2018_01_10 D_ Abbott CommentsFrom: Diana Abbott [mailto:dianity27@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:48 AM
To: Christopher Bradbury; Mayor Paul S. Rosenberg; Susan R. Epstein; David M. Heiser; Jason A. Klein;
j.rednick@verizon.net
Subject: Concerns re: 900 King Street project
Dear Honorable Mayor Rosenberg, Honorable Members of the Board of Trustees, and Village
staff:
I am writing you this letter to discuss the environmental impact analyses needed for the 900 King
Street project, and to elucidate possible adverse impacts of this proposed project. I have an
Urban Planning masters degree from Columbia University, have worked as a planner for the City
of Los Angeles in California and in New York City, in addition for numerous developers over
my 15 year profession, from land developers, to office building developers and leasing agents, to
residential developers and building owners. I myself have performed similar environmental
impact analyses for multi-family housing in NYC. Now that I am a resident of Rye Brook,
having moved to the Arbors two years ago, I am an affected stakeholder just by proximity of this
project and would like to give my personal and professional input on this project.
As evidenced by the Village of Rye Brook Comprehensive Plan, there is a shortage of available
land for any new developments. This project thus holds a tremendous opportunity in that
whatever gets developed can either propel the Village forward in its vision, or burden the village
and community with an economically deleterious asset. Specifically, I question whether this
project would further Goal 1.4-2:
Enhance sense of community through changes in the built environment. Policy: Minimize activities
that create significant adverse impacts to the quality of life in residential neighborhoods. Policy: Promote a
diversity of housing choices for both current and prospective residents. Policy: Preserve and enhance the
visual character of the village’s major roadways. Policy: Enhance community identity by creating
community focal points. Policy: Enhance community identity through the redevelopment and enhancement
of existing commercial areas to create a Village Center
Traffic along King Street would be even worse with an addition of 200 residential units, which
would not enhance any visual character of the major roadways. The added congestion would
make walking and biking more dangerous, and would do nothing for Smart Growth, since there
is no public transit plan included in the project.
The project would not create any community focal point or enhance any community identity,
since the housing would be limited to its residents. This is a great shame, since the land is
situated right next to the Village Hall. The Village could use the land to enhance it’s own
property, like having a small commercial square, or public use area that can be enjoyed by all
residents. This project would do nothing of the sort, and even uses Village property for an
egress.
I am concerned how this project will impact our schools. Rye Brook is lauded for the quality of
its schools, and this is a major source of property value. It is the reason why I and many other
young families moved here. Seniors would have little to gain from voting for higher taxes that
would benefit our schools, and that would put our school district at risk, which would in turn put
property values at risk. Not to mention that senior housing of this scale is itself an economically
untenable asset.
I understand that there is a real need to redevelop this property, since a vacant office building
serves no one. But the Village should look at its Comprehensive Plan, and ask itself, what does
the Village and the community really need? Senior housing is not it. And if it’s for the sake of
increasing tax revenues, that is a short term game plan, since this project would have far reaching
and long term consequences for residents and the Village. What market studies have the
developers produced which can validate the need for such a large senior housing complex in Rye
Brook?
Developers are not always committed to a project for the long term, since they can sell the
property to another developer once rezoning is complete, once they have secured greater value to
the property, so it is critical to think long term for this project. They create value by upzoning,
increasing density, and producing the most amount of units per acre. Density in itself can be a
tool for sustainable developments, but in this case, the location and type of density is not suitable
for the area. I urge the Mayor, the trustees, and all planning staff to think deeply on what would
be the best use of this property for Rye Brook’s and its residents’ long term quality of life. What
would be the best, most sustainable use of a property this large, which is a rare item, that would
enhance the surrounding schools, residential community, and Town Hall?
As for the environmental impact analyses, the developers should hire a well-known firm known
for its environmental planning work, like AKRF. I would not accept an environmental impact
report from any firm that does not have high repute as it is quite easy to hire a less reputable
company or independent contractor to put forth a report that negates any impacts. While those
reports have little integrity to them, municipalities accept them. I know this from experience.
The following are the categories which should be analyzed for the EIS:
1. Land Use, Zoning and Public Policy
2. Socioeconomic Conditions
3. Community Facilities and Services
4. Open Space
5. Urban Design and Visual Resources
6. Water and Sewer Infrastructure
7. Solid Waste and Sanitation Services
8. Energy
9. Traffic and transportation
10. Air Quality
11. Greenhouse gas Emissions and Climate Change
12. Noise
13. Neighborhood Character
14. Construction
Sincerely yours,
Diana Abbott
162 Brush Hollow Crescent
Rye Brook, NY 10573