|
|
|
|
|
WIDEWATERS COMMONS
ARTICLES
2004
KNGG vs WIDEWATERS MALL APPLAICATION
KINDERHOOK
NY
ALL ARTICLES
APPEAR IN DATE ORDER WITH THE LATEST AT THE TOP
INDEPENDENT - JULY 13, 2004 Widewaters nears final roundBy Matthew
Sheehey, The Independent, July 13, 2004 NIVERVILLE—The Kinderhook Planning Board meets Thursday, July
15 (7:00PM) to begin what might be the final chapter of the nearly three-year
review of the shopping center proposed by the Widewaters Group. The board is
expected to start work on the findings statement, which determines whether the
applicant has proven it can mitigate potential impacts. Thursday’s meeting, which begins at 7 P.M. at Town Hall, also
includes scrutiny of minor adjustments to the site plan, said Chairman Ed
Simonsen. The
adjustments include the addition of cross access provisions, giving adjacent
property owners and their guests the right to cut through if need be . . . . . .
The Planning Board, lead agency for the review, will develop the findings
statement with the assistance of consultants. It
could take several workshops, said Mr. Simonsen, but there isn’t much time. Widewaters was planning to file its Final Environmental
Impact Statement with the state Department on Environmental Conservation this
week, giving the planners 30 days to reach their final decision on the
project. “(But)
our consultants are working on (their findings), so it’s not like we’re starting
this from scratch,” said Mr. Simonsen. The
consultants, engineers Jim Green, Shelly Johnston and attorney Marc Gerstman,
hadn’t submitted their findings as of yesterday. Should
they find that something in the Environmental Impact Statement fails to mitigate
certain concerns, it could mean trouble for Widewaters. “If
they (the planning board’s experts) made a negative finding and the applicant
can’t say why it will work, it could lead to non-approval, said Mr.
Simonsen. “But
that’s not a decision that can be based on emotions—it has to be grounded in
fact and scientific opinion.” Opponents of Widewaters believe the $10 million plaza clashes
with Kinderhook’s semi-rural character. They
also fear the applicant’s plan to build a roundabout at the 9/9H intersection
creates serious traffic safety threats for drivers and pedestrians, especially
students from nearby Ichabod Crane schools. Fans
of the project want a second grocery store in town and point to the need for new
jobs and tax revenue. But
like any controversial proposal, opponents have been much more vocal throughout
the long review process. Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth, a local citizens’ group
formed in 2002, paid for its own experts to scrutinize Widewaters’ plans. Comments from KNGG, and dozens of townspeople from both
sides, are included in the Planning Board’s official record. Now
its up to the planners to wade through it all and decide whether (if) Widewaters
meets all the standards in the Town Code. The final decision could come as early as next month. |
|
MARCH 9, 2004 - The Independent - ON THE NET Hannaford yes, Widewaters no? | ||||||||
|
| KINDERHOOK-Most of the people who spoke at a public hearing last
week would like to shop at a Hannaford Brothers
supermarket. They just don't want the store to be built at the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H, where the Widewaters Group wants to put a $10 million development with nearly 500 parking spaces for shops and a restaurant. The site plan for that proposal brought nearly 100 residents to the Planning Board hearing Thursday at North Pointe. A dozen or so people in the audience wore green stickers with the slogan "Hannaford Yes" and several plaza foes from Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG) voiced their desire to shop at the Maine-based chain. But the vast majority of the evening's speakers said the Widewaters project is a bad fit for the town and a threat to traffic safety because of its size and its impact on the intersection and nearby roads. Former Planning Board member Warren Collins said roundabouts like the one proposed by Widewaters for 9/9H are "confusing and unsafe," especially for the many new drivers down the road at Ichabod Crane. "The peak times will be a nightmare," she said. Ms. Collins questioned the integrity of the applicant: "When I served on the Planning Board, I found the people at Widewaters to be somewhat deceitful, somewhat rude, and somewhat patronizing," said Ms. Collins, who served on the board in 2002. When reached after the meeting, however, the Widewaters representative dealing with the Planning Board said the company will address concerns raised at the hearing to the best of its ability. "It's the same people with the same old complaints that we've heard over and over again," said Marco Marzocchi. "We've tried to respond to all the comments and concerns." He met with the board Saturday morning in a workshop meeting and offered to eliminate one of the plaza's four buildings and shift one of the site's access roads, but the plan would still use a roundabout. The single-lane roundabout, said KNGG Attorney Jeff Baker Thursday, would need to grow to two lanes within 15 years to accommodate new traffic. The site plan, however, doesn't account for the eventual expansion, who would pay for it, or where the land would come from, he said. "If you're going to approve it, every piece of property mitigation has to be provided in the site plan," said Mr. Baker, addressing the six board members who attended Thursday. "If it isn't included in the document, it's not going to happen." He said the review has dragged on for over two years "because you continue to get incomplete and inadequate information from the applicant," including the "continuing gross deficiencies" in the site plan. Those deficiencies, said Mr. Baker, also include the plan's failure to address traffic increases in the future, open space preservation, the roof pitch on the main building, sign dimensions, and impacts on town services. For example, he said, Widewaters has yet to say what, if any, tax breaks it will seek from the town. Attorney Meg Moran of State Farm Road, a former member of the Planning Board who also served on the Comprehensive Plan Committee, said the plaza doesn't meet the development criteria established by the Comprehensive Plan. "This project embodies what we wanted to avoid-large, retail, non-local development that would overwhelm smaller-scale local businesses and monopolize limited commercially-zoned acreage in a way that would preempt and preclude the town's fledgling efforts to nurture and attract [small businesses]," said Ms. Moran. According to surveys, she said, Kinderhook residents would prefer new commerce related to "tourism, agriculture, non-retail sales, distribution and service areas" and niche businesses that complement the villages. And just because the property is zoned for commercial use, she said, doesn't mean planners must simply approve the permit as some might wish. Ms. Moran also criticized the state Department of Transportation for failing to meet with Supervisor Doug McGivney about traffic concerns after several requests while meeting in private during that time with Mr. Marzocchi. "Whose needs seem to be on DOT's priority list?" she asked. "What's going on here? Can you conclude that a plan has been proposed by DOT at the behest of the Town of Kinderhook that is designed to address the needs of the town? No." Frank Moses of McCagg Road said the "strip mall" site plan should call for more attractive lighting, shrubbery between parking areas, and a berm that separates the 19-acre lot from the road and its neighbors. Architect Marilyn Kaplan, who said the proposed landscaping is "minimal and inexpensive," called for more trees and plantings to break up long lines of sight, benches, and screening for Dumpsters. "There is no beauty, there is no joy," she said. "There is only consideration for spending the minimal amount of money." But Jeff Musiker, who said he spoke for a "silent majority" in town, simply wants a better place to shop for groceries. "If the town continues to grow, we're going to need a project like this," he said, citing the high prices at the Grand Union supermarket in Valatie. "We shouldn't continue supporting something that just gouges us." He questioned how the town enforces design standards. "As far as the town governing our architecture, we've got a purple building in town. I guess it's OK because they changed their name," said Mr. Musiker, referring to the Purple Pepper restaurant on Route 9. But the majority of speakers Thursday want to make sure Widewaters, if it wins approval, builds the best plaza it can. Diane Whelton, who said she served on planning boards in Manhattan for 20 years, said the motto for the project is "cheap." "I think it's because Widewaters thinks we're all a bunch of hicks with no aesthetic sense and they can just cram it down our throats," she said. Ms. Whelton asked planners why the applicant hadn't looked at buying a property closer to Interstate 90 on the west side of Route 9, which would give commuters here easier access to the plaza. "Please, no development at this site," she said. "There are other sites." |
| ©The Independent 2004 |
Widewaters removes building from development proposal
KINDERHOOK -- Widewaters representative Marco Marzocchi put a red marker to blueprints for the $10 million shopping center proposal at Saturday morning's special Planning Board meeting and he colored the Planning Board surprised -- if not pleased.
Yet, if there was tarnish to this silver lining on the cloud that is the Widewaters proposal, it would be that Marzocchi said this design change comes with conditions and can be withdrawn.
Urging the board to get a move on, Marzocchi said that if timing didn't improve, the changes would be withdrawn and Widewaters would stick with the extra building and the unmodified roundabout access plan.
With a few quick Marzocchi scribbles, gone from the proposal was 10,000 square feet of retail space; on the northern end of the plan. In its place could stand the center's proposed restaurant -- sized at 3,140 square feet -- moved farther north from where it was originally proposed.
Highlighting is by KNGG, not the author.
Excerpts from an article by Joe Prout
KNGG Attorney Jeff Baker:
Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth attorney Jeff Baker spoke early on in the public comment process. Baker, one of several people speaking for the opposition group said Widewaters’ submission of inadequate, incomplete information continues. He said gross inconsistencies between the site plan and the project’s environmental impact statement remain.Baker listed several areas of deficiency he found in the site plan. He said the site plan doesn’t have the expected expansion plans for the roundabout. He said since the need for expansion has been predicted, the plans should include how expansion of the roundabout will be accomplished.
Also, Baker said the applicant hasn’t provided any morning peak traffic data. He said the applicant states its businesses won’t generate morning traffic, but Baker said the project’s roundabout would affect morning commutes.
Baker said property that is currently undeveloped (on the site), that Widewaters said will remain undeveloped, should have this stipulation noted on the (site) plan. He also said design elements of the roofs are lacking and there aren’t sign dimensions on the (site) plan.
Baker said that the Planning Board doesn’t have to keep pulling teeth to get the applicant to submit information. He said if they don’t submit what’s requested then the board can reject the application.
Widewaters' representative Marco Marzocchi:
Marco Marzocchi, speaking for Widewaters, acknowledged much of what was said is a retread of what’s been said at previous meetings. “It’s the same old comments by the same individuals,” he said. He said Widewaters is looking forward to working with the Planning Board to resolve its concerns.
When asked why he thought why the same questions kept getting asked, Marzocchi responded, “My perception is they had been addressed. It’s just the naysayers don’t like the answers.”
Planning Board Special Attorney Marc Gerstman:
Planning Board Special Attorney Marc Gerstman said the Planning Board needs to determine if the final environmental impact statement reflects member’s views of what the project should be. He said the board also has to determine whether the site plan meets requirements in the town code. He said these will be open to judgment by the board members.
Gerstman said his role is an informative one. He said he provides information on time frames and legal code requirements. He said the board has its own expert consultants to provide opinions on some of the details in the plans.
|
February 13, 2004 - The Independent Plaza lawyer makes his case | ||||||||
|
| KINDERHOOK-An appearance by Marco Marzocchi, General Counsel for
The Widewaters Group, at the Town Board's regular monthly meeting on
Monday, February 9, led some town residents to wonder if he was trying to
influence a decision which belongs to the Planning Board.
But Supervisor Doug McGivney made it clear that Mr. Marzocchi had been invited by Councilman Keith Stack, and Mr. Marzocchi himself said his purpose in coming was "to make sure the Board was well-informed and would share information with the [Planning] Board, particularly with regard to the DOT {Department of Transportation] position on the roundabout." Widewaters, a Syracuse real estate developer, hopes to build an open-air shopping mall anchored by a Hannaford's supermarket at the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H with State Farm Road. The DOT had found the location unsuitable for additional curb cuts when Samascott Orchards sought to build a farm stand there several years ago, but state highway engineers settled on a roundabout, or traffic circle, as a way of dealing with traffic generated by the proposed supermarket complex. Many town residents have questioned the safety and efficiency of a roundabout in an area with heavy pedestrian and bus traffic from Ichabod Crane Central School, located a few hundred yards from the intersection. "I foresee a horrendous mess and a very dangerous mess," said one resident during Monday's meeting. As part of his presentation, Mr. Marzocchi furnished board members with a January 22, 2004 memorandum from Howard McCulloch of the Roundabout Design Unit in DOT's Albany office. In summation, the memo says the "Unit feels that this intersection is a very good location for a roundabout." And, as Mr. Marzocchi was quick to point out, the memorandum goes on to say that "Regardless of the status on the business development at this site, we feel that the replacement of the existing intersection with a roundabout will provide a much safer and more efficient intersection." Town Supervisor Douglas McGivney and Deputy Supervisor Francis Vecellio asked Mr. Marzocchi whether DOT engineers had considered any alternative solutions. "The public is looking for a better explanation of why alternatives won't work," said Mr. Vecellio. "There are other options, like two simple intersections. What we've gotten from DOT is 'because we said so'." Mr. McGivney said no less than four letters seeking further information from DOT engineers had gone unanswered. "Not once was a roundabout mentioned by the DOT for that intersection," said Mr. McGivney. "It came up after Widewaters asked for 3 curb cuts." Mr. McGivney said he would like to see whatever design standards have been adopted by the DOT, if any; and he asked Mr. Marzocchi if he could provide any assistance in getting the town a copy of them. Later in the meeting, Mr. Marzocchi's request under the state's Freedom of Information Law for all notes and memorandums from a meeting between town planning officials and officials from the DOT was denied by the Town Board as "too broad" in scope. He had been turned down previously by the Planning Board. Robert Freeman, executive director of the Committee on Open Government, said "statistical or factual information is public," but the "Open Meeting Law applies only if a quorum of a government body was present." The meeting from which Mr. Marzocchi sought to retrieve notes included only two members of the Planning Board, Edwin Simonsen and Gerry Minot-Scheuermann, along with planning and zoning attorney Marc Gerstman; engineers Jim Green and Shelly Johnston; and Howard McCulloch and Richard Schell of the Department of Transportation. Mr. Simonsen said didn't have a clue what Mr. Marzocchi expected to find in the notes. "I wonder what he thinks is there," said Mr. Simonsen. "The meeting was very cordial." Mr. Marzocchi said the board's resistance in itself made him suspect there was "something there to hide." Allen Schaefer of Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth , a group strongly opposing the development, characterized Mr. Marzocchi's appearance at the Town Board meeting as "rather unorthodox," saying "It looks like he's putting pressure on the Town Board to influence the Planning Board." Mr. Marzocchi ridiculed the suggestion. When asked following the meeting whether allowing the project to go forward was the Planning Board's call, Planning Board Chairman Edwin Simonsen said, "It sure is." "I don't think we've taken a position on the roundabout," said Mr. Simonsen. "We've yet to adequately discuss the whole issue of the roundabout. We will look in more detail as we look at the site plan." Complicating the issue, Mr. Simonsen said, is an application for a Dunkin' Donuts shop in the narrow point of land between Routes 9 and 9H on the south side of the intersection or the proposed roundabout. "It's going to introduce to that general area a greater number of turns and slower stopping activity," said Mr. Simonsen. "We've been fortunate to have a business there that has a very low traffic volume." During his presentation, Mr. Marzocchi suggested a joint meeting between the Planning Board and the Town Board, but Mr. Simonsen questioned the value of such a meeting. "Is it them you want to get together, or do you want to present it to the public?" said Mr. Simonsen. Both Mr. Marzocchi and former Town Board member Ken Wengler reminded the board that the location is zoned for business use. "It's this board that zoned the property B1 and extended the B1 zone," said Mr. Marzocchi. "You're the policy makers." Mr. Wengler, who has criticized the board in the past for what he sees as an anti-commercial bias, said "It's commercial, and he has a right to develop it." Pointing out that Stewart's Shops had paid $500,000 for a two-acre lot a few hundred yards down the road and that the 19 acres on which Widewaters proposes to build had a price tag of $900,000, Mr. Simonsen said "It certainly appears that there is a financial incentive in wanting to place [the Widewaters development] at that location." Mr. Simonsen said the Planning Board now has "the 'draft' Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Widewaters consultants. "What we are going to have to do," he said, "is to work through the document and modify where appropriate so we can stand behind it." He said he expected to schedule a public hearing on the site plan "at the beginning of March." |
| ©The Independent 2004 |
|
January 16, 2004 - The Independent Widewaters ready to fight long and hard
| ||||||||
|
| KINDERHOOK--Instead of cutting a ribbon, Mayor Alan Cohen sawed
a ceremonial piece of lumber last Halloween at the Ithaca Home Depot's
grand opening. Tompkins County residents flocked into the orange and concrete colored store on Elmira Road in search of good deals on 40,000 tools and materials. The store manager told the Ithaca Journal this Home Depot, built by the Widewaters Group real estate development company of DeWitt, is "going to be the best yet." But to many in Ithaca, the opening of the big-box retailer represents a major defeat. Citizens' groups fought development plans for the site since the early 1990s, when Wal-Mart wanted to build, and they battled the Widewaters Group for another four years over environmental and scenic protection issues. The same thing could happen here in Kinderhook, where Widewaters seeks approval for a supermarket, restaurant, and shops on a 19- acre property across from Four Brothers. The developer, which recently submitted its Environmental Impact Statement for official review, has been coming to Planning Board meetings since late 2001. And so have opponents of the proposed $10 million shopping plaza, who believe the plaza threatens traffic safety, ground water, and Kinderhook's quality of life. Those concerns were part of the contentious Widewaters debate in the Finger Lakes region. "The whole city of Ithaca was blindsided by this [development]," says John Milich, a city resident and former Ithaca Times reporter and freelance writer. He covered the Home Depot project during its four-year approval process, which included five lawsuits filed by residents against the city and the developer . "It seems that Widewaters really loves to do their developments in ecologically and environmentally sensitive areas," says Mr. Milich. "They're cheap and sometimes they're the last areas left in a city." He says the Ithaca site is on a flood plain, not to mention its visibility from hiking trails maintained by the state Office of Parks. The former city-owned park property is next to the entrance to Buttermilk Falls State Park, "the last open space in the city of Ithaca," says Mr. Milich. It was originally purchased by Widewaters for the construction of a shopping plaza anchored by a Target, but that store decided to locate at a mall out of town because Widewaters was behind schedule. "They were spooked by the controversy and pulled out," says Mr. Milich, who is now retired. "Now we have Home Depot, who are particularly militant. They're a good fit for Widewaters--equally unscrupulous." Widewaters representative Marco Marzocchi, who meets regularly with the Kinderhook Planning Board, did not return a reporter's calls for comment. City of Ithaca Planning Director H. Mathys Van Cort also failed to respond to this newspaper. Mr. Milich points to several problems with the approval of the Home Depot plaza. The developer had to win City of Ithaca approval for the plan three times due to planning errors on the city's part and site plan changes made by the applicant. During the process, plaza opponents charge, the Ithaca building commissioner was brought up on false charges and fired because he denied Widewaters an early permit. And the state Office of Parks had initially said the plaza should not be approved because it would ruin views from Buttermilk Falls State Park day and night. A parks official also told the city the development in the flood plain would prevent parks staff from interpreting the region's natural history. "They said the shopping center was totally inappropriate and would spoil the park," says Mr. Milich. "Six months later they get this group together in Albany for a compromise." State Senator James Seward met with Mayor Cohen and Office of Parks officials in February of 2000 after the mayor contacted the Office of Parks with his concerns about how the department would respond to the Target plan. Mayor Cohen supported big-box retail construction on Elmira Road because of the potential for new sales tax revenue, according to the Ithaca Journal. Mr. Milich, who obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Law, says Sen. Seward's office facilitated a conference between parks officials, lobbyist and former state Senator Tarky Lombardi, and Widewaters Executive Vice President Joseph R. Scuderi. Four days after that meeting, Sen. Seward received a campaign contribution from Mr. Scuderi. It was only $200, says Mr. Milich, but it infuriated people in Ithaca. The Parks Office approved the development. Mr. Milich says the compromise involved Widewaters agreeing to mute the colors on the plaza's buildings and put in plantings to screen it from the park. "Now Home Depot is in bright orange--nothing is muted," says Mr. Milich. But before that building went up, Widewaters faced lawsuits from Ithaca citizens. One of the suits involved the runoff Widewaters planned to divert to city-owned park land next to the shopping center, which center opponents argued was illegal based on a similar case elsewhere in the state. Lawsuits were dismissed, according to the Ithaca Journal, and Widewaters reached cash settlements with some of the plaintiffs after they tried to appeal. The city was also sued by the developer during the review of the project because it did not want to pay for $1.1 million the city sought for road upgrades. "Ithaca is probably, per capita, the most activist community in this nation," says Mr. Milich. "So for a development like Widewaters, coming into Ithaca is like coming into the Carrier Dome and knocking off the Syracuse Orangemen on their home court." Now, he says, Ithaca taxpayers are left with the bill for the infrastructure improvements needed to handle increased traffic near the Home Depot. |
To see more articles about KNGG vs Widewaters Mall - Go to WIDEWATERS COMMONS and CLICK ON "Articles 2002" and "Articles 2003"
TO SEE KNGG NEWS RELEASES - CLICK ON - "NEWS RELEASES"
* * *
