Inside Press

By Eileen Gallagher

Two New Castle residents, Frank Nestro and Kenneth Martin, received accolades and engraved plaques at Town Hall Tuesday to honor their actions on behalf of a New Castle Police Officer.  Chief of Police Charles Ferry provided a recap of a January 22 crime incident on North State Road–during which time Nestro and Martin, Chief Ferry explained, jumped into action on behalf of Officer Sean McNeill. Criminal charges brought against the perpetrator, who was convicted and sentenced in the New Castle Justice Court, were detailed in a recent police release.*

Nestro and Martin were driving along North State Road at the intersection of Route 100 in New Castle on January 22, around 6:45 in the morning, related Chief Ferry, when they came upon the scene of a “one car” automobile accident. According to Chief Ferry, as they slowed down in their respective cars, their eyes were drawn to the site of an agitated person with Officer McNeill, who had responded to the call. When the person grabbed the officer’s gun and tried to wrest it from his holster, Chief Ferry continued, Nestro and Martin sprang into action. The two civilians raced from their cars and grabbed the driver, now a suspect, restraining him enough for Officer McNeill to take him into custody, Chief Ferry said.*

With the danger behind them, Nestro, Martin, and Chief Ferry smiled broadly as they posed for photos with the town board members, supervisor, and families. A standing ovation for the citizens followed the presentation.

Station Restaurant Negotiations Continue

During a work session immediately preceeding the board meeting, Peter Chase, followed by Carla Gambescia, offered their ideas and vision for an optimal food service scenario at the currently vacant train station.

Peter Chase came to the meeting room with his own vision and a video presentation** depicting the concepts he has in mind for Chappaqua Station because, as he phrased it, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” As a developer and operator of restaurants and bars around the world, Chase and his wife Erin have been hired by hotels and restaurants to “conceptualize” their spaces. Chase sees the future of “the crown jewel of Chappaqua,” as town board member Adam Brodsky characterized the station, as a market type experience a la Grand Central Station combined with a restaurant and repurposed bar area in what was once the ticket window of the station.

Chase’s food service would begin in the early hours with coffee service and breakfast type foods available by 5 a.m. , and lunch and dinner throughout the day. The Chases are big proponents of the “slow food movement,” or the preservation of traditional and regional cuisine while encouraging the farming of plants, seeds, and livestock characteristic of the local ecosystem. To that end, they would make full use of the Chappaqua Farmers’ Market.

“These last few weeks have been incredibly difficult,” Gambescia began, as she recalled the hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars spent in creating and planning for what she thought was her space for the Chappaqua location of Via Vanti. Wishing to transform the station from its current “pass through” status to a place of community for her fellow New Castle residents, Gambescia attempted to tantalize the audience with her descriptions of nutella crepes, flavored gelatos, an array of meatballs, homemade mozzarella, and lasagna cupcakes.

Exuding her love of Italy and its culture, traditions, and cuisine, Gambescia took the audience on a tour through an Italian piazza, the center of a community where neighbors gather for food and friendship. Gambescia believes that Chappaqua’s train station could be such a place, in a town that, as she phrased it, is more about families and food than any other place in America.

Gambescia continued on, describing the past 13 months of negotiations with first the previous town board, and now the sitting board. According to Gambescia, what she thought was an agreed upon lease, after waiting seven months for the town to complete foundation remediation work, came to an abrupt halt over one unlikely issue:

Bathroom Disagreement

According to Supervisor Rob Greenstein, the one non-negotiable part of the lease to anyone who rents that space is that the bathrooms must remain available to the public at all times. Greenstein, who contended that bathroom use for the commuters is a major issue, indicated that the previous board had required that, and it is still in effect.

Discussions with Adam Brodsky since January of this year never resulted in a finalized lease, said Gambescia.  “We preferred to have the access [to the bathrooms] limited at dinnertime… I was lead to believe that we were having a negotiation. I was not under any impression that this [bathroom use] was going to kill the deal,” explained Gambescia.

At the next work session, the board will announced that it will hear proposals from the owner of a gourmet food shop in Hawthorne and Leslie Lampert, owner of Cafe of Love and Ladles of Love, both in Mt Kisco.

Code Red, and Code Red, and Code Red…

During the Administrator’s Report, Jill Shapiro also addressed citizen reports of a repetitive theme of the testing of the Code Red system.  Several residents described receiving several emails from the system. This was due to the “overperformance” of the system, according to Shapiro, town administrator, who apologized for this and ascertained from the company that the offending server will no longer be in use. There is now a policy and procedure to ensure that it does not happen again, she said.

Planning Board Vacancy Announcement

The following is an announcement from Rob Greenstein, Supervisor:

The Town of New Castle would like to thank Douglas Schuerman for his three years of service on the Planning Board and his three years of service on the Environmental Review Board.

As of April 1, 2014 the Town of New Castle will have an opening on the Planning Board.  The New Castle Planning Board was established on February 16, 1929.  The Board is composed of five members, each appointed for a term of five years.  The Planning Board meets on the first and third Tuesdays of each month, except during the month of August.   

The Planning Board is empowered by New York State Law to act on requests for subdivision of land and applications for approval of site plans based on application of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, the Land Subdivision Laws and the Town’s Master Plan of Development, and removal of trees as determined by the Town’s local ordinances. No construction, excavation, filling, re-grading, or clearing of vegetation on any area proposed for subdivision may be undertaken without approval of the Planning Board. The Planning Board also must approve site plans for single plots including location and dimension of buildings on the property, parking, screening, signs and landscaping. It may attach conditions to its site plan approval that must be met before a building permit is issued and that must continue to exist in order to obtain a valid certificate of occupancy. No change of use for a property may take place without Planning Board approval. Additionally, the Planning Board is responsible for implementing the Town’s Master Plan.

In addition, the Planning Board reviews and makes recommendations about amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and amendments to the Town’s Master Plan, which regulates land use within the Town to protect public health, general welfare, and safety of the residents.  The Planning Board is authorized to adopt any rules necessary to properly exercise its power of site development and plan review with final Town Board approval. The Board may apply the rules of “cluster zoning” to a subdivision if it determines that such a zoning application is to the Town’s benefit provided that, in certain instances, the Town Board authorizes it to do so. The Town Board appoints the members and Chair of the Planning Board. Members may be reappointed. Town Board members may not be members of the Planning Board. The Town Board may require Planning Board members to take educational and training courses.

The term of the vacancy is 2012 to 2017.

A resume with a cover letter identifying why you would like to become a member of the Planning Board should be submitted to Mary Deems, the New Castle Town Clerk

* According to the New Castle Police Department press release, Dimitrios Vitaliotis was charged with the following crimes:

Attempted Robbery in the third degree
Attempted Grand Larceny fourth degree
Resisting Arrest
Obstructing Governmental Administration second degree
Criminal Mischief  fourth degree  

Vitaliotis was arraigned before  Judge Sorkin of the New Castle Justice Court and was sent to the Westchester County Jail on $20,000 bail.  His next court appearance was set for Jan 23 2014 at 7:30 p.m. New Castle Justice Court.  He was subsequently convicted and sentenced to one year in jail.

 

By Tom Auchterlonie

A proposed mixed-use redevelopment of the Legionaries of Christ site has residents concerned about its environmental impacts and procedural items tied to it.

The proposal submitted to the town is called The Spa at New Castle and is from developer Soder Real Estate Equities, LLC. It calls for redeveloping the site with 50 condos, 34 hotel rooms, a spa and a restaurant. The condos would be situated in east and west wings while 30 of the hotel rooms would be in a new south wing, the proposal’s petition states, with the other four rooms being located in the site’s estate house. Amenities for the proposal include a juice bar, basketball and tennis courts, a 75-seat theater and a gym. The restaurant and spa would be open to the public, the petition states.

The site is currently under the town’s R-2A zone, which allows for single-family homes on at least 2-acre parcels. However, the proposal would involve the creation of a new zone called the Active Lifestyle Floating District (AL District). The floating zone, if created, would not just apply to the current proposal’s location. It could be used at any site in New Castle that is at least 75 acres and has at least 300 feet of frontage along a county or state road, according to a draft version of the zone’s language.

It is the location for the proposal, which is located at 773 Armonk Road (Route 128) and is about 96 acres, that has neighbors concerned. Multiple residents who were interviewed for this story cited traffic, the location’s septic system and lighting as factors. They are also concerned that the proposal entails putting something that is commercial in a residential area.

Among the neighbors is Jeff Goldstein, a resident of nearby Tripp Street. He is concerned about the impact of the site’s septic on surrounding well water, along with traffic, noise and lighting. Goldstein is among those concerned about a commercial proposal for a residential area and whether it could set a precedent for elsewhere. He also feels that the planning board should have the role of lead agency, which is for oversight of the project’s environmental review and is a role that the town board currently has.

Armonk Road resident Jeff Kay is concerned about what the project could do to traffic on his street and feels that the master plan would not allow for it. He also does not want the master plan, which is in the process of being updated, to get developers’ influence.

Sharon Greene, a Tripp Street resident, has environmental concerns that include sustainability of the septic system given the number of people on the site, along with traffic, lighting and noise. She also brought up how the project goes against existing zoning and the town’s master plan. Greene also takes issue with the floating zone. As an example, she raised the possibility of a future developer being able to acquire multiple parcels that add up to enough acreage. Additionally, Greene is not pleased with the proposal being considered without first updating the master plan. She also feels that the town board is not doing due diligence because environmental impact information from an earlier proposal for the site has not been examined. That information is derived from an expansion plan that was proposed by the Legionaries of Christ.

The planning board’s feedback is about caution, based on a Feb. 21 advisory memo that is for the project’s draft scoping document.

The memo states, “The Town Board should consider whether adoption of “floating zones” may have unintended ramifications in other parts of town.”

The planning board’s memo continues, “At a minimum, comprehensive amendments to the Town Development Plan would need to be considered by the Town Board for this project to address the desirability of zoning changes and the creation of “floating zones” for this project as well as for other similarly large parcels in town, especially where commercial development is proposed to be introduced into residential areas.”

Reached for comment, Supervisor Rob Greenstein explained that there will need to be study about whether the floating zone can be applied. Additionally, he explained that, so far, the town’s counsel does not think that any other parcel would meet the floating zone’s criteria. Regarding the process for the proposal, Greenstein also talked about letting it go forward so the developer has an opportunity to make a case. He was noncommittal about the project itself.

Greenstein also feels that the information gathered for the project’s environmental review will help with the master plan update process because more will be known about the parcel. He is also favorable to both the environmental review of the proposal and the master plan update happening concurrently.

David Steinmetz, who is the developer’s attorney, defended the use of a floating zone. He noted that the town board would decide in each instance which property should receive it. An alternative would have been to create a zoning text change to allow for getting a special permit. However, Steinmetz explained that it would apply to any property that meets the criteria and would apply automatically. Additionally, the town board would not have discretion under a special permit approach.

Discussing the project’s relation to the master plan, he said that amending does not need to be proposed now although it could be done in the future. Discussing the impacts of the project, Steinmetz explained that issues will have to be studied. An updated scope for the proposal is expected to be presented later this month, he explained.

According to state environmental law, following the scope will be a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS). It will be reviewed and eventually subject to public review. The DEIS will then be followed by a final environmental impact statement (FEIS). This will followed by the last environmental document, which is called a findings statement.

 

 

By Eileen Gallagher

A back to back town board work session and meeting with a potentially sleepy agenda took an unexpected twist as the town board convened for the first time since the February break. Dialogue quickly escalated as conversation about the town “triangle” sign and plowing of sidewalks shifted into heated debate over several controversial topics.

No other spectators were present during the work session portion of the meeting. Only viewers logged onto Livestream could have noticed the tension as Elise Mottel and Jason Chapin confronted Rob Greenstein, Lisa Katz, and Adam Brodsky about their exclusion from the selection process of the remaining two members of the Steering Committee and Brodsky’s appointment to the Business Development Advisory Committee, while Greenstein countered with talk of overhauling the outdated ethics code and the makeup of the ethics board. Ironically, the first discussion of the evening, choosing the color of the hamlet sign for the triangle at the foot of the Route 120 bridge, wrapped up with Brodsky stating that though there may be different colored signs (Millwood’s sign is blue and white, while Chappaqua’s will be hunter green), “We are all one town.”

When the Master Plan Steering Committee came up for debate, Chapin prefaced the discussion with a background to the matter. The Master Plan was last updated in 1989, with several efforts to revise it since then. However, according to Chapin, the revisions really began in earnest in the spring of 2012 with the hiring of Sabrina Charney Hull. That fall, the town board formally approved her updated Master Plan, and announced a steering committee the following year.

Chapin continued to explain that there had been no discussion with either him or Mottel about changes to the master plan regarding the replacement of the two members of the committee who had stepped down. “Sabrina was leading the effort to recruit new members,” Greenstein offered.

“Were there conversations or meetings held? What was the process? Were there e-mails?” Mottel asked. She went on to say that the first indication she had about the new members to the committee was from an article in New Castle Now. She conveyed her surprise that, as a sitting board member, she hadn’t heard this firsthand in a meeting of the full board.

Additionally, both Chapin and Mottel recommended that Brodsky recuse himself from the Business Development Committee due to his relationship with his in-laws, who own property downtown. “Adam has a tremendous amount of skill sets to offer,” Chapin continued, while expressing his concern that there would be “a conflict of interest given his family’s connection to the downtown.” Mottel concurred, trying to assure Brodsky that no one was questioning his skills or his role on the board, and that she appreciated his reaching out to the community.

Brodsky responded, “We all own properties, we should all recuse ourselves if that was the case.” He reaffirmed his position that his interests are aligned with the town in the redevelopment of the downtown, and he has only the best interest of the community at heart.

Brodsky continued, “People were glad that I reached out to the community, that is what the town government should do, which has not been done in the past.” He concluded with, “You should call me rather than accuse me based on stories in New Castle Now.”

“It would be appropriate to run [this issue] by the board of ethics,” suggested Chapin.

Greenstein responded with the statement that the board of ethics is going to be changed, that the current board is not effectively staffed, having been “set up as more form over substance” and unchanged for decades.  He announced that, with the help of the town attorney, he is in the process of exploring what other communities have, and that Ed Phillips is compiling a list of recommended changes, including adding two more members for a total of five.  According to Phillips, New York State establishes a floor for town codes, with minimum requirements. Other than that, it is up to the municipality to decide if any additional standards will be included.  As part of a public hearing process, they will start from scratch and work in the substantive content from the memo they have drawn up, rather than working piecemeal from the old code. Additionally, Greenstein would like more transparency, stating that most people don’t even know who is on the committee. The town board was in agreement, with Chapin adding that he would like to go for a higher standard rather than the bare minimum.

The meeting that followed touched on the items discussed during the work session, with the addition of public comments (a handful of residents arrived for this portion of the evening). Dominating the comments was the vision of the town going forward, as part of the Master Plan process. Accordingly, Greenstein mentioned that the public outreach process will begin next month, now that the Pace Land Use Law Center has been retained. When asked what the board’s vision of the town is, Katz responded, “We were elected to represent the residents of New Castle. We could state what our vision is, but that would not have any purpose.  We want to know what the community vision is.”  The following appears on the town’s Facebook page:

As we embark on updating our Town Development Plan (i.e. Master Plan), we should start by asking ourselves, “What is our vision?”

The overall purpose of the Master Plan is to provide a “roadmap” for development in the Town of New Castle over the next twenty years. New Castle is a wonderful community with a proud history. We have exemplary schools, caring neighbors, safe neighborhoods and a beautiful natural environment. We also have the very real challenge of improving our commercial tax base while preserving community values. Addressing this challenge will require some new thinking and actions.

Our goal is to ensure that the Town of New Castle is even better in ten, fifteen, twenty-five years than it is today.

We must ask ourselves where are we today? Where do we want to go as a community? Where do we want to be in twenty years?

There is a strong community spirit to be tapped. We have a strong community of shared ideas and opinions to engage. Together we will identify and reach our vision.

The Town Board has approved the contract with Pace Land Use Law Center. Tiffany Zezula, Managing Director of the Pace Land Use Law Center, will oversee and facilitate our public outreach for the Master plan process. This process will begin shortly.