HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.13.2021 R. Schlank CommentsROSEMARY A. SCHLANK
9 Bayberry Lane
Rye Brook, NY 10573
(914) 939-9273
RSchlank@ix.netcom.com
May 13, 2021
Chairman Robert Goodman and Members of the Planning Board
Village of Rye Brook Offices
938 King Street
Rye Brook, NY 10573
Dear Chairman Goodman and Members of the Planning Board,
Re: Site Plan Review for the 900 King Street Site
It is my understanding that the Planning Board’s process does not permit public
comments on the 900 King Street site plan at this time. However, I am respectfully
asking you to consider my comments anyway because this matter appears to be
consuming valuable Village resources, and I believe our tax dollars can be spent
more constructively by considering the concerns of the residents and taxpayers of
the Village in general and of our PUD in particular.
As a senior citizen, taxpayer, and homeowner in the same PUD as 900 King Street,
I urge you to consider the following before issuing any report or recommendation:
1. The applicable NY State standards. Please clarify - or obtain clarification
from the applicant - of which NY state laws, regulations, and requirements,
including environmental standards, apply to the proposed site plan. I am not
an attorney, but I believe the applicable laws would include Title 18,
SubChapter D, Adult-Care Facilities. ( https://regs.health.ny.gov/volume-b-
1-title-18/1413515569/subchapter-d-adult-care-facilities ). This clarification
would be helpful for evaluating both the current site plan proposal and any
future site plan revisions that may need to be considered if and when there
is a business failure that leaves the Village with unpaid taxes and no ready
buyer in the same distressed industry.
2. The lessons learned from the pandemic for assisted living and memory care
facilities. As mentioned in my letter of March 11th, recent studies and
investigations indicate that the health and safety risks are unacceptable for
assisted living and memory care facilities of the type proposed for 900 King
Rosemary Schlank
900 King Street, page 2
Street. These concerns are far more important to the future of our PUD and
our Village than the aesthetic matters that the applicant has asked the
Planning Board to spend its time on. To plan ahead effectively and avoid a
crisis situation in the future, the Village must consider the effects on the
health and safety of the future residents of this facility of any unwillingness
on the applicant’s part to voluntarily modify the site plan in response to the
lessons learned from the pandemic.
3. The need for improvement in communications with neighboring land owners.
At past hearings on this matter, the applicant and the attorney for the Arbors
HOA have been permitted to speak at length, while the residents of the
Arbors have been told to limit our remarks and avoid duplication. This is not
appropriate because the HOA is only one of 251 land owners in the Arbors
portion of the PUD. This project will have significant adverse consequences
that many Arbors landowners understandably do not want. To date, the only
access we have had to information about the project has been through the
Village’s website, despite the fact that the original PUD resolution requires
our consent for any future changes in land use. The Village has argued that
unanimous consent is too high a standard. But, even if true, this would not
be sufficient grounds to shut us out completely. In the future, please require
establishment of a process by which the other 250 landowners can obtain
answers to our questions and resolution of our complaints directly from the
applicant’s representative and/or the Village’s officials. We should have the
same direct access to Village officials as any other taxpayers in the Village.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Yours truly,
Rosemary Schlank
c: Chris Bradbury, Administrator, Village of Rye Brook, NY
Dan Barnett, President, Board of Directors, Arbors Homeowners Association