Photograph of the Day — Longview Lot Closes

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR PHOTO OF THE DAY. By the WPCNR Roving Photographter. June 5, 2007: As indicated by rather obscure signage last week, the Longview Avenue and Maple Avenue municipal parking lot which serves the Dickstein Center and White Plains Hospital Center closed Monday, signaling the beginning of constructing a 5-story, 657-space parking facility to serve the Kensington Senior Assisted Living project and White Plains Hospital Center, about to begin construction on Maple Avenue and Cromwell Place.


Commissioner of Parking Albert Moroni said, “Our plan from the start was for those folks who have permits to park in the Chester Maple garage. We reconfigured some of the spots in Chester Maple and took away some of the meter spaces and created more permit spots. The only other options for daily commuter types is The Galleria-Lexington West Garage. (4 long blocks away), On any given day, there are 800 spaces available.”



Longview Maple Municipal Lot yesterday.


Photo by the WPCNR Roving Photographer.


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Citizen Exposes 45% Increase in White Plains Train Station Commuter Parking Fee.

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. June 5, 2007: At the Citizens to Be Heard portion of the Common Council meeting Monday evening, a citizen, Yonah Wolf got up and protested the newest rise in White Plains parking fees: the massive 45% increase in the annual Commuter Parking Permit from $569 to $825. Wolf said the increase was almost double what he paid two years ago (2004-2005, the year of the last increase), when he paid $450 for the same daily parking privilege. He protested this was a “tax” on those who commute to New York City every day, which he estimated at 8,000 persons.


Wolf expressed the opinion that the Council deliberately hid this increase by considering the fees at a Special Meeting just before the Memorial Day Weekend, which he described as “short notice.” Wolf also drew a dollars and sense picture for the Councilpersons, saying “the multi-hour meter rates are increasing by a similar margin.”  Wolf points out the fees were set in budget hearings, but voted on prior to Memorial Day weekend getaway Friday. His remarks:


 Good Evening Mayor Delfino, and Honorable Members of the City Council. My Name is Yonah Wolf, and I have lived in White Plains for just over 6 years. While I have been privileged to meet some of you at various events around town, this is the first time I am attending a Council Meeting. I am here tonight to express my disappointment with your recent decision to increase parking rates at our city’s meters and garages. While I understand that rates increase over time, I feel that this rate increase is grossly unfair in both the percentage of the increase as well as in the manner it was considered by the common council.

 With the new increase – the second increase since 2004, the cost of my Annual Daytime Parking Permit at the Transcenter will go up to $825, a 45% increase over last year’s cost of $569, and almost double the $450 I paid for  the 2003-04. In addition, the multi-hour meter rates are increasing by a similar margin. This is a tremendous burden for many of us who park in any of the city’s municipal lots – even more so to the many individuals who have two permits – one for parking near their home overnight, and one for parking near the train or their offices during the day. As of July 1st, someone with two-permits will now be paying for the equivalent of 3 spots for one car!

What this increase amounts to is a new tax on one of the fastest-growing segments of White Plains Residents – those of us who commute to NYC. While Metro-North would not provide specific figures, other sources and articles have put White Plains as the busiest station outside of Grand Central, and it is estimated that more than 8000 or so individuals travel from White Plains into NYC every day – a growing number fast approaching 15% of our population.

This convenience to New York City is one of two reasons that I chose to move here – the other being the socioeconomic and ethnic diversity of our residents. While the former remains true, the latter seems to be slowly slipping away, and if this trend continues, individuals of more modest means, such as myself, will be forced to leave and White Plains will ultimately turn into a haven for the wealthy.

 But commuters are only part of the picture. In addition, I feel that this decision will also have a negative effect on our city’s businesses as well.  As of July 1st, it will cost a full 50% more to park in our garages on an hourly basis and 100% more per hour to park at street meters. This rate will definitely have an impact on shoppers’ when they choose to shop here vs. in other locations in Westchester. Anecdotally, I know of many neighbors who don’t shop in White Plains anymore because every shopping center has a parking cost. As more people follow this trend,  our city’s coffers will be doubly-effected, both by lowered parking revenue as well as lower sales tax collections – not to mention the financial impact on our local businesses.

But I digress, the reason I am speaking here tonight, is because you chose to discuss this at a special council meeting with very little advance notice. As a taxpayer, I don’t think that I am off base in suggesting that a topic as sensitive as this should not be relegated to a last minute special meeting held on the eve a holiday weekend as this limits debate on the matter.

In conclusion, I realize that all that I have said to you tonight is moot, as the rate increases have already been approved, and it is unlikely that you will change your decision. However, I still feel the need to express my disappointment at your decision on the public record, as well as the manner in which it was made. I appreciate the opportunity to address you this evening, and I would greatly appreciate any comments that you have regarding my statement or your decision on the Parking increase.

Thank you.




 

Posted in Uncategorized

Council Balks at Granting Cappelli Exclusivity for Station Development.

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. By John F. Bailey. June 5, 2007 UPDATED 1:45 AM WITH CAPPELLI STATEMENT ADDED: The Common Council unanimously indicated they were not in favor of granting Louis Cappelli Exclusive rights to develop the Train Station area for a hotel and three office buildings. After three hours and fifteen minutes, and the council indicating they would vote down the Exclusivity Agreement the Super Developer had spent an hour explaining the advantages to the city of such an agreement, Mr. Cappelli asked the council not to take a formal vote. He said he wanted “to withdraw and go silently into the night,” and said he realized the project, Station Square, was “not right.”  The council, under the leadership of Rita Malmud agreed to withdraw the resolution and not take a formal vote.  Mr. Cappelli stopped just short of saying, he was withdrawing the project altogether.



Louis Cappelli at 12:15 AM this morning, contritely asking the council to not vote, that he wished to withdraw his proposal for an exclusivity agreement after the Council unanimously indicated they would not grant the Exclusvity Agreement with Ms. Malmud even saying “White Plains is not ready for this project.”  The Super Developer delivered a 55 minute presentation promising $3 Million in studies and analysis to help the city decide what can be built on the train station site.  He pointed to the money (approximately $200 Million) a similar Exclusivity Agreement he has with the City of Yonkers has brought to that city. The council heard 26 speakers, with residents of Battle Hill decidedly for the project, and about 13 against the Exclusivity Agreement. Mr. Cappelli at this point in the evening asked to “withdraw quietly into the night”.


Cappelli said he respected all the comments of the 26 persons who spoke. Councilman Arnold Bernstein, Councilman Glenn Hockley, Council President Malmud, and Councilman Benjamin Boykin all said they had received the most e-mail from citizens on the Station Square project of any issue they had ever encountered, most of it against the concept of granting Mr. Cappelli exclusivity rights.


Mayor Delfino grumpily told the council he wished they had indicated they were not happy with the project when it was first shown to them six weeks ago.


North Street Community Waits Some More.


In other action, the council continued again the North Street Community hearing because certain documents were not completed, and that all information had to be in to inform the neighbors, moving the hearing to the July meeting. It was unusual since North Street Community, it was widely believed expected to have approval this evening.


Dump fine Sketchy.


The city also approved complying to a Order of Consent with the Department of Environmental Conservation regarding the longstanding toxic contamination of the City dump, without explaining the terms of the consent order, but the Mayor did say the city has an outstanding relationship with the DEC. The city according to sketchy backup material has to pay $2,000 of an undisclosed amount the DEC proposes as a fine. That amount was not made public by the city even though asked by WPCNR what the total amount was. According to the backup material,  “the Order on Consent maintains that certain pollutants were discovered at the site during the course of investigations, and that further investigation is required to fully define and delineate the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination, and assesses a civil penalty requiring the City now to pay Two thousand dollars, suspending the remainder pending compliance with the proposed Order on Consent, ” with no further explanation.


The Cappelli Statement follows:


Rita Malmud, President of the Common Council, in her statement said Mr. Cappelli had focused her attention on an area of the city she had not thought of before, but said that the comments she received from residents on the issue indicated that the residents of the city wanted their “suburban-city,” remain more “suburban,” than “city.” Malmud said she wanted the council to focus on their own personal visions of the city, saying,


“I would like to see what strategies or policies or plannings the seven members of our White Plains government can discuss for an attractive inviting prosperous suburban environment in our city as inevitable change creeps or ushes towards us. White Plains is not ready now to sign off on any legislation commiting us to what is a longterm, expensive and expansive new direction.We need to think more before we act.”


After this from Ms. Malmud,  followed by Councilmen Boykin, Hockley and Bernstein also voicing their opposition, Mr. Cappelli asked to speak. The Mayor granted him the floor and Mr. Cappelli all but withdrew his Station Square proposal, saying,


“First of all, I’d like to address my comments to the people in the audience and the people on camera. If it’s one thing I’ve learned through ten years of development it’s to listen. I absolutely have learned how to listen.To wit, being so fortunate to have some success in some of these cities, the last thing I want to be is the cause of devisiveness. The last thing I want to do is to come forth with a proposal that causes people to have a controversy, because it just doesn’t make sense any more. We’ve worked very hard, everybody here, the council and everybody in the City of White Plains. We’ve worked very very hard to do what we think is good for White Plains, the City Center and the Ritz-Carlton.


I’ve also learned how also to read the tea leaves, and at the end of the day I would really prefer to go silently into the night and preserve my otherwise perfect record with the City of White Plains.


I appreciate every comment that I’ve heard from everybody here. I obviously wasn’t that good a salesman. I do believe everything I said. I do have tremendous passion for what’s happening in the city, in fact, I’m moving my headquarters here. I do respect highly everything I’ve heard from everybody here. And this suggestion, this proposal we have is obviously not right. It’s clearly not right. While there’s been many many pro speakers tonight, here that have been for this, and appreciate all that, and I appreciate all the people who are not for it. I respectfully, to Councilman Malmud, would like to withdraw and go silently into the night the resolution that you have on the floor to vote.


At the end of the day, I’ve heard everybody’s comments. I don’t need the formality of the vote, to know that this proposal while well thought about and passionate on our part is also equally passionate on your part. My preference would be to withdraw this resolution, not come back and ask for it in a different fashion. Simply let the process take its course.”


He seemed to leave the door open to the possibilities of tweaking the project with this reference:


“If something we’ve done here have caused focus to be on this train station project and has caused you to be able to figure out if there’s another way to do this, or if you want to do it at all, then the money that we spent was well spent. It will be my pleasure to have spent it in the furtherance of the City of White Plains.”


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Wood: Station Area Will Not be Put Out for Proposals. Would Cost City $1M

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL-CHRONICLE EXAMINER. By John F. Bailey. June 4, 2007: Paul Wood, City Executive Officer, confirmed to WPCNR early this afternoon that representatives of Reckson/SL Green met with him Thursday afternoon to notify Mayor Delfino of their interest in being counted in as interested in developing the White Plains Train Station area. Wood told WPCNR that the city has no intention of issuing Request for Proposals because it would cost the city a million dollars to do the studies of the area which Louis Cappelli would have executed as part of his proposal at no cost to the city.



Paul Wood, City of White Plains Executive Officer


 


“We were blindsided by the Reckson proposal saying if you’re soliciting proposals they want to be involved and we shouldn’t preclude them by giving them(Cappelli Enterprises) an Exclusivity Agreement, but now I’ve got interest from about six different developers,” Wood told WPCNR this afternoon.




WPCNR asked if the city was going to throw the station open to Requests for Proposals. Wood said the city would not, remarking,


“This situation is A, if the city is going to develop an RFQ, it’s going to cost at least a million dollars to do the studies first and then come up with a qualified developer, because we don’t know what the capacity is at the train station. We don’t have those issues Cappelli was willing to do that stuff on his own, but he wanted the Exclusivity Agreement in return for that (the environmental studies, etc.).  Now, if the Council is going to turn around and say we want competing proposals, then obviously what we need to do is study the area which will cost about a million dollars and develop an RFQ for the area at city expense.”


WPCNR asked if Reckson had explained why they had not come forward expressing their interest after May 10? Or May 24 when the Council was considering voting on the Exclusivity Agreement?


Wood, said “No. But, we figured this was going to happen which was one of the reasons why he wanted the Exclusivity Agreement. (WPCNR note: Mr. Cappelli explained this to the Council May 10 when he presented to them, and it was made clear with earlier secret meetings with the Common Council member.) If this was driven by the city, I could understand other developers all wanting to get involved. This  (Station Square project) has nothing to do with the city. We never asked Louis to do this. He presented the city with an idea. And it wasn’t something that the city designed or chose to even look at (before he presented it).I don’t know where it goes now  I really don’t Now there’s probably six or seven people involved in an idea that doesn’t even exist other than in the mind of Louis Cappelli. So how do we go forward from there?


WPCNR: Is there a move to table the Exclusivity Agreement?


Wood: I hope they don’t table it just for the sake of discussion purposes and information purposes. I hope they allow the presentation to proceed tonight and at least allow him to get the facts out as to what it is he is looking for. Hopefully they (the council) will allow that to happen. (WCPNR note: the council did not at the May 24 meeting when Mr. Cappelli requested to do so.) If they decide they don’t want it, maybe New Rochelle will capitalize on the office market.”


WPCNR: Have any other companies approached you since May 10?


Wood: We have had several: M Squared Development, TDC International, a company from New Jersey. We are getting competing proposals on an idea that is his, not the city’s. I’m not prepared to respond to these people (developers) because I don’t knowwhat their capacity is down there. We haven’t done the studies.  Louis was going to do that as part of this Exclusivity Agreement. He was going to pay for the studies and city staff time involved. How do you decide who’s best to do the studies. The city has to do it, it’s a million dollars. We don’t have the budget for it and we don’t have the time for it.


WPCNR: Any possibility the Exclusivity Agreement would have some of the more favorable endorsement pre-approval  language taken out?


Wood:  Whatever they want to do with it is fine with me. It’s not an administration-crafted document. It’s his document. Whatever they decide to do they decide to do. If they (the council) decide to turn it down and open up the process it’s going to cost a fortune to do that. It’s not like the city put these parcels together and decided to market them.


WPCNR: Did Reckson tell you how long they’d been considering this?


Wood: Since Louis came out with it.


WPCNR: Why didn’t Reckson let you know before the  day the council was first scheduled to vote on the Exclusivity Agreement, May 24th   ?


Wood: I don’t know. It’s moot at this point. Their letter means absolutely nothing to me, because it is not the city’s proposal. I don’t know how to respond to them, other than if you want to go out and spend millions of dollars on studies and come back with a plan that perhaps will or will not be accepted by the council they’re welcome to do that.


WPCNR: If the Council turns down the Exclusivity Agreement it’s in their ball park?


Wood: Whose ballpark?


WPCNR: The Council’s.


Wood: Not really, no. They’re not administrators. They’re policy-makers.


WPCNR: So the city has no plans to issue any RFP?

Wood: Absolutely not. No. We don’t have the budget to do the studies. We don’t have the time We’re working on Lexington Post Road that’s the next logical place to go. There is a need for office development.  Any developer willing to put together a plan that might or might not be accepted is free

Posted in Uncategorized

A Letter of Convenience Saves the Council’s Bacon

Posted on by

Hits: 0

 


WPCNR THE DAILY BAILEY. News Comment by John F. Bailey. June 4, 2007: WHEW! This was a close one for the Common Council. They were really squirming. I love to watch politicians squirm, don’t you? But as so often happens they were saved in the nick of time of having to make a decision. 


Thanks to Reckson/SL Green, the Common Council has been given a golden opportunity to throw out the Exclusivity Agreement, last item on tonight’s Common Council agenda, that Louis Cappelli, the Super Developer, was trying to get them to award him to negotiate for the city-owned land around the train station to build Station Square.


Reckson/SL Green came out of nowhere by sending the Mayor and Common Council a letter by e-mail Friday, saying, they have a plan for the station. It’s like President Nixon saying in 1968, “I have a plan to end the (Vietnam) war,” remember that one? He ended it all right five years later.




Man, this opens up a can of worms.


The letter raises a lot of questions. Was the delivery of the letter to the city Friday, the first time the Mayor had heard of the Reckson interest?  An SL Green spokesperson said the Mayor was informed in a private meeting Thursday. 


 When did Reckson first approach the city about their interest, saying, “hey, hold on, we’re interested?” Did they phone the Mayor May 11? Did they phone Paul Wood just after May 10? Did they call the Councilmembers after May 10? How long has SL Green been discussing it? Reckson/SL Green has had 21 days to jump in the game.



If the Mayor was approached by Reckson/SL Green right after the Station Square Proposal was made public May 10, then why did the Mayor push the Exclusivity Agreement, with his name on it? If Reckson just decided to fire off a letter Friday without advance notice, as The Journal News reports, then the Mayor is in the clear. If Reckson had talked to the Mayor prior to May 24 when the matter came before the Council, and the Mayor did not reveal this, well, that’s showing bias towards the Cappelli proposal.


The last minute nature of this from Reckson – though they have known about the proposal since May 10, raises the remote possibility:  Did friends of the Common Council arrange to have the letter written giving them an excuse to kill the Exclusivity Agreement because they were taking such heat for it? Of course not, no way, right? Reckson/SL Green could not allow themselves to be used this way.


WPCNR has learned this letter was sent to Councilpersons by E-Mail on Friday, and an SL Green spokesperson believes his company told the Mayor in a private meeting of their feelings about developing the station Thursday, the day before.


But if Reckson/SL Green wanted to get in the game…why did they not say so May 23?


The very fact that Reckson/SL Green did not raise their protest publicly before the May 24 vote on the Exclusivity Agreement when the council mysteriously voted to table it, rather than kill it outright then, is mystifying.


If Reckson/SL Green, having been turned down once with a proposal for the station area on Bank Street, wanted to do something as soon as Louis Cappelli went public, why did they not say, “hey, wait a minute,” before the May 24 Common Council meeting, when the Exclusivity Agreement hung on Benjamin Boykin’s vote, according to our sources.


Did the Common Council know something was coming from Reckson, and that is why they tabled it?


When did the Common Council know, and  when did they know it?


Was this another setup?


A letter of convenience for the Common Council.


Nonetheless, the Council could not have been happier to get this letter. They are off the hook and can climb on their sanctimonious soapboxes and claim they listen to the public tonight.


Councilman Glen Hockley was thrown a lifeline by this letter. The man who loved this proposal May 10, now says, perhaps sensing and hearing drums in the jungle in the Southend of town, tells the press he doesn’t want to rush into exclusive agreements and is quoted as saying the only answer is competition.  Competition? In White Plains? What a concept!


What is Reckson proposing to bring to the table? That station area has been rotting and blighting the city for year. In fact, Reckson’s vision for the municipal parking lot on Bank Street when it sent out RFPs for that property last summer, was rejected by the city in favor of the LCOR affordable housing project. The city approved the LCOR vision for that site at their last Special Meeting in a bum’s rush.


Thanks, says the Common Council, We Needed That.


The Common Council has been thrown a lifeline, too, giving them the excuse to hold off on the Exclusivity Agreement or just say “no.” That buys them some a lot of credibility with the gullible public who want desperately to believe the council represents them in the worst way and are not just prevaricators, rubber stamps, and Six Blind Mice, and a member of the Cappelli Enterprises Board of Directors.


It’s amazing how the Council always manages to throw the people a bone of intelligence now and then. This may be one of those times again. Be sure and tune in for Common Council Theater tonight and rate the actors as they read their lines. The Common Council performances tonight will be more entrys in Hollywood’s Newest Awards Extravagance: “The Delfinos”. Members of the Council will be up for “Most Believable Performance by a Lying Official” this evening.


Last week, WPCNR was told of an unknown developer to the area interested in developing the site, in addition to Reckson. And over the weekend Reckson says they want to develop it. But, hey, where has Reckson been the last 7 years? Have they noticed the building boom? Glad they spotted it last week morning before it was too late. They develop one building, 360 Hamilton, and say they started the boom? Give me a break. Did they call the Mayor when they heard of this proposal? And when did they call him?


The 100 Story WPCNR WHITE PLAINS WORLD Building


Home of the Quarropas Moon Casino Hotel & CondoEstates World Terminal


But I have decided that it is time to announce my plans for the station area, too.


 I got together with the WPCNR Editorial Board and mega investors and they have said that we have to take a serious look at the site for a headquarters for WPCNR


Yes, the rumors are true!


The media empire of the CitizeNetReporter – is looking for a new headquarters for our growing media empire with 10,000 Daily Visitors to our website, has a proposal that we are working on with several world class architects and we are thinking about bringing in some major Las Vegas players and oriental investors into the mix, and I’ve told my people to call Disney’s people.


We should have a preliminary proposal in about a month with a posh downtown casino hotel and condominium convention center and sports complex called Quarropas Moon with an underground train station plus a 1,500 foot stylized 21st Century landmark: The WPCNR WHITE PLAINS WORLD globe – based on the design of the classic Daily Planet Building,  topping the complex.


A one of a kind facility, unlike any other in the world, Quarropas Moon Casino Condo Hacienda & Officio will feature a sports arena sitting 20,000 for hockey, basketball, soccer, and softball and convention space. It will be WI-FI-ed, wired, YouTubed, Interneted.


 On an upper level, a state-of-communications meeting complex home to WPCNR, Aviation Monthly and SuburbanStreet.com and home to another worldwide news organization  with floors that rotate, showing residents and guests, different views of all the metropolitan area. The complex will soar 100 stories with a round crystal glass globe, recalling the Unisphere of the World’s Fair of 1964, and the classic Daily Planet Building. 


The tasteful blue mooted hue of the WPCNR WHITE PLAINS WORLD globe rotating nightly over the City Within a Park will have sex with the twin beacons of the Ritz-Carlton 50 stories below and to the East. The globe will also house the Quarropas Moon over Westchester World Class Gourmet Buffet a rotating restaurant unlike any in the world and White Plains will have it.  


The restaurant within it will be showcasing views of the tri-state On a clear day you can see New Rochelle and look down on the Ritz-Carlton 50 stories below.


There will not be four buildings but one everything building – true multi-use with 20% of offices leased as “affordable office space” and 30% of residences for “affordable housing,” in return for purchase of city land for $1. We’ll even tuck in City Hall, Glen.


And my renderings will show 44% Hispanic, 27% Black and 37% white people in the drawings, hopefully the drawing the enthusiastic endorsement of the Gannett Editorial Board.  After all any building has to be politically correct in the rendering before approval.


The White Plains Air Rights Exchange.


The complex will also be home to a new commodities exchange WPCNR has been approached to start: the White Plains Air Rights Exchange where air is bought and sold on speculation of future development of adjacent properties nationally and worldwide.


 And, did we forget to mention the concept of Showcase Retail: a Mall showcasing new retail ventures from around the world and a complete trading floor for the White Plains Air Rights Exchange: a new market trading in air rights worldwide, where investors can buy and trade air futures.


It’s ambitious. It is my vision and I believe in it. Financing details will come later. Just give me a week to line up my IDA and financing from my oriental and Canadian banks, and my unlimited letter of credit.


Please give me a coupla weeks and we’ll crank out the design for you, zoning kosher, too. I don’t want Reckson to squeeze me out.


Where does this leave the Super Developer?


 


In not a very good mood, because the Super Developer, the visionary and creator of Station Square predicted this is exactly what would happen if he was not granted the Exclusivity Agreement to negotiate with the city. On the other hand, he could offer to partner with Reckson/SL Green, let them do the office space and he will get the far more attractive Hotel-Condominium property anyway.


Or perhaps the city sells Reckson the City Hall/Municipal garage and they agree to build a City Hall.


 


We may need the White Plains Air Rights Exchange sooner than we think.


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Reckson/SL Green Offers Office Space, Mixed Use Gateway, Retail, No Specs.

Posted on by

Hits: 0



WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. June 4, 2007 UPDATED 11:50 AM EDT: The surprise letter delivered by Reckson/SL Green, the largest owner of commercial office space in the New York area received Friday by the Mayor and Common Council by e-mail, promises, that as a $15 Billion enterprise they can “readily undertake a redevelopment of the Train Station and surrounding area into a magnificent mixed use gateway to the City of White Plains,” and calls for the City to issue a Request for Proposals “or any other form the Council determines is in the best interest of the City without causing any delay in advancing the Train Station Project.”


Rick Matthews, a spokesman for SL Green told WPCNR that the Mayor was first advised of the project in a meeting Thursday, before the Friday meeting. He said he would check to confirm this. WPCNR asked how long SL Green had been considering working up a station proposal, he said he would also check on that, but thought there might not be any more comment.




Reckson promises they would devise a proposal “crafted to better reflect the City’s vision and Comprehensive Plan for the Station Square area,” including “high-end retail,” and ability “to attract the very best of commercial tenants,” and “creating a walkable urban environment around the Train Station Area with pedestrian linkage to the Mamaroneck Avenue Business District,” while “respecting the density in the area.” Reckson also holds out the carrot of being “very much amenable to discussing other amenity packages for the City good or better than the current proposal (Station Square).”


The letter “respectfully submits that an Exclusivity Agreement, as contemplated at this early stage in the planning process for a Train Station Project, would undercut the advantages to the City to be gained by a competitive process, and promote improper favoritism and fundamental unfairness. It would also be difficult, “ the letter closes, “if not impossible, for the City to enter into an Exclusivity Agreement now with one developer, and expect a company such as Reckson/SL Green to submit a proposal later.”


WPCNR contacted John Barnes, the Senior Vice President of Reckson/SL Green at his office in White Plains, for details on when the firm apprised the Mayor they were interested in the station area, and we await his return phone call.


The text of the Reckson letter, released to WPCNR by a member of the Common Council, follows:



 



 



 


 


 


 


 


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Other Developer Wants to Get Into the Act. Gives Council Excuse to Dump Cappelli

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL-CHRONICLE EXAMINER. June 4, 2007: Reckson/SL Green campaigned in the press today, urging the Common Council to deny Cappelli Enterprises the Exclusivity Agreement it seeks to develop the White Plains Train Station for Louis Cappelli’s Station Square project. The Journal News reported today it had received a letter Saturday from John Barnes of Reckson/SL Green, a Senior Vice President expressing the desire to develop its plan for the site.


The letter already has according to the Journal News turned Councilman Glen Hockley away from support for the Exclusivity Agreement. Hockley is reported by the paper as being in support now of competition, appearing to assure the dumping of the Exclusivity Agreement in some way, or more discussion. Ironically, the failure of the Common Council to vote the Exclusivity Agreement May 24 as Mr. Cappelli had expressed at the May 10 work session, has given developers a chance to jump on his idea for developing the station — even imitate it.


All members of the Common Council with the exception of Dennis Power, knew details of the plan from Mr. Cappelli for six weeks before May 24, but failed to move to approve the Exclusivity May 24 due to public pressure, when they had expressed no overdue concern on the project or the Exclusivity Agreement for five weeks.


The letter was sent exclusively to The Journal News. It also gives the Common Council reason to reject the Exclusivity Agreement and launch Requests for Proposals to develop the site. Cappelli had hoped to lease out the office components of his project in 2009. Sorting through Requests for Proposals should the city decide to go that route effectively kills this project timetable.

Posted in Uncategorized

Yorktown Defeats Tigers, 5-1 for Class AA Fastpitch Championship

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR PRESS BOX. June 3, 2007: Yorktown struck for 3 quick runs in the first and 2 more in the second inning today and withstood White Plains threats in the 3rd and 4th innings, to win the Class AA Section 1 Title today at North Rockland. The Tigers had bases loaded twice and did not capitalize, finishing another great season at 21-7, with their second straight appearance in the Class AA Fastpitch Finals, something WPCNR believes no other school has done.



Growing Accustomed to This Place: Tigers being introduced in the Pregame Class AA cermonies today.



Tigers in Action in North Rockland today.


Lauren Sputo after Yorktown’s quick strikes in the first two innings held the Huskers scoreless the final four innings and will be a dominant force in the circle for many years to come and she and her cohorts will be back. It was the last game for seniors Dena Frederick, who went 2 for 4 setting up Tiger efforts at rallies in the middle innings, Lisa Tompkins, Dani Szabo and Juliana Bailey, who doubled and scored the only  Tiger run in the third on Dena Frederick’s single.


 


After the Yorktown leadoff batter fanned, Kasey O’Connor hit the first pitch over the left field fence some 225 feet in straightaway left for a 1-0, Yorktown lead.


A walk, a single by Olivia Calgagnini, and a single by Tori Matzura, made it 2-0. With 2 out in the first a single to center by Danielle Montesano made it 3-0, but Sputo cut off the throw to the plate and nailed Montesano at second with Dani Szabo taking the throw as Montesano tried to take second on the throw.


In the second, Yorktown added two more, on a walk with 1 out, a single by Larssa Porcelli a single by O;Connor to load the bases, a baseloaded walk made it 4-0 and a groundout by Calgagnini made it 5-0.


The Tigers scored in the third. With 1 out, Juliana Bailey blooped a double on the line in left and made second. Dena Frederick ripped a single to center and Bailey came around to score.  Frederick, getting her stroke back was 2 for 3  with a walk in the big game and, of course, the only RBI. Singles by Dani Szabo and Lisa Tompkins loaded the bases, after “Dena the Dreama’s” hit,  but Larissa Porcelli ended the bid by inducing a pop up.


The Tigers loaded them again in the fourth, but again could not get the back-in-the-game hit.


Larissa Porcelli settled down after the 4th retiring nine of the last 10 Tiger hitters, allowing  6 hits, fanning 4 and walking one. Porcelli kept the Tigers off balance at the plate with off-speed pitches, painting the corners, throwing off Tiger timing. 


The game ended another fine and valiant season by the Tigers who fought back into the final game despite injuries to Dena Frederick which kept the hard-hitting thirdbaser out of the lineup for 20 games and the field for weeks, Dani Szabo also missed  a couple of games.


Coach Ted O’Donnell should get Coach of the Year for the job he did with this team by using personnel brilliantly, and instilling players  with the confidence and pride that produced comeback wins and outstanding performances against older more experienced teams.


The Tiger roster has 4 Seniors: Szabo, Bailey, Tompkins and Frederick; two 8th Graders, Sputo and Christina Coppola,  four sophomores, Kate Smayda, Shannon Nicholson, Laura Demarte, a fleet outfielder, and Sara Lorden, another outfielder, and three Juniors, Jackie Flooks, the rangy centerfielder, Cristina Giansante, the leftfielder, and the best catcher in the county, Sandra Mastrangelo.  


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Tigers — Cornhuskers Postponed to 11:30 AM Sunday . Hen Hud wins.

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR PRESS BOX. June 2, 2007: An hour of thunder and impressive cloud to ground lightning resulted in an hour and a half delay today at North Rockland High School, forcing postponement of the White Plains-Yorktown Class AA Section I Fastpitch Final Championship Game. The game will be played at 11:30 A.M. at North Rockland



Tigers in Action in last year’s Fastpitch Section I Final in North Rockland. Coach O’Donnell’s team is back in the Finals Again with another fantastic fastpitch finish.



That old Hudson River Bandit feeling. The former Bandit infield of Nikki Tamburri on the mound finishing off Tappan Zee in the 7th Saturday afternoon. Jill Gallagher at first and Heather Claussen at third lean in.


After resumption of their game with Tappan Zee, Hen Hud,  trailing 3-1; strung together 8 hits in the 4th inning to score 6 runs and defeat Tappan Zee for the Class A Section I Championship, 7-4. Jill Gallagher drove in the winning runs. Nicki Tamburri went all the way for the win, shutting Tappan Zee down from the 4th to the 7th.


In the stunning rally, Nikki Tamburri walked. Heather Claussen battling on a 1-2 count ripped a single up the middle to put runners and first and second. Meghan Kiernan singled to make it 3-2. Katie Joblon singled up the middle to tie it 3-3. After Nicole Martin struck out, Jill Gallagher blasted a scorcher again over the middle to put the Sailors ahead 4-3. Jackie Gallagher hit into a force at third for one out. Then came the hits that give you nightmares. Shannon Brown dunked into center and took second on the throw to the plate for a 5-3 lead. Kirby Wright tenth hitter up in the inning smacked a Baltimore Chop off the sunbaked infield that the shortstop could not handle, to make it 6-3. Nicki Tamburri did the exact same thing again chopping the ball high to the mound to get in the 7th run. It was a top to bottom team rally. In the fifth Jackie Gallagher with a TZ-er on at first and `1 out, cheating towards second backhanded a bullet at second, stepped on the bag and blazed a throw to first for a 6-6-3 DP.



Hen Hud — Class A Section I Champions.


It was the culmination of a team that had played together as the travel team, the Hudson River Bandits, six years ago and played with and against each other over years of travel fastpitch softball. It was good to see them together at the top. 


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Power: “Decisive Action” by Council on Exclusivity Agreement Monday.

Posted on by

Hits: 0

WPCNR Common Council-Chronicle Examiner. By John F. Bailey. June 1, 2007: Councilman Dennis Power promised WPCNR decisive action by the Common Council Monday evening on the Exclusivity Agreement resolution on the Common Council Calendar that was tabled last week until June 4, by the Common Council.


Power said the paperwork he received, better known among the news media who attempt to cover the city as the “backup material,” had not indicated there had been any revisions in the Exclusivity Agreement made public May 22. Usually, Power said, if there is a revised resolution in the backup material it is indicated upfront in the backup material. However, WPCNR has known surprise revisions of resolutions to appear miraculously on late Monday afternoon before Council Meetings.



If passed, the resolution as it stands, would grant Cappelli Enterprises exclusive rights to negotiate for key pieces of land the city owns adjacent the White Plains Railroad Station; automatically extend the exclusivity “freeze out” of other developing interests until the council decides to approve or deny Mr. Cappelli’s plans; and has the Council agreeing that “the Proposed Project (Station Square)…is a fundamentally sound concept for the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Site and an appropriate and acceptable basis and framework for the formulation of a Redevelopment Plan, and the Common Council and the Agency agree that they shall in good faith consider the Redevelopment Plan.” The Exclusivity Agreement essentially prohibits the city for entertaining other proposals for the land, if Cappelli Enterprises does not cowtow to Council demands. It locks the council in to the plan.


Power told WPCNR that the item on the calendar would be moved up so citizens could speak on the Exclusivity Agreement concept.


Asked if he held any animosity towards Council President Malmud, Councilman Benjamin Boykin, and Councilman Thomas Roach for not telling him about the plan when all three knew about the plan weeks before the May 10 “introduction” of the plan, Mr. Power said he was not going to address that.


Last night, a White Plains “CitizeNetReporter” who attended the Highlands Neighborhood Association Meeting where Rita Malmud was the guest, reports that when pressed by a hostile audience of 35 people who strongly criticized the Exclusivity Agreement and asked if she was going to vote down the Exclusivity Agreement, Mrs. Malmud repeatedly equivocated and refused to answer the question. “She just outlined the Cappelli position and the Council position, but would not say one way or another what she was going to do,” our source says.


The Four Members of the council who are undecided: Roach, Malmud, Boykin and Power are under intense pressure to vote down the exclusivity agreement, including a published letter to The Journal News by Paul Schwarz, “kingmaker” of the Democratic City Committee Nominating Committee, that described Station Square as a “monstrous proposal.”


What is interesting is that the three Councilpersons (Boykin, Roach and Malmud) who knew beforehand of the Exclusivity Agreement, apparently felt the concept of the exclusivity agreement was O.K. before May 10, and did not immediately balk when the Cappelli organization first proposed it in private schmooze sessions with them before May 10. They even did not protest strongly at the May 10 meeting. It was only after their prior knowledge was disclosed by this reporter that they have been ruminating against the Exclusivity Agreement.

Posted in Uncategorized