Beacon development would drop office space for housing
The owner of a mixed-use development at 248 Tioronda Ave. in Beacon wants to nix the “mixed.”
Bernard Kohn had planned for a two-story, 25,400-square-foot office building but asked the City Council on Monday (July 15) to let him instead build more apartments. Two residential buildings on the 9-acre tract between Tioronda Avenue and Fishkill Creek are nearly complete. The council referred the request to the Planning Board to make a recommendation.
The request is the latest twist for the project, which was approved in 2015 as a 100-unit complex. Construction had not started by 2017, when the city rezoned land surrounding the creek, ruling that steep slopes and wetlands could not be counted when calculating a parcel’s density. It also required developments in the creekside zone to include at least 25 percent commercial space.
That sent the developer back to the drawing board. In 2020 the city approved amended plans for 64 apartments over two buildings, along with the commercial structure. The apartment buildings will soon be ready but Kohn told the council on Monday that there’s “almost zero interest” in the office space.
“The most we had was somebody who wanted to take 2,000 or 3,000 square feet, which is a non-starter for a 25,000-square-foot building,” he said. “It’s almost guaranteed to fail as a commercial building.”
Kohn said he would like to include 36 apartments in the third building and raise it from two to three stories. He also asked the city to issue certificates of occupancy for the 64 apartments. If approved, the changes would return the complex to its original planned density of 100 units.
The revised Fishkill Creek zoning allows the City Council to waive the commercial component if the development includes “environmental, transportation or other substantial public benefits which would not otherwise be required of the project.”
Kohn said Monday that he believes a segment of the Fishkill Creek Greenway and Heritage Trail running through the property, which will include access to a small island in the creek, along with a “treehouse” for trail users to use as an overlook and four dedicated parking spaces, should suffice as public benefits.
In addition to those elements — which he committed to months before asking the council to approve the new plan — Kohn said he is planning to build another trail amenity. “It’s not something we’ve put on paper yet, but we think it’s something that the public will have a great benefit from,” he said.
Mayor Lee Kyriacou seemed amenable to Kohn’s request, noting the statewide housing shortage. Council Member Molly Rhodes asked Kohn if he would be willing to build more affordable units in the third building than the four required by city zoning.
Kohn responded that he is spending “a couple hundred thousand dollars” on the greenway. “Even with 100 units it’s still a challenging project to ‘pencil out,’ ” or turn a profit, he said. “Nevertheless, I’m here to make it work, not to not make it work.”
I’ve toured the Tioronda development and been inside every unit and, let me say, as a real-estate broker for 28 years and a past LEED Green Associate, this is a well-built, environmental and amazing housing project for the city and those who want to live there.
Commercial space doesn’t belong in this project. The mixed-use in this case means diverse neighbors of socioeconomic status, shared amenities and access to the natural beauty that surrounds this project. Otherwise, only one segment of our community would be able to do that. Kohn and Mayor Kyriacou are on the right path, and this would be create more green and inclusive housing.
Boy, developers will do just about anything to avoid adding affordable housing. A couple hundred thousand dollars for trail amenities is hardly a good trade for a handful of affordable units when Bernard Kohn stands to make millions adding luxury housing, which our city does not need.
Why isn’t Mayor Kyriacou setting an example by leading the charge for more affordable housing? He is all about development, raising our taxes and pushing out seniors and average-income residents, the very people who have helped make Beacon a colorful, unique place. Why not be a champion for them instead of developers?
I pray our City Council sticks to their guns and tells Kohn he can replace the commercial space he says is not leasable with affordable housing. Plenty of people will line up for it.
Can you elaborate on why only four below-market units were required within the original 64 apartments? The Beacon zoning code says that 10 percent of projects with 10 or more apartments must be below-market rate, which would mean at least six. Why does bumping it to 100 apartments not require at least 10 below-market units?
Our wording may have been confusing. To clarify, the 64 apartments in the two buildings that are nearly finished include six below-market-rate units. If the city allows 36 apartments in the third building, the zoning requires four of them to be affordable. A council member was asking Kohn if he would consider more than four below-market-rate units in the third building if it were approved for housing.
Wasn’t the developer of the Tioronda project supposed to build the commercial building first, before the residential units? He got out of doing that through negotiations. Now he’s trying to not build any commercial? Tough luck. [via Facebook]
Why is it Beacon’s obligation as a municipality to ensure a development is profitable? No compromise on this, City Council. We need commercial revenue to offset the newly constructed, high-density residential, which is a burden on infrastructure. [via Facebook]
I have zero sympathy for developers who agree to zoning restrictions to get started and then want to circumvent the restrictions to maximize profit. [via Facebook]
This developer constantly asks for changes, variances, complains later, etc. They built too close to the creek, so now the community trail to Madam Brett will have to be moved (probably through the parking lot), and the apartments will probably flood. They cut into the bridge improperly, they destroyed whole swaths of warbler and migrating bird habitat, I am sure the road will not be able to support the traffic, they have complained about affordable units, and now this? I am sure the city will roll over and acquiesce to their demands, but I wish it wouldn’t. Please force them to stick to their plans or levy a massive fine and change the tax structure if they change it. [via Instagram]