| Author |
Message |
    
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1646
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 8:13 pm: | 
|
Has anyone been watching the Planning Board meeting tonight and the discussion about Beifus? |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1647
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 8:18 pm: |
|
The Board is starting a discussion about Valley St. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1648
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 8:45 pm: |
|
I tuned in halfway through the discussion about Beifus. There was a resolution before the Board to memorialize the approval given to Beifus to eliminate the basement. I tuned in at the end of this, but evidently Dan Skrobe said that it appeared that there had been some misrepresentation when Beifus appeared previously. The Planning Board lawyer said that even if the resolution were passed, the Board always had recourse if in fact there was a misrepresentation. Maybe someone who was watching can fill in. ( Just caught the unintended pun)
ps - The resolution passed. Bill C. could be overheard talking to the board attorney something about "200 feet" and Bill C. then abstained.
pps - Even though the resolution was passed, the Board was going to ask Beifus to come back before the Board and explain what seemed to be inconsistencies/misrepresentations in his previous appearance.
|
Josh Holtz
Citizen
Username: Jholtz
Post Number: 378
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 8:56 am: |
|
I missed it last night but would be very interested to hear what those inconsistencies/misrepresentations were at the last meeting. |
jayjay
Citizen
Username: Jayjayp
Post Number: 557
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Last night's planning board meeting is must-see-TV. Take a look at the video. Thank you, Mr. Daniel Skrobe, for being the only one to really see Beifus for what it is. Calabrese's remarks were outrageous as he tried to offer some lame reasons for the Beifus deceptions. Then he proposes some inane idea of writing a letter to chastize them so they will be afraid to come before the Planning Board next time. NEXT TIME!!!???? Will there be yet another revision to their plan? And how can this this VP continue to discuss this matter, acting more like the chairman of the planning board than a member, when he abstains from voting. You can't have it both ways, Mr. Calabrese. Either you have a conflict of interest or you do not. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1660
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:10 pm: |
|
When watching the video, be sure to hear what Calabrese says about tax abatements for Valley St. Is there any doubt that he has told any developer who has expressed interest in SO, "don't worry, I'll get you a tax abatement."
ps - Beifus never needed a tax abatemnt. He got one because he was told by Bill C. from day one that he would get one. |
SO1969
Citizen
Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 257
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:18 pm: |
|
The lens thru which you should see all things relating to the Millenium proposal for Valley Street redevelopment is this:
Calabrese, et al, are using the monster sized project - and its $3mm PILOT - as an attempt to fill the monster sized hole they've dug for us in all our budgets going forward (see SOPAC, TSmith, all of the delayed developments and torn down buildings that are contributing little to the tax base).
Using this lens, one sees that the following are secondary:
- traffic/congestion impact on residents
- magnitude of profit Millenium may garner due to too generous of PILOT (as long as it is big enough to fill hole)
- impact on existing businesses
Under good management, redevelopment could be a tool for growing our small tax base by methodically increasing density near the train station in a thoughtful and well designed way that addresses parking, increases the likelihood of revitalization of S. Orange Avenue, and results in a more attractive village center.
Under the pressures created by bad management, the developers get the upper hand and the Village and Villagers pay the consequences for decades to come. Oversized projects with too little parking - or ugly, poorly sited parking decks, worsening quality of life and making commercial space on SO avenue even less attractive. |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 530
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 2:31 pm: |
|
When will the BOT rescind the redeveloper status given to "Millennium Homes" for the block on Valley and Third? |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page