Resident of Gedney Farms Rebuts Westchester Business Council on their Support of FASNY Approval

Hits: 97

THE WPCNR LETTER TICKER. AUGUST 4, 20015:

To John Ravitz  and Marsha Gordon,Westchester Business Council:

It was so kind of you to ask your members to encourage the (White Plains) Common Council to vote Yes To Fasny. Also threatening them with a lawsuit from Fasny if they don’t vote Yes. I see you live in Pelham.We happen to be residents of White Plains  since 1969 and are in the areas that would be affected.
There are thousands and thousands of people like us who will be severely impacted by a yes vote. Perhaps you are not aware of how many city commissions and boards that have said no to the Fasny plan. The Board of Education unanimously signed a letter telling of the dangers to all of the White Plains families and students if Fasny were passed. Also the Planning  Board.
These letters were sent to our Mayor and Common Council. I personally , along with others, went door to door throughout the City with petitions saying No to Fasny. There are over 3,000 signatures.  Is your membership that high?  We are not a small group of irritated neighbors . No matter what FASNY tells you. Thousands  of residents will live with air pollution , noise pollution , water problems .serious traffic  issues and safety issues for our own children.
We will also pay more in taxes. This will not affect you because you are far away and won’t know the difference. I cannot believe you would want to see any harm come to your children because of traffic issues. This is a monster of a school and according to covenants is illegal to be on that property.
I am not sure how you get your monetary figures that would be generated by Fasny. I can’t figure out since these people live in Westchester County already and have been shopping here for years and the school has been in existence in Westchester County for 10 years. Seems to me you all have been drinking the Kool-Aid. You are buying what FASNY is telling you all.
You are forgetting the human element  of this and only thinking  about the financial element , which will probably never happen. No doubt Fasny wants their school. They certainly don’t care how much it will destroy people who live here and pay taxes.
We are suppose to lie down and let them run over us. You all need to think in other terms. I assure you we will not let them run over us. You should be more open minded to the other side of this. If this was your city and neighborhood you would fight like mad to protect it.

Sharon Gould
White Plains , N.Y.

Posted in Uncategorized

5 YEARS OF REVIEW AND THE FASNY PROJECT STILL HAS MANY NEGATIVES WITH NO OFFSETTING MITIGATIONS AND NO SOLUTIONS–READER SAYS.

Hits: 144

       
WPCNR THE LETTER TICKER. AUGUST 4, 2015:
Marie and Ron Rhodes of the Gedney Farms neighborhood have been following the city review of The French American School of New York plan to  build a campus on the former Ridgeway Country Club. The Rhodes have sent a letter to the Mayor and Common Council commenting on the lengthy Resolution that will be voted on tomorrow evening at 7 P.M. The Rhodes have these comments after reviewing the resolution final form. Here is their letter:
Dear Mayor and Common Council,
 
Voting “no” on FASNY is the right thing to do as it protects WP School Children from FASNY’s massive Traffic. . .and safeguards the citizens and neighborhoods in the Southend. 
 
Let’s review FASNY’s history in White Plains.  We all know the importance of location, location, location. . .and FASNY’s purchase of property in a residential area was wrong from the start.  And without an experienced Developer-in-charge, such as a Cappelli, FASNY’s lawyers and consultants were left to make all the strategic and day-to-day decisions.  Not enough upfront due diligence was ever done which resulted in FASNY constantly changing their plan details. . .compounded by their SEQR and Site Plan submissions not being completely accurate and forthcoming. . .with the end result leaving the FASNY Project with many negatives that have no solutions.     
 
The bottom line is. . .after all FASNY’s plan changes we are still left with a “poor” plan that is not the right fit for the City and the citizens you serve.  Councilwoman Hunt-Robinson best described all of FASNY’s failed attempts at changes and mitigation. . .as trying to fit “a round peg in a square hole”. 
 
We ask Council members to reject FASNY and also ask for your protection against these FASNY negatives. . .
 
√  protect WP School Children where minority students are the majority. . .who walk, bike and travel by bus to school and will be most negatively impacted by FASNY’s massive Traffic increases and the flawed North Street Entrance.  Our WP Board of Education raised these safety concerns. . .yet FASNY never responded with any mitigation to reduce the Traffic safety risks to our school children.  It’s ironic and unfortunate that while FASNY in trying to help their own school students. . .FASNY actually will be hurting our own WP school children.
 
√  protect residents and neighborhoods from FASNY Traffic. . .FASNY ‘s Traffic has been characterized by some fuzzy math. . .as FASNY has never disclosed their daily Total Vehicle Trip numbers. . .which we think could be more than 2,000 per day.  And never explained how their 530 number is calculated or where the 530 number came from. . .and in the recent Agenda Packet FASNY’s 950 student Cap is being removed before Phase I Construction is even finished.  Our own figures show that at the 950 student level. . .FASNY will exceed both their own Phase I and Phase II Caps using their own 530 benchmark.  While FASNY’s removal of their 950 Cap in the recent Agenda Packet is not right. . .it also is an abandonment of the SEQR Findings restrictions of December 19, 2013.  And shows that FASNY is not really serious about permanent mitigation to protect WP citizens.  If the intersections of North Street at Bryant and at Ridgeway as well as the intersections of Mamaroneck Avenue at Ridgeway, Heatherbloom and Bryant already account for some of the highest Traffic accident totals. . .won’t these totals go up when you add all of FASNY’s additional cars and buses?
 
 √  protect Hathaway Lane from Closure. . .from an outside private developer who wants to take over a well-traveled City street without offering any benefits to the Public.  This Closure is not mitigation as the City’s June 29th Agenda Packet claims. . .as the Closure hurts the residents of the Southend by making FASNY Traffic more risky, reduces emergency response times to resident homes and reduces nearby residential property values.  Only the private developer FASNY benefits from this Closure.  And wouldn’t closing Hathaway Lane allow FASNY to add unapprovable Accessory Uses in Parcel D to get around the Special Permit process altogether?
 
√  protect our Neighborhoods from FASNY’s 10-year Construction. . .which will bring Noise, Pollution and Construction Vehicles. . .while damaging the Health, Safety and Welfare of residents.  Did anyone on the City Staff ever inform the outside developer FASNY that 10 years of Construction on 53 acres of current Open Space grassland is not right for a residential area. . .particularly when this extended length is due to FASNY’s own Money deficiencies?  FASNY’s temporary attempt at mitigation to reduce their student population down to 950 was always confusing to us. . .since FASNY’s Construction is for square foot facilities for 1,200 or more students. . .when FASNY doesn’t even have the Money on-hand to fund Construction.  FASNY apparently has plans for significantly more students than the 950 they were limited to in the SEQR Findings Report. . .and these internal undisclosed student growth plans may be a violation of SEQR.  If FASNY is allowed to build foundations that disrupt underground streams and construct their 53-acre campus over Open Space grassland that currently absorbs rainwater. . .will FASNY be providing insurance and guarantees for neighborhood homes that will be in danger from water damage?  We ask Council members to keep in mind that for senior citizens like ourselves FASNY’s prolonged Construction in our neighborhood may be permanent hardship and suffering for the rest of our lives.   
 
√  protect our Neighborhoods from FASNY’s Lack of Money. . .and the possibility of FASNY leaving their project in the middle of a residential neighborhood partially unfinished.  FASNY has never demonstrated that they have the necessary Money-on-hand or locked-in financing guarantees to complete their planned Construction.  SEQR certainly allows discussion about funding resources. . .yet FASNY has never provided the necessary funding evidence.
 
√  protect our current Zoning and Rule of Law. . . FASNY’s regional school campus is not allowed by our Comprehensive Plan, Special Permit regulations, current R1-30 Zoning and other WP laws as written. . .and is not in harmony with the single-family home Character of the neighborhood. . .while compromising the Health, Safety and Welfare of the community.  The old existing Restricted Covenant was put in place back in the 1920’s to protect both the integrity of the golf course and surrounding residential homes in this original WP planned community. . .and FASNY not mentioning the existence of this original deed restriction is probably a violation of SEQR regulations.  And why didn’t FASNY prepare Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for the Closure of Hathaway Lane, the North Street Entrance and the Conservancy as required by SEQR?  Circumventing Zoning, Special Permit and other regulations is not to be taken lightly as future developers will ask the City for the same concessions.    
 
√  protect the health of residents from FASNY dumping carcinogenic herbicides on their Conservancy near resident homes. . .no mitigation was ever offered to offset the impact on residents of FASNY’s planned carcinogenic dumping in their Conservancy.  This dumping is not the right thing for FASNY to do in a residential neighborhood. . .and who among us wants dangerous chemicals near children and our families?  The Conservancy is really a mirage and sham as its primary purpose is to permit FASNY to concentrate their all building activities on their other 53 acres.  And the Conservancy is certainly not a gift to the City since FASNY is not giving the City anything. . .however FASNY is giving the Conservancy all of the “unbuildable” wetlands and steep slope parts of the old golf course property.  And why should anyone believe FASNY’s new proposed Restricted Covenant for the Conservancy. . .if FASNY is ignoring the old existing Restricted Covenant for the old golf course?
 
√  protect our Property Values from further declines. . .FASNY’s 10-year Construction along with the size of their 53-acre massive school campus and the impact of FASNY’s massive Traffic increases. . .according to real estate professionals will result in permanent reductions in Property Values.  And the weakness in Property Values has already started just from the threat of FASNY’s presence in our community.  After only a few months we already don’t like the German School’s destruction and Traffic distractions. . .so we’re worried that FASNY’s 53-acre 10-year Construction will make our residential neighborhood look like a third-world country and dramatically devastate Property Values.      
 
√  support your fellow WP citizens in rejecting FASNY’s plans. . .including 8 Neighborhood Associations, the WP School Board, the Conservation Board, the Planning Board and residents in the Southend of the City. . .all who will be adversely impacted by FASNY’s intrusion into our community.
 
X  there are no benefits with this FASNY project. . .for the 60 thousand or so citizens of WP whose taxes will be supporting the non-profit FASNY. . .especially compared to the alternative of 60 new residential houses that. . .would be allowable under the WP Comprehensive Plan and the current R1-30 Zoning. . .would provide additional property tax revenue. . .and bring in significantly less Traffic than FASNY.
 
Our list of FASNY negatives is significant and the citizens you serve are asking for your protection.  In our list you see all of our FASNY concerns together in one place. . . and also see that there are no benefits for FASNY building their school campus on the old golf course.  This is really a dramatic indictment of FASNY’s project.
 
Not many elected officials get the opportunity to leave a critical and historic legacy for their public service.  Please don’t ruin your own legacy by voting “yes” for FASNY as your “yes” vote would be. . .betraying WP School Children. . .betraying your fellow neighbors. . .and betraying the rule of law. . .all of which you were elected to protect.
 
The future of our City depends on our elected leaders protecting school children, residents and our Comprehensive Plan and Zoning.     Please vote “no” on FASNY.
 
Thanks for your support,
                                                                                                                                                                 Your Truth Police, Team Rhodes
Marie and Ron Rhodes
Posted in Uncategorized

CITY CALLS FOR PROPOSALS FROM FIRMS THAT WOULD CONDUCT SURVEY TO DESIGN AND DETERMINE “MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER.

Hits: 150

WPCNR WEST SIDE STORY. From the Request for Proposals Preliminary Planning, Design, and Engineering Services for the Multimodel Transportation Center Redevelopment Project. AUGUST 3, 2015:

The City of White Plains issued a Request for Proposals Monday seeking credentials and ideas from companies to select a “party to provide professional services to complete preliminary planning, design, and engineering work and a financial plan for a proposed Metropolitan Transportation Center in Downtown White Plains.”

2015803 050

The area proposed is included in the circle above encompassing the County Center on the West to Church Street on the East, Ferris Avenue on the North, and the beginning of Bank Street to the South.

Proposals are due in 25 days (August 28).

The applicant selected will have one year to complete the Survey, working with the city on some “deliverables” and the consultant will be responsible for other “deliverables,” consulting with the city.

Among the responsibilities will be working with the Mayor’s Stakeholder Task Force of 10 to 15 persons, analyzing what is in the area now. The consultant will manage a Public Outreach Plan, including public meetings; An Existing Conditions Report; and the Consultant will on the basis of these meetings…

…prepare a Strategic Plan  that “states goals, objectives, and the performance measures related to the redevelopment of the project area and its environs to include mobility and intermodel operations, place-making and design and quality of life considerations including access to parks, aesthetics; economic development and on-site job creation…capture the expenditure potential of commuters who utilize the station; infrastructure and resources, safety and security, complete streets that provide walkability and accessibility for all populationa, environmental, scenic and natural resources, requirements for community acceptance of the Redevelopment Project and cost effectiveness requirements.

The Consultant selected will present plans for the next phases of the project, planning activities,deliverables and Project schedule.

The Strategic Plan is expected to be completed by the Third Quarter of 2016.

The complete document outlining what the consultant is responsible for doing may be viewed at

http://www.cityofwhiteplains.com/DocumentCenter/View/1433

Posted in Uncategorized

GEDNEY ASSOCIATION FEARS WEDNESDAY SPECIAL MEETING ON FASNY IS CALLED FOR FINAL VOTE .

Hits: 145

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. SPECIAL TO WPCNR. JULY 31, 2015 UPDATED SATURDAY AUGUST 1, 8 A.M.:

An agenda for a Special Meeting of the Common Council has been posted on the City of White Plains website late Friday.

The agenda may be seen right here and appears to be calling the question on a Resolution to approve closure of Hathaway Lane and approval of a Special Permit for the French American School of New York. This meeting would come two days after the regular Common Council meeting on Monday and begin at 7 P.M. Wednesday evening. The agenda:

http://www.cityofwhiteplains.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/08052015-371
The Gedney Association, reacting this morning has sent out an e-mail message declaring this is the “Final Vote” on FASNY
WPCNR sent an e-mail to White Plains Mayor Thomas Roach asking about the nature of the meeting, if a vote is planned,  whether discussion is planned for the meeting, if The French American School of New York will speak to issues raised by the Mayor himself in the June 29 Meeting on FASNY on the impact of longterm construction; Councilman John Martin’s being troubled by the closing of Hathaway Lane; Councilwoman Nadine Hunt-Robinson’s concern that the mitigation outlined by the resolution does not make the neighborhood impact worse than if the project was not built; and the numerous objections of Councilwoman Milagros Lecuona and Councilman Dennis Krolian.
WPCNR also asked the Mayor if Susan Habel, the major consultant for the city on the project will speak on the matter; if the matter can be tabled; if the question will be called for a vote.The Gedney Association is issued this e-mail this morning:

The Common Council has scheduled a Special Meeting to vote on the FASNY application for Wednesday, August 5th at 7:00 PM.   This is a critical Meeting in which we can expect a decision on the application after 5 long years.  We urge you to attend this meeting and arrive early to make sure our supporters are able to be present in the Council meeting room.

The Gedney Association

Posted in Uncategorized

LAGUARDIA, THE FIREMAN’S PLEA, LENNAR’S DESIGN FOR NEW WP PAVILION, THE LIQUOR AUTHORITY CITES 3 POPULAR WP BARS ON WHITE PLAINS WEEK MONDAY AT 7 AND ON THE INTERNET

Hits: 155


WhitePlainsWeekkeysign

TONIGHT

WESTCHESTER’S UNIQUE NEWSTALK PROGRAM

15 YEARS OF TELLING IT LIKE IT IS

 7:00 MONDAY  FIOS CH. 45 COUNTYWIDE

 CABLEVISION CH. 76 (WHITE PLAINS)

 ON THE INTERNET NOW AT

www.whiteplainsweek.com

2014801rhodes 002
PETER KATZ
2014829airforceone 053
JOHN BAILEY WHITE PLAINS OWN  CITIZENETREPORTER

ON

FIREFIGHTER PLEADS GUILTY TO VEHICULAR HOMICIDE

STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY FINES 3 WELL-KNOWN WHITE PLAINS BARS

PETER KATZ ANALYZES THE GOVERNOR’S LAGUARDIA AIRPORT TERMINAL PROJECT–VIDEO OF WHAT TAS K FORCE PROPOSES.

LENNAR UNVEILS ITS VISION TO REBUILD WHITE PLAINS PAVILION– EXCLUSIVE PHOTOGRAPHS

AND MORE!

 ONE OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY’S LEADING ALLERGISTS ON THE WORST POLLEN SEASON EVER AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT it

2015518 004

ON

PEOPLE TO BE HEARD

WESTCHESTER COUNTY’S MOST RELEVANT INTERVIEW PROGRAM

AT

www.whiteplainsweek.com

THE REBROADCAST OF THE DR.JILLIAN HOCHFELDER INTERVIEW

Posted in Uncategorized

LCOR GETS ITS FINANCING FROM WELLS FARGO–PREPARES TO GET PROJECT ON THE WAY. 710 UNITS PLANNED ON COMMUTER LOT ON BANK STREET

Hits: 379

WPCNR QUILL AND EYESHADE. Special to WPCNR  from LCOR JULY 30, 2015:

LCOR, a fully-integrated real estate company specializing in property development, investment and management, has closed on an $80 million construction loan from Wells Fargo for the mixed-use development site located at 55 Bank Street,

. Upon anticipated completion of Phase I in 2017, the property will provide White Plains with a dynamic mix of premier residential and retail space that further evolves and extends this walkable community.

LCOR plans to develop the land at 55 Bank Street into an impressive mixed-use property in two phases.

Phase I will consist of a 16-story, 288-unit leading rental building with 3,000 square-feet of ground floor retail space and 381 underground parking spaces.

Phase II will include a 16-story, 273-unit full-service, rental building with 3,350 square-feet of ground floor retail space and the balance of the underground and above grade parking, for a  total of 570 parking spaces. Of the 561-units, 20 percent have been designated as workforce housing.

“Located in the center of White Plains, 55 Bank Street provides LCOR with an extraordinary opportunity to redevelop an area that was underutilized but will now provide the city with substantial residential and retail offerings,” said James Driscoll, Senior Vice President of LCOR. “The site location is ideal for creating a successful transit oriented development that will further advance the Westside of White Plains into an invigorating walkable community.”

Upon completion, 55 Bank Street will feature a mix of luxury studio, one- and two-bedroom apartment homes. Residents will have exclusive access to a host of first-class amenities that will serve as an extension of their home.

Amenities will include a stunning sky lounge complete with a clubroom, private dining room and outdoor deck featuring barbeque grills and additional seating. A landscaped area for outdoor recreation can be enjoyed on the mezzanine level, along with the swimming pool and fire pit.

Additional amenities include a distinguished resident’s lounge, cyber café and business center, billiards lounge, children’s playroom and state-of-the-art fitness center.

(Editor’s Note: The project is getting on the way 8 years after its approval in 2007, in the Delfino administration in White Plains. The nature and amount of the brownfield clean up program involving the Bank Street commuter lot where the project will be built reimbusements has been asked about by WPCNR, and I await the answer.

Kyle Walker speaking for LCOR, said the exact time frame for the start of construction has not been determined yet by the team, but he is checking on it. He also was checking on when the commuter parking lot will officially close.)

55 Bank Street will also feature a full-service lobby with concierge service and shared parking garage that extends 200 parking spaces to White Plains commuters. The building is slated for LEED Silver certification.

Both the City of White Plains and the Westchester County IDA took important roles in helping 55 Bank Street to come to fruition. The creation of the Bank Street Redevelopment Area, by the City of White Plains, allowed LCOR to develop the northern portion of the redevelopment area into the adjacent 502-unit Bank Street Commons residential and retail complex in 2004.

In 2010, LCOR purchased the former municipal parking lot, now home to 55 Bank Street, from the City with the goal of redeveloping the land into a mixed-use community on the southern portion of the redevelopment area. The Westchester County IDA created numerous incentive programs to allow large TOD projects to be developed in these areas, including a PILOT program, a Sales Tax Exemption, and Relief from the Mortgage Recording Tax.

As part of LCOR’s mission to revitalize the area around 55 Bank Street, the project site is part of the NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program.
(Editor’s Note: The project is getting on the way 8 years after its approval in 2007, in the Delfino administration in White Plains. The nature and amount of the brownfield clean up program involving the Bank Street commuter lot where the project will be built reimbusements has been asked about by WPCNR, and I await the answer.

Kyle Walker speaking for LCOR, said the exact time frame for the start of construction has not been determined yet by the team, but he is checking on it. He also was checking on when the commuter parking lot will officially close.)

Posted in Uncategorized

Does PETS ALIVE Restrictive Covenant Have an Impact on the FASNY? Reader says it Should

Hits: 434

WPCNR THE LETTER TICKER. JULY 29, 2015:

To: Hon. Mayor Roach and Hon. Common Council Members  
 
Legal or illegal?  FASNY’s plan to build a school on the former Ridgeway Country Club property would breach the restrictive covenant in the deed filed in 1925 (Gedney Farm Co. sold the property to Gedney Farm Golf Club.  RCC bought the golf club in 1952).  In fact, it is possible that the sale to FASNY by RCC was itself a breach.
The restrictive covenant, which runs with the land in perpetuity, allows only a golf course or single family residences on the property, no matter who owns it.  Special Permit or no Special Permit, a school is an illegal use of the property and RCC sold to a school planning to build a regional school campus, not run a golf course or build single family residences.
I am revisiting the issue of restrictive covenants because of an event last week which places the spotlight on this issue as it relates to Pets Alive in Elmsford. The issue was raised by Town of Greenburgh Supervisor Paul Feiner with respect to the decision by Pets Alive to close its animal shelter in Elmsford and move the animals to its main location in Middletown, NY. The predecessor of Pets Alive, Elmsford Animal Shelter/ Central Westchester Humane Society, needed a larger space to house its overcrowded shelter in Greenburgh.
 Efforts began in the 1980’s’ to find a suitable location.  Paul Feiner, who was not yet Supervisor, was heavily involved in this effort. The shelter was eventually built on donated property in Elmsford resulting from a land swap between Greenburgh and Westchester County. The surprise announcement of the plan to close the Pets Alive shelter and sell the property caused immediate outrage by Feiner and animal advocates. The Greenburgh Town Board held an emergency meeting on 7/22/15 to discuss ways to save the animal shelter. According to Feiner, “Inasmuch as the land was donated for the sole purpose of being used as a no kill animal shelter — I do not believe that Pets Alive should be able to keep the land if they are not going to use the land for a shelter.”
Because Greenburgh was so heavily involved in helping the shelter get the land donated to them, prior to the meeting, Feiner asked the Town Attorney to review the deed to determine if the town has any rights.  The original animal shelter did not pay for the property and Pets Alive only paid $10 for it when it took over several years ago.
 A deed restriction was discovered stating that “the grantee, its successors and assigns shall use the said premises solely and exclusively for park, recreational, or general municipal purposes or as an animal shelter in perpetuity.”  As a result, Pets Alive will not be able to sell the property to a commercial developer, according to Feiner.  It is Feiner’s belief that Pets Alive hoped to sell the property for three to four million dollars.
Which brings me back to FASNY.  While the Pets Alive desire to sell and the Ridgeway Country Club sale to FASNY are not the same, (except that lack of money was the underlying issue) what has bearing here is that both properties have a restrictive covenant which runs with the land in perpetuity.  The restrictive covenant is binding on future title holders of the property.
We know that the deed for the golf course property prohibits the use of the property for anything but a golf course (which was its sole use through 2010) or single family residences (but not permitted before 1940), in perpetuity.  From my research, I have learned that an original seller/developer who imposed a restrictive covenant could grant “retrospective consent”  to get around the problem of the restrictive covenant, if requested.
 Otherwise, if the terms are ignored the property owner is in breach.  Can anyone show that RCC or its predecessor made such a request and so changed the terms of the restrictive covenant?  Would a successful golf course make such a request?  I think not. And if RCC thought about it as its financial situation deteriorated, who would it call, The Long Island  Medium in hopes of speaking with the long dead seller?
RCC knew that FASNY didn’t plan to operate a golf course or build single family residences but planned to build a school. It doesn’t matter whether or not RCC didn’t know or didn’t care about the restrictive covenant. It was still legally in force.  But FASNY should have known that a school was prohibited because a deed search would have uncovered the restrictive covenant.  I cannot believe that FASNY’s attorney didn’t research the original deed for encumbrances.
Howard Willets, the owner of Gedney Farm, sold the property which was developed into the golf course,  The golf course was on four non-contiguous parcels, bisected by local streets, and so was integral to the developing community.
Willets, the founder and first president of The Gedney Association, was now actively subdividing his property for development of single family residences, many of which abutted the four golf course parcels.
The restrictive covenant was meant to protect the newly subdivided properties by maintaining their values and the character of the attractive and sought after neighborhood  —  both then and  in the future. Today, at least 115 homes abut this property and many more are on nearby streets.
The surrounding properties in particular would be harmed by a breach.
So I ask again, does this mean that the Ridgeway Country Club sale to FASNY was illegal?  Certainly what FASNY wants to build is illegal under the terms of the 90-year-old deed’s restrictive covenant.   Doesn’t the Pets Alive situation underscore the argument that the restrictive covenant on the former golf course lives and cannot be violated, even if the seller or buyer didn’t know or care?
 And furthermore, how can a new restrictive covenant in perpetuity for the “Conservancy” supersede the existing restrictive covenant in perpetuity for the entire property?  And being the creator of a new restrictive covenant that runs with the land in perpetuity, what is to stop FASNY from ignoring or changing the terms to be more favorable to whatever future plans it has?   That is a loophole you can drive a a truck through.
Respectfully,
Ellen Alzerez
White Plains NY
Posted in Uncategorized

Photograph of the Night

Hits: 364

2015729 009

The Waxing Gibbous Moon rising tonight over White Plains New York USA a harbinger of August and illuminating the sky with the orange glow of the lazy setting sun.
The Moon today is in a Waxing Gibbous phase. This phase is when the moon is more than 50% illuminated but not yet a Full Moon. The phase lasts round 7 days with the moon becoming more illuminated each day until the Full Moon. During a Waxing Gibbous the moon will rise in the east in mid-afternoon and will be high in the eastern sky at sunset. The moon is then visible though most of the night sky setting a few hour before sunrise. The word Gibbous first appeared in the 14th century and has it’s roots in the Latin word “gibbosus” meaning humpbacked

Posted in Uncategorized

New Vision of White Plains Pavilion Unveiled by Lennar Corporation: 707 Apartments in Two Towers, Swimming Pools on the Roof.

Hits: 450

2015728aerialsobdway

Perkins Eastman rendering of the new apartment and retail complex present by Maple and Broadway LLC, subsidiary of Lunnar Corporation to the Common Council Monday evening.. This aerial view is looking northeastl. Maple Avenue is street on the right. South Broadway is in the foreground.

WPCNR EAST SIDE STORY. Special to WPCNR from Jim Benerofe. July 27, 2015:

At the Common Council Special Meeting Monday evening, Maple & Broadway LLC, subsidiary of Lennar Corporation,  the second in the nation builder of family housing communities, unvieled their vision for replacement of the White Plains Pavilion Mall, should they close on the property.

2015728aerialmaple

View of the Lunnar proposal looking northwest. The Crowne Plaza is in the right of the picture. Maple Avenue is on the left, where it curves onto South Broadway. Hale Avenue is the street in the front of the picture.

Jim Benerofe of suburbanstreet.com told WPCNR that the giant developer plans a rental housing development consisting of two apartment towers of 24 stories, with a total of 707 rental units, 70 or 10% of them at “affordable housing” rates and the rest (631) at market rates.

Benerofe said price points were not brought up. He said that a principal of the Lennar subsidary at the meeting said there was to be 85,000 square feet of retain and would consist of a majority of new restaurants. There would be separate parking for residents and retail patrons.

A feature Benerofe said included two swimming pools on each top floor of the two buildings.

Benerofe noted the proposal “makes a lot of street sense” compared to the original Urstadt Biddle proposal. Urstadt-Biddle of Stamford sold the property to Lennar this month. Retail will be on the streets of Maple and Broadway with the apartments being on the interior. The previous project had retail on the street, and inside the complex and contailed a hotel and apartments.

The proposal will be presented to the Common Council next Monday, August 3 in a televised meeting. Councilpersons Dennis Krolian and James Kirkpatrick were not present.

In announcing the proposed acquisition in May Urstadt Biddle said in a news release:

” In November 2014, the City of White Plains approved the Company’s request to change the zoning of the property to allow its development as a mixed-use property containing residential apartments above ground level retail and restaurant uses. The contract contains several contingencies that need to be satisfied in order for the transaction to close, and there is the possibility it may not close.”

 

Posted in Uncategorized

COMPTROLLER: STATE SALES TAX RECEIPTS DECLINED 1.8% IN FIRST HALF OF 2015:

Hits: 367

 

WPCNR QUILL AND EYESHADE. FROM THE NYS COMPTROLLER’S OFFICE. JULY 26, 2015:

Local sales tax collection growth across New York State slowed to 1.6 percent in the first six months of 2015 from 3 percent growth in 2014 and was considerably lower than the 4.2 percent average annual growth over the past 15 years, according to a report released today by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.

County sales tax collections, excluding all cities, increased only 0.5 percent for the first six months of 2015, with many counties seeing a decline in their collections.

“There has been a general downward trend in sales tax collection growth over the last several years and that is continuing in 2015,” DiNapoli said. “The slow growth in sales taxes could pose fiscal challenges for local governments across New York, especially for counties who rely heavily on sales tax collections to pay their bills.”

New York City’s sales tax collections grew by $91 million, or 2.7 percent in the first half of 2015, accounting for a substantial part of local sales tax growth statewide. Still, the city’s growth rate fell from a 4.8 percent growth rate for the same period in 2014.

The Capital District had the second strongest sales tax growth in the first half of the year at 2 percent. Western New York was next with 1.5 percent growth.

In contrast, sales tax revenue declined in five of the 10 economic regions of the state, with the sharpest decline being in the North Country, which saw a 2.5 percent drop. Also declining were the Southern Tier (1.2 percent), the Mohawk Valley (1.0 percent), the Finger Lakes (0.4 percent) and the Mid-Hudson region (0.4 percent).

Sales tax collections declined in 33 of the 57 counties outside of New York City from the same period in 2014. The largest decline was in Schoharie County, with a 6.1 percent drop. Allegany, Delaware, Lewis and Montgomery counties also had declines of more than 5 percent. In some cases, these declines were due to technical adjustments, which can have a large impact in counties with relatively small populations and retail sectors.

Of the 24 counties that saw sales collections rise, the strongest growth was 8.8 percent in Steuben County. Ulster County had an increase of 8.4 percent, which was due in part to a rate change.  Hamilton and Washington counties also saw growth rates of more than 6 percent. Technical adjustments can explain some of these increases.

See the report here, or go to:http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/research/snapshot/localsalestaxcollection0715.pdf

See the County-by-City Table here, or go to: http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/research/snapshot/localsalestaxcollectiontable0715.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized