Huguenot Hills Homeowners at risk while local developer, Young Companies, LLC., increases profits with Planning Board Special Pe

ShareThis

The Young Companies, LLC, builders of Huguenot Hills, will appear before the New Rochelle Planning Board for a Special Permit to increase profits on their 601 North Avenue property. The Young Companies have defied the City of New Rochelle and Huguenot Hills homeowners, who have issued violations for the absence of gutters on the Huguenot Hills complex. The failure to complete the roof drainage & storm water management is a violation of the approved plans and violates state, county & local codes. Young has delayed the completion of the gutter system because he can’t afford to pay Consolidated Edison the funds to wrap the electric service wires to allow safe completion of the drainage system. There are many questions raised; How did this building pass final inspection and receive a Certificate of Occupancy? Who was the building inspector who performed and signed-off on the final inspection? Why has the city allowed Young to thumb his nose at the violation and not demand he make homeowners whole immediately? So while Young increases his profits the general public must walk on the opposite side of the street during storms and the city will continue to close the sidewalk due to hazardous falling ice spears from the improperly drained roof.

The following is the official agenda listing;
ITEM # 4 — SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL (PUBLIC HEARING)
4.1 PB 4-12: Application by the Young Companies, LLC, Owner, for a special permit to
construct an outdoor dining area in the existing, enclosed rear yard of the existing
building; no changes proposed to the rear façade or the lighting plan located at 601
North Avenue, Block 994, Lot 46 in a NA zoned district.

Commenting on this Blog entry is closed.

Fifth Ave Guy on Mon, 04/23/2012 - 18:55

Don't know what happened with the zoning application for 601 North Ave., but has anyone noticed the improved appearance along North Ave by the gas station just north of Fifth Ave.? The Young Companies actually tore the dilapitaed building at 579 North down.

1 eyesore gone, but what will become of the now vacant lot?

John D'Alois on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 20:23

You're right Old Timer. The city does and has closed off the sidewalks and the question is who is paying for the time and manpower to put up and maintain the horses and caution tape. I have posted pictures of people disregarding the caution tape and walking under the 30 pound icicles hanging 3 stories above them. Who will pay when someone crosses the barrier and gets injured? YOU the taxpayer when the lawsuit is filed for allowing people the opportunity to walk through a dangerous area. Search Huguenot Hills on this site and read who the enablers are. Young, building inspector, Strome and others. Meanwhile, the business' suffer from their front doors being barricaded. Speak up, Speak out and get involved! Provide no consideration for any project involving Young until this deadly situation is resolved.

Bob McCaffrey on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 21:13

John D, Warren, Knitter and Fifth Ave Guy,

It is time for all of the Citizens of New Rochelle to get up off their couches. Stop relying on the few to get it done. Get involved in your local government. Speak to your Council Members, The Mayor and The City Manager. Even work your way up the food chain until you are heard. But you need to do something and do it now. Don’t wait for the other guy to do it for you. Only the few can’t do it alone. They can get the ball rolling and start the conversation like they have. Now it up to the regular Joe’s to get to work for just a few minutes out of you day and do something that could help you for a life time. Start next week at the next Citizens to be Heard. There are no listed Public Hearings for next week. It’s a Perfect time to speak.

Citizens to be Heard is Next Tuesday Night:

Date: April 10
Time: Public Hearings starting at 7:30 PM and Citizens To Be Heard immediately following.
Address: New Rochelle Council Chambers
515 North Avenue
New Rochelle, NY 10801

Warren Gross on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 18:48

This is preposterous. Drags Con Edison into it as contributing to a failure to provide gutters?

Waht the hell is wrong with the residents that they allow these deadbeat enablers to latch onto available contracts, as few as their are, and then default, defalcate, do shoddy work.

We are supposed to celebrate Beechmont, feel thankful for being only 8 places behind Albert, Indiana in terms of crime rate.

Read what I just posted. Its called Aside from the Shooting Mrs. Lincoln, Suffer! It is long, but like Old Timer, NRinfo, so many others, it is researched, and FELT.

Can't you enablers give a cry out to substantially change governance here. Read the latest Westchester Guardian especially Aris' article on Yonkers. We are nouveau Yonkers without the physical advantages.

That is just around the corner. Wake up. We need a third party. I want to hear from politicians on both sides of the county, state, and national scene saying "enough is enough."

I don't know why I am so riled about this particular one; maybe it is because it was so avoidable and the developer so well known.

this is horsepit period.

I love my city, my family, my wife, and I cannot imagine a life without two of the three. Can you guess which.

Tomorrow is Good Friday and I hope it rains like hell.

NRinfo on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:14

Is this the same Young who used to live in the new McMansions by the beach clubs? I heard he no longer resides there because he scammed his partner and took materials from the jobsite to expand a city official's kitchen. I also heard he is a slumlord in the west end.

Fifth Ave Guy on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 16:25

That'd be him.

Can't comment on the other allegations, but he's also the 1 who redid the playground by the children's library a few years back. The playground came out nice, but there really wasn't anything wrong with the 1 that got replaced.

Fifth Ave Guy on Tue, 03/27/2012 - 21:43

The Young Companies has assembled many of the properties adjacent to 601 North Ave & several on Fifth Ave that abut these properties in the back. His plans to put in 10 story residential towers has faltered (probably because of the economy), but because of these plans I don't support Iona's plan build a 10 story dorm because it sets a precedence. I bet there's a lot of debt on these properties and the property next to the gas station looks to be in downright horrible condition. I don't know why the city doesn't force him to clean up these properties. I suppose a donation or 2 in the right pockets can get amazing results.

Bob McCaffrey on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 13:21

Fith Ave Guy,

The Young Companies plan died with the adoption of the new zoning for North Avenue. Not the economy. He was looking to build 12 story buildings on North Avenue. This is also why Iona College should not be able to build the Proposed Dorm on Mayflower Avenue. Yes it was withdrawn. However, when the college withdrew its petition to amend the zoning, it did so w/out prejudice meaning they can re-submit the same or a similar proposal in the future.

The amendment went down as follows. From The Mayors News Letter December 15, 2010:

New Zoning Approved for North Avenue Revised Standards Aim to Encourage Private Investment to address this challenge, the City Council voted last night to adopt new zoning standards for the North Avenue corridor, from Eastchester Road to the Memorial Highway overpass. Our vote concludes a years-long process of study, discussion and public comment.

The most significant changes are: (1) an increase in the maximum height of buildings, which will now be set at three stories or forty feet; and (2) an increase in the maximum floor-area-ratio, newly set at 2.0, up from the previous 0.5.

The new zoning standards aim to enhance the value and marketability of land on the corridor by expanding the range of investment and development possibilities. It should be noted that the original planning analysis presented to the City Council recommended a more dramatic change, including building height of up to twelve stories in certain limited circumstances.

These original recommendations, however, received a largely negative reaction from the community, with many arguing that the burdens of such density would outweigh any benefits. The final iteration of the zoning represents a sort of lowest common denominator with which most interested parties were comfortable. Whether it is, in fact, sufficient to accomplish the objective of economic renewal can only be discovered with time. There is more information on record and in the newsletter.

About the Iona College Planning Process, I have been getting a lot of calls and questions about the recent mailing of the “Iona College a Call for Concepts”. The Call for Concepts is a request or a call to invite property owners, developers, contractors, designers and/or any party to submit ideas for the College student-resident hall development concept. The Call for Concept was to be mailed directly to everyone in 1/2 mile of the La Penta building on campus. These were the parameter set by Iona College and the Planning Committee. This truly limits the ability to solve the housing issues in a beneficial way for the city and Iona College. It damages the ability of the city to resurrect its business district, placing a burden on existing neighbors which is intolerable and actually limits their ability to grow. There are available sites downtown off Huguenot and up North around Wards Acre, etc. which might be totally acceptable. Iona College should meet with all of the property owners, developers on North Avenue. They shouldn’t have to come to them. Iona College and the city should reach out to them. There is not a clear understanding of what options are possible and or available to them. Discussions should be had up front about what is truly needed and what changes in zoning may be possible so that they may submit realistic plans for the Call for Concept. Each land owners limits are different.

The prevailing winds in New Rochelle are such that non-profit growth, destruction of neighborhood property values, overexpansion of scarce resources in police and fire, etc. are untenable to the voter. They were a small college that is growing in a residential neighborhood. Do something similar to UConn in Stamford and elsewhere if you wish to grow and expand. We want to see them succeed but not at our cost. Remember most of the people that are in this area were here before any of the growth. The college grew in a residential area. Not that a residential area grew around the college.

“Common Sense for the Common Good”.

Fifth Ave Guy on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 18:58

I don't think the plan is dead as it always involved variances so regardless that the area was upzoned (meaning owners can now build more than they could before) in 2010 the owner can still present their grand plan of 10-12 story towers as they were planning to do before 2010 when the zoning changed.

Recent Comments

James O'Toole | Congrats
Bob McCaffrey | The good old...
Funtime | Bob the body...
Martin Sanchez | Good Choice
Anthony Galletta | Great fit!
Bob McCaffrey | Got Me!
Dennis Orzo | Great Pranks
Ken Lewis | Problem is...
Moises Valencia | Got me good !
Robert Cox | Email Exchange...

Retro Fitnessx200

Google Translate