In this recent, and fifth, court case that Chase Partners brought against the village, the court's decision downplayed the importance of the planning board's site plan review and environmental review. Alpert called the findings of the environmental review "arbitrary" and "capricious," citing them as "seek[ing] to impose unreasonable and unjustifiable conditions on Chase's proposed apartment project,... affected by errors of law, and amount[ing] to an abuse of discretion and is not supported by substantial evidence."
The judge said that the board will not be permitted to resubmit an amended site plan, blaming it for delaying the start of the project's construction for the past three years. He also said that "a planning board is not empowered or authorized to interpret the local zoning code as part of a site plan application."
However, the judge did force the developers to make some concessions. Since the project will be located so close to King Kullen supermarket, Chase will be responsible for finding a way to improve traffic flow in the area. Also, in an effort to curb parking congestion, Chase must provide a shuttle to the Long Island Rail Road during peak hours. It also is required to provide fire vehicle access through a 20-foot paved ring road around the north and south buildings.
The Signature Place site is part of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's Brownsfield Clean-up Program. This requires Chase to clean the contaminated site prior to any construction. At this point, before Chase's Brownsfield application can be approved, the state is requiring the developers to conduct further studies at the site to determine the extent of the contamination.
Chase originally expressed interest in the site in 2003, but because of opposition from Rockville Centre residents and the municipality - opposition Alpert described as "unanimous, vociferous and often angry" - the developers have yet to begin construction.
The village board still has the opportunity to appeal Alpert's decision, said Gary Fishberg, the special counsel for the village planning board. He said the trustees will meet this week to review and discuss the judge's decision and whether they'll appeal it. "There's much in the decision subject to an appeal if they choose to appeal it," Fishberg said. He also said that "obviously the village doesn't agree with [the judge's decision] because of the scope of the project... which is the largest project in [its] history." The board has until the end of July to appeal the decision.
"These Signature Place Court decisions highlight the danger of the January 2003 multifamily law, which allowed for the first time apartments to be built anywhere in the commercial districts," said Village Trustee Jeanne Farnan Mulry. "Unlike this judge, I was at every planning board hearing on Signature Place, and believe that the planning board review and determinations were thorough, reasoned, and had the best interests of the village in mind. The flaw here is not in the work of the planning board, it is in the January 2003 multifamily law which opened the door to these aggressive outside apartment developers. I have tried for the past year, along with Trustee Karamouzis, to repeal the January 2003 multifamily law, but Trustee Karamouzis and I did not have the votes," Mulry added. "I am hopeful that now the village board of trustees will unite and move swiftly to repeal the January 2003 multifamily law."
"We're still studying [the decision] and trying to analyze it," Fishberg said. "It appears that the judge has said a number of things in the decision that we don't subscribe to and we're still studying it to determine what the course of action will be."
Comments about this story? TRazzano@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000.
