| Reader's Comments |
 |
What an article! I can't thank you enough for doing such an in-depth job. I honestly don't beleive you left a thing out! Thank you for being such an advocate for White Plains. We need more people like you. -- Dina Giordano, City Center Dancers,
|
|
| White Plains Week |
 |
 CLICK HERE TO WATCH NOW!
John Bailey
Jim Benerofe
welcome
Peter Katz
to the
WHITE PLAINS WEEK
NEWS TEAM
Fridays at 7:30
Mondays at 7
on
WPPA-TV
Channel 76
NEW!
See Current Edition of
White Plains Week
on the Internet at
www.whiteplainsweek.com
|
|
| User Info |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gedney Association to “Digest” Hospital Decision.
Posted on Tuesday, August 06 @ 12:57:44 EDT by jfbailey
|
|
|
WPCNR Afternoon Tribune. By John F. Bailey. August 6, 2002: The President of the Gedney Association, Guy D’Antona , commenting on last night’s Common Council approval of the New York Presbyterian Hospital biomedical research/proton accelerator project, said “We’re disappointed in the vote, and we’re going to digest its contents and see what’s going to happen.”
D’Antona, a lawyer by profession, said that he personally had never been involved in an Article 78 legal proceeding. Asked what monetary resources would be required for a legal challenge to reverse the council decision, D’Antona said he expected it would “cost a substantial amount of money.”
He said his association will meet to discuss the decision aftermath, its impact and possible future action on the part of his neighborhood. He did not say an Article 78 was ruled out, but did not say it was certain, either.
Mr. D’Antona is President of the Gedney Association, the neighborhood south of Bryant Avenue, closest to the New York Presbyterian Hospital Property. Residents of that neighborhood have been the most vocal and active in opposing the hospital project, under review by the Common Council the last 18 months since January of 2001, when the city agreed to settle the Article 78 lawsuit the hospital had filed against the city and review their “Plan B” project under threat of $500 million damage suits from the hospital were to lose the proton accelerator franchise opportunity for their campus.
Speaking thoughtfully, D’Antona said the Association could not understand the Council decision. He said the Association disagreed because “the traffic would have been too much,” and because the environmental impact would aggravate a city already plagued by air pollution.
He also took issue with the Councilpersons’ conclusion about “ancillary use,” praising Thomas Whyatt’s comments made at the Monday Council meeting. “It is not ancillary,” he said, “It’s a primary use. It is industrial, and inappropriate (for this location)”
He said the Association had sent three or four letters to the Council expressing these reasons to deny the project.
|
| |
| Article Rating |
 |
Average Score: 0 Votes: 0
|
|
|