Hits: 0

WPCNR THE BID NEWS By John F. Bailey April 9, 2007: The key form Property Owners need to object to including their property in the new proposed extension of the Downtown Business Improvement District  to West Post Road, Lexington Avenue, Maple Avenue to Bloomingdale Road will be mailed on telephone request to owners who want the form, the City Clerk said today.  

 

Objection! Previously this form required to file an objection to having your property join the Expanded BID District,  was only available to owners  at the City Clerk’s Office, and, WPCNR has learned the key form to object to BID expansion was not distributed by mail when the public hearing was announced, nor procedures to object explained comprehensively. Photo, WPCNR News.

 

It  was announced today by City Clerk Anne McPherson that the Objection Forms are obtainable by owners, by  phoning the City Clerk’s Office  at 422-1227, and requesting a copy by mail, rather than coming to the Clerk’s office in person. They need to be filed to make an objection within 30 days of when the Public Hearing is closed (which is still open, McPherson said).

 

Rick Ammirato, Executive Director of the BID told WPCNR the Objection Form was not mailed out to prospective owners because Public Law 980-e does not specify that the city has to send out the form. Mr. Ammirato is shown at the Common Council hearing last Wednesday as he was explaining how extensive the notification process had been.

The materials sent owners in the target BID Expansion zone, did not say the form was available by telephone.

Ammirato told WPCNR owners were sent the Resolution of the Common Council  which the Common Council passed which specifically endorses the procedure where owners had to schlep into City Hall to file the objection:

Council-endorsed. No Objections Yet, Clerk Reports

The  Council Resolution reads, to wit: “RESOLVED, that any owners of real property deemed benefitted and, therefore, within the proposed extension of the District, who object to the plan, must file their objection in the office of the City Clerk, on forms made available by said Clerk,within the thirty days of the conclusion of the public hearing…”

Anne McPherson, the City Clerk told WPCNR today, that so far no objection forms have been received by any of the approximate 200 property  owners,  refusing to join the BID.

She said that persons have picked up the forms, but has not kept a tally of how many “Objection Forms” have been handed out. McPherson said owners wanting a form can call the clerk’s office at 422-1269, and the form will be mailed to them.

 The form sent property owners announcing the public hearing  instructed that “Any owner of real property deemed benefitted and therefore within the District, objecting to the Amended District Plan, may file an objection at the Office of the City Clerk, on forms made available by the City Clerk, within thirty (30) days of the close of the hearing on the proposed District.”

The form asks, or tells the recipient,  “IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE OBJECTIONS MAY BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAY(S) OF THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I, THE UNDERSIGNED, FILE  THIS OBJECTION TO THE EXPANSION OF THE WHITE PLAINS BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WITH COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS.”

No Step-by-Step Instruction.

Nowhere does the form say  explicity that this is the only way to turn down the program, in this case, words in plain English to the effect that to vote against expanding the BID to his area, the owner must say ‘No” they do not want it.  All it does is ask for “ Negative Comments” and ask for objections.

There is no “check box NO” if you do not want to join the BID instruction. 

Public Law Allows It.

According to the General Municipal Law Section 980-e, which governs Business Improvement District Expansion,  the city appears to has done the minimum necessary to inform members about the BID. According to its Executive Director, Rick Ammirato, the BID sent out a 1,000 letters, sent letters to all owners, but did not include maps of the district. Ammirato said the map was available at the Clerk’s Office.

According to an owner who is in favor of the BID expansion, and owns within the target area in the BID expansion, he did not receive the form pictured above in the mailing he got. He said he was not informed of how much approximately his assessment would be, and he did not receive a map of the district.

A Law Subject to Interpretation

Exactly what the city was required to tell owners about what they could expect is very vague in Law 980-e. The law states, in part, in addition to publishing a Public Notice in the official city newspaper,

 “the legislative body shall cause a copy of the resolution or a summary thereof to be mailed to each owner of real property within the proposed district,”  and that “such summary shall include the business address of the municipal clerk, a statement that copies of the resolution shall be made available free of charge to the public, the improvements, maintenance and operation, and a statement indicating the rights of owners to object pursuant to subdivision (b) of this section.

The Public Law 980-e states “The resolution shall also contain a statement that any owner of real property…objecting to the plan must file an objection at the office of the municipal clerk within thirty days of the conclusion of the hearing on forms made available by the clerk….”

The Public Law does not say the “forms” to file any objection have to be mailed to all the owners. Hence, technically the city is within the law by saying that owners must pick up the form at the clerk’s office to file the objection.

Supporter Criticizes the Subterfuge

According to the property owner WPCNR, he never received the form upon which the objection should be filed. “I did not know, if you don’t show up that’s a vote for yes, and it should be the opposite. That reminds me of Port Chester. “

Asked if had received the form that has to be returned to the city clerk when he was informed of the hearing last week,  “I do not think so. At least it doesn’t ring a bell.”

The owner did not receive the map of the proposed district, but he has seen it.

Asked if the letter told him how much his property would be assessed, he said, “No.”

Million Dollar Baby

Ammirato said that should the majority of the owners not object (51%) the BID budget (now $575,000)  would expand to $1.6 Million, with the new expansion to Lexington Avenue, West Post Road, and down Maple Avenue to Bloomingdale Road providing $1,000,000.

Ammirato said there was not that much objection to the BID expansion at last Wednesday evening’s Common Council meeting.

The Executive Director also said the communication to property owners contained, in addition to the Common Council resolution, a Notice of Public Hearing, spelling out what “The Extended District Plan” would do:

An excerpt from that Notice of Public Hearing reads:  White Plains Downtown District Management Association would offer the following services including, but not limited to: Marketing and Promotion, Business Recruitment, Public Amenities, Physical Improvements, Parking Promotions, Sanitation needed for special events and sidewalk cleaning not now performed by the City and Holiday lighting; Business Assistance, Administration, Special Projects and Research and Planning.

Ammirato encouraged owners and tenants of businesses to come in to the Clerk’s Office to examine the “amended District Plan” at the City Clerk’s office to learn more details of the above services.

Typical Costs to Typical Businesses in Targeted Area.

Ammirato issued a statement to WPCNR explaining the impacts on typical businesses along Lex, West Post Road and Maple Avenue:

 

The estimated rates for BID assessment in the extended district are $0.056497 per sq. ft. of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and $14.353123 per sq. ft. of Linear Street Frontage (LSF). In practical terms:

 

1,000 sq. ft. of GFA + 25 sq. ft. of LSF= $415.33 per year or $1.14 per day

10,000 sq. ft. of GFA + 100 sq. ft. of LSF= $2000.28 per year or $5.48 per day

100,000 sq. ft. of GFA + 200 sq. ft. of LSF= $8,520.32 per year or $23.34 per day

 

 

In examining  the paperwork sent by the BID to owners, including the Notice of Public Hearing and Council Resolution, there is no mention of the “maximum cost thereof” of the “improvements proposed and the maximum cost thereof, the total annual amount proposed to be expended for improvements, maintenance and operation,” as called for in the law.

 

Worthy of any Book Club Copywriter:

The Notice of Public Hearing states this on objection to inclusion in the district:

 “Any owner of real property deemed benefitted and therefore within the District, objecting to the Amended District Plan, may file an objection at the Office of the City Clerk, on forms made available by the City Clerk, within thirty (30) days of the close of the hearing on the proposed District. If owners of at least fifty-one (51%) of the assessed value of benefitted real property situated within the boundaries of the District proposed for establishment… or at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the owners of benefitted property within the area included in the District proposed for establishment file objections with the City Clerk, the District shall not be established.”

The procedure endorsed by the Common Council (by their own resolution) and the state General Municipal Law Section 980-e is reminiscent of book club offers, where you had to send back a postcard refusing this month’s book.

The law makes it easy to put the onus of objection on the owners – requiring them to come in to City Hall to get a form, and not sending them an objection form to start with – let alone a sample assessment.

It is as if to stop a book coming to you, you had to fly to a publisher’s headquarters to pick up a form to stop those books coming.

Devious, Backhanded, Underhanded

This process of notification and saying “NO” to the BID, was roundly criticized by Bill Waterman, the former councilman last Wednesday evening. Speaking to WPCNR today, Waterman said there was no map, no explanation of what the BID would do for the Post Road area. He said the first time he knew you could get a form by mail was when it was mentioned on the televised Common Council meeting last Wednesday.

Bill Waterman property owner in targeted area, as he appeared at the Common Council hearing last week.

 

He characterized the BID notification procedure as “a backhanded, underhanded devious way of doing business, and excusing it by hiding behind a public law. We don’t need the BID in our area. We rejected the BID in our area 7 to 8 years ago. These landlords say they are behind it. They’re just going to pass along the cost to the tenants.”

He said there was no explanation of what the BID was going to do for the neighborhood. He said the neighborhood was a group of mom and pop stores which could not bear the increase in rents. He said street festivals, a staple of BID promotion could not work on Post Road because the Hospital emergency entrance was on that street, and posed the question, what could the BID do for the neighborhood.l “They (the BID) don’t understand our neighborhood. They’re a group of  Hispanic and Latino businesses catering to the neighborhood, this is neighborhood retail.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hits: 0

WPCNR VIEW FROM THE UPPER DECK. Revisited By Fast Pitch Johnny . April 7, 2007: I went to Ebbets Field once. The Mets new ballpark that began construction last fall, has been ballyhooed as a nostalgic ode to Ebbetts Field, the best ballpark in the world according to the most recent book about it.   In the original of this article, WPCNR made a Merkle’s Boner — a Snodgrass Muff — a Kubek Choke — a major error. Thank you to the two young readers who backed us up on this one.   We transposed the dimensions of the two stadiums, in the heat of our passion denouncing the architectural fraud of Citi Field. WPCNR is embarrassed we made this error, but still feels the interior of the new Citi Field looks not at all like Ebbets Field — and in our opinion, is just like any other park HOK ( for Hellmuth, Obata, Kassabaum) Architects has done around the major leagues. There is nothing unique about the new Citi Field and it is no Ebbetts. If anything the fact that new Citi Field will be deeper makes it worse!   Even with our mistake in the dimensions of the fields — the felony–  the “phoney”  of Citi Field is compounded by creating a deeper ball park — with no distiinguishing alleys or configurations or quirks. I still stick to my original premise that a bandbox park would be very cool. But to say the interior of the stadium looks like Ebbets Field is poppycock. Let’s take a look, shall we:   Ebbets Field, Brooklyn USA. Memorial Day Doubleheader with Pittsburgh, 1955. Note the cantilivered wall of  rightfield; the scoreboard and the extension of the centerfield bleachers into right center. Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.

The new design by the “Official Ballpark Builder of Major League Baseball”  ROK Architects – builders of Camden Yards, PNP Park in Pittsburgh, the Great American Ballpark in Cincinatti, PacBell in San Francisco, Petco Park in San Diego– is another ROK cookie cutter stadium – not uniquely New York in any way.    Lots of brick and somewhat of a look of Ebbets on the exterior, but the resemblance to Ebbets Field stops as soon as you hit the field. Citi Field, 2006 Rendering. Nothing Ebbetsian About It. Note bullpens in right center. No roofs in left — the symetrical fences. And another thing — in old Ebbets the bullpens were down the left and right field lines so they warmed up within a few feet of the fans. Since the fans in the box seats will be paying astronomical prices for the box seats it would be a nice touch to put in more cheap seats in right instead of wasting space on bullpen areas. Web Capture of Computerized Flyover from New York Mets Website.   If you take the virtual fly through of the ballpark on the New York Mets website at http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/ballpark/citifield_overview.jsp, you will note immediately that ROK has continued its trademark rakeback construction of the upper decks, setting the fans awaayyyy back from the field and above it.  It’s not as bad as the “perched on the edge of a saucer cup” feel that Roger Kahn coined to describe Shea Stadium when it opened in 1964.   Citi Field Left Field Line. Note the setback of the decks and the steep rake, putting the upper deck aficianado considerably away from the greensward. Virtually a knockoff of Camden Yards, not Ebbets Field Webcaptures from Computerized Flyover on New York Mets website.   However, if you’re in the decks you are set way back starting well back of the field box level. Not good. This is done to accommodate sky boxes on the mezzanine levels. If you compare the new ballparks ROK has built the aim is to create more field level boxes (expensive seats) while stacking the upper decks high, slanted and back away from the foul lines.     Observe how set back the upper decks are in the Citi Field grandstand. When you set the decks back you are putting folks farther away from the action. If you note the original Ebbets upper deck it is almost even with the front row box railings. That is the tyranny of modern construction.  Webcaptures from Computerized Flyover on New York Mets website.   I am sick of these architects designing stadiums that are lousy to watch baseball in.   Let’s go around Citi Field  There is no intimacy about the interior of the park. The interior has three decks in left field just like Camden Yards — the same look as Camden Yards. The right field section has two upper decks – does not look at all like Ebbets Field. ROK has borrowed the Briggs Stadium overhang effect in right, thinking it’s cute. The Polo Grounds had an overhang, but old Ebbets Field did not.   The Citi Field Right Field Corner. Where does that come from? Extend the stands to the foulpoul and give us a single bleacher for more Ebbets Look.    An overhanging deck in right has nothing to do with Ebbets Field. Ebbetts Field had a humpback boomerang outfield wall that Carl Furillo played the carom on and threw out many a runner at second and third trying to stretch. Why could they not duplicate that?     Then there is the rightfield screen. Ebbetts Field had double deck bleachers from the leftfield line past centerfield. Does ROK do that? No. They stop the stands at just before leftcenter and have various entertainment and eateries and plazas and two garish dominating scoreboards rising monolithically like something out of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Nothing nostalgic there. There is no homage to the famous “Schaefer Scoreboard” in right centerfield which they could have easily incorporated instead of placing the unimaginative bullpen chutes in right center which is more Fenway Park than Ebbets Field. Do the architects have any knowledge of baseball anyway? No. They do not.   The interior stands wrap around majestically in a circle effect – just like Shea Stadium – with stands that are borrowed from the Turner Field, Dodger Stadium look – again with upper decks set back placing you far away from the action on the field.   Gil waits on deck to greet Campy Campanella after a three-run shot. Note the gallery in the upper deck how close the fans are. Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.       You lose the right angle, overhanging effects  that marked good ol’ Ebbets. Why is this important?   Intimacy is not to be found.   Too much foul territory in this new design. The concept of all the ROK ballparks is to pay lipservice to nostalgia visually, but the upper decks are still stack cantilevered stadiums that cater more to entertaining you with your backs to the ballgame. You’re going to need binoculars to go this ball game if you sit in the Upper Decks in Citi Field – from the visuals in the flyover tour. Maybe the decks will be closer and steeper when built – but the flyover does not show that.   The rake and voluptuousness of the spacious decks in the new Citi Field  conjour up visions of a football stadium like Municipal Stadium in Cleveland – and yes, Shea Stadium the uninspired rockpile next door. You may even be closer in Shea to the action than you are in the new Citi Field.   ROK essentially is doing on the major league level what Kaiser, Garment and Davidson do with synthetic turf stadiums around Westchester County: one size fits all and little tweaks to the basic design are made – with the same gee whiz electronic scoreboards, jumbotrons and visual chock-a-block that substitutes sensory stimulation for good baseball. Every time they get a new ballpark, ROK flips the decks from side to side and rearranges the “deck chairs,” on their stadium Titanics and creates nothing unique.   For a 42,000 seat stadium which Citi Field is – those seats look a long way from the field and in no way hang over the field  the way they used to do at Ebbets, “Where the howling mobs” seemed on the backs of the visiting New York Giants.   Even the Polo Grounds was more intimate than this faux-Ebbets Field.   Hanging out at the Batting Cage. Ebbets Field, 1955. Note the blue-gray seats (not green) and the jaunty red box seat railings! Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.     And another thing: the ball park measurements are another Shea Stadium with the exception of the power alleys.  in view of our readers who noted our inadvertent switching of the dimensions, the Mets pitchers  will have 8 more feet to work with in left center and 20 more feet to work with in right center. But this means the Mets will have to have a good outfield to cut off the doubles.   In Ebbets Field, the bandbox effect and the cantilevered fences and contours and short fences made the ballpark a factor. Brooks pitchers had to be good pitching in that park.   Absolutely a mistake to design Citi Field with deeper power alleys.   How many games did Mr. Wilpon ever attend at Ebbetts Field? One wonders!  The beauty and the beast of Ebbets was its bandbox size. It was 393 to centerfield. A ridiculously short distance. It was a 348 foot poke down the Left Field Foul Line. The colorful advertising on the left field wall then ran out at a right angle only 3 feet to 351 feet in left center  (the new Citi Field is correctly this time supposed to be 379 in left center (a full 28 feet DEEPER).   Then good ole Ebbets went at a right angle out to 393 in dead center (Citi Field is to be 408 in dead center).    In centerfield, Ebbets took an abrupt right turn straight across center and angled slightly out to 403 feet in right center in a V.  Then the center field wall with the colorful advertising took over all the way at a right angle to the right field foul line, tracking in  to  352 feet in straightaway right  right center (Citi Field is to be 391 in right center).   The cantilevered Ebbets Field wall then nipped in 52 feet nightmarishly to 297 feet at the right field foul line. The Citi Field right field foul pole is 330 feet from home plate.   No Quirks, No Nips. No Tucks in the outfield. Just plain wall.   It would be interesting if Mr. Wilpon and the HOK guys duplicated those dimensions, but maybe they were too afraid the fans eating sushi in centerfield restaurants would be killed by the screaming line drives bombarding the concourses beyond centerfield like mortars thanks to the hand grenades that serve as baseballs today. (Talking about the lively juiced up, souped up, tightly wound baseballs of today.)   However – you could duplicate the configuration of the Ebbets Field walls with the new dimensions of CitiField.   They have simply recreated the Shea Stadium dimensions a little deeper in the alleys (8 feet deeper in left center, 20 feet deeper in right)with the power alleys moving slightly out. How creative.   One of the most boring aspects of Shea Stadium is that the outfield is easy to play. It is symmetrical and the outfielders really have no challenging catches to make, except at the fence. That same antiseptic outfield though deeper is being recreated for another 40 years.   Skoonj’s Territory. The intriguing rightfield wall. How could HOK leave it out? Carl Furillo (Skoonj) used to play the caroms and gun down runners at second with his “Springfield Rifle” Arm. Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.   A closer look at Skoonj’s Territory. Note the cantilevered wall Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.         Perhaps, just perhaps the architects could have duplicated the boomerang-cantilever wall in centerfield over to right field….to provide the feel of the unexpected when you got a line shot caroming off the wall in the 1950s.   Why could they not replicate the old Ebbets Field scoreboard at field level, with drop down scores as they have in Fenway Park and Wrigley Field?   That would be a touch. But, there are no touches in this ballpark.  The monster pyramids of two scoreboards with the jumbotrons is a visual eyesore – typical of the phoney superficial cuteness that has always characterized the Mets as a franchise.   The doubledeck in right has no similarity to Ebbets Field at all…you might have extended the left field decks around into right center and curled the right field upper deck over and around the foul pole.   Ahhh, the grandeur. Only the dead know Brooklyn. The Ebbets Roof and lighttowers. Russ Meyer is on the mound in 1955. Pee Wee at short. Gilliam at third. Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.       Now another feature of Ebbets was it had a roof on it, as did Shibe Park, Old Comiskey Park, Forbes Field, Crosley Field – those “Baths of Caracala” ballparks of baseball’s golden age.   Why could you not put a roof on the upper deck in left field and square cut it over the other decks for the fans on rainy days.  Too expensive? But that was the Ebbets Field look you “suits” out there.   In fact you could have put posts in the upper deck for nostalgia sake and sell them as old time Ebbets Field seats with see-through panels you’d have a real intimate experience. Preposterous? I say it is a touch that would have given soul to this HOK back-of-the-hand design. They may be big and do a lot of jobs, but that does not mean they know baseball and how it is watched – or that they know what is good in a ballpark.    But, I guess I’m different:  at $100 a person, for parking, hot dogs and two beers – I go to watch the ballgame. In this park I see more antiseptic baseball, honky tonk and special effects that are typical of every HOK-built ballpark in the majors.  There is nothing unique about Citi Field.     HOK simply flips the positions of the left and right field upper decks and relocates the scoreboards, while adding the usual picnic areas, grills and ways to distract the fans from the boring ball game.   I have sat behind posts in Old Comiskey and they were great “frames” of the action. But then I am old. A ballpark without posts is a football stadium in my opinion.   Please not a lot of candy colored seats. I hate that.   I am not done picking this new stadium to pieces. One wonders if the architects or the Wilpons had ever really really looked at old Ebbets. They say they will have green seats. If they go bright blue that is wrong too. Should be blue-gray with red trim.   Well that is wrong…Ebbets Field had (based on color pictures on baseball cards in the 1950s), blueish gray seats with red railings for the box seats and red box seats – a terrific colorful touch. Very snappy.  Please, no green seats – this ain’t Fenway Park. (That leads me to another discussion…the wedding caking of seats on the roof at Fenway have destroyed the look of that place, too.)   Now what will the new dimensions comparison be on the new park compared to Shea Stadium here they are:   New Citi Field DIMENSIONS                   Old Shea Stadium DIMENSIONS LF  Foul Line                        335                           LF Foul Line      338 Left Center                             379                           Left Center        371 Center                                    408                            Center                410 Right Center                           391                            Right Center     371 Right Field                             330                             Right Field       338   Take a careful look they have pushed left center some eight feet (more doubles), and pushed out right center 20 feet (more doubles), but remember Ebbets alleys were short — 351 feet and 352 feet – a good 30 to 40  feet closer in than Citi Field. To say that Citi Field is designed like Ebbets Field is simply not true.      Would that be interesting or what? However the dimensions are going out in the power alleys at the new ball park and the right field foul line is 8 feet shorter than Shea Stadium in the new field.  The left field line in Citi Field is only 3 feet closer.That does not make sense.   Foul Resemblance Way Foul   The kicker is that the foul pole dimensions at Ebbets are very different from both Shea and the new “Ebbets” Citi Field.  At the original Ebbets, Left Field was 348 feet down the line, compared to 335 in new Citi Field, and right was 291 compared to 330. Bring the foul pole in to the Ebbets distance   I have a big problem with the lack of creative symmetry in the new Citi Field.   I dislike the twin monster scoreboards gone amok affect in right center. This looks nothing like Ebbets Field ever did.   Why couldn’t they have put a single bleacher running behind a right field screen to simulate the Ebbets Field look, adding seats where the bullpen areas are now planned? Put the bullpens in play – like old Ebbets down the foul lines?     The rotunda looks pretty majestic on the inside. However, Ebbets Field had an awning on its entrance. They could have duplicated the awning. And another thing: Ebbets had a chandelier hanging down in the rotunda of the old ballpark  in the shape of a beautiful huge ivory baseball with white baseballs setting on crossed bats. That’s not here – just some nice ramps and girders. Doesn’t look anything like the Ebbets Field rotunda.   Now, I love Jackie Robinson, who doesn’t? But Brooklyn Dodger fans are dying off. It is high time the Mets stopped glomming on to old New York Giant and Brooklyn Dodger memories. How about pictures of Met greats in the rotunda? Seaver, Jones, Dr. K., Jerry Grote, HoJo, Daryl, Koos, Wayne, Carter — Jackie, Johnny, Carl, Duke and Gil?   Give me some Sexy Lights.   Light towers – I hate the new style of lights today. How about duping the triangular light towers of old Ebbets on the infield side…and if you put roofs on the decks you could use the motion picture show look of lights on those roofs. But the light towers I can live with.   HOK’s idea of oldtime looks is girders. Come on — the old parks were not just girders and ramps. They were odd dimensions. They created a warm old feeling as you went into the park. You were close to the action.   Ebbets exterior was windows and arches and intriguing signage like E X I T –and little Gate signs, as well as colorful ad signs on the walls. Put em on the walls Fred and cantilever the walls and let’s have some fun.   The new Yankee Stadium they are building in the Bronx also suffers from that hideous restaurant in centerfield and the boring symmetry of the present Yankee Stadium makeover.   HOK builds stadiums for corporate types – not baseball fans.   What I love the most about attending minor league and National Pro Fastpitch games is the lack of contrived environments.   When Citi Field opens, joining the other HOK cookie cutter nostalgia parks across the country it will be a shadow of what it could have been.   But it is no Ebbets Field.   You be the judge. Citi Field, 2009. Webcapture from “Flyover” Computer Simulation on New York Mets website. Ebbets Field 1955.Photo (c) by John C. Wagner, Jr., www.pportals.com/jcw. Used with permission.   Note: The photographs of Ebbets Field were taken May 30, 1955 at Ebbets Field by John C. Wagner, Jr. when Mr. Wagner was 17 years old. They were shot with an Argus C3 35mm camera, and 8 x 10s and various sizes of these one-of-a-kind-photos may be purchased on Mr. Wagner’s website at www.pportals.com/jcw. Mr. Wagner recalls Bob Purkey pitched for the Pirates and Russ Meyer for the Brooks in this game. Da Bums won both ends of the doubleheader.

Article Rating   Options

Hits: 0

WPCNR Funnies.  Humor By  Big Mel Meed, the Legendary Rajah of Rock N Roll Radio. April 7,2007: WPCNR got to thinking that since Indian Point is tightly regulated, and the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Safety Administration is watching over us, that the same blanket of security model could be applied to the conduct of Senior Prom Dating. How would it work?

Here is a suggestion of how it could be put in place for this spring’s proms throughout the county. It involves issuance of a PROM CARD and a completion of a Senior Prom Itinerary & Security & Safety Application.

New Security Measure? Big Mel Meed, the Legendary Rajah of Rock N Roll Radio suggests Westchester County should regulate Senior Proms in the interest of keeping dates safe.

 

Westchester  County Department of Youth Social Safety.

Senior Prom Itinerary Security Safety Application

 

In the interest of security AND the mutual safety of prom participants, the Family Department of Homeland Security, a new Westchester County department   has issued the following Application, all prospective senior students in schools throughout the county must  register their intent to bring dates to their senior proms and file with the county prior to arranging and escorting  ladies to prom dances throughout Westchester County.

Upon completion of this Application and clearance, which may be submitted at any high school office or at the Westchester County Prom Van when it visits your high school.

 You will be issued a Westchester County Prom Card that will verify when shown to an officer at any check point that you have an official County Cleared Prom Date. Uncleared Dates are subject to termination by County Police.

If at various sobriety checks by county security personnel, you cannot produce an approved copy of this Westchester County application and a “Prom Card”, your date will be terminated immediately, parents notified and you will be returned home.

So ask your prospective date promptly, to allow appropriate time for the County to process your Prom Applications.

This Application needs to be filed within 21 days of the Prom to the County Clerk’s Office. County Prom Vans will be visiting high schools throughout the county within the Month of April distributing the forms. To request a form or file your Application on line – go to www.promcard.com or call 1-888-OPSAFEPROM.

Forms also must be submitted in duplicate with parents of all dates attending the Prom.

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT A REAL REQUIREMENT. THIS IS A HOAX.

Complete Official Application for Prom Card Below

Senior Prom Itinerary Security  Safety Application

Date of Prom______School__________

Location__________________________

Name of Date______________________

Name of Escort______________________

Address____________________________

Driving and Transportation

1.       How long have you had your driver’s License?

2.       Do you have any speeding tickets, moving violations?

3.       Have you had a traffic accident?

4.       What is your mode of transportation to prom

A.      Limo Driver with others.

B.       Drive yourself. 

C.      C. If driver other than yourself…name________________  Driving Records:

                                                                 

Prom Etiquette

 

5.       Do you plan on buying a corsage?

 

6.       Will you be renting a tuxedo?

 

 

7.       What brand of alcohol do you illegally consume?

 

 

8.       Who is your designated driver in event of group date?

 

 

Dance Conduct

 

9.       Do you plan to slowdance?

 

10.   If yes to above, what slowdances do you do?

 

A.Overhanging grope

B. Embrace in Place.

C. Twin Leaning Towers of Pisas

         11. What do you plan to do after the prom?

                 A. Go to Club    State place______________Estimated Time of Arrival___________

                                             Estimated time of departure.

B. Go to Beach      State beach________Mode of Transit____________

C. Private Party at house:  State address______________

     Adults/chaperones attending_____________________

     Refreshments served____________________________

   (Is party registered with White Plains Department of Public Safety)

    Mode of transit to and from party___________________

    Time of End of Party________________________________

 Medical Knowledge…

13. In event of date passing out  What will you do with Date?

A. Take to Hospital.

B. Call ambulance

D. Call Police

E. All of the above

 Personal Information:

 

14.Description of vehicle you plan to use:

 

15. Cellphone number:

16. Do you plan to feed your date?

 

16A—If so, what kind of meal?

A.      Fast Food Chain (state name and location)

B.      Restaurant (state name and location)

C.      Expensive Restaurant (state name and location)

D. Take Out Food (State brand)

 

 Conditions of Date Custody, I agree to by completing this application:

 

A.      Date will be equipped with a Lo-Jac and GPS Device.

B.      Upon embarking on transits, departure time will be phoned back to base via cell-phone and arrivals announced via cell-phone.

C.      Departures from expected times of arrivals and departures will be announced if expected to vary

D.      A Detailed Date Plan Itinerary must be filed for review within 72 hours of The Prom.

E.       Nose Rings, Piercings must be reviewed for security reasons

F.       Car must be driven at  or below speed limit at all times.

G.     All portable drink containers must be presented for inspection  by parents upon pick up of date.

H.      Escort should plan on enough time to undergo security search and x-ray of all possessions and a vehicle search prior to  pickup of date.

I.        Transportation shall be limited to traditional sedans and limousines, with dividers in front seats, no vans, pickup trucks, SUVs allowed

 

Conditions of conduct on date. Escort agrees in accepting custody of date to the following codes of conduct

 

A.      Slow dancing shall be limited to up and down movement no forward “grinding” and couple must circulate on dance floor, no dancing in place permitted. You will be watched

 

B. Fast dancing shall be limited to dancing with date only no group multi—partner shake-it-ups.

 

C. If passenger in vehicle – vehicle shall be in motion at all times.

 

D. If escort is driver, both hands shall be on the steering mechanism at all times.

 

E. Escort agrees to pay all gasoline charges.

 

F.Escort agrees to accept installation of computer cam in front and backseats of vehicle

 

After analysis of answers and agreeing to observe these few simple regulations, your application will be processed and reviewed, and you will be notified of your date clearance with date within 7 days of the Prom and a PROM CARD issued in name of the escort.

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

Andy Cano

Westchester County Executive

 

 

REPEAT THIS IS NOT REAL. THIS IS A HOAX. NO PROM CARD SYSTEM OR APPLICATIONS FOR PROM PROCEDURES ARE CONTEMPLATED BY WESTCHESTER COUNTY AT THIS TIME.

Hits: 0

WPCNR City Hall Circuit. By John F. Bailey. April 6, 2007:

 Sunrise Assisted Living has bailed out of White Plains.  

One week ago, March 30, the day the city completed agreements to purchase the Legal Aid Services of Hudson Valley building at 4 Cromwell Place to complete acquisition of the last piece to build a municipal parking garage and provide the land for the Sunrise Assisted Living project on Cromwell Place, Sunrise – the developer of the senior assisted living project planned for the site — announced by e-mail they would not build the project.

Corporation Counsel Edward Dunphy told WPCNR he understood that Sunrise said they wanted to be closer to the downtown  or New York Presbyterian Hospital and did not like the new configuration of the project where their tenants would be looking out at a parking garage. Paul Wood, City Executive Officer and David Maloney of the Mayor’s Office,  said a new chief executive of Sunrise had flown in on a tour of current projects of the company, to look at the site recently and, taking one look, said the company would not do the project.

Within hours, the Planning Commissioner told the Common Council, former key employees of Sunrise, running their own company, telephoned the Planning Department and offered to take over the project with Chevy Chase Bank financing the project.  Up against a deadline of bids for the $17 Million 6-story parking garage expiring at the end of the month, the city took them up on the offer, after Executive Officer Wood did a “thorough”  investigation of the company, the Planning Commissioner reported to the Council.

Thursday afternoon at City Hall, the Common Council met to schedule a public hearing on the project for April 16, when they will decide to authorize $19 Million in bonds to begin work on the garage. They also met the new developer, White Plains Kensington LLC, and two of its four principals. The executives received great praise from Montgomery County, Maryland, for which they had built a project, Kensington Park, on the basis of the Montgomery County recommendation the Planning Department accepted their offer, saving the project in 5 days, creating a “save” of the parking garage being built for White Plains Hospital Center, city and the senior project use.

 

Hits: 0

WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICLE-EXAMINER. April 5, 2007: In her assessment of the city Wednesday evening, Common Council President Rita Malmud, speaking for the Common Councilpersons endorsed “high density downtown and low density in the surrounding circle” in her comments on development. She called for “an adequate number of building inspectors to prevent degradation of existing housing,” and said the council approved of a policy of expanding revenues to rein in rising property taxes, while calling for adjustment in the state equalization rate formula to assess commercial properties realistically.

Common Council President Rita Malmud delivering her Assessment of the City Wednesday evening.

She became the first Common Council member to acknowledge publicly that the city landfill has caused greater expenses than expected and that the council recognized the need to assure the landfill meets “environmental standards,” stopping short of endorsing a complete remediation.

Here is the text of Ms. Malmud’s remarks at the Common Council Wednesday evening:

  COMMENTS on the State of the City

 

 

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for this opportunity to expand upon your remarks on behalf of all the Councilmembers:  Arnold Bernstein, Ben Boykin, Glen Hockley, Dennis Power, Tom Roach , and myself.  We also our proud of our City and all it has to offer our residents and visitors.

 

Government is about how people work together to promote municipal harmony and manage inevitable change.  On our local level that translates into ensuring that all residential areas are up to the high standards we have experienced over many decades, that the commercial areas are subservient to our residents’ suburban lifestyle, that sufficient funds for essential services are provided, and that diverse programs responding to diverse family needs are offered.

 

Despite a wide array of proposed and completed new developments, residential sectors remain oases in the midst of significant new development.  Our commercial and our high-density residential redevelopment have been concentrated in the downtown core and abutting fringe.  High density downtown, low density in the surrounding circle remain a priority.

 

Recently there have been approvals for many new and expensive apartments.  That construction comes with a strong commitment to support affordable housing.   We will not waver in our determination to maintain existing affordable units, but also to produce new affordable units (such as the ones now being constructed on Kensico Avenue or already built at One City Center Place).  We must ensure an adequate number of housing inspectors to work day and night to prevent degradation of existing housing standards. This council has long supported a night and weekend inspection policy, and will continue to do so.  With decreasing federal housing funds each year, that is a more burdensome challenge, but one that we shall overcome.

 

Housing of a different nature is also a sad necessity here in wealthy America.  Too many people find themselves homeless.  White Plains has responded generously with many sites for homeless individuals and families.  But at a time when there are some Westchester shelters closing, it is unwise to increase the number here in White Plains so that we are serving a disproportionately high percentage of the region’s homeless.  Last year we saw a new homeless shelter pop up at 85 Court Street.  Despite unanimity on the need to find an alternative site, there have been differences amongst the 7 members comprising this Council about the best method  to achieve its relocation.

 

Due to the cooperative, positive, and persistent teamwork of my fellow Councilmen Ben Boykin, Dennis Power, and Tom Roach as well as County Legislator Bill Ryan working with me in approaching County government, I am enormously pleased that County Executive Spano has been more than willing to meet and really listen to our concerns about this shelter site.  In a written letter to us last month, County Executive Spano has announced his determination for that shelter’s relocation to a better site elsewhere in the county.  All seven members of this Common Council need to participate in this process for a successful conclusion.  As you are fond of saying, Mr. Mayor, and I agree, “There is nothing we can’t accomplish if we all work together.”   We should all emerge winners – the temporarily homeless, County and local government, and most importantly, our residents.

 

Because the City government of White Plains offers so many services to our residents and visitors while having one of the lowest property tax rates in the county, our fiscal resources have been strained.  The only answers to curbing rising property taxes are expanding revenue sources, reducing existing expenses despite inflationary demands and unfunded mandates by other levels of government, or a combination.  This year more than ever we recognize the importance of demanding greater frugality and planning new ways to accomplish old services.  Vigorously examining the expense side of the budget becomes more of a necessity each year.

 

A larger than anticipated expense has been our landfill, which fell short of State standards.  We will see that this City meets all environmental standards, both here at the landfill and in all other City areas.  We are also resolved to have as much open space and parkland as possible without jeopardizing other City goals and values.

 

Our downtown additions have slowed the decline of assessibles comprising so much of our tax base.  However, we must continue to press State government to address their equalization rate for White Plains which is so disastrous to our economic health.  We must also continue to explore traffic and parking strategies that will be viewed as a service accommodation rather than a penalty for visiting downtown.

 

 In this Information Age of Technology, we repeat last year’s directive to refresh our website so that it is more current with City facts and each week’s events, easier to find what a user is looking for, and includes the City Charter, Municipal Code, and Zoning Ordinance. 

 

And finally, the entire legislative body needs to interact with other government entities representing WP in a more proactive and positive manner.  There is much the City needs that cannot be supplied solely by our employees or our purchasing power.  White Plains is interdependent; we are not the island of White Plains.

 

We thank you Mr. Mayor for giving the public insight to your views on the State of the City and allowing us to amplify on that.

 

 Rita Z. Malmud, Common Council President