Elmwood Country Club Update

At Wednesday's Town Board meeting (4/13/22), Mr. Feiner read a statement that the Board will comply with the 2016 Town Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance in making its decision in regard to the former Elmwood Country Club.

NO INCREASE IN DENSITY IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS

NO DOWNZONING IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS

The Town will support ALTERNATIVE (H) - 113 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES with the required land transfer.

He stated that there was an extensive amount of documentation received by the Town Board. Letters and emails on this project were sent to the Town by the following:

Involved Agencies: Conservation Advisory Council, Westchester County Planning Board, NYS Dept. of Transportation, Greenburgh Planning Board, Greenburgh Parks & Recreation Advisory Board.

Interested Parties - Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations, Elmsford School District, Fairview Fire District, Worthington-Woodlands Civic Association, Fulton Park Civic Association, Secor Homes Civic Association, Ardsley-Sprain Road Civic Association, Historic and Landmarks Preservation Board.
Residents of Greenburgh.

The Commissioner of Planning with the Town staff and the Planning Consultants will draft the Town’s Findings Statement within 2 weeks. The official resolution will be voted upon in MAY after the Town accepts the Findings.

It is apparent that the responses from Greenburgh residents were instrumental in the Town Board arriving at its decision. Thank you to all who participated in the SEQR process (Scoping Committee), sent emails and attended and spoke at the Public Hearings.

– Dorinne Livson, WWCA

Duplicitous Meeting Obscures Truth - Again

To the uninitiated, when taxpayers receive a neighborhood invite from Mr Feiner, they think it’s something special. Such was the case on Saturday when they were invited to the former Multi-plex for a site visit and another meeting with all of the interested players seeking to build another ShopRite store in Westchester, this time in Greenburgh, known as North Elmsford. It will be directly across the street from Sam’s Club. The same diagrams that had been used back in June were regurgitated for this meeting. In fact, no changes had been made since the initial offering. The only difference this time is all of the players were willing to acknowledge what we had learned even before June, that this would be a new ShopRite supermarket.

One might wonder why ShopRite would want to build at this site? Location, location, location. Don’t be confused, it’s not a great location yet. It will take about two years or less depending on how much green-lighting they need from the Town Board once they take on Lead Agency status. ShopRite knows what we have been reporting for years. The Mt Pleasant portion of property adjacent to Greenburgh’s Northern Elmsford has discussions underway to be developed with numerous apartments, motel, etc., giving them a perfect position to cater to those families. Already existing residents will also benefit. We’re sure Mr Feiner had his hand in this offer as he traditionally is planning for projects several years into the future.

But here’s what doesn’t gel. Residents who participated with this site visit were told numerous things. In part, they heard Feiner-speak and the other part, code for done-deal. So the proposed ShopRite will be 75,711 square feet. Also proposed will be a yet-to-be-announced restaurant or retail business that will be 13,765 square feet in size. The proposal also includes an additional 3,000 square foot restaurant that should be close to the entrance/exit off of 9A. The 20,000 square foot multi-plex theater as well as the stores and bank will be demolished. When looking at the dimensional layout of the project, it’s been crafted to solely benefit the developer and ultimately, ShopRite, by moving the building closer to the Westchester Hills Condominiums and the Orchard Lane residents in the Beaver Hill community.

But this walk through was not about hearing the community residents’ concerns. Rather, it was the developer and Mr Feiner, along with his Town Board, and Commissioner Garrett Duquesne letting the residents know what they can expect with this project. There was nothing different this day from the previous meeting held in the Westchester Hills Condominium’s Rec Center room in June. Everyone here continued to say they had no objection to ShopRite coming into the space. What they all seemed united about was that they did not want an entrance/exit onto Old Country Road. They said an already dangerous area would be made worse by even more tractor-trailer and truck traffic as trucks currently use Old Country Road as a cut through to get to the businesses in the Executive Boulevard complex, which is zoned for light commercial businesses. Old Country Road, which currently prohibits commercial traffic, is the only access/exit road for the Westchester Hills Condominium complex.

The developer’s plans call for major working of the property’s grade from what it is now to a more leveled one. The excuse given was that the zoning requires it and they also wanted to control runaway shopping carts. That was almost laughable. Mr Feiner, his Town Board, and/or his hand-picked Planning and Zoning Boards give out zoning variances like candy at Halloween. Some recent projects where this was done was on Old Colony Road for steep slope; Brightview Assisted Living for setbacks; Deli Delicious for setbacks; Westhab for setbacks, building size; Shelbourne Assisted Living, with a 3,000% variance and setbacks; and on a Central Avenue office building at Ardsley Road and Central Park Avenue for setbacks, undersized building parking and structure heights.

In fact, every developer that pre-meets with Mr Feiner privately before they submit plans at a Town Board work session already know what few obstacles they may face. Regardless, this was a fake argument to make for this crowd because they don’t follow these Boards, nor understand that this deal is already underway. How do we know? Because everyone from the applicant’s side, Mr Feiner and Walter Simon, the Chair of the Planning Board said that once the Planning Board has the project on their agenda, residents can come and speak about it. This is interesting because the Planning Board doesn’t allow comments to be made.

So, looking at the unrevised site plans that everyone struggled to see because the presenters stood by the front of the building’s glass doors and windows with the bright sun blinding the crowd of about 50 or so people, we were shown how the trucks will be coming in and going on a two-way roadway on the perimeter of the property. They will head northward, making a right-hand curved turn toward the rear of the building, pulling past the rear loading docks with their tractor-trailer trucks and then backing into the loading dock proper. Once unloading is completed, the trucks will pull out onto Old Country Road. The unchanged site plans also allow the tractor-trailers to enter from the proposed Old Country Road entrance. An unmentioned aside is that the condominiums are built on what used to be marshland. The piping for the condominium’s storm water, waste, etc., were not built for truck traffic, but for residential vehicles. Let’s not forget that there have been numerous shifts in that entire complex and Old Country Road itself as settling and sinking still occurs.

We see no reason that the developer cannot make adjustments to their plans to be a good neighbor with the three existing residential surrounding this property. Instead, they’ve dug their heels in and continued with the phony slope argument. The Town is famous for allowing steep slope variances and could do so here. The trucks can continue around the building and come down the south side of the drive and exit at the same light that they enter. This isn’t rocket science and in this day and age, computers are doing the reworking once new coordinates are put into the developer’s CAD system. The next step in this scam would have been for Mr Feiner to offer to help create a neighborhood committee so they can meet with a few neighbors to discuss this. He prefers this angle as he likes to try to talk to one or two people at a time to sway their opinion. But since he didn’t offer this, it proves our “done-deal” theory.

This may not be the right project for this property. On a much smaller level, when people are looking to purchase a home, they shop and look at numerous properties before making a decision. Frankly, if there’s something they don’t like, the driveway is too long or too small, or, they don’t like the schools, or the area floods, whatever the reason, you walk away. Will ShopRite walk away? Maybe they desire this property enough to work with the neighbors, maybe not. Another one of Mr Feiner’s ploys is trying to coerce neighborhoods to accept what he wants by saying you don’t know what else might come in here. It could be a methadone clinic or a homeless hotel. It doesn’t have to be if he stuck to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan.

We don’t have to accept this either. You can keep pressure on him, his Town Board and yes, ShopRite. You’re entitled to have a good quality of life and what you want, just as they can want what they want. The difference is that we live here – they are outsiders looking for us to give into their pressure. We’re convinced that this not a good deal as it stands. Let them come back to the Town and its residents with an reworked proposal and see if there can be a compromise. It’s what will make for A Better Greenburgh.

Letter To The Editor

To A Better Greenburgh,

A Scarsdale Inquirer article of 8/10/18, concerning the proposed development of the former Elmwood Country Club by the New Jersey based company, Ridgewood Realty, contained mis-information and omissions.

The “pre-submission conference” with the Planning Board that was requested by Ridgewood should NOT have been granted because there is no provision in NYS Town law enabling legislation or the Code of the Town of Greenburgh that allows an applicant seeking a map change and proposed rezoning to bypass the normal procedure of first going to the Town Board. According to the Code of the Town of Greenburgh, this type of meeting is allowed for site plan or sub-division approval only. It is not allowed for projects that require changes of zoning. All zoning changes must be approved by the Town Board.

In a July 3rd letter to the Planning Board, Ridgewood blames the Town Board for delaying action on their application. The problem of the delay is not the fault of the Town Board. At a Town Board Work Session, a request was made to Ridgewood to submit their plans (site plans, landscaping, water course, steep slopes, utilities, roads, etc.) for the as-of-right 119 Single Family Homes development. To date, they have only submitted an engineer's rendering of the Single Family Homes. Ridgewood is the problem for the delay, not the Town Board.

In the article, Ridgewood claims that the Town House Condo proposal, an Adult 55+ Community, will generate $350,000 more tax revenue (Town, School, Fire District, etc.) than the Single Family Homes proposal. That statement is incorrect because of the fact that Town House Condo units are assessed at between 50-60% of their value as compared to 100% assessment of Single Family Homes. At comparable selling prices, the 119 Single Family Homes will generate more tax revenue than the 175 Town Houses.

Ridgewood also states that their traffic engineer says that “the traffic generated from the 175 unit development proved to be less than the traffic generated from the as-of-right 119 unit single family home plan”. At our Civic Association meeting, the Ridgewood CEO, made the statement that people over 55 do not go to work. That claim was strongly disputed by the association members. If that assumption is being used as a criteria for the traffic study, there is a major problem.

Our community strongly believes that a full comprehensive SEQRA review of the project should be conducted by an outside, independent consulting firm to study all the issues concerning this development: financial, density, environmental, traffic, alternative development options, etc., as has been done previously by the Town for major projects such as The Jefferson (JPI) and Regeneron.

Dorrine Livson
President
Worthington-Woodlands Civic Assoc.

Opposition to Zoning Change Increases

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015, Hartsdale Park Association (hartsdalepark@yahoo.com) 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 - pfeiner@greenburghny.com
Town Council Members: 
Kevin Morgan - kmorgan@greenburghny.com, 
Ken Jones - kjones@greenburghny.com, 
Francis Sheehan - fsheehan@greenburghny.com, 
Diana Juettner - djuettner@greenburghny.com

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

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.

Sincerely,
Herbert Rosenberg

Traffic Woes Continue in Fulton Park

Old Kensico Road looking south (left pic) and north (right pic)

So today, Friday, sees construction of the soon to be all-blacktop deli property underway. Traffic, as usual, is backed up from the north heading toward Rt 119. Residents are held captive in their own neighborhood, unable to find an opening in the traffic congestion. We drove down our hill and parked at the new CVS to check out a phone tip we received. There was nothing happening at the County Center, nothing happening in the east or west bound lanes of Rt 119. One thing we did notice is that the deli has removed the No Left Turn and other signage placed on Town property prohibiting left turns from the CVS parking lot onto Old Kensico Road and no parking signs. Is anybody in the Town watching any of this? It appears not!

Looking in either direction at about 10AM, traffic can be seen until it literal disappears out of sight. It actually started at about 9AM and has continued up to this posting at noon. This is not because of construction at the deli, or construction and heavy traffic on Rt 119, or an event at the County Center. This is what the residents are stuck with because of the over-development by our various Boards, but in particular the Town Board. It was so bad, a County utility type truck drove south in the north bound lane, went around the traffic circle on the left and up County Center Road, where the driver made a right turn onto Rt 119. Unfortunately, he drove too fast for us to get a license number to follow up with.

As the Comprehensive Planning Committee gets stalled having to look into other tasks thrust upon them by Mr Feiner , there is no cohesive plan to help control the bastardization by Mr Feiner and his Board of the Town. There’s a saying often bandied about with the Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations that states, if it happens in one neighborhood, you can be sure it will happen in others. To all of Fulton Park’s  neighbors we say beware, you might be next. Our Town Board needs to listen and help all of its residents. Then we will see A Better Greenburgh

More Traffic Woes Once Deli Opens - You Could Be Next

When CompUSA moved into the corner location at Rt 119 and Old Kensico Road, the Fulton Park neighborhood was relieved that the space would not be used as another homeless facility. It felt the same when Staples moved in as well. Directly across the street was the former Kings Inn Motel that Mr Feiner vowed to fight to make a senior residence should it close. Then he reneged on that promise (simply an ad hoc crowd pleasing-lie at the time to protect himself). Subsequently he contacted a host of people and helped broker a carte blanche deal for Westhab, as extremly lucrative albeit not for profit corporation. 

Now still only partially occupied after being opened for several years, ABG’s guess is it will soon be turned into a  DSS Section 8 housing facility commanding $1400 for a 400-600 square foot “efficiency” apartment. Since the government has no limits on its spending, Westhab will rake in the Benjamin’s once their full business plan is finally implemented! Previously, Mr Feiner condoned the facility’s use as a transition location for just released convicts and crime in the neighborhood soared. The neighborhood nor their concerns didn't matter to Mr Feiner. They shortly learned the rest of the Town Board didn’t care either - mostly because Mr Feiner instructed them not to.

The deli next door complained about damage to the building, thefts and break-ins. Could it be directly attributed to the residents living at the transition facility? The politically correct won’t say so but the neighbors will. Mysteriously, when the facility was finally closed by the County, crime in the area all but vanished. Maybe the neighbors were right?

We believe the pseudo-abandoned deli, they continued using it behind the plywood encased windows and doors, had been illegally boarded up and had illegal signage installed on it. The Fulton Park Civic Association asked Mr Feiner and the Town to address it. We’re told by residents the deli made campaign donations to Mr Feiner’s re-election campaign. The Civic Association did not. The illegal signage went untouched for two years – no fines, no mandates to remove any of it and no repercussions. The “struggling” deli owner is really a real estate owner of numerous properties along with his brothers, one of whom owns RJT Towing and more.

He maintained he was losing thousands of dollars in lost revenue because he lacked a drive-thru window. Really – that’s the reason? It couldn’t be the asbestos-caused empty Verizon building across the street who had provided the majority of his customers? Or, an issue of quality with the food? Or, the disposition of the employees and owner toward customers? Or, the day laborers hanging out in the parking lot each morning? Or, well, it doesn’t matter any more.

The deli petitioned the Town Board, Zoning Board and Planning Board to allow it to build a drive-thru window. Making an teary-eyed plea, the deli owner feined weeping as he explained his parents had started the deli, he used his mother’s recipes and worked there as a teenager and he wants to keep this going in their memory. Oh my gosh, what a performance. It seemed so real. Give me a minute to dry the keyboard from my own tears. His act worked and they disregarded the neighborhood’s complaints of increased traffic, setback violations, encroachment onto state property - all of it.

The former Staples closed and a CVS reopened in its place. As an aside, the CVS building is in White Plains and the parking lot is in Greenburgh. We guess with that entire staff on board, sandwich sales at the deli should soar to what, maybe four more a day? But keep in mind we don't believe this was ever about sales or a deli or a parents legacy. Rather, it was about flipping the building with a drive-thru window grandfathered into the sale. We’re guessing Dunkin Donuts. Once the deli reopens, for however long or short a period of time, traffic woes promise to be worse. We need a Town Board willing to help its residents. Then we will see A Better Greenburgh.

Ethics Anyone, or Foxes in the Henhouse?

It seems residents and taxpayers are repeatedly treated to more and more questionable, and in fact illegal, actions through Mr Feiner’s seemingly untouchable administration. Since we know we cannot curtail these actions, we’re forced to seek remedy through other means. On the surface, one might think the Ethics Board would be an avenue worth pursuit for this satisfaction. Once traveling down that avenue, you will soon find the well-honed and notorious roadblocks craftily set in place to dissuade your pursuit of justice, remedy or anything close to it.

In September of 2013, Town resident Thomas Bock submitted a registered a complaint against Town Attorney Timothy Lewis for several ethics violations relating to the Democratic Primary election petitions. Simply, he lodged an Ethics Complaint against Town Attorney Timothy Lewis because of the actions Mr Lewis took for getting Democratic Primary ballot petition signatures for Town Supervisor Paul Feiner and Town Clerk Judith Beville and swearing to their legitimacy as Town Attorney. Without fear of being found guilty of an ethics violation by an Ethics Board appointed by Mr Feiner, the preordained outcome for Mr Lewis was no surprise to anyone, especially Mr Lewis.

If you read our post, “Ethical Challenge Dismissed By Ethical Challenge” of September 24, 2013, (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6521092612847585726#editor/target=post;postID=4973448450613789264;onPublishedMenu=posts;onClosedMenu=posts;postNum=17;src=postname)  

you can see some of the disingenuous bloviating that takes place by members of the Ethics Review Board. In fact, several members of the Ethics Board brought up Chicago politics as though to compare Greenburgh to the worst political model in hopes of validating a foregone conclusion for “one of their own”. Interestingly, the Ethics Board is chaired by Jack McLaughlin. The Planning Board is chaired by his wife, Fran. He should recuse himself with any claim involving planning, zoning, departments, or employees. Ethical, unethical? Your call. 

As can be found on Mr Feiner’s blog during the waning days of his still practicing open government, there are numerous statements validating other violations, specifically Mr Feiner’s violations, such as what’s listed below from his 2007 blog (ABG has added the bold highlight):

“Feiner has been caught lying to the Town's Ethics Board about lawyer Mark Weingarten's involvement in a March 2004 fundraiser that netted Feiner tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from developers with applications pending before the town. 

In his October 6, 2004 letter to the Ethics Board, Feiner made no mention of Weingarten when he described the $1000 Feiner picked up that night from Michael D'Allessio, the developer who had an application pending before the town to cut trees in Edgemont. Feiner wrote as follows: "Mr. D'Alessio attended a fundraiser that William LoSapio of Gregory's Restaurant in White Plains hosted for my campaign account on March 29th."

Here’s another quote from that same post:

“See The Scarsdale Inquirer, "Residents Question Feiner on Campaign Contributions," September 17, 2004. Mr. Feiner also omits to mention in his letter that Mr. Weingarten was then representing Mr. D’Alessio and that, in addition to Mr. D’Alessio’s $1,000, his law firm contributed another $500."

On Wednesday, August 1, 2007, the Town made public the actual invitation to the event. The invitation, dated March 4, 2004, was on the letterhead of Weingarten's law firm and says as follows:

"On Monday, March 29, 2004 . . . Bill Losapio and I will be hosting a fundraiser for Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner." Weingarten cited Feiner’s “strong support for economic development within the Town of Greenburgh” and said, “I know you have been helpful to Supervisor Feiner in the past. . . A minimum contribution of $250 is recommended. Paul has earned our support in the past. . . .” Contributions were to be mailed to Weingarten’s law firm, to Weingarten attention, care of his secretary.

The invitation was mailed to numerous developers with applications pending before the town.”    

William LoSapio’s reward for his fund raising efforts was to be appointed by Mr Feiner to the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. He raised money for Mr Feiner and thereafter gets appointed to the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. How much do the other seats usually cost?

In 2010, community leader Bob Bernstein brought a verified ethics complaint against two residents, Jordan Glass and Nicholas DeCicco, both attorneys, who were both serving as volunteer members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. For Glass, he represented Deli Delicious’ Ernest Tartaglione’s brother and at the time leased space in Valhalla from Tartaglione’s real estate corporation. Tartaglione was an applicant before the Zoning and Planning Boards. For DeCicco, it was about attending a fund-raising event held for him by Irvington developer Chuck Pateman, and sitting on the Zoning Board as he ran for the vacated County Legislative office against Hastings-on-Hudson’s Mary Jane Shimsky. Pateman, an area developer, hosted the DeCicco fund raiser at his home in Irvington, NY. while representing Zoning Board of Appeals applicant Ernest Tartaglione and owner of Deli Delicious in Fulton Park pursuing expansion. 

Mr Bernstein’s persistence with the verified complaints against these two residents (Glass and DeCicco) exposed the web of deception. The Board of Ethics had no choice but to negotiate a settlement which resulted in Glass and DeCicco’s “voluntary” resignations.

There was a third person involved in this deception appointed to the Town’s Ethics Review Board, Mark Constantine, also a local Attorney with an area practice and a resident of Tarrytown. Mr. Constantine filled the vacant “Republican seat” and has served ever since. Mr Constantine was the co-sponsor with Pateman of the above fund-raiser! 

Concerned citizen/activist Hal Samis lodged a Verified Complaint against Mr. Constantine on February 15, 2011 on similar grounds to those cited by Mr. Bernstein. Mr Samis’ complaint was in reference to Mr Constantine’s involvement as a sponsor with Mr Pateman of the fund raiser. Again, there were overlapping connections among these persons and all with direct or indirect involvement with an Applicant before the ZBA, Ernest Tartaglione owner of “Deli Delicious”!

Read more at: (Thursday, March 17, 2011); Paul, You Have Some Explaining To Do!
(http://abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com/2011/03/paul-you-have-some-explaining-to-do.html)

The Ethics Board properly referred Mr Samis’ complaint to the Town Board, citing a conflict of interest as Mr Constantine is a fellow Board member. While the Town Board has been repeatedly reminded of the need for a decision, they have refused to take any action. The charges against Mr Constantine are for three violations of the Town's Ethics Code: 570-7, 570-4(D) and 570-4(L)(2) relating to/with Prohibited Political Activities and Standards of Conduct. By definition, Mr. Constantine is an Agency Member and thus subject to the Code. Without any action by the Town Board, whether to clear or indict him, Mr. Constantine has been free to continue unrestricted to advocate and to vote on the Ethics Board since 2011. This is Mr Feiner playing fast and furious by his own rules. Who on any of these appointed Boards will challenge him?

So, to review, Mr Feiner appoints LoSapio, Constantine, DeCicco and Glass to maintain control of the various Town Boards. Tartaglione has a numerous zoning applications (appeals) before the Zoning Board of Appeals (LoSapio, DeCicco), the Planning Board (Chairwoman Fran McLaughlin – not that we’re accusing her of any impropriety) and the Building Department by Tartaglione to approve his building changes. When it is discovered that these players are implicated in Pateman’s fund raising efforts, it seems like the collusive players just dig in their heels preparing for the seige. To be forthcoming regarding Mr DeCicco, he did return the money collected and given to him from the Pateman fund raiser, claiming he had no knowledge of the relationships between Pateman and Tartaglione and stepped down from his Zoning Board position when everything came to light.

Another appointed and non-voting member of the Ethics Review Board, Mr Joseph Malara, whom we understand is a Somers, not Greenburgh, resident. He too, “serves” on the Ethics Review Board, providing the unpaid service of Council to the Board. Even so, he regularly tenders his (albeit Mr Feiner’s) point of view without being asked for a legal opinion, participating as though he were a “regular” Ethics Board member. His actions remind us of Town Attorney Tim Lewis’ constant input during Town Board meetings. He is there to render legal opinions if requested by the Board. Ironically, when they do ask, he typically suggests not giving an answer and to seek outside council. 

ABG has stated before that having Mr Feiner and his Town Board being reviewed by a Board appointed by Mr Feiner creates a host of new ethical challenges in a Town bereft of ethics. How can we have a Ethics Board rule on complaints against the same people who appointed them have the public expect a fair outcome? We can’t and probably never will. 

Mr DeCicco resigned from the Zoning Board but was appointed by Mr Feiner as an alternate to the Planning Board. Mr Pateman is no longer representing Ernest Tartaglione although Tartaglione is currently before, and trying the get approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the same project they turned down 2-years ago. The exception to this offering is he has increased the impervious surfaces, seeking to pave the entire property. Mr Malara continues to be the Council for the Ethics Board while living far beyond the Town line. Mr McLaughlin has not recused himself from Ethics Board decisions involving other Boards. Mr Constantine continues to be in property tax arrears with numerous properties he owns within the Town. He desperately needs the flawed “Tax Amnesty” program Mr Feiner seeks to initiate as another Feiner Folly to collect over $21 million owed the Town – and accrued during Mr Feiner’s tenure. The other Board members sit unscathed by all of these ethical issues – for now. The Town needs some major overhauls or we will never have A Better Greenburgh.

Densification

The last several years have proven that The Paul is not interested in preserving the “green” in Greenburgh. He’s not alone. The County has a master plan that incorporates an increased densification of the southern portion of the county as well as the Unincorporated sections of Greenburgh, especially on Rt 119. Regrettably, The Paul and his cohorts, from his Stepford Board to the developers to other politicians, all believe in a master plan that includes blacktopping our green space.

Many projects throughout the Town exemplify this endorsed densification. Planning Commissioner Thomas Madden, knows where his “bread is buttered”. Not only does he go along with The Paul’s plans, he goes beyond them. He pursues every avenue to help create larger and more grandiose plans throughout the Town. Residents will find Madden routinely endorsing plans that will add to his job security and eliminate our suburban Greenburgh into a more urban one. Stop and Shop on Rt 119 and Brightview Assisted Living in Glenville are obvious ones that come to mind.

Changing the zoning in the Town at the whim of a developer’s request has allowed The Paul to give away our green space, congest our neighborhoods, lessen the attractiveness of purchasing a home in the Town, increase traffic, flooding and overwhelm an outdated and beleaguered infrastructure. The latest example of this is the zoning change requested by the Brightview Assisted Living Center in the Glenville Neighborhood. ABG has previously written about this particular issue. In short, Brightview is utilizing a lack of definition in our zoning code for Assisted Living in hopes of getting a “custom made” zoning change that will benefit them.

There are several issues at stake with this. First, the Comprehensive Planning Committee, which was tasked for developing a Town Comprehensive Plan, continually has new requests asked of it, forcing their Comprehensive Plan to be delayed for submission and adoption by the Town. Second, each time another task is requested, the Town Board proceeds with any changes it pleases to keep the developers happy. This thwarts any benefit we might get if our Comprehensive Plan was presented and approved. Third, it’s currently overdue with no visible submission date on the horizon.

Spot-zoning is illegal. Simply, spot-zoning is when the Town Board changes the zoning for a particular project, developer, neighborhood or parcel of land. This is routinely done throughout the Town by The Paul and his Stepford Board. Again, it is illegal. We’ve witnessed spot zoning for numerous projects such as for Stop & Shop in Glenville, Westhab in Fulton Park, Dromore Road and Central Avenue in Edgemont, soon-to-be for sports bubbles in Veteran Park and at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road and Assisted Living Centers in Glenville. If The Paul wants it, it will happen. ABG recognizes the need for some change and the right for property owners to do what they desire with their property. But there needs to be a balance of uniformity and conformity within Town guidelines when this is done to maintain a level of attractiveness and functionality within the Town. That’s what our planning and zoning regulations should do. Yet, with The Paul and the Stepford Board subverting them, the planning and zoning boards are impotent to stop them.

With the Town zoning in place, when an owner/landlord/developer wishes to use the property for a proposal the zoning does not allow, property owners and/or developers are required to go to the Zoning and Planning Boards and request a variance or change. Most often, this is exactly what happens for an owner or landlord. And, depending on the proposal, they may rightly be refused their request until concessions and accommodations are made to conform with the zoning. There are many reasons for refusal by numerous Boards. Sometimes, the refusal is based on size (too large), style (doesn’t blend), traffic (increases/hinderances/flow) and the like.

When it’s for an individual homeowner, or small landlord, they are tasked with redoing their plans and proposals at their own additional expense and re-applying to that particular Board. When it is a developer asking, and they are refused, they simply confer with The Paul behind closed doors. When they emerge with their marching orders, they’ll all dance the dance as required by The Paul and present their proposal to the Board with soft, attractive water color renditions with the lovely landscapes to his “go-along” Board. From there, the developer’s game is in play. The Board will vote to become the lead agency and begin the sham approval process – regardless of what’s wrong with the project.

As was done with the Hebrew Hospital Home of Westchester, at 61 Grasslands Road, The Paul told them they could receive site approval to add buildings to their site if they donated a fire truck to the Fairview Fire Department. Once Rescue 3 was ordered and delivered (since replaced), site approvals sailed through the Town Board like beer flows at an Octoberfest! When The Paul told the Fortress Bible Church to donate a fire truck to the Fairview Fire Department, they said, “No!” Not surprisingly, Fortress Bible Church began receiving no site approvals and the internal departmental run-arounds that residents are so used to. Ultimately, with no additional fire apparatus in the offing, no site approvals took place and nothing could be built. Fortress Bible Church refused to play “FeinerBall” and sued the Town on seven counts AND WON! The Town went to an Appeals Court and again Fortress Bible Church WON! One of the reasons The Paul claimed against the Church was the increased traffic and safety issues it would cause on Dobbs Ferry Road. If this was an issue then, why did he not see it as an issue for the proposed GameOn 365 property across the street which promised more traffic?

The Town’s Zoning and Planning Boards are appointed positions by The Paul. Perhaps this would be okay if The Paul and his Stepford Board were not part of the process. The Zoning and Planning Boards can only make recommendations to the Town Board as the lead agency. Subsequently, when the Zoning or Planning Boards make a recommendation to the Town Board, it is just that, a recommendation and no matter how competent, correct, caring or pellucid either of these Boards are with their information, the Town Board is not bound by it. Whether it involves receiving a piece of fire apparatus or not, the lead agency moves ahead with more developments throughout the Town. The increased densification of the Town needs to stop. Projects that increase our impervious space are not helping the Town’s residents who routinely get flooded in normal rain storms. The aging infrastructure, ignored by The Paul for his entire 20-plus years tenure have left the Town residents hurting. The illegal actions of The Paul and his Board have taken it’s toll. It has to change. We can only hope.

It’s Been Said Before

The G8 has said it before. Other residents have gotten up at Town Board meetings and said it before. Town employees, with and without contracts have said it before. The lamestream media has quietly said it albeit in a muted voice. And of course, ABG has said it before. The King of Greenburgh, aka The Paul, lies and treats those not in his close circle of giving, with distain, deceit, and duplicity. Of course, very simply, he lies to those he doesn’t like or care about: his constituents.

We continually refer to The Paul and his Stepford’s spot zoning debacles in most neighborhoods. There are numerous examples and more awaiting the sweep of his crippling hand. He has routinely spot zoned throughout the Town as lead agency for so many projects, developers recognize it as their “norm”. He made sure that those trains don’t even slow down as it approached the Planning, Zoning, Building and Codes Department stations.

When Westhab purchased the former transitional housing property in Fulton Park from “Z” that had been used by the County to house the homeless, The Paul openly lied to the neighborhood in private meetings, along with his Stepfords, saying they (meaning Westhab) would need to find another location for the proposed seven story apartment building. Did they? No! He rezoned the .7 acre property from M-22 (22 units per acre) to match Hartsdale’s worst zoning nightmare of M-174 (174 units per acre).  He maintained the value of the location because of the “walking distance” of area supermarkets, even though those supermarkets are now gone.

Next, The Paul and his Stepford’s leveled crippling demands of the Fulton Park Garden Apartments, when they applied to the Town to rezone their property from it’s current zoning to match the newly spot-zoned Westhab neighbor next door. They informed the Board that they were requesting the change so they could remove the existing buildings, rebuild in the same footprint, with no ground level apartments or utilities as they currently flood with most rain storms. The utilities would be on the roof, away from flood conditions and the apartments would be up higher. They were looking to increase their buildings by six stories to match the Westhab height. The Paul mandated they develop flood mitigation plans, offer flood control solutions throughout the neighborhood and so on. It was clear that The Paul sought to discourage this project by overburdening them with untenable demands. When Deli Delicious sought to pave almost the entire property for a flawed drive-thru window, no similar demands were made of him. Another lawsuit seems imminent. 

The Paul has tried to systematically fine many of our already beleaguered businesses with more “fees” if they put products for sale on the sidewalk in front of their establishment. One such victim was The Apple Farm on Rt 119. The Board wrestled with wording and dollar amounts continually entertaining more fees and fines for the Town to utilize for financial collections. The temporary situation for the Apple Farm is that they store their produce (and sometimes other) deliveries on their private sidewalk until their staff can bring it inside. We hope the Stepfords see the light and do what they can to help maintain this store without additional taxes through fines - just for doing business. 

Stop and Shop recently closed in Tarrytown at the intersection of Routes 9 an 119, to reincarnate into a CVS. We need more CVS stores like we need Alan Hochberg chairing another useless committee. Having been there as a supermarket for years as First National, Finast and then Stop and Shop, the corporate decision was made to close this branch and relocate to a new space on Rt 119 near several hotels close to Benedict Avenue. This is all part of The Paul’s, Planning Commissioner Thomas Madden and Westchester County’s grand plan to transform the entire Rt 119 corridor into an industrial, mega apartment building and thoroughfare like many of the “Central Avenue”-like corridors in New Jersey.

The Glenville area protested with complaints of increased traffic, flood mitigation and congestion as well as other concerns. These all fell on deaf ears. The Paul had decided along with his Planning Commissioner Thomas “Let Me Help You Build It (for my job security)” Madden, that Stop and Shop’s new megastore would be built, regardless of the objections. But the zoning wasn’t correct for this store to be built. No matter, The Paul waved his hand over the plans, the soft watercolor presentation and it was a done-deal. Interestingly, according to Councilman Kevin “Henchman” Morgan, who recently said when the Dobbs Ferry Road residents (no real count or names provided) protested the police department’s proposed move to 715 Dobbs Ferry Road (the former Frank’s Nursery), The Paul and the Stepford’s acquiesced and withdrew the plans. Given the GameOn 365 debacle currently underway, it now makes more sense than it did then. 

The old Union Carbide property in North Elmsford has continued to quietly be (over)developed in recent years. The Eastview property houses a now expanded corporate park to the west of Old Saw Mill River Road, with several huge new buildings and the requisite parking capability, increasing and adding to the impervious surfaces there. They have gotten approval from The Paul and his Stepford’s to build 400+ condominiums on the property as well. Water that would previously be absorbed into the ground will increase and head south toward the Fairview Park area, which itself has been increasingly developed.

This section of the Town no longer has the previous water absorption capability and forces its runoff south. Sam’s Club, at the sight of the old Drive-In Theatre, knew about the flooding and built their property up five to ten feet to be above the flooding problem. It worked for a while, but the over-development north of them has caused so much water flow to come south, it became the new marker for where flooding begins as water encompasses the businesses and residences south of it, culminating at Babbitt Court lake. The Paul and his Stepford’s authorized all this development with the blessing of  Commissioner Madden. They just won’t say no to any developer.

On the opposite side of the Town, in the Fulton Park lake region along the Bronx River, The Paul searches out the tiniest parcels of land and offers them up to not the highest bidder, but the most connected bidder. And while residents wrestle with the Planning Department employees, rules and high fees for even the simplest fixes, changes and additions to their homes, the developers are hand-held and walked over to the express lane for their projects. Of course, the Westhab seven-story project mentioned above is but one glaring example of this. Right next door the “former” Deli Delicious, which illegally installed signs stating he was closed for business and for lease has not been fined for illegal signage or not paying the sign permits and fees. This move was not only blessed by The Paul, but probably suggested to him by The Paul. The owner continues to work from the basement office.

While no change in taxes is an impossibility in this Town, The Paul has mastered the double-digit tax increases for property, sewer, water, building fees and so on for our residents, all while managing to drive out struggling businesses, seniors and our young couples looking to spend their twilight years and/or start their lives together in something other than the Greenburgh mecca of public housing. His tax and spend policies, along with guilty lawsuit verdicts, have driven out two key and strategically located supermarkets forcing many residents to shop for their staple food items at various dollar stores and occasional farmers markets. This just in: SanMar Laboratories in north Greenburgh, which benefitted with a $750k grant from the Empire State Development, the real Bank of New York, to stay in NY, and then an additional $250k, will be relocating to Pennsylvania. Well played.

The list of issues being pummeled by The Paul continues with other locations and neighborhoods. One project that appeared successfully “discouraged” was that of the Fortress Bible Church. Until Fortress Bible Church went to court for help. The Paul thought he had succeeded in helping out his buddy, Tom “Proclamation” Abinanti, to keep the church out of his neighborhood. When Abinanti realized The Paul would lose the case, he moved to Tarrytown! Then the Federal Courts found The Paul and the Board guilty of discrimination, perjury, willfully destroying evidence and more. The Appellate Division Court upheld the verdict. It will soon cost the Town’s Unincorporated residents millions of dollars because The Paul feels he’s exempt from laws only others must follow. We may finally be able to take advantage of the AAA Bond Rating that The Paul feels obliged to brag about at the most inopportune times. We can borrow the money to pay his fines and try to not be assaulted with his high tax increases while claiming fiscal restraint due to the NYS 2% Tax Cap. That is a sham in itself. We need a change at the top, in the middle and throughout the Town. We can only hope.