Summit/Greenfield Attorney Urges Retail Voting, Warns of Litigation

At its recent meeting, the attorney for Chappaqua Crossing owner Summit/Greenfield urged the current town board to approve the retail proposal for the site and warned of the legal consequences of inaction.

Speaking before the town board, John Marwell compared the latest plan, which includes a 40,000-square-foot Whole Foods, to an opportunity that could be gone.

“It's there for you to take," he said.

Whole Foods received approval internally to proceed with lease negotiating, according to Marwell. The plan includes a total of 120,000 square feet of retail space, with 80,000 now proposed to be ancillary retail.

The current town board's tenure is winding down, with three members set to take over on Jan. 1. The members - incoming Supervisor Rob Greenstein and incoming council members Lisa Katz and Adam Brodsky - campaigned in opposition to the retail rezoning application. At the time, the proposal involved having a grocery store situated in the cupola building and the adjacent 100 building. The current layout, which is officially called a preliminary development concept plan (PDCP) and included  mention of Whole Foods, was submitted to the town about a week after the elections.

Marwell warned of legal consequences that could happen in the future. For example, if a retail plan is not approved, then litigation that was suspended could be reactivated, which was a term of a settlement reached between the town and developer last December. That deal was for a federal lawsuit and a state lawsuit filed by Summit/Greenfield in 2011 over how the town handled the review process of its requested rezoning for residential usage on the site.

Summit/Greenfield's bid for multi-family residential was reviewed in many forms for years, first at 348 units before being reduced to 278 and then again to 199. The town board, in April 2011, voted to rezoning but only allowed for 111 units. However, even that could be lost because it is due to expire in April, which Marwell noted.

Additionally, Marwell brought up the legal conflict between the town and Summit/Greenfield over tax certiorari proceedings it has filed since 2006, seeking a refunded amount. He noted the importance of what will happen to the site in relation to the dispute.

At the meeting, the town board voted to refer the new PDCP to the planning board and to Westchester County, denying a request that Marwell made at a work session the week before to avoid doing so. He felt that the differences between the PDCP versions did not necessitate referral.

The vote was 3-1, with outgoing Councilman John Buckley voting against it. Deputy Supervisor Elise Kessler Mottel recused herself due to a connection between her employer and an affiliate of Greenfield Partners, which is part of the Summit/Greenfield joint venture.

Before the board voted, members laid out how they disagreed with Marwell, particularly the three members who are vacating their seats at the end of December.

Outgoing Supervisor Susan Carpenter stated her support for commercial and retail usage at the site but did not feel that the PDCP had adequate review. She also suggested that Summit/Greenfield could work with the new town board and Whole Foods.

Outgoing Councilman Robin Stout, noted that the PDCP is different and felt there needs to be a “hard look” of the plan. 

Buckley stated his intention to vote against retail for the site. However, he would like to have the town revisit the housing aspect of the site. 

Although the new board was mentioned, none of the current board members explicitly ruled out voting on the proposal.

Greenstein, Katz and Brodsky were each present at the meeting. Speaking after its conclusion, Greenstein felt that litigation would not be in the interest of anyone. The incoming supervisor also noted that he would like to see Chappaqua Crossing included in the master plan updating process.