Mamaroneck REVIEW THE
April 8, 2016 | Vol. 4, Number 15 | www.mamaroneckreview.com
Close shave Hayden Cohen throws a strike during Mamaroneck’s 7-6 season-opening win over Eastchester. The Tigers are eager to defend their state title crown in 2016. For more, see page18. Photo/Mike Smith
County Playland review deadline extended to late April By JAMES PERO Staff Writer An agreement between Westchester County and the management company Standard Amusements to transfer management of Rye Playland will spill over into late April as the Board of Legislators works to whittle down the deal’s $58 million in county-funded capital projects. A newly proposed deal by members of the county Board of Legislators, according to board Chairman Michael Kaplowitz, a Yorktown Demo-
crat, would suggest a new price tag of $30 million in countyfunded infrastructure projects, cutting the former proposal by nearly half. As part of an amended agreement struck between Standard and Republican County Executive Rob Astorino’s administration, which was reached in late February, Standard is also planning to invest $30 million of its own money into making necessary improvements to the park. Ned McCormack, spokesperson for Astorino’s administration, said that the new pro-
posed dollar amount isn’t set in stone, but will be part of an ongoing conversation with the Board of Legislators and Standard. “The negotiations are between Standard and the board,” McCormack said. “If they come up with a number that’s less than $58 million then that’s between them.” According to Kaplowitz, the proposed $30 million in county-funded projects for the park represents a much more feasible split between the two partners. “We showed that a 30/30
[split] is the sweetest spot,” Kaplotwitz said in reference to both partners putting in $30 million. “It’s a significant investment but it reduces our financial cost quite a bit.” Kaplowitz added that through 2027, the deal with Standard will ensure that the county spends $4 million less than they would if there weren’t a deal agreed upon. Additionally, proposed legislation—which will be voted on by the Board of Legislators after press time—aims to extend PLAYLAND continued on page 9
Larchmont board denies second moratorium appeal By JAMES PERO Staff Writer Another appeal from a developer looking to skirt the rules of Larchmont’s moratorium on residential development hit a brick wall after the village board stood its ground on what is now a second blocked project. According to new Mayor Lorraine Walsh, a Democrat, the project in question—located on 15 Thompson Place—does not meet the standards required to bypass the village’s current moratorium on demolitions and subdivisions. The board’s unanimous rejection of the appeal marks the most recent denial after developers of a controversial project aimed at demolishing a historic home on 40 Ocean Ave. was also blocked by the village board. Currently, according to former Mayor Anne McAndrews, a Democrat, Cuddy & Feder, the law firm representing the project on 40 Ocean Ave., has already filed a formal notice of complaint. However, a similar suit against the village will not be forthcoming, according to Paul Noto, the attorney representing the owners of 15 Thompson Place. “We’re disappointed, but not shocked,” said Noto about the board’s decision to deny the appeal. Noto added that not only would a lawsuit against the vil-
lage fail to be “cost-effective” for his client, but the project in question will likely continue as soon as the moratorium has expired. Since January, proposed tear downs in Larchmont have been on hold until the village board— in tandem with its zoning and planning officials—retool site plan laws that they believe are endangering the village’s historic character. The building moratorium, which went into effect earlier this year, is not set to expire until July. According to Noto, however, the Thompson Place project aims to keep the lot as a singlefamily residence; parameters that the attorney feels won’t affect his client’s project once any new zoning laws are passed. “We can hit the ground running as soon as the moratorium is lifted,” he said. Conversely, the controversy over 40 Ocean Ave. stems from the developer’s desire to subdivide the property and construct multiple homes and village officials’ intention to halt that process. Fervor over the project proved to be the impetus for the Board of Trustees’ decision to enact a moratorium, after concerned residents flocked to public hearings to show their support for a temporary ban. According to Walsh, while the process of developing new zoning laws has been an arduous one on board members and
INSIDE Hampshire court cased dismissed. Story on page 14.
APPEAL continued on page 8