UPS neighbors to go before Yonkers Zoning Board of Appeals
Neighbors of the UPS distribution center at 555 Tuckahoe Road in Yonkers were scheduled to bring an appeal before the city’s Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) on Sept. 15 over an interpretation made by the city’s commissioner of housing and buildings to allow above-ground fuel storage tanks and a refueling facility at the UPS center.
Attorney Joel Sachs of the law firm Keane & Beane, who will be representing the residents, told the Business Journal that there are two issues they’re raising.
“Number one, the zoning code does not allow above-ground fuel tanks. The zoning code specifically says that all fuel storage tanks in the city of Yonkers must be underground,” Sachs said. ”We don’t think that the planning board had any right to waive that requirement and allow an above-ground tank that would require a use variance by the zoning board, but they did not agree.
“And, secondly,” he continued, “the building commissioner … takes the position that a truck refueling depot is a permitted use in the CM zoning district, which is what district this property is located in. Our position is that a truck refueling depot is only permitted in an industrial zone, not permitted in the commercial zone.”
The planning board on Aug. 19 approved plans submitted by UPS to make changes at the distribution center located on a 22.6-acre parcel. In addition to the storage tanks and refueling facility, the plans include additional parking, adding new doors and windows to the building, adding a new human resources office, putting up signs, allowing for up to 225 package delivery trucks to be accommodated on the site, adding new turning lanes on Tuckahoe Road, adjusting traffic signals and relocating curb cuts.
Sachs, who represents about 2,000 neighboring families in a number of associations, said that depending on what happens before the ZBA they may have a cause to file a second lawsuit, in addition to the one he has been poised to file challenging the planning board’s action.
The lawsuits would be in the form of Article 78 proceedings, a fairly common procedure to challenge and review a government’s administrative actions in court.
“We probably will begin an action later in September or early in October,” Sachs said. He added that because of the Covid situation, Gov. Andrew Cuomo may extend the time period allowed for court actions to be filed. Normally for an Article 78 proceeding there would be a 30-day filing window after a governmental action has been officially recorded.
‘NEVER A PUBLIC HEARING’
“It’s a lot of work,” Sachs said. “We’re also putting in a claim that the city has denied us due process by not allowing us to participate at all, by not allowing us to question UPS or question the planning board members, not allowing us to have our consultants make presentations before the board.
“There was never a public hearing held by the planning board on this. Never. No public hearing,” he continued. “I’ve been practicing law a long time. I’ve never been involved in a situation where in my opinion there’s been such a lack of procedural and substantive due process by a municipality. And we represent loads of municipalities in the Hudson Valley.”
Sachs charged that the planning board has not stood up to protect the interests of residents.
“It’s like we don’t even exist,” Sachs said. “All we can do is send in letters and emails and we have no idea if those documents were ever event transmitted to the planning board.”
He excoriated the planning board for deciding that no environmental impact statement was necessary for the UPS project.
“There are significant impacts to the residences in terms of traffic, noise, air quality, 24/7 hours of operation,” Sachs said, “and from day one we had asked UPS and we had asked the planning board to require an environmental impact statement, which would have pointed out all the potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposal and what steps that UPS would take to mitigate those impacts.
“UPS has other sites in the metropolitan area, including Westchester where there is either no refueling or limited refueling,” Sachs added.
He pointed out that the 12,000-gallon tanks would be the height of three-story buildings. He said that other UPS sites in Westchester are in industrial and commercial areas and not surrounded by residential neighborhoods.
Sachs provided the Business Journal with two documents that were prepared by the planning and development consulting firm Ferrandino & Associates Inc. for the group stopUPS.org that has been publicly opposing the project. A traffic memorandum declared that the proposed use of the building is a new use “with completely different, more intense traffic impacts from that of all prior warehouse uses.”
An addendum quoted a representative of stopUPS.org as reporting that she had a conversation with business agents of the UPS drivers’ union. She said that the union officials estimated that in the future the number of employees at the UPS Yonkers Distribution Center could reach 1,000 and parking on the site would be inadequate.
Sachs said that the neighbors would still be willing to sit down with UPS and try to work out a plan that would have less impact.
“If UPS is willing to make some serious concessions as to issues like the on-site fuel storage tanks, a limit on the numbers of trucks, a limit on the hours of operation, we’d be willing to talk to them,” Sachs said. “I would think it’s in the interest of everybody to resolve a litigious matter without litigation or, if litigation is started, to resolve it after the litigation is started. But otherwise, if we have to go to court, we’ll go to court.”