adopted Comprehensive Plan ! What was the consultant thinking and who paid for this study? Word has it Bob Young paid for a good portion of the study.
Who benefits from the North
Who benefits from the North Avenue Redevelopment?
If done right I guess us all but will Bramson’s administration and Council members get it right?
What had he gotten right in his tenure?
Considerations-Congestion,Parking,Traffic,Polution all bordering residential neighborhoods. How many children will be going to school. Is it not a consideration or only throw up any idea to bring any change.
Flushing Queens went through this kind of zoning changes so did Forest Hills. People ran for the hills which turned both area’s into what they are today.
Both Flushing and Forest Hills had many other routes for Traffic but North Avenue is a different situation.
I suggest that Mayor and Craig King have lost their way a long time ago.
The Mayor has Sussman and Fertel no matter what!
We know where Trangucci and St. Paul are at!
Stowe seems to be actually considering his constituants rather than the Mayor, while Tarantino thinks this is all good for his personal business.
In the end the Tax Payers gets screwed again.
I am sure a rezoning would be good in the right scale, over time. I sure hope some of these dots get connected and maybe we can reveal the motivation for all of this nonesense.
I say finish one thing you started before this.
Forewarned is Forearmed
Take a look at these figures . The council is going hogwild , swinging for the fences , hoping something will stick . Problem is , they leave the planning wide open to attract any developer to have free reign with “their” plan . I get it , but that’s not what’s best . It’s as if their reading from “planning for dummies” and just following the script , without the savvy that comes from experience . The “master plan” (if one even exists) is cloudy and poorly defined by allowing such high FAR #’s instead of keeping them more in scale and letting the developer offer a compelling reason to exceed them . Let those who would make the most money work for it instead of NR just handing it over . Do you walk into a car dealer and say “which car should I buy?” . As he sells it to you , all of his reasons will make sense from his standpoint . You’ll get the biggest , most expensive vehicle he can get his hands on . Have a contractor come to your house and ask him ” how big should I make my addition ?-don’t worry about budget or zoning ” . You will wind up with the Taj Mahal . Is that what you were thinking of ?
There is no form of checks and balances to regulate the out of control , rush to push through , mentality . Success for them comes in pushing things through before anyone realizes , and dealing (or not) with the consequences later . (By then , Mr Bramson won’t worry when he’s in Nita’s office .) They count on little involvement from the public .
Is the developer paying for the “independent”study and does that bias it to his advantage ?
Think about the mayors behavior . Early on in his term , did he seem much more outgoing , engaging , easy to connect with ? He would go anywhere to meet and greet . Does he appear to be insulating himself more and more with those who blindly agree with him and his developer associates (future campaign contributors ?)? Using veiled promises of a better future to motivate the pawns . Not unlike Haber in “The Lathe of Heaven”
Get up , talk to your council member , call the mayor , be involved . In the end , it will save YOUR tax dollars. Remember , the IDA ( It’s Done Already) will be subsidizing this latest Taj Mahal.
If you don’t like it…
Then run against a councilmember or Noam Bramson.
New Rochelle looks amazing right now1
Either get with the party or move to Mt Vernon or Yonkers. We don’t want you here anymore!
Dolts are back and now they’re communists !
Spoken like a true “apparatchik ” . Do you work at city hall ? Are you the political officer , comrade? In America , we are all blessed with not only the ability , but the right to speak out as we see fit . Thanks to you I will now redouble my efforts to expose corrupt , self serving , brainwashed dolts like yourself . If you’re afraid of opinion or comment that offends your sinking party affiliation , perhaps YOU should move to where there are more like you . China , North Korea , Iran , Cuba all come to mind. You would fit right in since you’re so afraid to speak your mind . Too bad you’re so petty , I’m sure you have at least one redeeming value to contribute to my city .