Home expansion flouts zoning laws

To the editor:

The Hebrew Home at Riverdale wants to build what its president, Dan Reingold, is billing as New York’s first continuous care retirement community, at a location just south of its main campus in North Riverdale along the Hudson River.

This sounds great in theory. The design of the 763,790-square-foot facility is pleasing and innovative. Undoubtedly, the Hebrew Home would provide an unrivaled level of service to the senior residents of these 300 new high-end apartments. 

To its credit, the Hebrew Home is offering ample opportunity for the public to “kick the tires” on this project, and has ostensibly been transparent about what it wants to do.

There’s only one problem. The project does not conform to a zoning standard established by Community Board 8 after much debate and collective soul searching over a decade ago. This was a standard that was meant, among other things, to limit development and preserve the natural beauty and topography of Riverdale.

Not surprisingly, the public outcry against this project is unmistakable in its clarity.  Jennifer Klein, the leader of a new but formidable group of local residents formed to oppose the project, directed the following one-line statement to the Hebrew Home at its last working session meeting:  “Conform to the R-1-1 existing residential zoning.”

Mr. Reingold’s response was disingenuous at best. He indicated that the home had no desire to flout existing zoning laws or seek a variance. Yet the project moves forward, flying in the face of the zoning laws. 

By Mr. Reingold’s own admission, this project could be constructed on the home’s existing north campus, but with a density he believes the community would find distasteful.  

When Paul Elston of the Riverdale Nature Preservancy dismissed that claim and suggested that the Hebrew Home install a sculpture garden open to the public as well as its own residents on the new property, Mr. Reingold quipped, “That’s a pretty expensive sculpture garden.”

This is yet another example of a development that the community, by way of its established zoning code, has deemed irresponsible.  

For Riverdalians already denied access to their own waterfront, this proposed development would add insult to injury.  

For the residents of the Skyview apartments, and especially the homeowners along Palisade Avenue, both the increased traffic and impeded views of the Hudson River would be most unfair.

Given the financial power and political influence of the Hebrew Home, betting against this project would be unwise. Mr. Reingold made sizable contributions to Councilman Oliver Koppell’s last campaign, and has already made an investment in the political aspirations of the City Council candidate backed by Mr. Koppell, community board member Andrew Cohen.

Let’s hope the will of the people and the concerns of residents speak louder than the political muscle that the Hebrew Home can enlist.

Cliff Stanton