Chappaqua Crossing: Parts of 'Main Street' Concept Eyed for Inclusion

Officials who work on behalf of Chappaqua Crossing owner Summit/Greenfield confirmed that elements of an alternative concept for the site that was created by New Castle Planning Board member Tom Curley are being considered for inclusion in the pending retail and grocery store proposal.

The interest was confirmed after officials had a meeting with Curley on Thursday afternoon, which followed a planning board work session with three board members.

Curley has suggested that if the developer's plan is to move forward, there are other ways to do so. Instead of having the three envisioned uses on the site – they would use approved zones for office and residential and a proposed zone for retail – in self-contained areas, buildings would be lined up along a “main street” that would go west from the access drive that comes in from Route 117.

Ancillary retail and condos would line the sides of the main street. Another roadway that would run north-south from the main street would be used for Summit/Greenfield's proposed townhouses, with some units' doors facing the road. Other units would be situated in mews. This proposal, Curley explained, would involve something designed as a hamlet instead of as a shopping center.

“You make it like the town where you drive into town and you walk into town and you pass the houses and then the houses get bigger and sometimes there's, you know, multi-family housing and then you get right to the shops,” he said.

Curley's concept envisions elements such as a pocket parket, market space, sidewalks, lighting and benches. Making his case to officials in the work session – among those present was Felix Charney, who founded Summit Development, which is half of the Summit/Greenfield joint venture – Curley argued that such a scenario would add value to their investment and be a “better result for the town.”

“So, the intent them is to take these two, these buildings, put them on this side of the street [along the main access road from Route 117] in order to create a traditional main street, hamlet shopping environment,” Curley said about moving some of the retail.

Curley has been consistent about considering such a concept as an alternative, having brought it up in recent meetings for the review process.

Summit/Greenfield's proposal involves establishing a retail overlay zone onto part of an existing commercial office zone. The plan involves 120,000 of retail space, including allowing for a grocery store anchor tenant of 36,000 to 66,000. It also would make slight tweaks to a multi-family residential zone that can accommodate up to 111 condos and townhouses, which the town board approved in 2011. The residential zone, which was proposed by the developer to be larger, was the subject of federal and state lawsuits against the town over how the process was handled. The lawsuits were suspended by Summit/Greenfield in December as part of a settlement, with one of the terms being that they would be dropped if a retail and grocery plan gets requisite town approvals.

Andrew Tung, a planner who works for Summit/Greenfield, expressed some concerns at first about adopting the hamlet-style concept because of the site's specific nature. He described the access drive as a "feeder road" and having more direct access to the office space on the property's western side, coming from the Route 117 entrance. He noted that this was also an historic interest from former site owner Reader's Digest, which developed the property in 1939, sold it to Summit/Greenfield in 2004 and remained as a tenant until 2010. Tung also felt that people would need to slow down on the road under Curley's scenario.

Curley responded by saying he thinks that the main traffic for the site will be coming in from the south. He also felt that there was nothing wrong with slowing down on the main road, which Tung agreed with.

Tung, who also presented a history of the site that included a 1937 early version of the Reader's Digest campus similar to Curley's concept, also expressed concern about whether reviewing the plan could slow down the overall process. As one example, he noted the fact that a prospective grocery tenant is interested in the property.

Talk then shifted to how Curley's plan could fit within the current review. Currently, a draft supplement environmental impact statement (DSEIS) is open for written public comment, which will continue to be accepted until May 10, when Summit/Greenfield will get ready to give responses in the form of a final SEIS (FSEIS).

Curley did not feel that it would affect that rezoning law itself, but rather it would have more to do with changing the site plan.

Les Steinman, a land use attorney for the town, explained that it could involve having Summit/Greenfield submitting another draft version of the environmental document or adding it into the final version. Talk also focused on what would need to be looked at for the concept, given its zoning similarity to the developer's plan. Tung felt that for the residential part it would be site disturbance while for the retail part it would be shifting the space from one commercial area to another. Tung added that it's possible to stay with the proposed zoning but to make changes in relation to a preliminary development concept plan that is part of the proposal.

Town Planner Sabrina Charney Hull said that there might be ways look at both a time frame and to keep flexibility for making changes.

John Marwell, Summit/Greenfield's attorney, said they were "amendable" to do it.

After the work session was adjourned, Curley met with Charney, Tung, Marwell and other officials in a closed meeting, which is exempt from the state's open meetings law because there was no quorum of the board, to discuss the matter further. Another such meeting is planned for Friday, and the planning board is set to have two more meetings on the proposal: on May 7 at 7 p.m. and on May 8 at 3 p.m.