V.S. developer pulls BZA proposal for 18-unit apartment building

Builder cites opposition from School District 24

Posted

When a handful of residents arrived at Village Hall on Dec. 4 to protest a proposed 18-unit apartment building on the corner of Roosevelt Avenue and Cochran Place before the Board of Zoning Appeals, they were met not with the standard group of suburban design experts, attorneys and associated foam boards adorned with site plans and mockups, but instead with a sign.

“The application for the Board of Zoning & Appeals Case #3837 & #3838 has been withdrawn by the applicant,” it read.

In its application, the builder, Kay Development LLC, had sought 10 variances for the project to exceed the building coverage limit of a lot; front, side and rear yard setbacks; reduced street setbacks; off-street parking requirements; driveway placement requirements and corner sight requirements.

Speaking to the Herald, Kay board member and longtime Valley Stream resident Vassilos Kefalas cited potential opposition from School District 24 for the withdrawal.

“What happened was, a couple of days ago I realized that there was a lot of concern that there might not be enough room in School District 24,” Kefalas said. “So I decided, rather than go ahead, to remove the application so I get a chance to meet with the school district.”

The proposed development would be three stories — 30 feet — tall, and include 13 two-bedroom apartments, four one-bedroom units and one studio, with 19 parking spaces.

School District 24 officials said they learned of the project through a legal listing in the Herald and at the district’s Nov. 28 Board of Education meeting. Schools Superintendent Don Sturz encouraged residents to attend the BZA hearing to express their views.

“Any high-volume residential project has the ongoing potential to significantly impact the school district,” Sturz told the Herald, adding that it would be short-sighted to judge the impact of such a development on the immediate influx of students. “. . . At any point in time, multi-unit housing developments will have the potential for variable numbers of residents, es-pecially numbers of school-age children, and an increase of just one student can have significant financial ramifications for a school district.”

Factors that the district would have to contend with over time, Sturz said, include the grade level of incoming students, current enrollment in those grades and whether a student has special needs, any of which could impact class sizes, the need to hire new teachers, add class sections and construct new classrooms.

“Our buildings are operating at full capacity at this time, necessitating creative planning to meet all students’ needs with the limited funds and space available,” he said. “High-occupancy residential projects will always potentially significantly impact a school district fiscally and functionally in the immediate present . . . and in unpredictable ways . . . into the future.”

Resident Jose Gobaldon, whose home is a few houses down on Roosevelt from the proposed apartments, and who said he had moved into Valley Stream about three months ago, said he opposed the development for aesthetic and traffic reasons.

“If they build apartments there, I think it’s going to be crowded,” Gobaldon said, “but I don’t know how the community feels . . . It’s [going to be] right in my backyard. If [you] saw a building there, you wouldn’t like it.”

The property currently serves as a parking lot, and is owned by Valley Stream-based Valley Parking, Inc. The company paid nearly $19,000 in school taxes and roughly $2,000 in village taxes for 2018, according to village and county tax rolls.

On the day of the scheduled hearing, Kefalas issued a letter to the village Building Department to say that he was withdrawing his proposal and that he was planning to meet with District 24 representatives and community members to discuss their concerns, although as of press time on Tuesday no meeting had been scheduled.

He said that given the location’s proximity to the Valley Stream train station, he thought the apartments would be a good fit to attract young professionals and empty nesters.

“I thought it would be a major improvement,” Kefalas said. “. . . The problem that I heard was specifically about the schoolkids, and a lack of room, which is something I should address.”