ZBA Formalizes Mt. Pleasant Decision Despite Lack of Information

by Meg Yergin -

On June 7, 2026, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) formalized its decision overturning a Building Inspector's determination that a proposed Mt. Pleasant Avenue housing development resembled a nursing or convalescent home.  The vote came almost a year after the appeal was filed and after months of contentious public hearings with many residents expressing their opposition to the affordable housing project.

The ZBA reached its decision without reviewing a NYS grant application submitted by the developer, Search for Change, that describes staffing, nursing support, behavioral-health services, crisis intervention, and resident-support programs planned for the project. 

Proposed Project

The proposed project consists of a six-story, 62-unit affordable housing development on Mt. Pleasant Avenue. Thirty-one of the units would be reserved for supportive-housing residents living with serious mental illness who would receive support services.  See HERE.

In a Letter of Determination dated July 1, 2025, Building Inspector Scott Ransom states that the project resembles a nursing or convalescent home which is not a permitted use in the C2 zoning district.  See HERE. In response, Search for Change appealed his determination to the ZBA.

May Meeting Discussions

After closing the public hearings in April, the ZBA began its deliberations on this matter at its May 7 meeting.  A majority of ZBA members disagreed with Ransom’s finding that the proposed development resembles a nursing or convalescent home.  In a 3 -2 split vote, the Board decided instead that the project meets the Code definition of a multi-residential development which is permitted in the C2 district, overturning Ransom’s determination.  See HERE.

Village land use attorney Kevin Staudt was then tasked with compiling the oral findings of the ZBA and drafting a final decision for the members to vote on at its June meeting.

June Meeting Deliberations

The audience in the courtroom at the June meeting included a few residents who had previously attended the appeal’s public hearings, the applicant’s attorney, Neil Alexander, and Village Mayor Sharon Torres.  It is not typical for elected officials to attend ZBA meetings.  The zoning board is a quasi-judicial body that must remain impartial and nonpartisan in its review and deliberations.

Unusual Language in the Draft Decision

During the review of Staudt’s draft, ZBA members were surprised by some of the language Staudt included in his draft.  Specifically, they discussed a paragraph describing how members of the public doubt the integrity of the applicant -

“The Board is aware that there have been allegations by the public that, contrary to the Applicant’s representations, the Applicant intends to provide additional services… While the Board grants the Applicant’s appeal based on the nature of the use as described by the Applicant, to the extent that additional services are offered on site, the use may well violate the C-2 and R-5 zoning ordinances and the Applicant may be subject to enforcement actions by the Village.”

Kramer questioned if “all that was in the record”.  She pointed out that it would be unusual for the ZBA to include this text as it implies the ZBA will be monitoring what services they provide. “We don’t do that in other applications,” she said.  ZBA Member Richard Clifford said that “the applicant has the right to feel the appeal has been decided.”

ZBA Members agreed to replace Staudt’s original paragraph with a more neutral statement that is typical of ZBA decisions: the ZBA grants the appeal based on the applicant’s description of the use, and the applicant must comply with all other laws.

Additional Information the ZBA Did Not See

Throughout the hearings, ZBA members sought information regarding the staffing and services that would be provided on site from Search for Change because those issues were central to determining whether the project resembled a nursing or convalescent home or qualified as a multi-residential building.

ZBA Member Gretta Heaney repeatedly requested details regarding staffing and the scope of managed-care services.  Applicant’s attorney Alexander argued that the ZBA did not have the right to review staff roles as that was beyond the ZBA’s scope and ultimately they did not provide any specific information.

Funding Application Describes Scope of Services

The Mamaroneck Observer has obtained the NYS grant application submitted by Search for Change on July 31, 2025.  In the application, the organization seeks approximately $1.04 million in annual operating and service funding for the operation through the NYS Empire State Supportive Housing Initiative (ESSHI).   See HERE.

The grant funding application contains detailed descriptions of staffing, nursing support, and scope of other services that were not provided to the ZBA.  But ZBA members were not provided the comprehensive information included in the funding application.

Grant Application Defines Resident Eligibility

The grant application defines supportive-housing residents as "occupants who qualify for placement in accordance with a disabling condition and require tenancy support services."  It also states that many residents will require continuing assistance in managing the effects of past trauma, including periodic emergency support to address psychosocial stressors. 

Staffing and Services

According to the grant application, all services are to be provided in a trauma-informed, recovery-oriented manner.  Staff will include a Clinical Director, a Program Director and a Registered Nurse to monitor health and ensure coordination of medical and primary health-related services.  Services to be provided to the supportive-housing residents include:

·      behavioral health treatment

·      nursing supportive services

·      care management

·      counsel and crisis intervention. 

Safety Concerns Addressed in the Grant

The application also contains a detailed discussion of security and risk-management procedures.

The application proposes round-the-clock security staffing, surveillance cameras with remote monitoring, individualized tenant safety plans, 24-hour emergency assistance, overdose-response capabilities, and ongoing staff training in crisis intervention and trauma-informed care.

The application states that ESSHI residents will undergo a need and risk assessment during the intake process.  Potential threats to community safety arising from tenant behavior will be evaluated on a continuing basis through periodic incident reviews and the organization's Continuous Quality Improvement program.

In addition, the application states that individuals will generally not be disqualified solely because of identified risk factors.  These include individuals listed on the NYS Sex Offender Registry, although their placement would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and alternative housing options could be pursued if their placement were deemed detrimental to the safety or viability of the project.

Next Steps

While the ZBA determined that the proposed use is permitted for the site, the project still faces significant challenges.

Since the application was filed, the Board of Trustees eliminated several affordable-housing zoning bonuses that were incorporated into the project's design, potentially requiring substantial revisions before plans can be approved and construction begins.  These bonuses included an allowance for a larger-sized building, an additional (sixth) floor, and a reduced number of required off-street parking spaces.

Any revised application for the project would still have to comply with the Village’s land use laws including site plan and subdivision review from the Planning Board and other various land use board oversight.