WHITE PLAINS WEEK THE JUNE 12 EDITION ON THE NET NOOOOOWWWWW! RELENTLESS AND FOCUSED!

Posted on by

2015327wpw 010

KATZ BAILEY AND BENEROFE

ON

THE EDUCATION TAX CREDIT CAMPAIGN

THE CITY WITHIN A CITY ON WESTCHESTER AVENUE — INTRODUCING THE COLLECTION

PLAYLAND COMMITTEE BALKS ON APPROVING THE  STANDARD AMUSEMENTS AGREEMENT IN WEDNESDAY MEETING…MORE LEGAL TWEAKING IN WORKS

AND MORE ON RED LIGHT CAMERAS.

TONIGHT ON CHANNELS 45 AND 76

AND ON THE INTERNET NOW AT

www.whiteplainsweek.com

 

Posted in Uncategorized

PLAYLAND REVIEW COMMITTEE IN REWRITE OF KEY “FINAL CUT” OF APPROVAL PROCEDURES ON CAPITAL PROJECTS AND HANDLING OF PLAYLAND POOL. VOTE SET FOR MONDAY.

Posted on by

WPCNR PLAYLAND GO-ROUND. By John F. Bailey. June 12, 2015:

The last meeting of the County Legislature  Labor Parks Planning Housing Committee Wednesday morning failed to reach agreement on approving the Memorandum of Understanding between Westchester County and Standard Amusements, the entity on the verge  pending a vote Monday of becoming Managing Operator of the landmark amusement park, Playland in 2016.

The Committee discovered that an arrangement by which county employees would be assigned to Playland and their wages paid by the county and the county reimbursed by Standard Amusements was not spelled out specifically in the agreement.

This  oversight was pointed out doggedly by County Legislator Benjamin Boykin, despite Chair of the Board of Legislators Michael Kaplowitz not recalling any such discussionin previous commitee meetings.

Chairman of the Committee, County Legislator MaryJane Shimsky and Legislator Catherine Borgia remembered this exchange and agreed with Mr. Boykin.

Kaplowitz backtracked and agreed to add language which he suggested on the spot. Kevin Plunkett, the Deputy County Executive said he was reluctant to approve language that might in some way upset or be prohibited by union existing contracts.  It was agreed that the new language would be run past legal either Thursday and Friday.

The execution of Capital Projects requiring County expenditures required for the Playland existing structures,  was disputed by Legislator  Kay Parker of Rye, as being inadequate. The agreement as written says the County and Standard Amusements will review together the capital needs of the park that the county needs to fund.

Parker said the procedure on deciding capital project necessity “lacks specifity. I don’t see an agreement to review is going to bring these projects about in a timely fashion.”

Parker said the Astorino administration in its revised second draft of the review of capital projects and procedure for determining what capital projects should be done and the costs, did not meet her earlier concerns.

“I want to see Standard Amusements succeed . I want to take one more day to put in language that will add some specifics,” she said.

Parker and Shimsky said they would work on the new legal capital projects review language, which has to be approved in time for a scheduled vote on Monday evening on approving the Memorandum of Understanding with Standard Amusements.

The third area of contention again involved the matter of what entity decides what, this time on it involved the pool at the park.

Ms. Shimsky, the Chair of the Committee asked Mr. Singer, principal of Standard Amusements about his plan to preserve the pool, if it could be preserved.

Singer said the pool had many problems, its infrastructure was sinking, the pool depth was too deep and as he has said for 10 weeks of review, Standard has to go in this summer and evaluate the pool (as with the rest of the structures and how the pool is operated).

Singer said presently the Memorandum of Agreement that stipulates the pool area needs to be a pool or a water feature. Shimsky, pressing asked how what happened to the pool is determined, whether their would still be a pool.

Mr. Singer read the memorandum of agreement draft,

“The manager should shall have the ability to repurpose the pool area as long as it contains a water feature.”

This brought a collective quiet intake of breath by some committee members.

Shimsky, after a few seconds of silence, said ‘I guess we will have need of legal counsel.”

Singer said his legal team would have to look at the changes in the county employees employed by Standard at Playland and any additions to the capital Projects review procedure that Parker and Shimsky are working on.

Mr. Kaplowitz said the changes whatever had to be in very quickly as to be reviewed by the concerned parties: the County Executive’s office, Standard Amusements and of course the legislators.

The meeting can be seen at the Westchester County Legislators website at

http://westchestercountyny.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=3733&Format=Agenda

Posted in Uncategorized

THE LETTER TICKER: BURNING QUESTIONS ON FASNY UNANSWERED. (PART 1)

Posted on by
 
How come after 4+ years of Common Council reviews there are still so many open resident concerns on this FASNY project that require Common Council attention and solutions?
We’re not just referring to a couple of more notable concerns such as FASNY’s massive Traffic, 10-year (Editor’s Note: projected) Construction and the attempts to Circumvent WP Laws as written. . .There are dozens more as our list of 30 resident-driven concerns below details.
Some of our concerns weren’t even brought up by FASNY and discussed in the SEQR process and in Site Plan meetings. . . others were discussed yet contained misleading information and recommendations.
And with so many of our list of FASNY concerns still in need of Common Council real solutions. . .we are wondering if the Council may have received bad advice on the requirements of the SEQR process and the Site Plan reviews?
 
Here’s our list of resident-developed FASNY negatives and concerns that still have not been addressed with realistic solutions:
1.  Current neighborhood Traffic and Living Conditions, starting early in the SEQR process, were never described correctly. . .especially where information on local Commuter Traffic flow and Accident Experience was lacking.
2.  In the SEQR there was no mention of the 10 existing schools on the perimeter of our neighborhood where start times are essentially the same as FASNY’s proposed schedule. . .and the resulting Traffic risk to WP school children walking, biking and in cars or buses will be substantial.
3.  FASNY’s significant Traffic increases of more than 2,000 Vehicle Trips traveling each day into residential neighborhoods was never mentioned at all.
4.  FASNY never acknowledged our country-style streets without sidewalks where any type of permanent Traffic increase is a concern.
5.  FASNY’s flawed North Street Entrance will negatively impact WP school children, seniors and other residents. . .our WP Board of Education pointed this out. . .yet FASNY never came up with any solutions.
6.  FASNY trying to close Hathaway Lane, a Public Street, will increase Emergency Response times to neighborhood homes.
7.  The North Street Entrance and Hathaway Lane Closure decisions both make FASNY’s Traffic worse.
8.  New Environmental Impact Studies (EIS’s) should have been prepared for the North Street Entrance, the Closure of Hathaway Lane and for the Conservancy.
9.  FASNY did not disclose that the Closure of Hathaway Lane helps the value of their property by combining 2 land parcels while also helping them to getting around the “Accessory” restrictions.     
           
10. FASNY’s 10-year Construction program in an area surrounded by private homes is just not right. . . and neither is there claim of 75 ft setbacks from resident homes when FASNY’s own maps show only 25 ft. setbacks from adjacent homes.
11. Also 10 years of significant Noise and Pollution in a current quiet residential neighborhood is a significant Safety and Health hazard to residents.
12. FASNY’s SEQR didn’t acknowledge that large Construction projects in residential areas need stricter requirements than development projects in downtown areas (as we learned with the German School).
13. FASNY doesn’t understand that their plan to destroy 300 of our 100-year old trees and replacing them with new saplings. . .is not a 1 to 1 swap.
14. FASNY building on 53-acres of current grassland is a significant loss of Open Space for our City.
15. FASNY’s planned 3,000 foot-long roadway near NYS designated sensitive land is a threat to our environment.
16. FASNY’s plan to dump carcinogenic herbicides next to resident homes with their planned Conservancy is disgraceful and will harm the Health and Safety of citizens near their property.
17. Additional Water in basements will flow from FASNY building over underground streams and on top of 53 acres of current grasslands.
18. FASNY has been misstating and trying to get around our existing Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and other WP laws as written.
19. (Edited out)
20.  Some Common Council member comments that “you have to give a Special Permit to a school” were not true in the R1-30 Zoning District where a “private secondary or a private elementary school may be eligible for a Special Permit but not both together and certainly not a private regional school campus.  
                                                                                                                                                                          
21. FASNY has ignored discussing the old golf course’s 1925 Restrictive Covenant that would prevent FASNY’s regional school campus.
22. FASNY’s project has (Editor note: may be a contributing cause) already caused resident Property Values to decline before the Construction work even starts.
23. FASNY’s SEQR never considered the alternative of additional residential housing which would be allowed under the existing R1-30 zoning of the old golf course. . .and would provide needed property tax revenue.
24. FASNY’s 53-acre regional school campus is not in Character with our neighborhood and WP laws.
25. With other non-profits experiencing financing difficulties with their expansion plans. . .no mention was made in SEQR of FASNY’s lack of Money on-hand to complete their project in a reasonable time period. . .and what the options for the City and residents would be if FASNY can’t raise enough money.
26. (Edited out)
.
27. The Common Council throughout the 4+ years of reviews have asked few questions of FASNY and provided even fewer answers to their constituents’ questions.
28. The Common Council has allowed FASNY to get away with not having all their up-to-date plan details in one place.
29. Throughout the 4+ years of the SEQR process FASNY has not shown a lot of respect or concern for the Health, Welfare and Safety of neighborhood residents.
30. The Common Council as Lead Agency during the SEQR process didn’t address and eliminate all of the FASNY negatives and adverse impacts.
Marie and Ron Rhodes
Posted in Uncategorized

GREENBURGH –WP NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR– HOLDS PUBLIC HEARING ON MASSAGE PARLOR LICENSING TONIGHT. FIRST STEP IN CRACKDOWN ON MASSAGE PARLOR PROSTITUTION

Posted on by

WPCNR THE FEINER REPORT. By Greenburgh Town Supervisor, Paul Feiner. June 10, 2015:

WPCNR THE FEINER REPORT. By Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner. June 10, 2015:

The Greenburgh Town Board will hold a public hearing tonight at Town Hall on a proposed law that will provide the police with the tools to close down massage parlors that are involved in illegal activities – such as prostitution.

The hearing will take place tonight after 7:30 PM at Greenburgh Town Hall.

Two different versions of the law are being considered: one law written by Bob Bernstein, President of the Edgemont Community Council.  The other by the Town’s Planning Board. The legislation drafted by Mr. Bernstein was based on a law that the Town of Clarkstown approved in the 1990s. The village of Farmingdale in Long Island also approved a similar law.  A link to the Town Board agenda (with texts of the two versions) is below.

http://www.greenburghny.com/Cit-e-Access/webpage.cfm?TID=10&TPID=13179

The ECC’s proposal requires massage establishments to obtain a license from the town to obtain a special permit to operate.

Town Councilmembers Kevin Morgan, Francis Sheehan, Chief Chris McNerney, Howard Hirsch of the ECC and Bob Bernstein met recently to discuss both competing laws -hoping that a compromise law, with some modifications could be adopted by the Town Board. It is anticipated that the Town Board will vote on the legislation after we listen to the comments at the hearing and finalize a new draft law.  No vote is expected tonight –the goal: to hear comments and than to finalize a compromise version.

Among changes in the proposed legislation: reducing the $500 cost of obtaining a license to a more affordable amount – a cost that could be burdensome to legal massage owners.  Another compromise: exempting solo practitioners from the legislation since the law’s goal is to close down massage parlors that are really being used for prostitution.

     You can watch the forum that was held -“Illegal Massage Parlors and What Really Goes on Behind Closed Doors”- on  https://youtu.be/mmWXUXyF3fI.

Speakers included  reporter Ken Picard who conducted an investigation on massage parlors in Vermont. And Nancy Levine of My Sisters Place as well as the police chief. The forum was organized by Town Clerk Judith Beville earlier this year.

 

Posted in Uncategorized