The Village of Great Neck board on Tuesday once again postponed making a decision on site plan, architectural and facade reviews for two projects that have been met with mixed reviews from the public.
The proposal at 777 Middle Neck Road is a three-story multifamily project with 38 units (13 one-bedroom units, 21 two-bedroom units and four three-bedroom units) and 80 parking stalls, according to updated plans presented by Paul Bloom of Harras, Bloom and Archer LLP. This is a shift from plans with 44 residential units and 79 parking spaces. The project’s developer is Lions Group LLC, with architectural aid from Newman Design.
The developer was asked by village officials to provide a rendering of all sides of the building during the April 6 public meeting after showing schematic renderings that showed its elevation. Brian Newman of Newman Design presented the board with an updated, more modern look that trustees said had a more commercial look.
“It looks more like a business office rather than a residential building,” Trustee Eli Kashi said.
“It looks extremely commercial and doesn’t quite fit in with the rest of the block’s design,” Trustee Annie Mendelson said.
Village Mayor Pedram Bral called the rendering “interesting” but said it did not look to be the same design as the schematic renderings presented at the previous meeting on April 6. Deputy Mayor Bart Sobel said there were some elements of the design he liked but understood concerns about an overly modern design.
The design wasn’t met with a warm reception from a virtual audience that has voiced concerns and displeasure with certain aspects of the proposal and its approval process.
Village resident Sam Yellis said the proposal reminded him of “a self-storage warehouse.” Fellow resident Cindy Zubli said the design, which features a stucco exterior, looked as if it belonged in an urban rather than suburban environment.
The board agreed to have village officials reach out to the applicant in the next week to discuss any potential design changes they would like to see, and a date for the continuation of the review would depend on their discussions. Only Trustee Steven Hope abstained from the vote.
The board also postponed a decision on the reviews for a proposed mixed-use project on 733-41 Middle Neck Road.
The proposed structure is a four-story mixed-use building that is 44 feet high and features 60 proposed dwelling units, with 56 two-bedroom apartments and four one-bedroom apartments, 93 below-grade parking spaces, a recreation center and a public art gallery.
There are also amenity spaces for the tenants that will include storage areas, a conference room, a lounge, a library and a small fitness center, according to the latest set of plans presented by John Farrell, who represents the developer, Gesher Community LLC.
The property is 34,849 square feet, according to Farrell.
The board lauded the applicant for creating a more appealing proposal with various colors to choose from. The new proposal featured French balconies, a more compartmentalized appearance and ornamental lighting on the building’s exterior, based on the board’s request at the last meeting.
Farrell also informed the board that the applicant rescinded the request for a rooftop deck at the moment, saying that everyone involved wanted to move onto the next stages of the process regardless.
The board noted that physical materials were not submitted to the village prior to the application, and renderings of the east and south sides of the buildings were not included in the presentation, as they were previously.
“I am interested to see what the other sides look like,” Bral said. “I also think it’s good to see it. The people who will be living behind need to see what this building will look like from the east side as well.”
A handful of North Road residents, who will be directly impacted by the project, have voiced their concerns about potential intrusions from tenants in the proposed building, along with their displeasure about the proposal’s approval process to this point.
Though similar proposals have been sent to the Board of Trustees in the past, these updated plans, submitted through the village’s zoning board, did not feature 12 variances approved by the village.
The 25-unit proposal sent to, and ultimately approved by, the Board of Trustees more than a year ago included the 12 variances along with requiring the applicant to pay the village $150,000 in lieu of a specific community amenity under the village code and the existing incentive overlay district.
Village officials said that the 25-unit project was ultimately withdrawn by Gesher Community LLC and that the plan featuring 60 units and 93 below-grade parking spaces was taken directly to the zoning board.
Village resident and architect Ken Lee attempted to express his displeasure with the variances during the zoning board meeting on March 4, but the zoning board did not permit it since the public hearing was strictly focused on the site plan review for the proposed structure. Instead, Lee pleaded with the applicant to be as reasonable and accommodating as possible in constructing the building.
“Be considerate,” Lee said during the March 4 meeting. “I mean, luckily you have all those variances approved. So at this point, you need to think about it, how to help the neighbors and how to not damage further.”
Lee also claimed the 5,000-square-foot easement for dry wells on 7 Hicks Lane was taken into consideration improperly. Lee claimed that the 5,000-square-foot easement should not be taken into consideration in terms of how many units were granted.
Village resident Rebecca Rosenblatt Gilliar, who resides within 200 feet of the proposed project, said she was not properly notified of the project by the developer.
“The developer has never sent me a notification,” Gilliar said in a letter to village officials. “In my possession are three of the envelopes in which the developer mailed to my husband notification of meetings/hearings, but not to me. My husband and I co-own the property.”
Gilliar said her husband had envelopes addressed solely in his name from June, September and December 2020. She also expressed disapproval for the way that zoning board Chairman Dennis Grossman and the zoning board handled the proposal’s evolution.
Kenneth Grey, legal counsel to the board, informed the public that there is no 200-foot notification requirement under the site plan review portion of the village code. However, the board of appeals section of the code states, “Before an application for a variance or a conditional, special or other use permit may be heard by the Board of Appeals or the Board of Trustees, a complete and accurate list of the names and addresses of the owners of all the lands within a radius of 200 feet of the property affected by such application shall be submitted simultaneously with the application.”
On Tuesday, village Clerk-Treasurer Abraham Cohan also presented a tentative $11.67 million budget, $2 million of which is to cover initial architect and foundation costs for a new village hall at 756 Middle Neck Road.
The $2 million increase, Cohan said, will not increase residents’ taxes, and the budget aside from the funds slated for the new village hall actually yields a 6 percent decrease from the 2020-21 budget of $10.14 million.
Homestead properties will be taxed at 2.56 per $1,000 of assessed value, remaining virtually the same as last year. Non-homestead properties, which are mainly commercial buildings and places with five or more residential units, will see a slight decrease in the tax rate from 4.035 per $1,000 of assessed value to 3.89.
