.

Bridge Street Developers Threaten to Sue Village if Board Passes Zoning Law Without Parking Structure

The Irvington Village Board delayed voting on a a Waterfront Zoning Law again after Bridge Street Developers threatened taking legal action if the revised law was passed.

Bridge Street Properties Managing Member Bill Thompson made his point loud and clear Monday night: if the Village Board passes the revised waterfront zoning law as is, they will sue. 

Until recently, the lengthy document that outlines a master plan for Irvington's land closest to the Hudson River allowed developers to propose a project that included a parking structure—something otherwise banned in the village—as long as it met a number of stringent criteria.

However, after more than 80 residents signed a petition to stop the passage of the law and attended six public hearings speaking out passionately against the allowance of a garage, the board tabled the law—later amending it to omit the right to build a parking structure under any circumstances.

"I was shocked that you took out the parking structure," said Tompson, an Irvington resident and partner in the developing company that owns the waterfront land. "This is unfair, counterproductive and conflicts with all the priorities you laid out for the waterfront."

Thompson argued that it was unjust for the village to strike the parking structure from the law, while simultaneously retaining large setbacks on all sides of the property which render about 25 percent of the land off limits for development.

John Marwell, attorney for the developers, took Thompson's speech one step further.

"You're putting a strait-jacket on future development," he said. "If you pass this law, it won't end the discussion." 

Trustee Walter Montgomery asked Marwell to clarify his statement.

"This could well go to litigation if you pass this law," he said. 

Clearly winded by the the developers' strong statements, trustees opted not to vote on the law Monday night, postponing its passage again after more than seven years in the works.

"It seems imprudent to push ahead with this when the village is clearly so divided," Montgomery said. "When we changed our mind on the parking structure, I had a good sense of the depth of opposition to it."

Montgomery continued that in recent discussions with residents, many admitted having a "visceral reaction to the words parking structure"—and after looking more deeply into the issue, said they were less opposed.

Resident Cathy Sears disagreed.

"The waterfront is not just an ordinary place; it is a sense of identity for the community," she said. "I don't know who those people are who were uninformed, but everyone I know has followed this from the beginning and read all the information."  

The board closed the hearing without establishing a set date for it to be reopened.

 "What's clear is that we need to try harder to bring the community together on this issue," Montgomery said, asking for suggestions on how they could reach out to more people. "We can't go forward with anything when the community is so polarized."

EESH April 05, 2011 at 04:32 PM
It is amazing that it only takes 80 people to bankrupt a village.
Irvingtonian April 05, 2011 at 11:00 PM
It is amazing that it only takes one developer to destroy river views
EESH April 06, 2011 at 01:47 AM
It is amazing that it only takes a previous mayor and board to destroy river views. That newer building right on the water is taller that the older bridge st. properties.
LORETTA RICCI April 06, 2011 at 12:16 PM
It amazes me that this town doesn't want a parking structure. Is that to keep everyone except Irvington Residents out. I assume so. I've been living here for a long time and these people with the big $ don't want any change to their or at least they think their precious town. Well new is good for everyone. Give it a chance and enjoy the benefits it will serve.
LORETTA RICCI April 06, 2011 at 12:18 PM
The riverfront will always be there if you open your eyes.
Kathy Kaufman April 07, 2011 at 03:10 PM
I'm open to development, but have yet to see a riverfront development that is nicer than none at all. I think that the nicest riverfront development in our area is in Piermont. Yet, despite high-end condos, a restaurant and a gallery, Piermont's riverfront is generally devoid of people and the view is dominated by TONS of sterile concrete. Personally, I prefer to stare out at the river amidst nothing than to try to appreciate the view from the edge of someone else's failed fantasy. Remember, THE COMMUNITY DOES NOT "OWE" ANYONE RIGHTS THAT WERE NOT AVAILABLE TO THEM WHEN THEY PURCHASED THEIR PROPERTY.
mjb fresh June 27, 2011 at 10:51 PM
lets stop arguing and look for a good solution: if we disguise the parking garage as a nail salon that also sells middle school girl overpriced jeans, it can sneak through!
mjb fresh June 27, 2011 at 10:54 PM
lets stop arguing and come up with something that everyone will like: lets disguise a parking structure as a staging area for summer concerts and firework launch area....d'oh...I forgot, those got cut out of our budget..
mjb fresh June 27, 2011 at 10:55 PM
lets stop arguing and really put our heads together: lets build a parking structure that doubles as a free lending library with a plastic bubble over the top that has no employees...this way, we can close our existing library which caters to all those snotty folks who read books, and maybe we can get those fireworks back again...

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something