55.0°,
Mostly Cloudy Court sides with developers
Posted
Once more, the village's efforts to keep the large-scale development out of Rockville Centre has been dealt a blow. A panel of judges from the Supreme Court's Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department has denied the village's appeal of a July 2006 ruling by State Supreme Court Judge Bruce D. Alpert in favor of Chase Partners, the developers of Signature Place.
In 2004, the village Planning Board completed an environmental review of the site, and concluded that it could not support such a large development. In his ruling, Alpert characterized the Planning Board's findings as "arbitrary" and "capricious," concluding that the board was "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 ..."
The appeals panel agreed with Alpert, saying that he "correctly determined that the Planning Board ... failed to provide a reasoned elaboration of the basis for its [environmental review] and instead based the statement of findings on generalized, speculative comments and opinions of local residents."
"Obviously, we're disappointed with the result," said Gary Fishberg, special counsel to the Planning Board. He said that while there is a possibility of further appeal by the village, he could not comment on the village Board of Trustees' future actions because it had not yet had the chance to discuss the decision. Mayor Mary Bossart said that an official comment from the board should be available next week.
"The appellate court decision confirms residents' worst fears about the dangers of the multifamily laws that were passed in January 2003," said Trustee Jeanne Mulry. "The ... laws provided too few protections for the village and too many privileges for developers."
Mulry, along with fellow trustee - and fellow Residents' Voice Party member - Andrew Karamouzis, has been a staunch opponent of not just Signature Place, but of any extensive development in the village since she was elected in 2005, and worked to introduce a density cap in 2006. Three new board members - Bossart and Trustees Charles Joyce and David Krasula - were elected in June, and the five have worked together to repeal sections of the multifamily law governing the Business A zone. They have focused on further reducing new building heights and limiting density.
Michael Faltischek, the attorney for Chase Partners, said the court's ruling was exactly what he expected. "This is vindication of the merit that everyone has seen in the proposed project," Faltischek said. "This was approved by a prior village board; it was approved by the Nassau County Planning Commission; it was awarded a Smart Growth award by Vision Long Island; and now the court has sustained this view."
Faltischek added that Chase Partners, as well as Darby Group Companies Inc., the owner of the property, are anxious to see the proposed construction zone's brownfield site cleaned up, and to see the condo complex's groundbreaking take place as soon as possible.
Faltischek also said the appellate court's decision would be key in Chase's $25 million lawsuit against the village for wrongfully delaying the developer's project for five years. "The lawsuit is a separate lawsuit for damages," he explained. "The only question is how much the village will pay as a consequence of its actions."
Former Deputy Mayor Wayne Lipton has suggested that should Chase win its lawsuit against the village, the $25 million in damages could affect residents' tax rates.
The same court did rule in favor of one of the village's appeals relating to the site, involving the Darby Group. A panel of judges reversed a State Supreme Court decision that the village "intentionally, unequally, and selectively enforced the local laws in an attempt to stop Darby's contract-purchasers," Home Depot, which also wanted to build on the site, and Chase Partners. The appellate court said there was no evidence that the village's actions were malicious, and further determined that the Supreme Court improperly denied the village's request to dismiss Darby's complaint against it.
Comments about this story? TRazzano@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 221.
In 2004, the village Planning Board completed an environmental review of the site, and concluded that it could not support such a large development. In his ruling, Alpert characterized the Planning Board's findings as "arbitrary" and "capricious," concluding that the board was "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 ..."
The appeals panel agreed with Alpert, saying that he "correctly determined that the Planning Board ... failed to provide a reasoned elaboration of the basis for its [environmental review] and instead based the statement of findings on generalized, speculative comments and opinions of local residents."
"Obviously, we're disappointed with the result," said Gary Fishberg, special counsel to the Planning Board. He said that while there is a possibility of further appeal by the village, he could not comment on the village Board of Trustees' future actions because it had not yet had the chance to discuss the decision. Mayor Mary Bossart said that an official comment from the board should be available next week.
"The appellate court decision confirms residents' worst fears about the dangers of the multifamily laws that were passed in January 2003," said Trustee Jeanne Mulry. "The ... laws provided too few protections for the village and too many privileges for developers."
Michael Faltischek, the attorney for Chase Partners, said the court's ruling was exactly what he expected. "This is vindication of the merit that everyone has seen in the proposed project," Faltischek said. "This was approved by a prior village board; it was approved by the Nassau County Planning Commission; it was awarded a Smart Growth award by Vision Long Island; and now the court has sustained this view."
Faltischek added that Chase Partners, as well as Darby Group Companies Inc., the owner of the property, are anxious to see the proposed construction zone's brownfield site cleaned up, and to see the condo complex's groundbreaking take place as soon as possible.
Faltischek also said the appellate court's decision would be key in Chase's $25 million lawsuit against the village for wrongfully delaying the developer's project for five years. "The lawsuit is a separate lawsuit for damages," he explained. "The only question is how much the village will pay as a consequence of its actions."
Former Deputy Mayor Wayne Lipton has suggested that should Chase win its lawsuit against the village, the $25 million in damages could affect residents' tax rates.
The same court did rule in favor of one of the village's appeals relating to the site, involving the Darby Group. A panel of judges reversed a State Supreme Court decision that the village "intentionally, unequally, and selectively enforced the local laws in an attempt to stop Darby's contract-purchasers," Home Depot, which also wanted to build on the site, and Chase Partners. The appellate court said there was no evidence that the village's actions were malicious, and further determined that the Supreme Court improperly denied the village's request to dismiss Darby's complaint against it.
Comments about this story? TRazzano@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 221.
Report an inappropriate comment
Comments