Heated debate on changes to village building codes




Garden City residents in attendance for the Board of Trustees’ meeting on Thursday, November 17 saw the culmination of two processes that have been building for the past year: preliminary recommendations from the Mayor’s Committee on Building Code Changes, presented by the committee representative James L. Bauer of Huntington Road, and strong opposition to the proposals.

The contrast was most obvious on the Board of Trustees’ dais, seated next to each other, as comments from Trustee Robert Bolebruch and Deputy Mayor Brian C. Daughney challenged the validity of what the mayor’s committee is attempting to do.

The lone procedural accomplishment with respect to the proposed code changes was setting a total of three public hearings for three code changes at the next Trustees’ meeting, on Thursday, December 1 at 8pm inside Village Hall. Each recommendation is detailed on the village website under “Proposed Local Laws – December 1, 2016” in the central, prominent Village Notifications and Alerts section. Mayor Episcopia promised that the village will “publish the information everywhere we can.”

Bauer, who was elected as committee chairperson by members with over 100 years’ experience serving the village in building-specific roles, spoke in detail on each proposed law. His time was uninterrupted but the contention he heard from two trustees (Daughney and Bolebruch) and members of the public led Deputy Mayor Richard Silver and Trustee John Delany to consider whether the public hearings had somehow just broken out, or if setting them up was the reigning priority. The meeting lasted until 11pm mainly due to over 100 minutes spent on the presentation, challenges made to proposed code change, a few calls for more stringent measures and public comments and questions

By a 4-3 vote, with Silver, Delany, Mayor Nicholas Episcopia and Trustee Theresa Trouvé were in favor of the hearings going forward with the proposed laws, while Daughney, Bolebruch and Trustee Stephen Makrinos were opposed. Trustee John DeMaro was not at the November 17 meeting.

As Mayor Episcopia explained, the laws can be changed again and updated any time between their proposal and seven days before the public hearing for each – in this case, that deadline falls on Thanksgiving Day, November 24. The website listings for each proposed change would contain the up-to-date contents. Last Thursday night, however, became a forum for the trustees to debate the changes and receive community input.

At the start of Bauer’s presentation, Mayor Nicholas Episcopia noted that since the original proposals were made at the September 8 Board of Trustees’ meeting, there have been several changes made and residents that have emailed their thoughts or asked questions have all been responded to. Some suggestions shaped the current state of code changes proposed.

“There were several changes made in response to comments from Trustees, other residents and POA board members who had certain concerns about the initial proposal. The changes became somewhat less stringent than what was originally proposed. There were people who wanted it more stringent with a height requirement, a bulk requirement, etc. What I can say is for me, I will go along with what the Committee recommends. They did a tremendous amount of work and they tried to represent the pros and cons of everyone’s concerns here. The result that they had was something very fair and very valuable,” he said.

Demolition and Detriments?

Mayor Episcopia explained that conversations he has personally had with municipal officials (mayors or building superintendents) in the Villages of New Hyde Park, Mineola, Rockville Centre, Floral Park, Westbury, Farmingdale and others resulted in a thought that these proposed changes represent moderate, middle of the road rules for building where the character of Garden City neighborhoods shall be preserved. Mayor Episcopia mentions that in Mineola, Upper Brookville and East Williston knocking down homes is frowned upon or disallowed unless the homeowner has an approved set of plans. In New Hyde Park homeowners aren’t permitted to knock homes down and leave an empty lot.

“Floral Park is the opposite as they will let you knock a home down – somewhat analogous to what we have – so long as you restore the property and fill in the foundation which has to be graded and seeded. Westbury allows you to knock a home down so long as you post a bond and restore the foundation to something that is not an eyesore. Obviously what we are proposing here is the more liberal side of things comparable to Rockville Centre or Floral Park that would allow demolition – so long as the property is graded and we don’t have an eyesore,” the mayor said.

The notification part of construction regulation in Garden City was first considered, by the mayor’s committee, a priority to have neighbors aware of “various activities going on” with parcels and properties they live nearby to. Now just demolition will require notices.

“We have limited that to demolition, which clearly can have a traumatic effect if someone does not know that it is going on,” Bauer said.

One intended triumph for the committee goals was pointing out the four POA’s review processes that included confirmation and further suggestions by the EPOA, the Central POA and the West POA. Trustee Trouvé and Bauer briefly recollected the two meetings the CPOA had with committee members and specific points of input that helped formulate current proposals.

“The Central Property Owners’ Association got the final version of the changes Monday morning (November 14) and voted in favor of that,” Bauer said.

Deputy Mayor Daughney is a representative of the Estates POA and his organization was the only one not expressing support (or rejection) for the committee’s planned code changes. He told Bauer he is worried about unintended consequences of the new laws proposed. For example, he said there may be a better situation for some homes that should be torn down to just leave a lot vacant rather than create “eyesores” that are the decrepit homes.

“It is very unlikely that a house would be demolished and something would not be built. The property is clearly too valuable to leave it empty. So we are putting that section in as a contingency against that happening,” Bauer said. The mayor added that most definitions of a decrepit house would mean that it standing would be a danger to the public or the homeowner.

During his presentation Bauer spoke about preserving air, light and privacy between homes through the side setbacks being proposed. Several times last Thursday night he made reference to homes in Queens and the smaller distances between some of them, which can include shared driveways.

Trustee Bolebruch challenged an attempt by Bauer to ask him “if you have ever driven on the Grand Central Parkway and seen homes in Jamaica Estates.” He told Bauer he grew up in Astoria and knows all about what Queens houses are like, past and present, but living in Garden City did not mean the same standards were looming as those that exist for any boroughs of New York City, let alone other suburbs.

Process and Purpose Questioned

All the recommendations were reviewed by the Board of Trustees prior to the meeting. Bolebruch started to question just how the latest iterations came about, as he had spoken to a member of the original Mayor’s Committee on Building Code Changes and from that he learned that the last meeting was over six weeks ago. The drafts presented in writing to the trustees on November 2 had been collected after feedback from residents was “digested” and taken into consideration, but three leading minds tightened the language in each, with the assistance of Village Attorney Peter Bee, who also was not at the November 17 meeting. In addition to Bauer, 30-year Zoning Board chairman Robert Cunningham and ADRB Chair Hugh S. Lacy were steering the last draft of the changes. Bolebruch contends that changes were made November 3, 4, 9, 12, 15 and finally on November 16, just over 24 hours before the board meeting, with a final draft. Bauer tried explaining bluntly saying “we aren’t hiding anything, and it’s not bait and switch.”

“We got comments from the September meeting up to now, and those are all public, put on the website, from developers, real estate people, residents and architects. The materials have continuously been circulated and emailed out. I have been making changes and in that time frame they are reviewed by counsel (Peter Bee). At every stage of the process our committee members received the documents and had the right to review them and make comments on them. We are making them as a central point and they are discussed, but we can’t have meetings every week with all the members. We did get comments back and I had a long conversation with (ZBA member) Brian Paradine for example. To the extent that members see something they have a comment on, they have gotten back to me,” Bauer said.

Bauer says with regards to a law change impacting the rights and responsibilities of the ADRB, the goals of defining the board’s role was consistent but technical language “moved around a little” before being restored to a version close to what came up at the September 8 meeting.

“For single family dwellings, any applications for additions or exterior alterations within the front half of the property adjoining the street, visible from public streets or affecting the front half of the dwellings, and where the floor area within that alteration increases the existing floor area by 30 percent….in other words any addition to the front half of the building that increases the size by 30 percent would in fact be reviewed by the ADRB. I think this represents the single greatest number of applications that come before the ADRB, with those kids of increases. The intent of this is to ensure architectural review of buildings or additions and extensions that affect the front half of properties,” Bauer explains.

The ADRB also reviews painting and siding for all commercial structures in Garden City, as Bauer notes language in the law one-family dwellings are referenced. The ADRB had reviewed changes in exterior finish materials that result in changes of appearance for buildings, however Bauer said that the newly proposed law would allow for windows, shutters and gutters to be excluded from ADRB review and “that clearly did not make any sense” he said. Styles for the locations and numbers windows and roof shapes or other visual issues will still be reviewed. Bauer said it was the responsibility of Superintendent for Building Ausberto Huertas to determine “what changes are in fact substantial.” Landscaping plans and conditions for grading parcels are another part of changes proposed with the December 1 hearings.

Trustee Bolebruch asked Huertas if additional work would fall on the shoulders of the village’s building department if the local laws passed. He said there would be adjustments and changes to make for his staff, as the department was reported to be short on personnel as of the start of this month. But Huertas said any changes to the building code would need to be enforced fully. The only additional workload Huertas confirmed was for demolition, with applicants needing to go back before the ADRB.

“Everything else would be status quo as far as the process,” Huertas said. Yet Daughney and Bolebruch were left with more questions on impacts on the Department of Building.

“Garden City does not look like Queens — sorry. I am trying to see it through your eyes Mr. Bauer but you are wanting to change the existing law without understanding the potential ramifications might be, such as to the housing department, and houses being one of if not the largest investments anyone can have, I am sorry but I’m concerned about that,” he said.

Immediately Trustee John Delany said he’d support the changes over worries that things involving housing designs and overbuilding could happen in the future.

Trustee Stephen Makrinos asked Huertas for statistics on the number of demolitions and the length of time each application that involved one took to leave the parcel vacant and then put up a new home. Huertas didn’t have that data on hand. Bolebruch said there were six total demolitions in the last few years and 6,500 homes in the Village of Garden City.

“Every year we have 9/100ths of a single percent of all the homes in Garden City being demolished. — .0009 and that is it – think about that,” Bolebruch said.

The room fell silent during comments by Trustee Theresa Trouvé after she heard that point. She lives on Second Street between Rockaway Avenue and Cathedral, and three demolitions have happened ‘too close to home’ for her. On November 17 her comment started with a need to combat accelerating demolitions since 1969, when she moved to Garden City. The comments turned to character preservation for the village’s aesthetics.

“In the very recent past there has been a very rapid acceleration of people coming into the community, buying a home in one of the areas of the village where housing prices are the lowest. They buy homes, demolish them and then put up a residence that looks like it is out of sync with the streetscape. No one is saying don’t come here and demolish or don’t put up the kind of home you want. There are plenty of houses in the village we would like to see demolished. Why do they have to go where the plots are small and a new house built looms and encroaches over the original house that was there? I cannot really be convinced that it does not ruin the appreciation or price on both houses. What Mr. Huertas might want to look at is a report that shows evidence of acceleration in demolitions of homes in Garden City,” Trouvé said.

“Ever since the purchase of the acres and lots of the Hempstead Plains in 1869, aesthetics has enjoyed a focal point in the way we develop and maintain our village in Garden City, as we are known nationwide as well as in Europe. In summer of 2015 we were here and there was a BBC production film done in Garden City – why? Because aesthetics, balance, and harmony are what we always looked for thus far in this community in determining what is suitable to be put up,” she said, evoking applause from a dozen residents in the audience.



Leave a Reply