Greenburgh board pauses ADU vote after neighbors warn law is too restrictive or too vague

The Greenburgh Town Board adjourned its public hearing on a proposed local law to permit accessory dwelling units (ADUs) until the board's first November meeting, after residents urged stronger safeguards and staff warned that certain edits would be substantive enough to require further public process.

The hearing, continued from earlier sessions, focused on a draft that city staff says has been revised to require a 7,500-square-foot minimum lot size for eligibility, a typical ADU size range of 400–800 square feet (with limited exceptions), clarified what constitutes a complete application, and a new requirement that a building permit be obtained within six months of a special-permit approval.

“ADUs can be a smart, responsible way to create housing without changing the feel of our neighborhoods,” resident Sherry Yuji told the board, but she said she now supports strict limits on size, parking and height after learning of a large assisted‑living expansion proposed near her home. “No one’s home should be devastated by an ADU project,” she said.

Other speakers pressed different concerns. Hugh Schwartz said the revisions, as written, appear to be more restrictive than current zoning and could effectively bar conversions such as garages or prevent modest driveway expansions needed for practical access. “This appears to mean… that even an existing garage could not be converted,” Schwartz said.

Commissioner Garrett Duquesne, who presented the changes, clarified the drafting choices and the official rationale: in the current text, a garage conversion would be excluded where the conversion eliminates a parking space and would likely require expanding a driveway, which the draft seeks to limit. “To convert a garage, you’re eliminating a parking space and increasing the probability that you have to increase your driveway,” he said, explaining why the language was drafted that way.

Supervisor Paul Feiner moved to adjourn the hearing and schedule a work session to address the substantive questions and drafting issues; the motion passed unanimously. The board left the hearing record open and asked staff to prepare materials for a follow-up session so board members can review specific changes before any final vote.

The adjournment leaves several remaining questions to be decided in the work session: whether the town should allow conversion of existing garages, whether the minimum lot-size threshold should be lowered, and how parking and tax-assessment impacts for income-generating ADUs should be handled. Duquesne recommended that editorial or minor “tweaks” could be handled in a work session, but that changes such as lowering the lot minimum would be substantive and likely require reopening the public hearing.

The board expects to consider the item again after the work session, with more targeted discussion of conversion rules, permit caps and the balance between neighborhood character and additional housing options.