Gannett Will Launch new White Plains Weekly Newspaper.

Hits: 0

WPCNR MAIN STREET JOURNAL. By John F. Bailey. October 29, 2006: Gannett Newspapers, publishers of The Journal News, the Westchester-Rockland daily newspaper is launching a weekly news publication entitled White Plains Express which is scheduled to publish Thursdays of each week beginning in November. It is aimed squarely at the local advertising market now served by the White Plains Times.


 



The Prototype of Gannett’s new White Plains Express. Photo,WPCNR News


The announcement to Journal News advertisers this week promises to deliver advertisers 93% of White Plains households — guaranteeing a 20,767 circulation to the White Plains households which do not subscribe to the daily Journal News.  It promises the White Plains Express will cover the local police blooter, briefs and news, White Plains sports and sports schedule; local property sales, business news, plus photographs of White Plains citizens and events and editorial generated by White Plains residents. A calendar of local events is promised. 


The flyer announcing the new paper hints that ad buys combining the circulation of both newspapers will over advertisers 93% penetration of the White Plains market. Delivery will be by mail and by hand. The paper promises 21,000 readers of the Express weekly, and 14,000 readers of the daily Journal News, for a total reach of 34,768 households in White Plains.


 

Posted in Uncategorized

WATER MAIN BREAK SHUTS OFF WATER TO THE WESTCHESTER. BACK TONITE

Hits: 0

WPCNR EAST SIDE STORY. By John F. Bailey. October 28, 2006 UPDATED 12:15 PM EDT UPDATED 6:10 P.M. EDT: A water main break this morning shut off all water to The Westchester, White Plains posh mall on Bloomingdale Road. According to eyewitnesses, all bathrooms were closed, and The Food Court  closed. Police confirmed there was a water main break.


The Department of Public Works reported they had a crew digging now at the location of the break and that they do not know the cause of the break.( “We won’t know until we get down there,” was the response.) At this time, the DPW said it appears The Westchester is the only location affected because they have not received any calls from any other locations in the area. 


At 6 P.M., the White Plains Department of Public Works reported they were completing their work there to restore the water and “it should be back on tonight.”

Posted in Uncategorized

White Plains Week Proposes School District Acquire St. Agnes Site, NYPH site

Hits: 0



WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. News & Commentary By John F. Bailey. October 28, 2006: On Friday evening’s cablecast of White Plains Week, Co-Anchors Jim Benerofe and John Bailey of WPCNR in discussing the city’s Memorandum of Understanding with New York Presbyterian Hospital – now under eleventh hour consideration by the Common Council – advanced an idea that made sense for both the city, the hospital and the School District – that neither the city nor the school district have entertained.


The program is recablecast Monday evening at 7 P.M on Public Access Channel 76 — “The Spirit of 76.”


 



The Dean of White Plains School of Journalism: Jim Benerofe, suggesting the School District acquire the St. Agnes Hospital site on White Plains Week. See the provocative proposal he suggests tonight at 7 on “76′ Photo, WPCNR News.



 


The idea would preserve the 65 acres or more — now a mere Common Council thumbs-up from being turned into a 125-home subdivision and minimum $120 Million to $160 Million or more windfall for New York Presbyterian Hospital.


 


School District to its and the City’s Rescue?


 


In the discussion on the Friday evening television show, it was pointed out that in the city’s apparent rush to enhance the value of the New York Presbyterian Hospital land by multi-millions of dollars for 5.5 acres of parkland – the school district capacity for bonding for such a purchase for its own future expansion has been ignored.


 


Bailey pointed out that, by its own admission and the analysis of its distinguished Capital Projects Committee, the School District has no land on which to expand on for a future Middle School, new Mamaroneck Avenue School or new George Washington School – should they reach their apparent school district mandatory retirement age of 90 years service.


 


Now, though with the New York Presbyterian Hospital about to enter into an agreement with the Common Council for a Conservation Development of 65 acres of their property adjacent Bryant Avenue, in exchange for leasing the city 5.5 acres of parkland – it appears the hospital since they do not build houses – would have an incentive to shop the 65 acres for at least $160 Million – because any realtor will tell you the conservation development approval by July – could double the value of the hospital land. The developer simply has to buy the land and build —  no more approvals needed.


 


Bailey and Benerofe realized that New York Presbyterian Hospital land would be an ideal “land bank” for the City School District that could strike a deal with the City of White Plains  and the Hospital for the New York Presbyterian Hospital 65 acres. The School District and the city could use their combined bonding powers to save the New York Presbyterian Hospital for a legitimate dual purpose: a park, a campus for future expansion of White Plains Schools — now all on the verge of being dangerously creaky and overcrowded.


 


The Benerofe Parlay


 


Later, over the traditional City Limits post-show lunch at Table 51 between the three News Amigos, Peter Katz, Bailey and Benerfore,   Benerofe suggested the School District should also consider acquiring the North Street Community-owned – former St. Agnes hospital site for possible use as a school site – rather than build Post Road School – or as a possible “hedge” site against possible future school expansion needs.  The North Street Community is now stalled out in its attempt to build a senior residential community there, and is now paying taxes on the property with no approval in sight.


 


Benerofe said the school has modern buildings there that could  be converted to  class rooms, labs and computer rooms and libraries for a potential elementary school or Middle School – or even as expansion for White Plains High School as that facility bulges at over 2,000 students today right at capacity.


 


Bailey noted that the School District in its recently successful (by 116 votes) $69.6 Million Capital Expansion claimed there was no land for available for the district to purchase and that any land-purcahse from other sites in the city (other than NYPH-piece)  alone would cost the district $21 Million.


 


Now, beginning Monday evening,  the School District, after passing the bond vote, is employing a consultant to do “strategic planning” for the district future, a “strategy” for acquiring room for expanding the district is here for consideration. It needs to be considered fast.


 


Bailey and Benerofe suggest an enrollment inflation hedge.


 


With the district expanding by 280 students by 2010, with no handle on how many more births will be coming on line each year until then (the district’s modus operandi of predicting future enrollment is by births per year ), and George Washington School, Mamaroneck Avenue School and the middle schools approaching the school district-determined “mandatory retirement age of 90 years” the district has to think what they are going to do about them. Should they continue to build schools adjacent to the old schools, or should they rethink matters and seek a campus like environment.


 


Once the New York Presbyterian Hospital goes to subdivision, it’s gone. The acquisition of the 65 acres by the city and the school district, combining their bonding powers would provide land for school expansion in the future and give the city a park, and the school district options for the next century. The taxpayers would be paying taxes for the future of their children and the aesthetic atmosphere of White Plains – instead of paying freight for developers with their taxes.


 


School District has Deep Pockets


 


According to Assistant Superintendent for Business, Fred Seiler, the school district has the capacity to borrow $248 Million even after the $66.9 Million school capital project is issued. And that will go up, since City Assessor Eyde McCarthy places the present value of taxable property in White Plains is $8.3 Billion, about $1 billion more than the school district presently calculates the figure.


 


Now, if the City School District and the City of White Plains really work together, Benerofe and Bailey suggested – this land could be saved – rather than turned into a massive profit tool for the Hospital and Toll Brothers, or some other developer of interest.


 


The School District Capital Project Committee estimated it would cost about $21 Million to acquire other land in the city to build the Post Road School as a reason for just building a new Post Road School adjacent to the present one. However, at the time, this Memorandum of Understanding (in the works for a year quietly by the Mayor’s office) with the Hospital was not known to the district.


 


Now if the School District and the city work together as they are fond of saying they do, perhaps the Mayor may get White Plains more than a 5.5 acre park at the price of a massive subdivision.


 


Millions of Dollars At Stake Here for Developers/Hospital


Millions of Futures at Stake for School District.


 


The New York Presbyterian Hospital is a delicious green filet mignon of a piece of land that will set any developer, super or not so super’s mouth watering.


 


The White Plains Week conversation pointed this out.


 


The discussion continued at luncheon and the economics made sense for a developer: Buy the 60 acres of land along Bryant Avenue at say $2 Million an acre (or more), build 125 homes on it, for say $600,000 Plus  a home ($75,000,000- $100,000,000 ) and resell them for $3.5  Million apiece  and you have doubled your money. And that’s just rough money.


 


Throw in a golf course, health club and pool and you could probably get $4 Million a home for it, bringing your total gross to $500 Million, your expenses for acquiring the land: $160 Million, Building maybe $75 to $100 Million, and you can see the millions in profit just light up on the scoreboard, can’t you? The homes would “go.”


 

Posted in Uncategorized

THE NEW, IMPROVED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.

Hits: 0

WPCNR FOR THE RECORD. October 27, 2006: Herewith is a copy of the new Memorandum of Understanding delivered to the Common Council Thursday evening. The document has not been accepted by the Common Council, with matters of timetable, terms of reimbursement for expenses, the lease, and a right of first refusal clause under consideration:


MEMORANDUM


OF


UNDERSTANDING


 


This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is entered into as of this day of,


by and between THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS, a municipal corporation, having an office and place of business located at 255 Main Street, White Plains, New York 10601 (the “City”) and ROYAL CHARTER PROPERTIES WESTCHESTER, [NC., a New York not-for-profit corporation, having an office or place of business located at 435 East 70th Sheet, New York, New York 10021 (the “ RCPW”),


 


GENERAL


 


RCPW is the owner of approximately 214 acres of land (the “RCPW Site”) in the City. The entire property is situated in the R1-l2.5 zoning district and has received a special permit to use the RCPW Site for “Hospital” purposes as defined in the City’s Zoning Ordinance.


 


Pursuant to this MOU and the terms and conditions contained herein, the City proposes to cause to be subdivided, as a Conservation Development approximately 65.5 acres of the property owned by RCPW (the “Proposed Conservation Development”), with (a) approximately 5.5 acres of the RGPW Site being subdivided and the development rights associated with that parcel, defined herein below as the “Park and Recreation Parcel,” being transferred to the “Residential Parcel”, also defined herein below, pursuant to the City’s conservation development zoning and subdivision regulations, and such area set aside for Park and Recreation purposes (the “Park and Recreation Parcel”) for use by all residents of the City with the rights of access and control by the city described herein below, and (b) a parcel of approximately 60 acres of the RCPW site having frontage on Bryant Avenue, for Residential Purposes (the “Residential Parcel”). The City proposes to undertake the environmental review of the environmental impact of the Proposed Conservation Development in accordance with Section 5.7 of the City’ s Zoning Ordinance and NY State SEQR regulations. Such use of the RCPW Site will require an amendment to RCPWs master plan and special permit pursuant to Section 6.7.5 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Proposed Conservation Development, including the Park and Recreation Parcel and the Residential Parcel, are depicted on the “Conceptual Conservation Development Plan”, annexed hereto as Exhibit A for illustration purposes only. Exhibit Al will consist of a conventional subdivision plan and Exhibit A2 will be a proposed Conservation Development Plan. Exhibits Al and A2 shall be finalized by the parties, subject to such modifications as may be made during the environmental, subdivision and special permit processes.


 


TERMS OF AGREEMENT


 


I – The City shall prepare, at its cost and expense, and submit to all appropriate governmental agencies, including but not limited to the White Plains Planning Board (“Planning Board”), an application for subdivision of the approximately 214 acres of land owned by RCPW, including the subdivision of the Residential Parcel and the Park and Recreation Parcel generally as shown on the Conceptual Conservation Development Plan. The Conceptual Conservation Development Plan shall be used for Informal Review pursuant to Section 5.7.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and to establish the lot count for the Conservation Development. This paragraph is made subject to paragraph 3 herein below. The City shall be the applicant for the subdivision and environmental approval of the Proposed Conservation Development. When mutually deemed ready for submission to start the subdivision process, the proposed plan for the proposed Conservation Development shall be submitted to RCPW, which shall, within forty-five (45) days thereafter, review and comment on such plan.


 


2. Upon final agreement of the parties on the proposed Conservation Subdivision Development, RCPW shall submit to the Common Council an application to amend the special permit issued to RCPW and to amend RCPW’s Master Plan, which is a part of the special permit, to remove the portion of the property subject to the proposed Conservation Development from the Hospital use special permit, such action by the Common Council being made subject to the granting final conservation subdivision plat approval for the proposed Conservation Development, and authorize the use of the Residential Parcel for residential purposes and the use of the Park and Recreation Parcel for park and recreational purposes upon granting of final conservation subdivision plat approval.


 


3. The City shall, subject to RCPW’s approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, retain all consultants (including approved land use counsel) it deems reasonable and/or necessary to pursue the Proposed Conservation Subdivision, shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, all drawings, studies, plans, reports and documents, and shall pay for all costs necessary and required to obtain environmental and other approvals for the Proposed Conservation Subdivision. ,Attached hereto as Exhibit C is the agreed-upon budget for the costs of the review process for the proposed Conservation Development (the “Approved Budget”). The Approved Budget may be amended from time to time by ants upon the agreement between the parties. RCPW shall not be obligated to reimburse the City (as such reimbursement may be effected as described in this paragraph 3) its allocable portion of any expenditures that exceed the amounts set forth in the Approved Budget. In the event the City desires to amend any application, plan, sketch or drawing in connection with the Proposed Conservation Subdivision, such amendment shall not be made, submitted or filed without the prior approval of RCPW, which approval shall not be unseasonably withheld. Each party shall be responsible for their own attorney’s fees in connection with (a) any legal proceedings or challenges of such approvals or (b) any requests by such party for services not directly related to the purpose for which land use counsel has been retained, as described in the first sentence of this paragraph 3. The parties hereto shall develop a fair and equitable distribution or allocation of the reasonable third party costs associated with the Residential Parcel, consistent with the Approved Budget, and, upon the granting of fmal approval of the Proposed Conservation Subdivision plat and related environmental review, and after any and all challenges to such approvals have been exhausted (resulting in a non-appealable fmal order or judgement) or the time within which a challenge must be made has expired, RCPW shall reimburse the City for those costs allocable to the Residential Parcel. The City shall be responsible for such costs allocable to the Park and Recreation Parcel. RCPW shall reimburse the City for such costs attributable to the Residential Parcel by conveying to the City additional land adjacent to the Park and Recreation Parcel of equal value in the area (or portion thereof) so designated in Exhibit A2, unless the parties mutually determine that such reimbursement shall be made by cash payment. If RCPW terminates this Agreement without good cause or ceases to proceed in good faith with its efforts to secure necessary governmental and land use approvals for the Proposed Conservation Development in accordance with this MOU, it shall reimburse to the City, in a timely manner, all reasonable costs (consistent with the Approved Budget) expended by the City in obtaining the environmental and all other approvals for the proposed Conservation Subdivision, by cash payment. No such reimbursement shall be required in the event RCPW exercises its rights under paragraph 9 herein.


 


4. RCPW agrees that upon the granting of final approval of the Proposed Conservation Subdivision plat and related environmental review, and after any and all challenges to such approvals have been exhausted or the time within which a challenge must be made has expired, it shall grant to the City, by written instrument, the undisturbed right to use, occupy, develop and maintain the Park and  Recreation Parcel for a period of ninety-nine (99) years, with renewal options that may be exercised by the City.


 


5. The City shall construct at its sole cost and expense and otherwise provide for all labor and materials it deems necessary to construct all improvements to the Park and Recreation Parcel, including but not limited to ball fields, playgrounds, landscaping, equipment, lighting and fencing, access road (in the location designated in Exhibit A) and retention basin (if required). The Park and Recreation Parcel shall be enclosed by a fence, which shall be similar in height, structural and aesthetic design to the wrought iron fence presently enclosing the RCPW property. RCPW shall have no obligation to pay for the cost of any improvements to the Park and Recreational Parcel. The City shall, after the completion of the initial construct, repair, maintain and, if desired, reconstruct, redevelop, or improve, or cause to be repaired, maintained, reconstructed or redeveloped and improved, the Park and Recreation Parcel, including constructing an access road between the Park and Recreation Parcel and Bryant Avenue, and the City shall pay all costs in connection therewith. The City and RCPW shall execute and record a restrictive covenant to limit the use of the Park and Recreation parcel to recreation use open to the residents of White Plains and theft visitors and guests, and to impose such reasonable restrictions on the use of such Park and Recreation Parcel as may be agreed to by the parties (ugh as, hours of operation, permitted/proscribed activities, noise levels, security, etc.), such agreement not to be unreasonably withheld. The cost to record such restrictive covenant shall be shared equally by the parties.


 


6. In order to enhance and facilitate RCPW’s operation of the RCPW Site and the conduct of all Hospital activities occurring thereon, all easements, roads, retention basins and points of access to public streets shall be designed so that the same are acceptable to RCPW, including, without limitation, reasonable additional or new means of access to the RCPW site from Bloomingdale Road. Any amendments or changes to the easements, roads, retention basins and points of access shall be subject to approval of RCPW.


 


7. RCPW shall be responsible to secure, at its sole cost and expense, the approval, if required, of all regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over RCPW in connection with the activities described herein. RCPW shall, within 6 months after the execution of the MOIJ, apply for such approvals and shall diligently seek approval thereafter. RCPW’S failure to secure such approvals which failure shall prevent the use of the Park and Recreation Parcel by the City as contemplated under this MOU, shall constitute a cause under which RCPW is required to reimburse the City by cash payment for all of its costs related to the environmental and other approvals of the Conservation Subdivision.


 


8. The Planning Department of the City has estimated that the Proposed Subdivision Plat will be ready for final approval within nine months from the date hereof plus any periods necessary to obtain a survey of the Residential Parcel and Park and Recreation Parcel, if not already part of a survey in possession of RCPW, and any review periods for RCPW as described in paragraphs I and 4 herein above (the “Proposed Conservation Subdivision Plan Schedule”). Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a summary of required actions and respective anticipated time frames (“Conservation Subdivision Timeline”), culminating in the Proposed Conservation Subdivision Plan Plat being ready for final approval. The City and RCPW, its successors, assigns and designees, agree to (1) proceed in good faith and with all due expedition in the prosecution and completion of the Proposed Conservation Subdivision and (2) cooperate with each other (a) in promptly filing any applications for approval of the Proposed Subdivision Plan and any amendments thereto, (b) in timely filing any documents in connection with environmental review of the Proposed Conservation Subdivision Plan and any other required actions and ( c) in taking all other steps to achieve the objectives of this MOU consistent with the terms herein and the Proposed Conservation Subdivision Plan Timeline and Proposed Conservation Subdivision Plan Schedule. The City and RCPW shall diligently work together to resolve any issues, misunderstandings or disputes in connection with the Proposed Subdivision Plan and the environmental review in connection therewith.


 


9. If the Proposed Conservation Subdivision is not approved within the Proposed Conservation Subdivision Schedule or such modified or extended timeline to which the parties may agree, RCPW may withdraw from this Memorandum of Understanding and, upon such withdrawal, neither party shall be bound by the terms and conditions herein. Recognizing the timeline agreed to herein, RCPW agrees that it shall review plans, respond to questions and provide information to the City and its designated consultants in a timely manner.


 


10. Notwithstanding section 7.6 or any other provision of the Zoning Ordinance, the parties acknowledge that RCPW’s affiliate, New York Presbyterian Hospital (NYPH) submitted a letter to the City, dated as of August 1, 2005 (“Renewal Request”), requesting a renewal of its Special Permit Approval for the Proton Beam Therapy Center/Research facility (“Project”) at the Site. The parties, therefore, agree that such Renewal Request shall be held in abeyance and (a) NYPH and/or RCPW shall not take any further actions in connection with such Special Permit Approval or the Project and (b) the City shall not place such item on the agenda of the Common Council or any other department, board or agency for consideration, until such time that this MOU shall terminate or expire, as set forth herein; it being further understood and agreed that, upon granting of final approval of the Proposed Conservation Subdivision plat and related environmental review, and after any and all challenges to such approvals have been exhausted (resulting in a non-appealable final order or judgement) or the time within which a challenge must be made has expired, such Special Permit Approval shall no longer be effective and NYPH’ s request for renewal thereof shall be deemed withdrawn. The City further agrees that in the event the MOU expires or terminates and NYPH (or RCPW) proceeds with its request for renewal of the Special Permit Approval, the passage of time between NYPH’s timely submission of the Renewal Request and the effective date of the MOU’s termination or expiration shall not be the sole basis of the


City’s consideration of and determination on such Renewal Request.


 


11. Jurisdiction over any action or proceeding arising out of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be vested in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Westchester.


 


12. Except as set forth in paragraph 9 above, this MOU may be amended only by written agreement executed by both pasties. The parties agree that this MOU constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and that there are no agreements, contracts, covenants, promises or representations, except as set forth herein.


 


13. The persons executing this MOU represent that they (a) are executing this instrument on behalf of and as the act of the party for which they sign and Q) possess all requisite authority to execute same on such party’s behalf


 


14. The parties agree that any notice regarding the MOU shall be sent to the following by ovemight courier or first class mail:


 


For the City of White Plains:


Paul Wood


Executive Officer


City Hall


255 Main Street


White Plains, NY 10601


 

(and other parties)

Posted in Uncategorized

COUNCIL & NYPH MOU: Appears to Agree to Surrender Approval Power to Planning Brd

Hits: 0

WPCNR Common Council Chronicle-Examiner. By John F. Bailey. October 27, 2006, UPDATED 1:30 P.M. EDT: The Memorandum of Understanding between the city and New York Presbyterian inched closer to acceptance by the Common Council Thursday evening.  


 



 


The council demonstrated  no objections to the major effect of the MOU—relinquishing right of the Common Council approval of the project to The Planning Board. That happens once the Council accepts the MOU  which if executed in full, secures 5.5 acres or more of parkland from the hospital for the city.  In exchange the NYPH is given a  ready-to-go subdivision layout of 114 lots that will produce a 125-unit subdivision on 60 adjacent acres paralleling Bryant Avenue.  Mayor Joseph Delfino (back to camera) assured the Common Council that the hospital “has no plans at this time to develop the property.” Photo by WPCNR News


 





The council was informed by the city Planning Commissioner that the total budget for preparing the subdivision would be $635,500, with the city paying $60,000 out of pocket (for its 5.5 acre park portion of the subdivision) and the hospital reimbursing the city for the balance of the costs.  The Planning Commissioner said it was up to the council whether they required the reimbursement in cash or in extra land added to the 5.5 acres on the wetslopes and forested area descending from the 5.5. acre “park area.”


 


It was made clear that if the Common Council agrees to the Memorandum of Understanding (planned for as early as the November 6 Council Meeting), that the only opportunity for the Common Council to bail out of the deal would be when it comes time for the Common Council to remove the 65 acres from the Hospital Use Special Permit that now is attached to the targeted property. By refusing to remove the property from under the Special Permit, they violate the aggreement, in effect,  killing the park, and the property reverts to as of right.


 


WPCNR wants to point out that the Planning Board, by state law, is the agency charged with reviewing proposed subdivisions, however, by presenting the MOU to the Council, the council in effect has this one opportunity to either buy in or reject this concept of a subdivision on this property.


 


City Gets to Choose the Land with a Conservation Development


 


It was painstakingly pointed out by the Planning Commissioner that the Planning Board which under Zoning Law retains exclusive jurisdiction over “Conservation Developments”  would hold public hearings each step of the way as part of their series of steps to final approval of the subdivision.


 


Council President Rita Malmud told WPCNR after the meeting broke up that the Council can reject the park/subdivision plan and the 125 home development by either not signing the Memorandum of Understanding or by not approving the removal of the land from the Special permit.


 



 


The Planning Commissioner explained to the Council, by proposing the Conservation Development, the city is able to dictate where the parkland would be, while if a site plan were submitted, though the Common Council would have approval rights, the hospital could dictate where the parkland would be. Photo by WPCNR News


 


In contrast the Memorandum of Understanding gives New York Presbyterian Hospital the right to approve all access roads to the subdivision being designed for them by the city.


 


A troubled Dennis Power


 


Councilman Dennis Power expressed his desire to see a clause written in to the Memorandum of Understanding that if the New York Presbyterian Hospital were to entertain the sale of the land, that the Trust for Public Land be allowed to obtain it as a right of first refusal. Planning Commissioner Susan Habel said the Trust for Public Land did not buy land, that the organization was a negotiator only to try and bring two parties together. Asked what the value of the sixy-five acres now was, Paul Wood, Executive Officer said between 1.1 and $2 Million, but he did not know.


 


Mayor Delfino was adamant that he would not add any clause allowing the Trust for Public Land to attempt to broker a land deal. It was calculated by Councilman Thomas Roach that the land at 60 acres at $1.3 Million an acre would require an investment of $78.6 Million. Mayor Delfino said he did not think adding a right of refusal clause was legal. He said he might be able to get a separate letter from the New York Presbyterian Hospital to that effect.


 


Assessment Shot.


 


After the meeting, Wood  told WPCNR that upon approval of the Conservation Development plan, the city would obtain the 5.5 acres of park for immediate development into a park. He added on questioning that once the Conservation Development was approved by the Planning Board, (anticipated in August, 2007), the 60 acres would return to the assessment roles. He estimated that would add about a million dollars to the city budget (and WPCNR estimates $4 Million to the City School District coffers).   


 


The substance of the agreement was not challenged by the Council members accept in the matter of the length of the lease and its renewal, the terms and circumstances on how the city expenses (on the residential parcel) would be paid. The agreement binds both city and hospital to a strict 9-month timeline (in which Draft and Final Environmental Impact statements and Findings Statements would expect to be completed in time for an approval by next August) which the Commissioner of Planning was going to rework  


 


Councilman Arnold Bernstein made clear that the Council could refuse to renew the Proton Accelerator/biomedical facility Special Permit and use it as “a club” to enforce the agreement should the hospital refuse to pay city expenses if they violated or dragged their feet on the subdvision timetable.

Posted in Uncategorized

K.K. All the Way! WPHS Junior Outruns County. Wins XC Crown

Hits: 0

WPCNR PRESS BOX. Special to WPCNR From Tim Sheehan. Written by John Bailey. October 27, 2006: Junior Kaylin Gilmartin-Donohue of White Plains High School won the Westchester County Cross Country Championship Thursday running 2-1/2 miles in 15 minutes and 6 seconds, pulling from behind going into the woods and coming out of the woods she was winning going away, splitting between the two rivals and winning with one of the classic kicks you’ll ever see.  


 


KK (15:06) beat out Tori Flannery (15:08) of Bronxville, Meghan Houser (15:14) of Horace Greeley and Bronxville’s  Emma Clarke (15:22)


 



The Agony of Victory: K.K. in the chute after win. The look on her face says it all about the heart, the effort, the will to win and be first. Photo, Armory Foundation website.


 



Kaylin Gilmartin-Donohue in 2004 at the Manhattan High School Invitational 2 years ago.  She’s Out of Sight Now! Photo, WPCNR Sports Archive


 


Two weeks ago, the poker-faced Ms. Gilmartin-Donohue, a star on the WPHS Cross Country team since eighth grade ran the course at Van Cortlandt Park in Da Bronx  in 15:27 and Thursday in perfect runners’ weather beat that by an incredible 21 seconds. Tim Sheehan, the cross country aficionado said K.K. was neck and neck with her two rivals from Bronxville just behind the pair going into the woods prior to the finish. He said he felt with her great finishing kick she could overtake them and K.K. came through. Sheehan reports it was an amazing, great Cross Country race. One to remember.


 


This is the second all-County Championship, “K.K.” has won.. 

Posted in Uncategorized

In search of an Athletic Scholarship? Do Homework. Reach Out, Mazzoni Says.

Hits: 0

WPCNR PRESS BOX. By John F. Bailey. October 26, 2006: Why do WPHS Athletes earn scholarships year after year? Because the White Plains coaches and Guidance Counselors take a professional attitude towards helping their athletes find the schools where they can excel. Last night, the traditional appearance of Wayne Mazzoni of Sacred Heart University took the mystery out of getting athletic scholarship.


 



 


On the day after yet another White Plains High athlete, Liz Flooks of Tiger Basketball fame, had chosen to accept a 4 year athletic scholarship to Niagara University, Sacred Heart University baseball coach, Wayne Mazzoni addressed about 25 parents and student-athletes at WPHS on how to get an athletic scholarship. Photo, WPCNR Sports


 


His advice: evaluate your abilities, be realistic, and search out schools that will be a good fit for you, and sell yourself. Go after the coaches, the colleges and the programs you want to be a part.





 How do you do that? Mazzoni advises you to find first the kind of college you want for your aca in the location you desire.  How do you do that? He suggests using the website http://www.collegecoachesonline.com the parent and their athlete can locate 20,000 coaches from NCAA Division I,II, and III teams to isolate your sport and the colleges in the regions you want to go. Then Mazzoni says, it is up to the athlete and the parent to find from that list of some 20 to  50 schools – the handful of schools you want to target.


 


What is the right fit? Mazzoni says it’s at a school that has the academic disciplines you’re interested in, and where you will play, where the coach and his philosophy are right. He says with the right amount of pre-research you can control the recruiting process. Mazzoni made the point last night that the college coaches are not going to be knock-knock-knocking on your door – you as the student athelete and the parent have to knock on theirs.


 


To evaluate your own talent, you have to talk to college coaches, go to camps and get straightforward appraisals of whether you are Division III, II or I material and concentrate your efforts on the level that you can play. Start with your high school coach, he says. Once you deterimine the level of play you can collect a series of colleges where you can help their program and their program fits your expectations of college play.


 


The ideal time to start making your “playlist” is at the beginning of your Junior year.


 


Next, Mazzoni says you have to make a play on the coachof the sport at the schools you like. You can write them. (The NCAA rule is coaches cannot contact you – but you can contact the coach all you want.) You can send them videos. You can visit a campus on your own to see them play, and talk to the coach.  Mazzoni says do not be afraid to follow up and ask those “coaches of opportunity” what they think about how you can help their program. Remember, it is all about you. You have to be happy, because as Coach Mazzoni says transferring if you have misevaluated a program is a “hassle.”


 


The coach remarks that  you learn something by proselytizing yourself. Some coaches will tell you you are not good enough, and that is helpful. Others will express and interest and you are on your way. Then you take those schools (which presumably you have already determined you like academically) where coaches like you as a player and athlete and concentrate on them.


 


Mazzoni cautions against attending showcase camps unless you can be specifically assured that certain coaches you want to see you play are going to be present. He is more positive about personal communication with the coach on your development and achievements. If the coach likes what you say you offer, he or she will make an effort to watch you hit, run, catch, pass, tackle or skate. Another tactic is to call the coach or coaches you want to see you play and find what tournaments they regularly attend and play in those tournaments.


 


At the end of the Junior year, Mazzoni says you must register with the NCAA Clearinghouse with the guidance department or at NCAA.org. The site provides the grade requirements for you to participate in NCAA sports as a freshman. The


 


Mazzoni encourages you to make campus visits. He notes you may make one campus visit paid for by the college, but subsequent visits you pay for. He encourages you to interview the coach, players, players paents. Find out how the team travels (bus or van, Mazzoni prefers bus for safety). Ascertain the mix between academics and sports, what your academic requirements will be and how much the team will respect them.


 


Do not hesitate, if the coach is interested in you, to ask the coach to make his appreciation of you known to the Admissions Office. He encourages you to be proactive in asking if there is any aid available. However, he warns against being an over proactive parent.


 


 


Mazzoni advises against recruiting services, because he feels “they are a waste of time and money.”


 


In deciding where you will go should you be offered a scholarship or merely accepted, Mazzoni notes you have to consider the academics, the Coaching, the Recruiting (how many you will be competing against), the Philosophy (why you are wanted, your responsibilities), how the team is managed.


 


In closing, what I took from Mazzoni’s talk was that you have to treat acquiring a scholarship for athletics as competitively as you do an athletic contest. You have to prepare. You have to scout. You have to hone  your skills (academics and athletic). And you have to be better prepared. If you approach a coach knowing about his program, showing by doing so natural leadership qualities, you stand a much better chance with that coach – any coach – than the passive prospect. You will stand out, and be better informed in choosing which school to play at – scholarship or not.

Posted in Uncategorized

Flooks Chooses Niagara on 4 Year Basketball Scholarship

Hits: 0

WPCNR PRESS BOX. October 26, 2006: Congratulations are in order for Liz Flooks, forward on the  White Plains High Tigers 2005 and 2006 Women’s Basketball Runnersup on being awarded a 4-year scholarship to play basketball for the Niagara University Purple Eagles. Liz announced her choice this week.



Liz Flooks far left, at Pregame Ceremonies at the States, 2006. Photo, Courtesy Tim Sheehan.

Posted in Uncategorized

NYPH Memorandum of Understanding to be Discussed Thurs Evening.

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. October 25, 2006: The Memorandum of Understanding that Mayor Joseph Delfino is encouraging the Common Council to approve, which would essentially put the city on record as endorsing city acceptance of a massive subdivision on the Bryant Avenue side of the New York Presbyterian Hospital property  with the city receiving 5.5 acres of hospital land for a park of two ballfields, which would be constructed and maintained at city expense will be discussed Thursday evening at a meeting of the Common Council at 6 P.M. Two routine public hearings are scheduled, as well as an Executive Session on “litigation” and “employment/promotion of an individual.” The Agenda:


 


 


PUBLIC HEARINGS:


 



1.                  Public Hearing on an application submitted on behalf of Heyman Properties, LLC for a proposed amendment to an “S Zone” Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of White Plains in relation to a change of district of Lots 8, 8A, 9 and 10, Block 9, Ward 4 (“White Plains Plaza Zone Ordinance”).


 


2.                              Communications from          Deputy Commissioner of Building (2)


3.                                                                              Design Review Board (2)


4.                                                                              Commissioner of Public Safety


5.                                                                              Commissioner of Traffic


6.                                                                              Traffic Commission


7.                                                                              Commissioner of Parking


8.                                                                              Environmental Officer


 


9.                              Environmental Findings Resolution


 


10.                         Second Reading Ordinance amending an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of White Plains in relation to change of District of Lots 8, 8A, 9 and 10, Block 9, Ward 4. “


 


11.                         Resolution of the Common Council of the City of White Plains approving the application submitted on behalf of Heyman Properties, LLC, (“Applicant”), owner of the property known as One North Broadway and 445 Hamilton Avenue for an amendment to an approved site plan to permit alternations and minor ground level additions to the existing building known as One North Broadway (“White Plains Plaza LLC”) exclusive of signage approval.


 


 


 


12.             Public Hearing in relation to the application submitted on behalf of the Jefferson at White Plains, L.P. for an amendment to the site plan of its existing special permit/site plan for certain changes to the project known as The Jefferson, a 281 Unit Luxury Residential Apartment Development, located at 300 Mamaroneck Avenue (Section 130.28, Block 12, Lot 2.1) originally approved by the Common Council on June 4, 2001, and extended by resolution adopted February 3, 2003 and October 7, 2003, and amended by resolution adopted September 6, 2005, to permit (1) the reallocation of parking on the property as a result of changes in the City’s trash collection procedures; and (2) the authorization of the use of a model unit for residential use.       


 


13.                         Communications from          Deputy Commissioner of Building   


14.                                                                         Design Review Board   


15.                                                                         Commissioner of Public Safety


16.                                                                         Commissioner of Traffic


17.                                                                         Traffic Commission


18.                                                                         Commissioner of Parking


19.                                                                         Environmental Officer


                       


20.                                     Environmental Findings Resolution


 


21.                                     Resolution of the Common Council of the City of White Plains approving the application submitted on behalf of The Jefferson At White Plains, L.P. (“Applicant”), formerly J.P.I. Apartment Development, L.P., for an amendment to the previously approved Special Permit/Site Plan for changes to the project known as The Jefferson, a 281 unit luxury residential apartment development, located at 300 Mamaroneck Avenue (Section 130.28, Block 12, Lot 2.1) originally approved by the Common Council on June 4, 2001, and extended by resolutions adopted February 3, 2003 and October 7, 23003, and amended by resolution adopted September 6, 2005, to (1) decrease the approved number of parking spaces by one (1) parking space to accommodate changes in the City’s trash collection procedures; and (2) to authorize the use of a model unit for residential use.


 


 


 


DISCUSSION:


 


22.             Proposed alterations to 1133 Westchester Avenue.


 


23.             New York Presbyterian Hospital Memorandum of Understanding.


 


24.             Inter-municipal Agreement Solid Waste.


 


25.             Agreement with N.Y.S. Department of Transportation to erect a decorative trowel at Hamilton Avenue and Tarrytown Road.


 


26.             Building Department Electric Inspection Fees.


 


27.             Entertainment of a motion to enter into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation, and matters related to the appointment, employment and/or promotion of a particular person. 


 

Posted in Uncategorized

The Exit 8 Nightmare Should End by Nov. 1. Last Blast today.

Hits: 0

WPCNR BUMPER TO BUMPER. From Don Hughes. October 25, 2006: Don Hughes, occasional contributor to WPCNR commentary and provider of informative “bits,” notes this from the New York State Department of Transportation:


The blasting on I-287 near Lake Street has been completed.  There will be two test blasts today on the West side of I-287 near Grant Avenue and then blasting will start up again in about a two weeks.

As before, traffic on I-287 and surrounding streets will be stopped in both directions prior to the blasting.

Also, the bridges near Bloomingdale Road are being demolished and traffic on Westchester Avenue is congested.  This will last for a few weeks.

Avoid the areas if at all possible.  Especially prior to the scheduled blasting. 

The good news is that the stop sign on the on-ramp near Ebersole (exit 8) should be gone by Veterans Day and the traffic pattern should be back to what it was previously.

Posted in Uncategorized