Friday, June 26, 2015

Opposition to Zoning Change Increases

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015, Hartsdale Park Association ( sent a letter to its membership regarding the important zoning change the Town Board is considering to benefit GameOn 365, a for-profit commercial entity. It details many of the aspects this decision will have as it will negatively impact the entire Town, not just the Dobbs Ferry corridor.

Dear Hartsdale Park Residents:
Much of the discussion in the case of Game-On's request for special rezoning seems to be focused on the Game-On use of the Vizioli property, the former golf driving range. That is only part of the proposal before the Town Board. Their proposal is to insert a commercial use ( indoor/outdoor recreation center) into a residentially zoned area by special permit. Its impact goes far beyond the Vizioli property.

The amendment to the Zoning Ordinance proposed by David Steinmetz, attorney for Game-On, requires the Town Board to grant a special permit if the applicant meets certain conditions. There is no discretion involved. If the applicant meets all of the conditions spelled out in the code, the permit becomes a right.

The problem is once you allow any commercial entity in a residential zone, there is nothingto stop that use from being expanded OR for it to happen anywhere else in Greenburgh! This is a VERY dangerous precedent to set.

Suppose Game-On receives approval and builds a 107,000 sq.ft. building, then is sold or goes out of business. The community would have a huge empty building with 300 parking spaces and other infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.) in place. Any number of fairly low-traffic-impact businesses might want to locate there, and depending on the financial standing of the Town, such commercial use might be encouraged. Also, there is nothing to stop other commercial uses from seeking entry into OTHER residential districts. If the Town does it once, other commercial uses will seek approval.

Paul Feiner argues that Dobbs Ferry Road is already a recreational and/or commercial corridor - Frank's, East Rumbrook Park, Carlson's Nursery, Elmwood Country Club, Elmwood Day Camp, Fairview Fire House. All of the uses cited (other than Frank's Nursery) -- parks, farms, membership clubs, camps, firehouses -- are allowed in one-family residence districts as permitted uses or by special permit. They are listed as the residential and related uses Zoning Ordinance. Fully enclosed commercial recreational facilities are differentiated and listed as "commercial.”

The focus of our opposition must be on not introducing any kind of commercial use into residentially zoned districts. Once they get a toe in the door, there is no going back!
Some may argue that we already have done this when assisted living facilities were introduced into residential zones. However, "health care facilities” have been Special Permit uses for more than two decades and these are residential uses. The principal change in recent years was to allow them on lots of four acres instead of requiring ten acres.

Creating a new zone is a discretionary act by the Town Board. If the Board chooses not to entertain a requested rezone, there is nothing an applicant can do. In other words, the Town cannot be sued in court.
The proposed change is not only about the Vizioli property. It affects all properties zoned R-30 that are greater than 20 acres on a state road. Thus, the Elmwood Country Club Property across from the Vizioli properly on Dobbs Ferry Road and the Knollwood Country Club property on Knollwood Road would also be able to request special permits if the code amendment is approved. Furthermore, if this code amendment is approved by the Town Board properties that are not 20 acres or are not located on a state road could seek variances from those provisions. Sunningdale Country Club on Underhill Road is a good example, though it is more than 20 acres in size. As an example, Mr. Steinmetz was successful in getting a code change to permit assisted living facilities (Brightview) on properties of four acres or more located within 200 feet of a state road.

I attended and spoke at the April 8, 2015 Town Council meeting. I was present for the entire meeting, which lasted for over 3 hours. During the public comment portion the ONLY people to speak IN FAVOR of Game-On were soccer coaches from Tarrytown!

As President of your Hartsdale Park Civic Association I am urging you to contact Supervisor Feiner and the Town Council Members immediately if you object to Game-On’s request for this “special consideration.”

Game-On is welcome to come to Greenburgh, BUT NOT on Dobbs Ferry Road. There are many other sites, including several in Tarrytown, already zoned for commercial use where this type of facility is more appropriate. We say, “Game-On please GO THERE!”

Here are the Town Officials’ email addresses for your convenience:
Supervisor Paul Feiner -
Town Council Members: 
Kevin Morgan -, 
Ken Jones -, 
Francis Sheehan -, 
Diana Juettner -

This is an extremely important matter to all of us. Your support is needed and much appreciated.

Yours sincerely,
Celia P. Novo, President
Hartsdale Park Civic Association

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Sustainable Westchester Q&A Meeting Moved

The meeting scheduled by Ken Stahn for residents to discuss the Sustainable Westchester ESCO at the Town Hall Cafeteria at 7 PM. before the Town Board Open Hearing on this topic has been moved to the Town Hall cafeteria. Everyone is welcome to attend and ask questions. 

Mr Feiner and his Town Board have decided, on their own, to enter  ALL TOWN RESIDENTS into  an "ESCO" or Energy Savings Consortium Organization run by Sustainable Westchester. This is an important meeting that we urge residents to attend!

Monday, June 22, 2015

Big Brother Creeps In

Billed as "Good News!" by the Town Supervisor, his latest move has "Big Brother" written all over it, and it doesn't pertain to the well-known television show. Mr Feiner and his Town Board have decided, on their own, to enter  ALL TOWN RESIDENTS into  an "ESCO" or Energy Savings Consortium Organization run by Sustainable Westchester. Mr Feiner sent out an email and a physical mailing to residents from the Town's snail-mail and email list, known as the GBList. This email list, by the way, was sought after by many community organizations as Town information/property and Mr Feiner refused to relinquish it when it was requested. Dorrine Livson, President of the Worthington Woodlands Civic Association, was one civic group representative that requested it under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) and was turned down by Mr Feiner. She appealed the decision and was again turned down. She went to court and was victorious, finding Mr Feiner once again guilty of breaking the law! Now appealing the decision, Mr Feiner is still refusing to turn the list over to her even under court directive.

The more we talk to different people about these ESCO's, the more questions and apparent problems for residents arise than answers can be had. Mr Feiner said people that don't want to participate can opt out at any time. What we have learned is that many ESCOs have a penalty charge when you opt out. More importantly, however, we don't understand why this was not set up for people to opt IN instead of having to opt OUT? Mr Feiner repeatedly refuses to answer that question. Governing by fiat appears to be Mr Feiner's latest abuse of his power.

He says your ConEd bill can go down by hundreds, even up to $600! Mr Feiner has a history of shouting out unsubstantiated figures whenever its convenient. Could you get a better rate on your own from purchasing your power from a company other than ConEd? Perhaps. Would you prefer to be in control of your own contractual obligations, rather than having the Town be in charge of your power options? Again, perhaps. But after witnessing so many instances of financial mismanagement by this administration, its a bit scary for us to think Mr Feiner, found guilty of lying in Federal court (re: Fortress Bible decision) is even telling the truth! And after the introductory period, will your rates stay the same or change? And, if they change, is Mr Feiner going to pay the difference or work on your behalf to make sure your rates are in fact lower and you continue to save hundreds? Perhaps, but more than likely it is highly doubtful, however, excuses will be plentiful, We foresee classic Feiner double-talk with little or no relief ever coming.

So, the Town Board approved a resolution some two weeks ago that will enter all Town residents into an agreement to participate in a "community choice aggregation" program through Sustainable Westchester. Participating communities will pool resources and procure energy supplies from an ESCO. In February of this year the New York State Public Service Commission authorized Sustainable Westchester to become the first business in New York State to put out for bid the total amount of natural gas or electricity being purchased by local residents and small businesses.

The claims are that the program has some benefits: Price stability for a fixed contract term, better terms than a typical resident could get acting alone and the ability to design a program that reflects local goals like cleaner power sources. Currently, anyone can purchase their energy from an ESCO but many ESCOs don't provide fixed rates -they offer ratepayers good deals initially and then increase the rates a short time later. It's confusing to some when trying to compare the ESCOs. Sustainable Westchester has the resources to compare ESCOs and to get an agreement for a fixed term. And if you disagree with their decision, well, you'll be S.O.L. (Stuck Outta Luck - the G-rated version).

One resident and Civic Association President Ken Stahn is also concerned about many aspects of this contract. While there may be some in favor of this vote-getting ploy to tout how they've saved the taxpayer's money, too many questions linger and threaten this purported "good news!" from Mr Feiner.

Mr Stahn has set up a meeting with the group,Sustainable Westchester, regarding the Town Board Resolution of June 10th, 2015.  The meeting will take place at the Town Hall at 7 PM before the opening of the hearing on this topic when the Town Board meets on that evening this coming Wednesday June 24th,2015.

He needs to get ten positive responses regarding this meeting from people to move forward with meeting with them. His hope is to hear from concerned taxpayers by noon Tuesday June 23rd, 2015 or he will be forced to cancel the meeting.

Please reply to Mr Stahn by noon June 23rd, 2015 either positive or negative about your interest in the meeting.

Kenneth G. Stahn, 644 Ardsley Road, Scarsdale, New York 10583-1804
Cell 917-642-7516; Home 914-693-4904; e-mail

We applaud Mr Stahn for seeking answers before the Town moves on yet another "done-deal". We agree with many who say this could be good but that taxpayers should only be required to "opt IN", otherwise Big Brother will start to creep into other decisions "for us". You can help to stop this madness! Join Mr Stahn this Wednesday evening. Regardless of the outcome, stay, and during the public speaking session tell Mr Feiner and his Board, "No!" They should only move forward with this if it is "Opt IN" Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Saturday, June 13, 2015

HazMat/WMD Full Scale Exercise

Westchester County has the highest taxes in the United States. We also have the highest threat assessment according to many, with perhaps the possible exception being Washington DC. So it was no wonder that with funds secured from tax dollars elsewhere, which of course we still all pay for, Westchester County's Department of Emergency Services hosted a Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Exercise. In all, 56 agencies participated. An unofficial breakdown was 42 paid agencies and 14 volunteer agencies for the 6-hour exercise.

Members of the HMRT getting prepped to respond into the "hot" zone.

Part of this scenario was some sort of bus incident that the Valhalla Fire Department responded to and immediately called 60 Control, the communications arm of DES, for assistance. 

In this photo above, members of the Westchester County all-volunteer Hazardous Materials Response Team get prepped to suit-up to make entry into the hot zone consisting of some sort of release of an unknown chemical. Once they were suited up and the totally encapsulated Level A suits were sealed, two team members went into the scene to do an evaluation. Armed, literally with pH tape on their sleeves for gross reactive readings, along with other metering devices to assist these HazMat responders, they went into the "hot zone". Initially, two responders from this team went to see if they could identify what the chemical agent being used might be. Then two more followed to assess the damage and wounded.

As the event unfolded, different emergency response agencies, mostly comprised of fire and police departments responded to the scene. In an event such as this, given the extreme weather we were experiencing, many of the responders were "recycled" through a rehab station and then allowed back into the event. With all of the departments being brought in, there was an abundance of equipment and personnel. In fact, many said there was too much of everything being brought in to the scene and that would be one of the points mentioned in the "after wash" critique.

While the responders were doing what they do, there were other staffers from a number of agencies monitoring all of the events, taking copious notes. While our taxes may not be lowered anytime soon, we can rest assured that we are well protected.

Friday, June 12, 2015

Remembrance Service

Remembrance Service
Sunday, June 14th
4:00 PM

at the
Corner of North Goodwin
and Main Street,

In Remembrance of
Army Specialist Michael Arciola

United States Army Specialist Michael Arciola, a resident of the Village of Elmsford, sacrificed his life on February 15, 2005 in action while serving our Country in Ramadi, Iraq. Please join us on Flag Day, Sunday June 14, 2015, as the Village of Elmsford Community comes together to honor Michael..

Thursday, June 11, 2015

Fulton Park Vindicated Over Westhab & Town Violation

In late 2008 and early 2009, the residents of Fulton Park received a letter from Mr Feiner stating that he had agreed to the demolition of the old Kings Inn Motel and construction of a seven-story Westhab facility. At that time, the motel was serving as a transitional halfway-house for ex-cons recently released from prison. The neighbors in Fulton Park had often complain of noise at all hours of the day and night, sex with prostitutes in cars on the side streets, drinking and drug use. Remnants of crack vials, used condoms and alcohol bottles could be found almost daily on residents front lawns or by the curb. Complaints to the police department resulted in a periodic patrol which consisted of a Greenburgh patrol car driving by. Other complaints went to the County Police as the County was in charge of the facility security - or lack thereof. 

Proposals were understandably met with resistance by the neighborhood because the industrial looking building did not fit in at all. Residents met and complained with Town Board members who were blatantly lied to by Mr Feiner and other Board members, who each said no decision had been made yet. This lie was later exposed when County documents were acquired under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). Those documents showed Mr Feiner's involvement with then County Legislator Lois Bronz, County funding as well as other funding that would help pay for the building. Curiously, before the plans were approved, the Town Board adopted a LEEDS certification for all new buildings within the Town. Westhab was not held to that standard, yet Mr Feiner still touts how "green" the building is. 

The residents were never against building something there, but only asked for a building that was not a huge, 7-story, out of character building that would not blend with the neighborhood. Their requests were ignored and Westhab went with their cookie-cutter gulag approach, justifying it as being patterned after area buildings. The only building it comes close to emulating is the old phone company building across the street with its design from circa 1960. An out-of-date design was used for a new building. 

One of the many conditions that was challenged by residents was their incorporation of the existing Town road that ran between the Kings Inn Motel and the Fulton Garden Apartments, named Fulton Avenue. In typical Town Board style, they ignored the two-way road that had been there from at least 1938 and used by everyone in the neighborhood. The Town ignored all maps and findings the Fulton Park Civic Association and other Associations furnished and accepted it as Westhab's. This allowed its use and could be part of the parking space count that was necessary for their project to move forward. When Mr Feiner wants a project to go forward, mere laws will not stand in his way, as was proven here again. 

Fast forward some seven years later with a lawsuit by the owners of the Fulton Garden Apartments against Westhab because Westhab paved over property that Fulton Garden Apartments has had as an easement for over 30 years. Basically, the property where the parking spaces are, which had been argued about repeatedly by the Fulton Park Civic Association, the Fulton Garden Apartments, the Greenburgh Council of Civic Associations and others, was not Mr Feiner's to give away. But when he favors any project, as long as its not in his neighborhood, all bets are off. Well, Fulton Park Civic Association, the Fulton Garden Apartments, the Greenburgh Council of Civic Associations and others are about to be vindicated even though the damage has been done. 

On the June 17th agenda for the Planning Board is an appeal from Westhab to change the one-way roadway back to a two-way road. Here's the agenda item:
Case No. PB 15-13 Westhab/Fulton Gardens, 22 Tarrytown Road, P.O. White Plains, N.Y. – Amended Site Plan
A work session to discuss an amended site plan application for a proposal to allow two-way vehicular traffic from a previously approved one-way driveway at an existing multi-family building known as Westhab. Presently, vehicles are restricted from entering the Westhab property from County Center Road. The proposed site modifications would provide direct access to an existing parking lot used by residents and visitors of the adjacent multi-family complex known as Fulton Gardens. Currently, the only access to this parking area is from Rt. 119 (Tarrytown Road). The Westhab property consists of approximately 30,492 sq. ft. (0.78 acres) and is situated on the west side of Old Kensico Avenue [sic]  approximately 210 feet from the intersection of Tarrytown Road and approximately 0 ft. from the intersection of County Center Road. The Westhab property is located in the M-174 High-Rise Multi-Family Residence District and is designated on the tax map of the Town of Greenburgh as Parcel ID: 7.500-310-2.

This is significant for several reasons. First it vindicates everyone, the Fulton Park Civic Association, the Fulton Garden Apartments, the Greenburgh Council of Civic Associations and others who did their due diligence and sought the truth. Mr Feiner and his Board, untouchable as they run for re-election unopposed, simply ignored what was right and did what he wanted. The Board knows they should go along or they will be "Sonya'd". Second, Mr Feiner gives carte blanche to developers at the expense of all the neighborhood residents throughout the Town and this practice needs to stop. But this is part of his warped scheme to fundamentally change the makeup of the Rt 119 corridor. He knew that the old phone company building would be taken over by Westchester County's Department of Social Services and its proximity would facilitate Westhab residents who need to report in to DSS regularly by being close by. Third, traffic has increased and backs up substantially from the traffic lights, as residents complained it would. Fourth, when Deli Delicious reopens as a fast food service restaurant, traffic will continue to be a nightmare for residents already living with an F-rating from the flawed traffic study. And finally, to avoid going to court and being found guilty of violating the easement that the Fulton Garden Apartments has for the property Mr Feiner "gave away" to Westhab, they have decided to acquiesce and turn the road back to a two-way lane. This is being done by Westhab to avoid going to court and being found guilty!

It's a shame that Mr Feiner's politics have trumped residents on the right side of the law. It's a shame that the residents of the Town remain willfully ignorant and stand by as Greenburgh crumbles. This laissez faire attitude with Town government must end. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Man Dies In Hit and Run, Police Seek Public's Help

of 57 South Road by a passing motorist.Police cannot say when the man was struck by the vehicle. No driver stopped or reported the incident, police said.

In an email sent out from Greenburgh Police Chief Chris McNerney, he's asking for the public's assistance in finding the vehicle:

Dear Residents,
At approximately 6:06a.m. this morning , the Greenburgh Police  Department received a 911 call reporting a man down in the area of 57 South Road. When officers arrived they found a 23 year old town resident deceased on the grassy area of the aforementioned residence along the curb line.

Investigators believe that the accident occurred sometime between 11:30p.m. Monday evening, and 6:00a.m. this morning. It is believed that the victim was struck in the back as he walked east along South Road. The vehicle involved should have damage on the front passenger portion of the vehicle in the area of the bumper and headlight. There is no further information available at this time as to the color or type of vehicle involved.

The police department is asking for your assistance in identifying the vehicle involved in this fatal hit and run accident. If you know anything about the accident or suspect a vehicle with damage similar to that described, please call the Greenburgh Police at 914-989-1710.

Chief Chris McNerney

Saturday, June 6, 2015

A Letter To The Planning Board

Former Justice and Attorney Herb Rosenberg recently sent a letter to the Planning Board and its members discussing why the Zoning Change proposal, veiled as the "GameOn 365 proposal" on the Visioli's Golf Driving Range property, is wrong for the Town, our residents, unfairly represented, and in our view, seemingly a done-deal. ABG believes it is a done-deal for several reasons. A) Mr Feiner has continually stumped for GameOn 365 amidst a 5-year public outcry against the proposal. B) Mr Feiner has attempted to violate the law to help these outsiders and ignore and disrespect the residents throughout the Town. C) Mr Feiner has adopted and used often his newest catch phrase, which is that people should have, "confidence in the process" (they don't); and finally, we believe Mr Feiner instructed Messrs. Morgan and Jones to tow his line or be "Sonya'd". Councilpersons Juettner and Sheehan are against the proposal for numerous reasons which we'll get into in another article. 

Here is Justice Rosenberg's unedited letter:

6/4/2015 12:14:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Game On/Planning Board

To the Planning Board

My name is Herbert Rosenberg. I am retired lawyer and a former judge. I am a stranger to you all except to Fran McLaughlin, who I have met before and we have had some limited contact. You may recall an Op-Ed article that I wrote that was published in the Scarsdale Inquirer on April 17, with the title A GameOn 365's plans set a dangerous precedent in town of Greenburgh, (the title was written by the editor, not by me, though I agree with it).

I attended last evening's Planning Board meeting because I am interested in the Game On matter. Please don't take this personally, but I was quite astonished and disappointed at what I saw. This long letter will explain why.

Let me put aside the question of whether there should or should not have been a pre-submission conference on the Game On application. What I am saying is that what took place was the wrong discussion. The application is for a zoning change to Code section 285-11 that cuts across all of unincorporated Greenburgh, yet the proposed zoning change was not discussed at all. What is not before you is the approval of the Game On project (which would be a site plan approval) and such an approval can be considered only if and after a zoning change is adopted, yet the Game On project was the only thing that was discussed.

This is what happened.

1. Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues presented an extensive and detailed description of the proposed Game On business. It took more than one hour. As one would have expected, he painted a glowing picture, with much overstatement of what will actually happen there, some attractive photos of the site and films of traffic movements that were quite unreal, and with no mention of the weaknesses and problems that will occur at the site and affect the neighboring communities. He even made an incorrect statement on an important point. One Planning Board member asked whether Game On had considered another location, and Mr. Steinmetz answered that there is no other available site in Greenburgh. That is not true. Landmark at Eastview has made it plain that they would like to have a recreational facility such as a sports facility at its site, and Landmark is in Greenburgh. Mr. Steinmetz spent about fifteen seconds on the subject of the zoning change, making the short statement that if the zoning application is adopted, it will also include the Elmwood Country Club and the Knollwood Country Club.

2. Several members of the Planning Board asked some questions about the project, how could it be made better for local kids and seniors, whether another site had been considered, etc. Not a single question was asked about the zoning change and its consequences and effect upon the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh.

3. At the end one community resident was given a very short time to speak -- not at all sufficient to discuss the issues involved.

But there is an overriding question, and that has to be addressed and answered before the Game On project can be considered. That overriding question is whether there should be a zoning change that would permit commercial uses on all R-30 residential districts that fit the specifications -- not less than 20 acres, with 400 feet frontage, on a state road. It is the overriding question because the proposed zoning change is not limited to the Dobbs Ferry Road site, but applies to many other areas of unincorporated Greenburgh. And it is the overriding question because the Planning Board has to first conclude that such an unincorporated area-wide zoning change is desirable for the Town before it can consider whether the Game On project is a good one. Indeed, even if the Game On proposed project were not controversial, the question of whether to change a zoning change that applies to all R-30 zones in unincorporated Greenburgh would have to be considered.

What surprised me last evening was that no member of the Planning Board asked any question about this zoning change. All the questions were about the Game On project. I commend Mr. Steinmetz for his skill in focusing complete attention on the project to the exclusion of the zoning change issue. His presentation was so well done that to the listeners in the audience it seemed that the Planning Board was unaware of the fact that this hearing involved an unincorporated area-wide zoning change rather than a site plan review of the Game On project. Had Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues not taken up almost all the available time, and had some members of the group opposing the zoning change been permitted to speak, the zoning change would have been introduced and discussed, to the benefit of the Planning Board.

Mr. Steinmetz asked you for an indication of how the Planning Board was leaning. He said, or indicated, that if the Planning Board is negative, then he and his client would not waste the large sum of money incurred in doing all the environmental and related work. (Similarly, the Town would be spared the significant expenses that are involved in continuing the exploration of this zoning change.) I think that it is fair to say that the comments of the Planning Board members strongly communicated to the listeners that with few tweaks the Game On project will be approved, almost as though there was no zoning issue at all. By the Planning Board not even discussing the proposed zoning change Mr. Steinmetz is entitled to presume that zoning will not be an issue or a deterrent, and so both Mr. Steinmetz and his client will incur heavy costs proceeding with the effort, and so will the Town.

Is that really the message that the Planning Board wants to convey? Have you already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue and does not need to be discussed? Have you concluded that other R-30 zones will not be subject to the possibility, perhaps likelihood, of commercial uses? That other R-30 districts, and R-40 districts, will not be added to the list of eligible sites for commercial use by variances regarding size and other business uses? Mr. Steinmetz mentioned the Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs, but he gave more away -- in a letter to the Town Board dated May 21, 2015, relating to abutter petitions, he raised the possibility that Ato the extent that parcels can be assembled in the R-30 District that satisfy the locational criteria of the draft Zoning Text..."a such assembled parcels would be free to introduce commercial uses under the zoning change." Mr. Steinmetz knows, but he is not telling you, that the possibility of commercial uses being introduced to R-30 one-family districts goes far beyond Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs. Real estate developers are not shy or timid.

If you have already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue that has to be addressed and considered then what you did last evening was alright. I don't think that you have reached that conclusion, but in all fairness you have given that impression. If Game On believes that you have reached that conclusion, as they have good reason to assume, then you have to correct that assumption. You need to do it so that Game On, and also the Town, do not incur the large expenses that are inherent in the application.

I suggest that the way to do it is to notify Game On that at the next meeting of the Planning Board you would like them to attend and discuss the zoning issue, and that you permit some comments by persons who are knowledgeable and who oppose the zoning change. I believe that this is the only way now to be fair to all the parties who have an interest, and also to the Town of Greenburgh.

I should add that the change of zoning, unlike the Game On project, involves policy and not facts. Hence, if you decide not to change the zoning, you can make that decision without hearings, studies, etc. It is what courts call a question of law, not a question of facts, and thus needs no hearings. It enables you to conclude, if you wish, the matter without having to consider the Game On project -- unless, of course, Game On decides to build its project elsewhere in Greenburgh, as it can if it chooses to do so.

Herbert Rosenberg