Pittsford village, town leaders question need for tax breaks for Westport Crossing

Listen to this article

The County of Monroe Industrial Development Agency (COMIDA) would be ignoring the wishes of village and town leaders in Pittsford if tax incentives are granted for the long-delayed Westport Crossing housing community.

Developer Mark IV Enterprises is again asking for tax breaks in order to finally begin construction on Westport Crossing, a 156-unit upscale apartment village that would be nestled alongside the Erie Canal.

The COMIDA board is scheduled to vote on $1.274 million in sales and mortgage recording tax exemptions for Phase I of the project during its monthly meeting on Dec. 17.

But the village of Pittsford Board of Trustees is opposed to the awarding of public money.

“There is simply no demonstration that the project needs any financial assistance,” Deputy Mayor and trustee David Marshall said at a public hearing on Monday, reading a letter from the trustees addressed to COMIDA. “During the planning board meetings, the project was described as a luxury housing community. Luxury housing communities do not need tax breaks.”

COMIDA members rejected a request for a $7.8 million incentive package in May of 2023 which would have covered all three phases of what then was a $53 million project.

The revised application eliminates a $5.45 million PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes), but the new request for tax incentives covers only the $25.2 million Phase I. The all-phase price tag is now $73.4 million, according to the application to COMIDA.

The developer’s application says its $5 million remediation of what was a brownfield site; the creation of public boardwalk, dock and greenspace; and roadway and water main improvements more than offset tax incentives.

Over the past 15 years, there have been more than 150 public meetings, countless revisions to conceptual drawings and well over $1 million in public dollars spent on legal fees opposing the development by Mark IV subsidiary Pittsford Canalside Properties LLC.

While the project eventually gained the blessing of planning and preservation boards — as well as the state Supreme Court — village trustees and the Pittsford town supervisor on Monday evening said the public shouldn’t help pay for an upscale development.

Marshall’s reading of the trustees letter inferred that basic supply and demand would indicate there is no need for tax exemptions. The development, which will feature studio, one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments, would have rents ranging from $1,800 to $3,500. There would be 31 units reserved for tenants earning less than 80 percent of the Area Median Income.

“The village of Pittsford is a highly desirable residential location in a market short of housing with premier school districts,” Marshall said. “Thus, this project can command top market prices and should not need tax breaks.”

When Mark IV’s request for incentives was rejected last year by a 4-3 vote, the developer filed suit in state Supreme Court, accusing COMIDA board member Joseph Alloco of conflict of interest. Alloco owns six apartment communities within a five-mile radius of the development site.

A review found there was no conflict of interest. Alloco is no longer a member of the board.

The legal costs incurred by the village and county should not be ignored, Marshall said in reading the letter.

“The village and COMIDA have spent enormous amounts of public funds defending a series of frivolous and unsuccessful lawsuits by PCP (Pittsford Canal Partners),” Marshall said. “This has been in excess of $1 million by the village. This is not reflected in the cost/benefit analysis. At a minimum, any approval should be conditioned by COMIDA being reimbursed for its litigation expenses and frankly, COMIDA should explain why it would grant tax breaks to an entity that acts toward the public as PCP as acted.”

Said village resident Peter Greendyke: “I scratch my head when I think of taxpayer funds going to assist a combative developer. The idea that we need taxpayer money to put up residences in Pittsford to me is bizarre. The project doesn’t fit. The scale is out of whack. It doesn’t fit anything alongside the canal.

“I hope COMIDA realizes this project will stand on its own without their funds.”

Pittsford Town Supervisor Bill Smith also questioned why public funding was necessary. Smith said he was speaking at the public hearing as a resident of the town, not as town supervisor. His reasoning in asking COMIDA to deny the application: other upscale developments moved forward without tax breaks.

“Recently we have seen other successful apartment complexes built in the immediate area without them; I’m thinking of Kilbourn Place up on East Avenue, I’m thinking of Dunnwood Green off Jefferson (Road) just across the (town) line in Henrietta,” Smith said. “Tax breaks shouldn’t be necessary for this.”

[email protected]/(585) 653-4020