FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FGEIS) FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF PORT CHESTER, CHAPTER 345, "ZONING" ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FGEIS)
FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF PORT
CHESTER, CHAPTER 345, “ZONING”, AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAP
VOLUME 1
MARCH 16, 2020
Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“FGEIS”) Name of Proposed Action: The adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map, hereinafter referred to as the Village of Port Chester Form-Based Code State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) Classification: Type 1 (see 6 NYCRR 617.4(b)(1) “the adoption of a municipality's comprehensive zoning regulations”) Location of Proposed Action: Village of Port Chester, New York Lead Agency Name: Village of Port Chester Board of Trustees Lead Agency Contact: Mr. Eric Zamft, AICP, Director Village of Port Chester, Department of Planning & Economic Development 222 Grace Church Street, Suite 202 Port Chester, New York 10573 Telephone No.: (914) 937-6780 Prepared by: Village of Port Chester, Department of Planning & Economic Development 222 Grace Church Street, Suite 202 Port Chester, New York 10573 Telephone No.: (914) 937-6780 And: Fisher Associates 325 Delaware Avenue Suite 200, Buffalo, New York 14202 Telephone No.: (716) 858-1234 Date Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement accepted as complete by Lead Agency: March 16, 2020
Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... A
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION (I.E., VILLAGE OF PORT CHESTER
FORM-BASED CODE) ............................................................................................................................. 2
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES TO THE DGEIS .................................................................................... 5
4.0 THRESHOLDS FOR FURTHER EVALUATION ................................................................................... 6
5.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS .................................................................................................................. 7
5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Comments on the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement ............................................... 9
6.0 Fair Share Mitigation............................................................................................................................... 52
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 52
6.2 Precedent in New York State ......................................................................................................... 52
6.3 Methodology................................................................................................................................... 53
6.4 Sample Calculation ........................................................................................................................ 57
6.5 Other Fair Share Contribution Mitigation Contemplated by the GEIS ....................................... 57
6.6 Other Non-Mitigation Fees Contemplated by the GEIS ............................................................... 58
6.7 Summary of Anticipated Fair Share Contribution Mitigation Funds .......................................... 58
TABLES
Table 1: Index of Comments and Responses ........................................................................................................... 7
Table 2: Build-Out by Use .................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 3: Fair Share Contribution Upgrades/Improvement Cost Estimates .............................................................. 55
Table 4: Per Square Foot Mitigation Amounts ....................................................................................................... 56
Table 5: Sample Fair Share Contribution Mitigation Calculation ........................................................................... 57
APPENDICES
Appendix A Public Hearing Transcripts
Appendix B Public and Agency Comments
Appendix C Build-Out Analysis Report
Appendix D Traffic Study & Fair Share Contribution Traffic Mitigation
Appendix E Revised Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”)
Appendix F Revised Proposed Zoning Code
Appendix G Port Chester Public Schools Overcrowding and Mitigation Analysis
March 2020Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) is intended to analyze and address public and agency
comments received by the Village of Port Chester Board of Trustees, as Lead Agency, pursuant to the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), in response to the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
(DGEIS). The DGEIS explored the impacts that may be associated with adoption of the amended Code of the Village
of Port Chester, which is the culmination of years of planning work that aims to support and encourage sustainable
and sensitive redevelopment in the Village.
The Village adopted its Comprehensive Plan in 2012, which formed the basis for the proposed zoning. Among the
goals established by the Comprehensive Plan included the following:
Maintain and Enhance Residential Neighborhoods
Revitalize Commercial Areas and Waterfront
Strengthen Industrial Areas
Improve Transportation and Infrastructure
Facilities and
Opportunities for New Development
The Plan established several Planning Intensity
Areas, including:
o Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement
Zones
o Limited Intensity Planning Zones, and
o Higher Intensity Planning Zones
The proposed zoning combined with the earlier comprehensive plan effort, constitutes the comprehensive zoning plan
for the Village. As indicated in the proposed zoning amendments, such comprehensive zoning plan represents the
most beneficial and convenient relationship among the various public and private areas within the Village. The
proposed zoning will guide future growth and development, create sustainable living conditions, protect the Village’s
character and social and economic stability, protect and conserve the value of land, and protect and preserve the natural
environment and its ecological systems, among other benefits.
As the amended Code and Zoning Map are the implementing documents to the Comprehensive Plan, substantial
changes were necessary to the existing zoning code in order to achieve the citizens’ vision for the Village.
The proposed zoning consolidates development regulations into a simple, illustrative, and user-friendly document for
buildings and districts, providing fair and transparent rules and procedures based on public input. Changes made to
the proposed zoning as a result of public comment on the DGEIS are included in Appendix E.
March 2020 AFinal Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This is the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) for the proposal by the Village of Port Chester
Board of Trustees to adopt the amended Code of the Village of Port Chester Chapter 345, “Zoning,” and Official
Zoning Map.
This FGEIS has been prepared in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law
(State Environmental Quality Review Act or SEQRA) and its implementing regulations found in 6 NYCRR Part 617,
including the specific provisions that relate to the content of final environmental impact statements contained in 6
NYCRR §617.9(b)(8).
A Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) dated November 4, 2019 was prepared for the Proposed
Action. At its November 4, 2019 meeting, the Port Chester Board of Trustees accepted the DGEIS as complete with
respect to its scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review, in accordance with 6 NYCRR
§617.9(a)(2). The DGEIS was circulated for review and to solicit comments from involved and interested agencies
and the public, pursuant to 6 NYCRR §617.12. The DGEIS was distributed to the Port Chester-Rye Brook Public
Library and posted on the Plan the Port website (https://www.plantheport.com/), in conformance with SEQRA
requirements.
A public hearing to accept comments on the DGEIS was held by the Board of Trustees on November 18, 2019 at the
Village Courthouse, 350 N. Main Street, 2nd Floor, Port Chester, New York pursuant to 6 NYCRR §617.9(a)(4). The
public comment period was held open until December 23, 2019.
Following its official acceptance by the Board of Trustees, this FGEIS will be circulated in accordance with the
requirements of 6 NYCRR §617.12. It will also be posted on the Plan the Port website and distributed to the Port
Chester-Rye Brook Public Library. Given the additional information included in the FGEIS, the Village is supportive
of providing additional opportunity for public comment. Although a public hearing on a Final EIS is only optional in
SEQRA, the Village will be holding a public hearing on the FGEIS. While SEQRA only requires a 10-day public
comment period on a Final EIS, the Village will be mirroring the DGEIS timetables and thus have a 30-day public
comment period. Finally, although there is no formal “comment and response” mechanism after a Final EIS is
complete, depending on comments received on the FGEIS, the Village may choose to provide responses to such
comments.
March 2020 1Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION (I.E., VILLAGE OF PORT
CHESTER FORM-BASED CODE)
In September 2019, a second draft of the proposed Form-Based Code was accepted by the Board of Trustees for public
review and comment. This second draft was encapsulated as the Proposed Action in the DGEIS. In response to public
and agency comments submitted to the Lead Agency during the public comment period, numerous revisions to the
proposed Form-Based Code are provided. All changes to the proposed Form-Based Code since the issuance of the
DGEIS are shown in redline so the reader can clearly identify all modifications (see Appendix F).
The general changes by chapter are:
Table of Contents
Table of Contents revised to match individual Article table of contents’.
Table of Tables & Illustrations
Table of Tables & Illustrations reviewed and revised to match titles throughout the document.
Preamble
Note added to indicate that the Preamble is provided for information only and does not constitute part of the Port
Chester Zoning Code.
Article 1: General
Section 345.122 revised to clarify the validity of permits issued prior to the adoption of the proposed Form-Based
Code.
Article 2: Zoning Map
Section 345.201.F revised to reflect the ability of the Zoning Map to be amended by the Board of Trustees.
Sections 345.202 and 345.204 revised to provide further clarity on the process by which special requirements or
assignment of district for development parcels occurs.
Table 345.204 revised to include the CD-3.R20, CD-3.R7, CD-3.R5 Districts and to remove the regulation for
the CD-5W and CD-6 Districts.
Article 3: Zoning Districts and Civic Zones
No substantial revisions outside of correct references and formatting.
Article 4: Building and Lot Plans & Standards
Tables 345.405.A-1, A-5, A-6, and A-8 Number of Buildings, Accessory Buildings revised to permit only in the
3rd Lot Layer.
Tables 345.405.A-5, A-6, A-7, and A-8 Drive-Through revised to include Drive Through standard.
Tables 345.405.A-6, A-7, and A-8 Building Standards, Façade Openings revised to except Shopfront, Gallery,
and Arcade frontages.
Table 345.405.A-7, Number of Buildings, Accessory Buildings revised to permit only in 3rd Lot Layer and not
permit on a Through Lot.
Tables 345.405.A-5, A-6, A-7, and A-8 Ceiling Height revised to indicate a maximum range of nine (9) to eleven
(11) feet for residential and a maximum of fourteen (14) feet for non-residential.
Table 345.405.A-9 revised to be consistent with new code references.
Table 345.405.A-10 revised to be consistent with new code references, including any potential bonuses.
Table 345.405.B.4 revised to except areas adjacent to the waterfront.
Section 345.405.D.1.b revised to clarify that it is the Planning & Economic Development Zoning Administrator
that could grant such waiver.
Section 345.405.H.1.c revised to clarify how building height is measured.
March 2020 2Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Tables 345.405.J-1 and J-2 Cottage and Estate House revised to be permitted in the CD-4 Districts.
Table 345.405.K-1 revised to add, remove, and clarify certain uses and the districts that they are permitted, not
permitted, or specially permitted in.
Section 345.405.K.6.f.I.(a) revised to indicate that drive-throughs must be located in the 3rd Lot Layer.
Section 345.405.K.7.a revised to indicate that an application for classification would be required.
Table 345.405.N-1 revised to add, remove, and clarify certain parking requirements.
Section 345.405.N.1.c.iii revised to indicate that the Planning & Economic Development Zoning Administrator
shall establish a radius of impact to be the appropriate general standard for use of public parking to count towards
the parking of a particular application or site.
Section 345.405.N.1.h.ii revised to remove standard for providing indoor employee showers or dressing facilities.
Section 345.405.N.1.h.vi revised to indicate that the Decision-Making Authority has the ability to entertain any
other acceptable way to reduce the required number of spaces.
Section 345.405.U revised to globally refer to “affordable AFFH”.
Section 345.405.U revised to include a subsection that requires that all developments incorporate an Affirmative
Fair Housing Marketing Plan so the affordable units are marketed consistent with local, state and federal
requirements.
Section 345.405.U.16 revised to state that Westchester County could be the Administrative and Monitoring
Agency.
Section 345.405.V revised to include an extensive subsection on Green Building and Infrastructure.
Section 345.405 revised to correctly refer to the Westchester County Planning Board referral process.
Article 5: Development Parcel Plans & Standards
Tables 345.504.B-1 and B-2 – Plaza illustration revised; Sport Field or Court revised to be permitted in CD-5W.
Article 6: Supplemental Standards
Section 345.609.B.1 revised to clarify that damage repair by the applicable lot owner.
Article 7: Sign Standards
Section 345.701.H.12 revised to remove canister signs.
Section 345.701.H.23 revised to clarify that design drawings be submitted to the Planning & Economic
Development Zoning Administrator.
Table 345.701B-15 revised to remove additional standard ‘c’.
Article 8: Administration, Procedure & Enforcement
Section 345.805.C.2 has been revised to include a discussion of the required parking standards, as well as the
operational aspects of any parking provided.
Section 345.805.E.2 revised to include a Conditional and Final approval process.
Sections 345.805.F, G, and H revised to indicate that the approval resolution is a non-binding document and that
all conditions must appear on the approved plan.
Section 345.805.G.3.b.i revised to require twenty (20) copies of the application.
Section 345.805.G.5.d.i revised to require five (5) copies of the site plan.
New Subsection 345.805.G.4.c added to include Reservation of Parkland on Site Plans Containing Residential
Units.
Section 345.805.H.4.c revised to indicate Development Parcel Plans.
Section 345.809.F.2 revised to give the Planning Commission approval authority over the location of signs within
a Site Plan or Development Parcel Plan.
Section 345.813.C.2 revised to clarify content of notice.
Table 345.814 revised to reflect types of development applications.
March 2020 3Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Article 9: Nonconformities
Section 345.901.A.1 and 3 revised to include Sign and Security Grill.
Section 345.901.D.3 revised to clarify that the request would come from the Planning & Economic Development
Zoning Administrator.
New Section 345.901.I (Alternate Method of Legal Nonconforming Use and/or Legal Nonconforming Building
or Structure) added.
Article 10: Definitions
Multiple definitions revised.
Multiple definitions removed or consolidated into other definitions.
A number of definitions added.
Uses and terms from the Special Districts (SD-PRD and SD-PMU) added and/or appended to existing definitions.
Other Global Changes
Cross references, including tables, illustrations, and sections, were reviewed and revised.
Table and illustration references bolded throughout the document.
Zoning Map
Legend revised to read “CD-5W”.
March 2020 4Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES TO THE DGEIS
Based on comments received on the DGEIS during the public comment review period (see Appendices A and B and
Section 5.0 of this FGEIS), the DGEIS has been revised accordingly and is presented in “redline” format in Appendix
E of this FGEIS. Key revisions to the DGEIS include the following:
Expanded discussion of build-out analysis (Section 2.4 of the DGEIS). A Build-out Analysis Report
is included in Appendix C to the FGEIS
Revised Transportation Resources section (Section 3.3 of the DGEIS) to include reference,
summary, analyses and mitigation associated with the Traffic Study completed for the Proposed
Action (Traffic Study is included in Appendix D to the FGEIS), expanded discussion of Commuter
Rail and Bus Network, and new section that addresses Parking.
Revised Community Services and Utilities section (Section 3.4 of the DGEIS) to include reference
to and expanded discussion of the updated Port Chester Public Schools Overcrowding and
Mitigation Analysis Report Updated January 2020 (included in Appendix G of this FGEIS), and an
expanded discussion of Jobs and Employment section.
Expanded discussion of Historic and Cultural Resources section (Section 3.6 of the DGEIS) to
include State and National Register-Listed or Eligible Properties and Locally Significant Buildings
and Structures
Updated and expanded discussion of Growth-Inducing, Cumulative, and Secondary Impacts section
(Section 4.3 of the DGEIS) Update of Further Alternatives section (Section 5.5 of the DGEIS) to
include a discussion of one (1) new alternative: Modified CD-5 and CD-5W Districts Maximum
Building Height Alternative
Updated Future SEQRA Actions section (Section 6.0 of the DGEIS)
March 2020 5Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
4.0 THRESHOLDS FOR FURTHER EVALUATION
As stated in 6 NYCCR 617.10 (C) “Generic EIS’s and their findings should set forth specific conditions or criteria
under which future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements for any subsequent SEQRA
compliance. This may include thresholds and criteria for supplemental EISs to reflect specific impacts such as site
specific impacts that were not adequately addressed or analyzed in the generic EIS.” Thresholds are used to ensure
that projects which were not adequately analyzed by the GEIS will be adequately reviewed prior to approval.
The Village has previously indicated that an objective of developing a new Form-Based Code and preparing a GEIS
is to assist in streamlining the development review and approval process. Beyond having a clear, community-driven
vision for the community and regulations that can effectuate that vision, focusing the SEQRA review of individual
projects to the resources that would be specifically impacted is an expected outcome of the effort. The GEIS evaluates,
generically, impacts on all environmental resources and provides generic mitigation measures for those impacts.
Section 6.0 of the DGEIS identifies the relationship between the GEIS and Future SEQRA Actions. In this case,
where a GEIS has been prepared to consider proposed Village-wide Zoning Code, any future site-specific SEQRA
action would remain subject to SEQRA for the required ‘hard look’ at potentially significant adverse impacts. To the
extent the GEIS has identified and analyzed certain types of impacts, future SEQRA actions may require less analysis
within some areas of potential impact.
It is expected the Findings Statement will reiterate that future SEQRA actions must identify and analyze where
supplementary information, analysis, and/or mitigation is required. Future SEQRA actions are generally more likely
to be focused on primary or direct impacts, whereas, secondary or indirect impacts may be sufficiently addressed in a
GEIS. For future actions following the issuance of a Findings Statement, initial SEQRA procedures such as Lead
Agency designation, classification of the Proposed Action, review of an EAF (with or without supplementary studies),
as well as a Determination of Significance must be performed prior to determining which potential impacts may
require supplementary SEQRA analysis or mitigation. Accordant with the SEQRA Regulations, supplementary
SEQRA analysis for future actions may yield one (1) the following determinations:
(1) No further SEQRA compliance is required if a subsequent proposed action will be carried out in conformance
with the conditions and thresholds established for such actions in the generic EIS or its findings statement;
(2) An amended findings statement must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was adequately addressed in
the generic EIS but was not addressed or was not adequately addressed in the findings statement for the generic
EIS;
(3) A negative declaration must be prepared if a subsequent proposed action was not addressed or was not adequately
addressed in the generic EIS and the subsequent action will not result in any significant environmental impacts;
or
(4) A supplement to the final generic EIS must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was not addressed or
was not adequately addressed in the generic EIS and the subsequent action may have one or more significant
adverse environmental impacts.
It is likely that most future SEQRA actions would fit into the category described above in item (3). Section 6.0 of the
DGEIS has been updated and details actions that may be required for future site-specific SEQRA review.
March 2020 6Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
5.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
5.1 Introduction
This section addresses the substantive comments on the DGEIS that were made at the public hearing held on
November 18, 2019, or received in written form during the DGEIS review period, which closed at the close of business
day on December 23, 2019. Table 1 below lists the sources of all of the written comments on the DGEIS received,
the substantive comments of which are addressed in this FGEIS.
Table 1: Index of Comments and Responses
Substantive
Author Comment Source Date
Comments
Mr. Bryant Lewis Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P1
Mr. David Cooper Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P2, 28
Mr. Tom Kissner Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P3-5
Mr. Richard Hyman Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P6-14, 29-32
Mr. Tom Corbia Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P15
Mr. Sheldon Kahan Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P16-17
Mr. John Colangelo Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P18
Mr. Ronald Luiso Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P19
Mr. Keith Morlino Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P20-21
Mr. Richard Abel Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P22
Mr. Gregg Hamilton Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 None
Ms. Nadia Ali Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P23-24
Ms. Beeta Jahdi Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P25
Mr. Carlos Santos Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P26
Mr. Mark Blanchard Public Hearing Transcript November 18, 2019 P27
Mr. Tom Kissner Comment Letter November 18, 2019 TK1-2
Mr. Frank J. Schumaci, IE, Region Comment Letter November 22, 2019 DOT1-3
8 Permits Unit, New York State
Department of Transportation,
Region 8
Ms. Linda Turturino Comment Email December 1, 2019 LT1
Mr. Sheldon Kahan, President, CEO Comment Letter December 3, 2019 SK1
Interstate + Lakeland Lumber
Mr. Howie Ravikoff, M. Ravikoff Comment Letter December 4, 2019 HR1-16
Associates, Inc.
Mr. John B. Colangelo, John B. Comment Letter December 5, 2019 JC1-2
Colangelo Attorney at Law, On
behalf of the Complex at Port
Chester LLC
Ms. Robyn M. Hollander, AICP, Comment Letter December 5, 2019 MNR1-6
Deputy Director, Station Area
Planning and Transit Oriented
Development, Metro-North
Commuter Railroad Company
March 2020 7Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Substantive
Author Comment Source Date
Comments
Mr. Anthony Baxter, Chairman, Comment Letter December 5, 2019 PC1-11
Village of Port Chester Planning
Commission *
Mr. David J Cooper/Kasey Brenner, Comment Letter December 6, 2019 ZS1-3
Zarin & Steinmetz, On behalf of
Broad Street Owner, LLC
Mr. Anthony B. Gioffre III, Cuddy Comment Letter December 9, 2019 CF-1
+ Feder LLP, On behalf of Tarry
Lighthouse, LLC
Mr. Greg Usry, Interim City Comment Letter December 9, 2019 CR1-2
Manager, City of Rye
Mr. Ronald Luiso, Byram Mason & Comment Letter December 9, 2019; RL1-2
Building Supply Corp revised December 11,
2019
Sustainable Port Chester Alliance Comment Letter December 11, 2019 SPCA1-4
Mr. Richard Hyman Comment Letter December 17, 2019 RH1-12
Dr. Hans-Jakob Wilhelm, Ph.D, Comment Letter December 20, 2019 HJW1
Board Chair, Ballet des Ameriques
School & Company
Mr. Gregg Hamilton Comment Letter December 22, 2019 GH1-11
Mr. Louie Sanchez, Business Comment Letter December 23, 2019 IBEW1-4
Representative, Local Union No. 3,
International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers of Greater New
York and Vicinity
Ms. Nadia Alia, Ms. Doris Bailey Comment Letter December 23, 2019 NAACP1-10
Reavis, Ms. Joan Grangenois-
Thomas, Mr. Tom Kissner, Mr.
Bryant Lewis, Port Chester/Rye
NAACP
Mr. Thomas A. Corbia, President, Comment Letter December 23, 2019 SB1-6
Port Chester-Rye Union Free
School District School Board
Mr. Frank Ferrara, Chairman, Port Comment Letter December 23, 2019 IDA1-3
Chester Industrial Development
Agency
Sustainable Port Chester Alliance Comment Letter December 23, 2019 SPCA5-11
Ms. Norma V. Drummond, Comment Letter December 23, 2019 WCPB1-13
Commissioner, Westchester County
Planning Board
* Resolution of the Village of Port Chester Planning Commission
March 2020 8Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
5.2 Comments on the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
The following subsections present each comment, after which the corresponding response is provided. In cases where
the comment is identical to another comment, comments have been grouped together. The subsections follow the
same titles and sequence as were presented in the DGEIS, for convenient reference back to that prior document. Any
comment that falls outside of the sequence presented in the DGEIS is presented in a ‘Miscellaneous’ sub-heading.
5.2.1 Comments on Section “1.0 Executive Summary” of the DGEIS
No comments.
5.2.2 Comments on Section “2.0 Description of the Proposed Action” of the DGEIS
5.2.2.1 Topic: Build-Out Analysis
Comment P-3
According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the rezoning will almost completely eliminate industrial
space from Port Chester, decreasing our industrial area from 1.7 - 1.378 million square feet to 24,000 square feet, a
decline of more than 98 percent. Yet the DGEIS has nothing to say about the huge problems this would cause,
including the elimination of potential hundreds of jobs.
Response P-3
The Proposed Action evaluated in the DGEIS is the adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port Chester,
Chapter 345, “Zoning,” and Official Zoning Map by the Board of Trustees –the rezoning of the entire Village. Zoning
on its own has no direct impacts on the environment, as it is the legal framework governing future development.
However, its implementation, meaning the likely future development that would occur under the zoning (new,
amended, etc.) after its adoption, does have the potential for environmental impacts. The practice in New York State
has been to evaluate the implementation of zoning in a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) because it is
a broad-based action having wide application with no specific development projects proposed. The challenge then
becomes how impacts are assessed, even generically, in the absence of a specific development project. The common
practice employed in New York State and other states having similar environmental review regulations, is to develop
a “build-out analysis” which can estimate potential development based on parameters such as current zoning
regulations, proposed zoning regulations, trends in development applications, and market conditions. For the Village
of Port Chester, two build-out scenarios were considered – 1) a 20-year build-out scenario based on market potential,
acknowledging development projects already being considered and 2) a maximum build-out scenario, which
considered both existing and proposed zoning codes. For the purposes of the DGEIS, the 20-year build-out scenario
represented the Proposed Action, which provided a more realistic estimation of potential development over the next
20 years. While the results of the build-out analysis were completed and included in the DGEIS for impact purposes,
a memorandum detailing and describing the full methodology and the detailed information was not. The complete
build-out memorandum has been included in this FGEIS as Appendix C. The Proposed Action and the Build-Out
Analysis Report do not propose or otherwise recommend demolition of existing development including any existing
industrial uses. See Response HR-13 on page 13 regarding nonconforming structures and uses. The build-out analysis
methodology describes the assumptions and methodology used to estimate potential impacts. This methodology
included an estimate of existing development within the study area, including an estimate of 1.378 million square feet
of industrial uses. The methodology also included assumptions regarding the likely future land use split for new
development projects (i.e. the amount of new development anticipated to be used for residential, commercial, etc.)
which was based on a market analysis completed in 2018, trends in development applications seen over recent years,
national industrial trends, as well as the sentiment of the community over the course of the 45-plus community
meetings held on the project. Based on these assumptions and market pressure, industrial land uses would likely be
replaced over time with other land uses (primarily office, retail, and residential land uses). The 24,000 square feet
noted by the commenter is “flex space” identified in the market analysis and utilized in the build-out analysis. This
use is considered a subset of light industrial uses that would likely be included in future development applications.
As noted previously, existing industrial land uses are not being recommended for elimination/removal.
March 2020 9Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Comment P-6
First of all, on page 9 and 10 is the build-out analysis and the market study. But it does not explain what the
methodology is. It talks about some software program called Zonar. I don’t [know] that anyone here probably knows
what that is, but there is no methodology at all explained about how they came up with the numbers. In the build-out
analysis and the market studies are crucial for determining what the impact will be of all the new buildings, various
parts of the infrastructure socioeconomic.
Response P-6
See Response P-3 on page 9 regarding the full methodology of the build-out analysis (and market analysis) being
provided as Appendix C in this FGEIS. Part of that methodology was the utilization of a software program called
Zonar , which is described in Appendix C.
Comment TK-1
[U]nder both the "full build-out" and the "20-year build-out" scenario, the DGEIS projects that industrial space will
decrease by 98.3%, from 1.378 million square feet to just 24,000 square feet, which would entail significant job loss
(Section 3.1.3.2, page 22). Oddly, however, the DGEIS states-without any explanation-that even without the rezoning,
under the "Current Zoning" scenario, industrial space would decrease by the exact same amount, to 24,000 square
feet. In other words, the DGEIS argues that industrial space and industrial jobs will entirely disappear from Port
Chester, to exactly the same degree, whether the proposed rezoning is undertaken or not. No explanation of any kind
is given for this coincidence, and the methodology is not available for public examination…[I]t is implausible that a
massive rezoning of the study area like the one contemplated would have no effect on industrial space; it is far more
likely that the industrial uses which are currently thriving in the village under existing zoning would continue to do
so if current zoning were maintained, but that industrial uses would be negatively impacted by the proposed rezoning
which would allow significantly larger residential development throughout the study area. The existing estimates call
into serious question the methodology used to do the build-out analysis, and the village should revise its
methodology… [T]he DGEIS makes no mention of the potentially massive economic dislocation that would be
involved if industrial uses decreased to the extent suggested in the DGEIS, but these impacts need to be studied and
the action should be revised to mitigate these effects and protect manufacturing jobs.
Response TK-1
See Response P-3 on page 9 with regards to the build-out methodology.
Comment HR-2
We suggest the Planning Office put out a series of projections of what the Village might look like in certain points in
the future; 1, 5, 10, 20 and perhaps even 50 years out and solicit written responses to a series of fixed question from
the heads of each department, office, and key personnel such as the Village Engineer, Manager, Clerk, Code
Enforcement, Police Department, Ambulance Core, Treasurer, Tax Assessor, and especially the IDA. We suggest you
ask; what is your overall opinion; is your office currently equipped to handle its current responsibilities at each future
point in time based on the provided projections; what will your office require and what will that cost in the future to
maintain or achieve its stated goals. These reports should be made public. Each decision making body should be
provided these reports.
Response HR-2
The build-out analysis presented fully in Appendix C of this FGEIS provides reasonable projections of the amount of
development that could potentially occur in the Village over the next 20 years (the “20-year build-out scenario”). The
build-out analysis also considers the maximum development potential of both the current zoning code and the
proposed Form-Based Code (the “maximum build-out scenario”). In the beginning of the Form-Based Code project,
the Village’s consultant team met with Village department heads to understand their experience with the existing
zoning code, any concerns they had about an amended or new zoning code, and potential impacts that could arise via
a rezoning. These meetings combined with the significant community engagement that occurred early on the in the
project via Planapalooza and the Plan the Port activities resulted in a Vision Book that was presented by the Village’s
consultant and released to the public on May 21, 2018. As part of the preparation of the DGEIS and FGEIS, Village
staff coordinated with the heads of each department through the Village Manager’s Office to understand the potential
March 2020 10Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
impacts that new development could have on each of those departments. This coordination has informed the
discussion of “fair share” contributions to mitigation as it relates to Village services. This is further presented in
Section 6.0 of the FGEIS and in Reponses P-9 (page 30), PC-8 (page 31), GH-3 (page 31), SB-3 (page 31), and
WCPB-10 (page 31).
Comment IBEW-2
The DGEIS estimates that industrial space in Port Chester will be almost totally eliminated (a decline of 98%, from
1.378 million square feet to 24,000 square feet, according to Table 2 in Section 3.1.3.2) -- yet we know from US
Census data that this space provides over 500 jobs in Port Chester, and these jobs are disproportionately held by low-
income people of color. A loss of potentially thousands of existing jobs, particularly blue-collar jobs, could be
devastating to Port Chester's working-class community and particularly to people of color. But the DGEIS makes no
detailed effort to estimate how many jobs might be lost, the types of jobs at risk or who will suffer the consequences.
Nor does the plan offer any way to mitigate this likely outcome.
Response IBEW-2
See Response P-3 on page 9 with regards to the build-out methodology. Current industrial land uses may remain as
nonconforming uses per the regulations included in the Proposed Code in Article 9. In addition, see Response HR-13
on page 13 regarding nonconforming structures and uses.
Comment GH-5
The DGEIS does not explain its methodology for estimating future population growth and so it is impossible to
evaluate and comment upon the validity of the population estimates which result.
Response GH-5
See Response P-3 on page 9 with regards to the build-out methodology and Appendix C for a description of the
methodology used to estimate. population growth.
Comment SPCA-5
First, the DGEIS offers no methodology for its estimate of population increases under the 20‐year‐buildout scenario,
so village residents have no way of evaluating whether the village will experience the (already large) increase of
nearly 10,000 people contemplated in one scenario or the (enormous and unmanageable) increase contemplated in
the Maximum Buildout. Furthermore, the Maximum Build‐Out Scenario, Proposed Zoning Condition assumes (page
10) that "all new buildings in the study area included first floor retail, one floor of office above, and the remaining
floors... for residential dwelling units" (page 10). Yet few or no developments with one floor of office space have
been built in Port Chester in the past few years, so the assumptions on which this scenario is based appear faulty; the
maximum build‐out scenario may actually underestimate the full population increase potentially resulting from the
new code. It is impossible to say whether the 20‐year‐buildout analysis falls victim to the same error since no
methodology is provided for it.
Response SPCA-5
See Response P-3 on page 9 with regards to the build-out methodology and Appendix C for a description of the
methodology used to estimate population growth. An assumption of the build-out methodology is that all new
buildings will contain at least a first floor that is retail, office space (if any) limited to upper floors, and residential
above. This assumption is based on development trends in urban areas and development applications received by the
Village. In addition, this assumption is an important component of transit-oriented development (TOD), which is the
foundation of the proposed new Form-Based Code. The Code mandates the activation of lower floors through retail,
office, and other similar uses. The Village is currently seeing this type of mixed-use development in a number of
applications that are currently before the Planning Commission. For these reasons, the Village is comfortable and
confident in the assumptions made in the build-out analysis as a sound basis to reasonably guide the evaluation of
impacts in the GEIS. See Appendix C.
March 2020 11Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Comment WCPB-9
The DGEIS does not contain adequate information to evaluate the impacts of the proposed zoning changes. While
Table 4 of the DGEIS describes the potential build-out of the new zoning at both the 20-year time horizon and at
full/maximum buildout, the methodology of this analysis is not discussed. Additionally, there are no assessments of
visual impacts or traffic impacts. The document instead states that this information would be provided in the final
GEIS. It is also noted that there would likely be another opportunity for public comment after the final GEIS is
completed.
Response WCPB-9
See Response P-3 on page 9 with regards to the build-out methodology and the full build-out analysis report included
as Appendix C of this FGEIS. See Response DOT-1 on page 23 with regards to the traffic assessment being included
in Section 3.3 of the revised DGEIS and the traffic impact assessment itself included as Appendix D. Community
character and visual resources, including visual impacts, were presented in Section 3.2 of the DGEIS per the adopted
DGEIS Final Scoping Document. SEQRA permits additional information not provided in a DEIS to be provided in
the FEIS, particularly when amplification of information provided in the DEIS is deemed necessary and appropriate.
Moreover, this approach is appropriate given that no new substantive information has become known regarding a
potential environmental impact and no significant project change is proposed. See SEQRA’s implementing regulations
(6 NYCRR Part 617.9(b)(8)) which state (emphasis added): “A final EIS must consist of the following: the draft EIS,
including any revisions or supplements to it; copies or a summary of the substantive comments received and their
source (whether or not the comments were received in the context of a hearing); and the lead agency's responses to
all substantive comments. The draft EIS may be directly incorporated into the final EIS or may be incorporated by
reference…” Given the additional information included in the FGEIS, the Village is supportive of providing additional
opportunity for public comment. Although a public hearing on a FEIS is only optional in SEQRA, the Village will
be holding a public hearing on the FGEIS. While SEQRA only requires a 10-day public comment period on a FEIS,
the Village will be mirroring the DGEIS timetables and have a 30-day public comment period. Finally, although there
is no formal “comment and response” mechanism after a FEIS is complete, depending on comments received on the
FGEIS, the Village may choose to provide responses to such comments.
5.2.2.2 Topic: Community Outreach
Comment HR-1
This community still needs to be educated. Whatever you think you may have done, its not enough. A huge number
of long term Village residents, property owners and established businesses do not understand what is going on. The
process is unclear, the proposal and its repercussions are unclear. The Planning Commission/Planning Office needs
to reach out to these two groups specifically and engage them in meaningful conversation.
Response HR-1
Community and stakeholder engagement is a critically important component of the entire Plan the Port effort. At the
beginning of the Plan the Port process the Village was clear that a community-driven approach, whereby the
community is involved and assumes ownership of the vision and ultimately the zoning, was the only approach that it
was interested in pursuing. Section 2.6 and Appendix E of the DGEIS details this extensive public outreach and
community engagement effort. As of the date of this FGEIS more than 45 separate meetings were held with and in
the community. These meetings included, among others, a Business/Property Owners Workshop on March 23, 2018,
a presentation to downtown businesses on July 22, 2019, and more recently, efforts to engage directly with property
owners and small businesses out of the concern of commercial and small business displacement. A separate and
dedicated project website – www.plantheport.com – has been available since the beginning of the project. In addition,
the project has a dedicated page on the Village’s website entitled ‘Form-Based Code/DGEIS’ which contains all
project documents and meeting information. The Village has also posted news items related to the project on the
front/home page of its website, as well as on the local cable channel. Section 2.6 of the DGEIS has been revised to
update this robust community engagement effort. See Appendix E.
March 2020 12Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Comment HR-13
We believe there should be workshops for existing commercial property owners. What is going to happen with existing
buildings? We believe the vast majority of current property owners do not know what will happen with their
commercial property when / if the zoning changes. There has been no publication geared to this population, no bullet
points of information like the example above…
Response HR-13
See Response HR-1 on page 12 regarding community engagement. Per Section 345.901.A.1. of the proposed Form-
Based Code (Appendix F), “If any Nonconforming Use of a Structure ceases for any reason for a continuous period
of one (1) year or more or is changed to a conforming Use, or if the Structure in or on which such Use is conducted
or maintained is moved for any distance whatever, for any reason, then any future Use of such Structure must conform
to this Chapter. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a Use, Structure, Lot, or Sign of any of the following
types that legally existed as of the Effective Date of this Chapter, any amendment of this Chapter or any amendment
to the Zoning Map, may be continued as a legal nonconformity in accordance with the provisions of this Section
345.901 and certification by the Zoning Administrator pursuant to 345.805.D.: 1. A lawfully permitted Use of
Structure, 2. A lawfully permitted Structure, 3. A lawfully permitted Lot, 4. A lawfully permitted Sign, and 5. A lawfully
permitted Security Grill.” Additional detail regarding nonconformities is provided in Article 9 of the proposed Form-
Based Code. See Appendix F.
5.2.2.3 Topic: The Proposed Action (Comments on the proposed Form-Based Code)
Comment P-16
[W]e run an interstate lumber, that's who we are, and I just want to be able to continue to do that. And within reason,
you know, if I need to just expand a little bit, whether is put a little office space above the building that exists there
now, it used to be Dave's Trucking, it is a good building, steel, concrete, well, steel and block, but it is in good shape.
And I may want to increase that a little bit or my outdoor storage, and that's something that I have to come before the
Board and you know, do what is required.
Response P-16
Comment noted. Industrial uses were discussed at the Board of Trustees DGEIS Comments Workshop on December
16, 2019. As a result of the discussion and direction provided at that workshop, the Proposed Action (the Form-Based
Code presented in this FGEIS in Appendix F) has been revised to include Light Manufacturing Plant (the equivalent
of “light industrial”) as a Special Exception Use in the CD-5 District only along: Townsend Street, Purdy Avenue,
Dock Street, and Martin Place. See revised Table 345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses) in Appendix F. The
Proposed Action has been further revised to include Outdoor Storage as an Accessory Special Exception Use in the
CD-5 District only along: Townsend Street, Purdy Avenue, Dock Street, and Martin Place. See revised Table
345.405.K-2 (Building and Lot Accessory Uses) in Appendix F.
Comment P-19
I just don't like the situation where it says its zone is not permitted. It shouldn't be not permitted, it should at least be
a special exception, you know. Nobody knows what tomorrow is gonna be and when an opportunity might come up.
But you have to have the ability to have industrial space in our communities and to be able to make it easier to develop
that space in an industrial use.
Response P-19
See Response P-16 on page 13 regarding industrial uses, Response HR-13 on page 13 regarding existing
nonconformities, and Response HR-1 on page 12 regarding community engagement utilized throughout the project.
In addition, see Section 345.806 of the proposed Form-Based Code (Appendix F) regarding Zoning Variances
including Area Variances and Use Variances.
Comment SK-1
The property at 31 Purdy Avenue, Port Chester, N.Y. has been and is presently being used for outdoor and indoor
storage of building materials, receiving and distribution of building materials, and includes the indoor office space
March 2020 13Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
required to manage this facility. As the property owner of this property, it is extremely important to me that I am able
to maintain the existing use and improve, modify, and expand the facility in the future, if needed.
Response SK-1
See Response P-16 on page 13 regarding industrial uses and Response HR-13 on page 13 regarding existing
nonconformities. In addition, see Table 345.405.K-1 “Building and Lot Principal Uses” within the proposed Form-
Based Code (Appendix F) regarding uses permitted, not permitted, and uses allowed with a special exception for the
CD-5W district.
Comment HR-3
Table 345.405.K-1, Building and Lot Principal Use, Retail Use / Personal Service Use / Artisan Use Categories,
Motor Vehicle Goods Maintenance / Cleaning / Repair / Service, other than Motor Vehicle Body Shop. This
description is also listed under Motor Vehicle-Related / Boat-Related Uses Categories. This needs further
clarification. Both are Principle uses. One is retail, one is not? How could the other not also be retail? Is wholesale
a permitted use? Re-write the definition of each. Or consolidate the two into one and clarify if retail, wholesale, or
open to the public is permitted or not.
Response P-19
Table 345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses) has been revised to list “Motor Vehicle Goods Maintenance /
Cleaning / Repair / Service, other than Motor Vehicle Body Shop” under the “Motor Vehicle-Related / Boat-Related
Uses Categories” only.
Comment HR-4
CD-4 district has several footnoted restrictions on Uses. It is the only district with any footnotes. It is our
understanding that the Village grouped certain areas together intentionally. Separate the areas in to two districts or
remove the footnoted restrictions.
Response HR-4
The commentator is correct that the rezoning effort consolidated/reduced the number of zoning districts within the
Village. The transition to character districts (“CD”) provided direction of how that could occur – basing the zoning
on the character of the district. Early on there was significant concern that the CD-4 District had consolidated too
many dissimilar character areas into one large district. Rather than creating a number of new districts, which could
result in the “jig-saw puzzle” of zoning districts the Village currently has, an alternative approach of differentiating
between the residential portions of the CD-4 District, and the commercial corridors was pursued. After much
discussion with the Board of Trustees (including specifically the January 8, 2019 workshop), the following
commercial corridors were identified: Willett Avenue, South Regent Street, William Street (between Washington
Street & Pearl Street), Westchester Avenue, Midland Avenue, Boston Post Road, North Main Street, Bowman
Avenue, and Putnam Avenue (between North Main Street & Willett Avenue). These corridors were identified by
footnotes within a number of tables in the proposed Form-Based Code. The utilization of footnotes is a common
practice within zoning, especially within tables, to further define or clarify uses, requirements, regulations, etc.
Comment HR-5
CD-5 should include USES Retail motor vehicle goods and etc. and Motor Vehicle etc. and should be a Permitted Use
or at least Special Exemption Use. Should the Commission not find that a suitable solution, a carve out for the
boundaries of New Broad and Pearl Street would suffice.
Response HR-5
Based upon the neighborhood character analysis provided early on in the Plan the Port project and the engagement
with the community, there was a desire to limit motor vehicle-related uses, especially within the downtown. As a
result, the proposed Form-Based Code in Table 345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses) limits “Motor Vehicle
Goods Maintenance / Cleaning / Repair / Service, other than Motor Vehicle Body Shop” as a Special Exception Use
along the commercial corridors within the CD-4 District only and not within the CD-5 District. As noted in
March 2020 14Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For the Adoption of the amended Code of the Village of Port
Chester, Chapter 345, “Zoning”, and Official Zoning Map
Response HR-4 on page 14, an objective of the zoning effort was to define character districts, consolidate zoning
districts, and avoid a jigsaw puzzle of zoning districts.
Comment HR-6
CD-6 district Industrial Uses should include Brewery / Distillery/ Winery as a Permitted Use.
Response HR-6
In the Village’s existing zoning code there is a distinction between “Breweries / Distilleries / Wineries” and
“Microbreweries / Microdistilleries / Microwineries / Nanobreweries”. “Breweries / Distilleries / Wineries” are
larger-scale, production facilities that have been historically industrial in nature; “Microbreweries / Microdistilleries /
Microwineries / Nanobreweries”, while involving some production are small-scale and primarily targeted to patron
interaction, including drinking on-site the produced alcohol, along with food consumption. The proposed Form-Based
Code continues this distinction, see differences in the definitions of each in Article 10 (Definitions). The proposed
Form-Based Code furthers this distinction by permitting them in different districts within the Village; with Breweries
/ Distilleries / Wineries being limited to the CD-4 (along the commercial corridors) and CD-5W Districts as Special
Exception Uses (see Table 345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses)) and Microbreweries / Microdistilleries /
Microwineries / Nanobreweries being permitted in the CD-4, CD-5, CD-5W, and CD-6 Districts (see Table
345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses) in Appendix F), but with special standards (see Section
345.405.K.8.b.iv. in Appendix F).
Comment HR-7
CD-6 should include USES Retail motor vehicle goods and etc. and Motor Vehicle etc. and should be a Permitted Use
or at least Special Exemption Use because these uses exist in the C-4 zone today. Should the Commission not find
that a suitable solution, a carve out for the boundaries of the C-4 zone would suffice.
Response HR-7
See Response HR-4 and Response HR-5 on page 14.
Comment HR-8
CD-6 USES should include all the uses currently available and or exist in the M-1 zone such as Light Manufacturing;
Brewery / Distillery / Winery, Machine Shop, Warehousing or Distribution Facility and Wholesaling as a Permitted
use under the same clear boundaries as are provided today in the M-1 Zone. Should the Commission not find that a
suitable solution, a carve out for New Broad Street would suffice.
Response HR-8
In the proposed form-based, character district zoning, the higher the district number the more “urban” the character.
Based upon the neighborhood character analysis provided early on in the project and the engagement with the
community, there was a desire to limit industrial, especially within the downtown. As a result, the proposed Form-
Based Code in Table 345.405.K-1 (Building and Lot Principal Uses) (see Appendix F) limits:
Light Manufacturing Plant as a Special Exception Use to CD-4 (along the commercial corridors), C-5 (along
certain corridors), and CD-5W Districts;
Brewery / Distillery / Winery as a Special Exception Use to CD-4 (along the commercial corridors) and CD-
5W Districts, Machine Shop / Woodworking Shop, other than Artisan Establishment as Special Exception
Uses within the CD-4 (along the commercial corridors), C-5, and CD-5W Districts;
Warehousing or Distribution Facility as Special Exception Uses within the CD-4 (along the commercial
corridors), C-5, and CD-5W Districts; and,
All industrial uses not within the CD-6 District.
Wholesale Sales is provided as a Special Exception Use within the CD-6 District. As noted in
Response HR-4 on page 14, an objective of the Village was to consolidate districts, not proliferate, as a “carve out”
of New Broad Street and Pearl Street would require.
March 2020 15You can also read
