A plan to tear down an office building at 701 Westchester Ave. in White Plains and put up a five-story, 360-unit apartment building has been rejected by the White Plains Common Council.
A resolution to reject the application by Senlac Ridge Partners was included on the council”™s consent agenda for its October regular monthly meeting. The council adopted the resolution while taking numerous other actions by a single vote that covered all items that were on the consent agenda.
Vocal opposition to the proposal had some from five White Plains neighborhood associations. They were the North Street, Gedney Farms, Rosedale, Haviland Manor and Old Oak Ridge associations that encompass about 1,600 homes.
Senlac owns the office park at 701-777 Westchester Ave. and asked the city to apply the Planned Campus Development Overlay zone to its 54.8-acre property.
Its proposed apartment building was designed with 21 studio apartments, 177 one-bedroom units and 162 two-bedroom units along with a fitness center, business center, library and lounge spaces for residents.
The resolution to reject the proposal pointed out that zoning amendments are a discretionary legislative action by the Common Council and the council is not required to approve petitions for changes.
“This is not like a special use permit where, if set standards are met, approval must be granted,” the resolution said. “By its very nature, approval of Planned Campus Development District overlay mapping is at the sound discretion of the Common Council.”
The resolution criticized Senlac”™s master plan for the property for not describing how it promotes the public health, safety and welfare of the city or needs of the community. It said that the plan “does not constitute environmentally sustainable building or site design nor is any public or private space proposed which can be integrated into the city”™s open space network.”
The resolution rejecting the application also said that the plan does not demonstrate compatibility with existing abutting residential properties. It pointed out that the city currently is engaged in a multi-year project to update the Comprehensive Plan and with that in mind said it is inappropriate “to adopt a zoning map amendment for a project that has not clearly established that it promotes the public health, safety and welfare of the community.”
Councilman John Martin said he supported the resolution to reject the proposal largely because of the Comprehensive Plan update but also noted the Westchester County Planning Board provided comments urging the city to pay special attention to how residential developments along Westchester Avenue would relate to their surroundings.
Councilman Justin Brasch said, “The important thing to remember is that we are going to maintain the status quo and it”™s not like they can”™t come back. If there was a zoning amendment made tonight we wouldn”™t be able to take that back and change it so this gives us time to think about how we want to plan our city and in what way and how we want to do it to respect our neighbors.”
Council President Nadine Hunt-Robinson said that she has supported zoning overlay requests in the past but is not persuaded that the 701 Westchester Avenue location is suitable for a Planned Campus Development District overlay.
“The Common Council takes its responsibilities very seriously, one might say soberly,” Council Member Victoria Presser said. “We listen to our constituents, we review all the documents, we make site visits whenever we can and we take the time to think through these matters because it is our job to make decisions for the benefit of the entire community. In this instance, it is to the benefit of the community that we deny this proposal.”
Mayor Tom Roach said that the Planned Campus Development District overlay zone was devised with a view toward providing flexibility for uses of a property while keeping the council in control of what is and is not permitted to be done.
“It is not simply rezoning the entire campus office district but giving each project a review on its own so you could say ”˜yes”™ to this and ”˜no”™ to that,” Roach said. “In this case, you”™re looking for an overall project that fits with the site and works well and I don”™t think that this one does.”
