By Mike Schnitzel
Site developer Dr. Leonard Bleicher¹s plan calls for a three-story complex to be built on a 33,766-square-foot parcel in a commercially zoned district adjacent to the Gibson Long Island Rail Road station. Bleicher said that the project would be targeted at young professionals and senior citizens. At a zoning board hearing in June of 2005, Bleicher¹s counsel, Dominick Minerva Sr., said the project ³would harmonize completely with the existing neighborhood.²
In her decision, Jones noted that the court has a limited function in the zoning process. ³Local officials, generally, possess the familiarity with local conditions necessary to make the often sensitive planning decisions which affect the development of their community,² she said. ³Absent arbitrariness, it is for locally selected and locally responsive officials to determine where public interest in zoning lies.²
Muller Place resident Alan Schaecter said that while he agreed with much of the substance of the judge¹s ruling, he was disappointed with the final outcome. ³It seemed to me like we were winning as I was reading the decision from the beginning,² Schaecter said. ³It wasn¹t until the end I realized we had lost. It seems that she agreed with a lot of our points, but she ruled [in the village¹s] favor because she thought it would improve the neighborhood.²
Bleicher¹s traffic and parking expert, Norman Gerber, said that retail use of the property would cause more traffic congestion than a condo complex, and environmental and land use planning expert James McAllister said that the project addressed the ³housing deficiency² for senior citizens and young professionals and was a good use of the property.
Schaecter said that he and other residents who joined in filing the suit, known as an Article 78, did not oppose the construction of condos on the site, but felt that Bleicher¹s plan was ³unsafe overdevelopment² because of dimensions that exceed village code. Six variances were granted by the village for items that did not meet village code.
Residents took issue with the fact that the code requires a 20-foot front setback for such a project, while the proposed setback for the Gibson condominiums is 4 feet. Code also allows no more than 30 dwelling to be built in a lot of this size, five fewer units than Bleicher¹s proposal calls for.
But Schaecter and another resident, William Freda, contended that village code limits the number of units to 23 in such a situation. "It was the biggest bone of contention by far," said Freda, who advised the group that filed the Article 78. Freda, who served on the Village Planning Board for five years, said that village code allows for one unit per 1,500 square feet in an apartment zone, which works out to 23 apartments, not 30. Building Inspector Thomas Viani could not be reached for comment regarding the discrepancy.
Ted Eid, who was among the residents who spearheaded the Article 78 proceeding, said that his major problem was with the setback. "Why should my house have a 20-foot setback and [the condominiums] can have 4?" Eid said. "If I have to live by the rule, why can't [Bleicher]?. Is he better than me? At 4 feet from the curb, you open the door and you're in the street."
Village Attorney Mike McKenna said that before Bleicher can move ahead with construction plans, he must first resolve the leases of three tenants who remain in the retail complex where the condominiums will be built. ³They still have leases, so he has to come to some kind of agreement with them,² McKenna said. ³It¹s pretty much a money issue.² The three stores are Gibson Laundromat, Page Music and Gibson Custom Framing.
Eid said that there would be no appeal of the judge's decision. "It seems that everybody is locked into their own problems and no one is able to get involved any further," he said. "I hate to put it this way, but they won. I don't like the idea of giving up, but we don't have much of an option."
Comments about this story? MSchnitzel@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 265.
