Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flooding Parking Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board backs positive recommendation for Neffraham towing business amid repeated flooding
Summary
The Greenburgh Planning Board recommended the Zoning Board approve a parking variance and site changes for the long‑standing towing business at 110 Neffraham Ave., citing flood damage to the property and engineering findings that the proposed raising of the building will not increase flood elevations. The board declared lead agency under SEQR and issued a negative declaration before voting 6–0 with one abstention to recommend approval.
The Greenburgh Planning Board voted to give a positive recommendation to the Zoning Board on a proposal to raise and modify the building at 110 Neffraham Avenue to keep an existing towing business operating.
The board first declared itself lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and determined the proposal a Type I action. After completing deliberations and engineering review, members voted to issue a negative declaration under SEQR and then to recommend approval to the Zoning Board; the chair recorded the recommendation as passing with six yes votes and one abstention.
The property owner, Glenn Preiser, told the board he has “owned the property for 32 years” and described repeated flood events that have forced him to evacuate equipment, suspend operations and spend personal savings to recover. “In the past four years alone, I took $1,200,000 out of my personal lifetime savings,” Preiser said, adding that he employs about 40 full‑time workers and “I plan on being here for the long haul.” (Glenn Preiser, property owner.)
Project engineer Mr. Peretti explained the design would raise new construction to meet the applicable building‑code elevation requirements, noting that the proposed raising “has absolutely no impact on the flood elevation” for the broader drainage basin. Board members who had visited the site described seeing rapid flooding after short storms and said the recommended action was intended to preserve an operating local business and address immediate flood‑related hardships.
Several members emphasized conditions to limit any unintended expansion of the business: the planning staff and a board member proposed—and the chair said he would include—recommendation language tying the variance to the current volume and nature of the operation and requiring the applicant to return for re‑evaluation if the number of employees or the operation’s scale changes.
Next steps: the applicant will take the board’s recommendation to the Zoning Board; the planning staff expects the Zoning Board filing and hearing scheduling to follow the normal calendar.
