Part 1: Limited opportunity for public input in the DOZ model

More than two dozen New Rochelle residents expressed opposition to a proposed revision of New Rochelle’s downtown development plan at a  public hearing before the City Council on Tuesday, April 14 (video available here; hearing begins at 2:43:07).  No speaker expressed support for the revised plan.  Many expressed profound disappointment with the outcome of New Rochelle’s downtown development boom over the past ten years, suggesting that the project has served the needs of developers far more than the needs of New Rochelle residents.  

The original development plan, passed by the City Council in 2015, called for the construction of about 30 new buildings with 10,000 residential units.  To date some 5,000 units have been built, and another 5,000 have been approved and are “in the pipeline” to be completed in the next several years.  The vast majority of the units built and planned are luxury rentals with minimal affordable housing and, to date, no  ownership opportunities.  Only a tiny fraction of the workers employed in the construction have been union members.

The proposed revision, formally known as the Supplemental Draft Generic Environmental Impact Plan (SDGEIS), was presented to the Council by the city’s Department of Development in February and calls for the construction of 2,800 additional housing units.  The city says the plan is based on updates to theoretical development models and lessons learned from the experience of the past decade.  Yet the plan’s projections for jobs and job creation closely mirror the theoretical model used in 2015, and no lessons seem to have been learned about the importance of local hire and full-time family-supporting job creation.  The proposal also seems to contain few or no provisions for a substantial increase in affordable housing, increased parking, or improved quality of life.  Speakers at the hearings addressed all of these issues.

New Rochelle NAACP President Aisha Cook, Bruce Soloway  and Lourdes Font opened the hearing by reading a New RoAR News editorial into the record (2:45:32)  The editorial called for the council to “codify the expectations of the community as it relates to careers, local hires, green space, homeownership, and truly affordable rents. Unlike the previous administration, this council should move from simply hoping for the best from developers to demanding a return on the taxpayer’s investments.”

Lourdes Font, Bruce Soloway, and Aisha Cook read the New RoAR News editorial on redevelopment into the Council record

Over the next several days, New RoAR News will present the testimony of many of the speakers at the April 14 hearing on a number of topics:

• Part 1: Opportunity for community input (below)
• Part 2: Family-supporting jobs
• Part 3: Affordable housing
• Part 4: Quality of life

Commissioner of Development Adam Salgado told New RoAR News that the City is preparing a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FSGEIS) that will provide written responses to the substantive environmental issues and concerns raised during the 66-day public comment period that opened on February 17, 2026, and closed on April 24, 2026, as well as  the public hearing held on April 14. The FSGEIS responses, which will include answers to some of the questions raised, will be reviewed and discussed by the City Council, and posted on the City’s website as soon as they are available, some time in June.  The Council is expected to vote on the amendment sometime thereafter.

Editors Note: Although the public hearing portion of this process has ended, please continue to reach out to your council member and the mayor to share your concerns and advocate for change.   At community events, political events, neighborhood association meetings, coffee and conversation or at fundraisers, continue to press our elected officials on their commitment to making substantial transformative changes to the DOZ amendment.  We know that developers and their consultants have a vision for our community and have been very effective in ensuring the DOZ process works for them.  Let’s make sure that it is the community’s voice, expectation and vision that is reflected going forward.  

Part 1: Limited opportunity for public input in the DOZ model

Several speakers noted that this major revision of the plan would be the public’s only real opportunity to impact the redevelopment process.  

Lisa Burton (3:23:51) told the Council that the public has realized that under the DOZ’s “form base zoning” scheme, the only way they can impact change is by making amendments to the city code.  “I’ve always had a problem with it,” Burton said, “because it really reduced public input to nothing.” 

Lisa Burton

“
This is your opportunity to go from asking, incentivizing, suggesting, to actually making real change,” Burton continued.  ”When we go to the Planning Board, they say, ‘We can’t do anything, City Council has decided that this is okay,’ and they check the boxes. 
You go to the IDA, they say, ‘We can’t do anything, this is the intent of the City Council.’ 
Now we are in front of you as you’re going to make a substantial amendment to the overlay zone. … You are not the council that started this. But you can be the council that changes it for the better. 
You can be the council that listens. … You can do better.”

Sean Wyawatski (3:30:27), a member of Enough is Enough, called the current DOZ amendment “a continued pattern of best efforts and half measures.”  

Sean Wyawatski

“But the time for that is over,” Wyawatski continued.  “We’ve seen that story play out over the past 10 years. 
All that does is lead to the developers being in the driver’s seat and the residents left by the wayside.”

Marion Whitaker (3:20:17), also a member of Enough is Enough, stated that the DOZ, “has become a lesson to us when developers instead of real bona fide urban planners are given uncontrolled power to fully dictate what should be built and not what is necessarily the best for our citizens.”  

Marian Whitaker

Matt Rooney (3:41:20) noted that rushed DOZ amendments subvert the public process completely, stating that it “is not good governance. And it’s not what your constituents are asking you for.”

Matt Rooney

Paul Martin (3:38:00) urged the council to not rush to accept the current amendments.  Like others, he noted that opposition to a project at public hearing before planning has no impact because their hands are tied by the rules of the DOZ code.  He warned council, “If you rush this process, you’re going to add credence to the idea that the DOZ is a mechanism tilted towards developer interests rather than a tool designed to maximize community benefit and economic vibrancy.”

Matt Rooney

And Myriam Decime (3:45:17) demanded the complete removal of DOZ ordinances so that the public could once again have real influence in the approval process for major development.

Myriam Decime

Next: Part 2: Family-Supporting Jobs