Mount Pleasant Faces Backlash Over Approval of 34-Unit Valhalla Project Without Adequate Notice

Residents Cite Lack of Transparency, Size Concerns; Town Officials Defend Process

By Mike Gold

Valhalla residents are raising alarms over the rezoning of a North Kensico Avenue property, where a four-story, 34-unit apartment building – with parking for 43 cars beneath it – is proposed on less than an acre of land, in the midst of a predominantly single-family neighborhood.

The 75 North Kensico property currently consists of a large house, containing a small number of rental apartments, an abandoned church and a garage.

Residents say the Town of Mt. Pleasant did not notify them of the hearing to rezone the property, which took place on March 11. The town board voted four to one at the March 11 meeting to rezone 75 North Kensico Avenue to “allow for the development of a multi-family residential community on the property,” according to town documents.

Carl Fulgenzi, the town board supervisor, and town board members Danielle Zaino, Laurie Rogers-Smalley and Thomas Sialiano voted to approve the rezoning. Board member Mark Saracino voted no.

Fulgenzi has said that notice of the rezoning hearing was provided on the town’s website. 

“We had meetings about this project for over a year. It wasn’t a secret,” Fulgenzi said. 

Councilwoman Rogers-Smalley said at the March 11 meeting that she received confirmation from the Mt. Pleasant planning board chairman that neighboring residents were notified.

Meg DePalma, a resident of Prospect Avenue, explained that town law does allow for signage on rezoning a property and that the town board’s March 11 agenda provided the incorrect address on its website.

“After the meeting I was reviewing the Town Code. Section 218-109-C-3 clearly states that if a petitioner is requesting an amendment of the zone map, that the Town Board can, in fact, require signage posted that states this,” DePalma wrote in an email to Rogers-Smalley.

“What is the reason that the Board did not require this on a development of this size and magnitude? DePalma asked in the email.

Rogers-Smalley responded by writing back to DePalma, “Thank you for your comments. I always appreciate hearing from residents. I have been and will continue to be in favor of revitalizing that property. I look forward to the decisions the Planning Board will make to determine the size and scope of the project. Please continue to follow the Town website for information on this and all other activities and projects taking place in Mount Pleasant. Change can be difficult, but I believe it will be an improvement to that neighborhood.”

The Next-Door Neighbor Says He Got No Notice

Kurt Myers has lived next door to the rezoned property at 65 North Kensico Avenue for 23 years.

In the days after 9/11, Myers, as a marketing manager for Verizon, distributed thousands of cell phones to first responders, including members of the Red Cross, FBI, Secret Service, NYPD, and fire department.

“I’m in shock. I got no notice,” Myers said in a recent interview with The Examiner at the Townhouse Diner in White Plains. 

“Two days before the March 11 meeting, Jim Russell knocked on my door and said, ‘do you know they’re rezoning that property?’ Jim was the first to tell me,” Myers said. (Russell is a resident of Hawthorne who is a regular presence at town board meetings). 

“At the March 11 meeting, there were three people there (from the neighborhood). Nobody knew,” he also said.

Myers continued: “I’m sitting there and getting madder and madder. He (Russell) was the only one who even knew this was happening.”

Myers explained that the developers who now own the property, Dan Amicucci and Emillio DiMatteo, have owned 75 North Kensico for about a year but did not inform him about the rezoning. Amicucci said at the March 11 meeting that the 34-unit building would be “a tremendous enhancement to the town.”

At the meeting, Myers said, “this guy (Amicucci) shows he’s putting up a giant building next to me. What I can’t believe is that I was given no notice on a huge building wrapping around on two sides of me.

“I got three letters about the rerouting of the tunnel at the Kensico Dam about a year ago. Another developer (of 63 North Kensico, on the western side of Myers’ house) told me he was going to build. It was a courtesy.

“Smalley (town board member Laurie Rogers-Smalley) said to me, ‘somebody must have sent you a notice.’ I got nothing about this. Smalley said, ‘I’m pretty sure the planning board sent you a notice.’”

“What does this rezoning mean? I still don’t know exactly what this rezoning allows, other than a four-story building. The thing that still gets me to this day – you can rezone without telling me, right next door to it?”

Myers explained that “I am not against improvement. I’m not against development. I’m against non-transparency of government. It seems like the town board was hoping no one would show up. 

“It sure felt like nobody wanted to let anybody know about this (the rezoning).” On March 11, “I could have talked till I’m blue. I feel like they had already made up their minds.”

This guy (the developer) already had a whole plan for this – he got it rezoned. It’s just weird,” Myers said. “I’m wondering what the town is going to do to me. Something that size is out of character in our neighborhood,” he said. 

“I still haven’t heard from the developer. As a good neighbor, knock on my door, tell me you’re rezoning. He’s owned it for a year and not once has he knocked on my door.”

Multiple calls to Matteo Development were not returned.

Residents Angry About Size of Planned Construction

“The apartment building would have fit downtown,” Myers also said. “It’s like a giant spaceship just landed in the neighborhood.”

A computerized rendering of the planned construction shows a brown and white apartment-style building with approximately 40 windows facing west, a large rooftop terrace and a parking area that can be accessed off North Kensico Road.

A four-story building would be as tall as the church steeple currently towering over the neighborhood, Myers said. 

He pointed out in an illustration of the project a large grassy area bordering a parking lot. “That’s my house,” he said. “They photoshopped me out.”

An Examiner reporter stood with Myers on the deck of his house as he explained how the proposed building would loom over his property. 

“I have some concerns about what this might do to the value of my property,” Myers said. “My tax rate better come down because my property values will. Sixty people could live here.”

Myers’ neighbors share similar concerns about the range of issues the size of the proposed apartment building could bring to the area. They expressed their unease about the proposed construction at Myers’ house on April 10.

“What happens when 34 families live here?” asked Joseph Malgiolio. “What about guests? What about two cars per family? This is a monstrosity.”

“It doesn’t fit with the neighborhood,” said Donna Babak, who’s lived with her husband on nearby Prospect Avenue for 31 years. “This is a quiet neighborhood.  We’re not against change. The scope of it is much too large for this area.”

At the town board’s April 22 meeting, the board discussed a new law to amend the town code “to provide additional notice to neighboring property owners, where a zoning change is considered by the Town Board,” stated a town document on the town’s website. 

A number of residents took the opportunity at the April 22 meeting to ask the town board to reconsider the rezoning variance. 

“Commercializing that area on Kensico Road will be a devastating move,” said Amelia Scordo. “Once this area becomes commercialized, it’s going to devalue those homes. To spring something like this is devastating.” 

“The rezoning was processed at lightning speed,” Scordo also remarked. “We need a re-do.” 

“The feeling is the public has been left out. It’s very upsetting for many of us,” Scordo continued.

Scordo suggested that all residents within 500 feet of the proposed construction be notified of zoning changes by certified mail. 

Mt. Pleasant Officials Argue The Rezoning Was Transparent

Fulgenzi and town board members aren’t alone in defending the rezoning process.

“This was a transparent process for almost a year,” said Mt. Pleasant town attorney Darius Chafizadeh. No one was trying to hide anything. It was in the newspaper on three different occasions. Articles about the rezoning were in The Examiner.”

Fulgenzi emphasized at the April 22 meeting that “the zoning was approved, not the building. People have the opportunity to make their voices heard on the project. There will be planning board meetings. They will be putting up signs for planning board meetings.”

At the April 22nd meeting DePalma asked, “Why was that option not used in this case? There was absolutely no talk (about the rezoning) outside of these meetings. People in the area should have been aware. Let’s fix this retroactively.”

“No one’s against making this property better,” said Anthony Pesce. “When a lot of people weren’t notified, that’s a big concern. They’ve already got their foot in the door to build. It’s not a full acre of land.” He said that to build 34 units on the property was “just mind-blowing.”

“It’s only one parcel of land,” Donna Babak said at the April 22 meeting. “This one parcel makes it possible for 34 units to be built. That’s why we want to open this up again. We need to reevaluate the rezoning.”

Councilman Mark Saracino, who voted against the rezoning, questioned whether reopening a public hearing on the issue would change anyone’s mind, and might therefore be “a waste of time.” 

Saracino said: “It doesn’t set a good precedent to reopen the hearing” on rezoning the property.

“We didn’t do everything that we could have,” he said, in terms of notifying the public.

Multi-Family Housing Vs. Single Family

“Multi-family housing” is “a possibility,” said councilman Thomas Saliano. “You’re talking about housing for teachers, housing for volunteer firefighters, volunteer ambulance corps, single moms, students, people that work in New York City that could walk into town, that could bring in business. The rezoning is consistent with the town’s master plan,” he said, but also emphasized, “this may not even happen.”

“I feel your pain. But we made a decision,” Saliano said. “The next step is to go to the planning board. And they (the developer) may not be successful.”

DePalma said, “Every single home contiguous with this property is single family. This is a major increase in density.” She said the rezoning was “a slap in the face to constituents.”

Fulgenzi said the property sits within “a multi-family area, two-family, three family.” He said the discussion “hasn’t changed my thinking on the use of that property.”

The town board decided to table the vote on the new law to provide additional notice on rezoning changes to neighboring property owners until the next meeting, on May 13. 

“It disturbs me when people say they didn’t get a notice,” Fulgenzi said in an April 28 interview. “They should have known about it.  The planning board had three or four meetings. We didn’t knock on anybody’s door. We don’t knock on doors. We put a lot of information on our website. We can’t go hand out notices to everyone.”

Fulgenzi also said, “We got this information (the plan for the 34-unit building) from the developer. We did not approve the building. That’s a planning board process. They’ll make a decision about what will work there. It will be up to the public and the planning board. 

“Years ago we weren’t aware that piece was left out of the hamlet zone (an unincorporated part of the town of Mt. Pleasant). It should have been part of the hamlet zone. Just north of this property, on Cleveland Street, there’s a lot of multi-family houses in this area. The Lakeside development has twelve to fifteen houses on top of each other. 

“We’re trying to create housing for some of our younger people. This is an opportunity for rentals for some of our younger people and seniors,” Fulgenzi said. 

“We followed the town requirements. I didn’t think it was our responsibility to knock on everybody’s door,” explained Dan Amicucci, Sr, the developer of 75 North Kensico Avenue.

When asked specifically about simply telling Myers, Amicucci responded, “I’m not sure why he felt I needed to do that. The entire town could have found out what was happening there. We continued that zone that the town has approved for all those hamlets. This is a great development for the town.”