At Tuesday night’s Planning Board meeting, Manhattan resident Marc Klein was in attendance to hear the review of a proposed site plan application submitted by pharmacy giant Walgreens, who plans to build a store at 1205 Mamaroneck Ave., former site of The Sports Page Bar and Grille. The store would be built right next to Rosedale Pharmacy, an existing independent neighborhood pharmacy that’s been at that location for more than 50 years.

Planning Commissioner Sue Habel later described Walgreens’ presentation to the Planning Board as “a conceptual layout,” adding that their plans were general in content and will be detailed at the next working session. According to Klein, representatives for Walgreens told the Planning Board that their aim was to “wake up this part of White Plains” and, presumably referring to neighboring Rosedale Pharmacy, said, “Competition is good for business.” Walgreens proposes building a (relatively small for the chain) 7,000 square-foot building with a second floor for office space and 44 parking spaces. Further, they want to construct “a driving loop” that goes around the back of the building and put up a fence around the property’s perimeter. The store’s hours will be 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., seven days a week.

Owned by Klein since Feb. 28, Rosedale Pharmacy specializes in custom compounds such as sustain-release capsules, animal compounding medications, progesterone creams and diabetic care. In an interview with the White Plains Times, Klein says his clientele is not only comprised of longtime Rosedale residents, but includes customers from Mamaroneck, Scarsdale, Harrison—as well as mail-order customers from around the country. He takes pains to state that he “didn’t want to change the flavor” of the operation, which he purchased from its previous long-time owner, Alan Goldman. Klein, who’s been a pharmacist for more than 10 years, points out that he has even retained Goldman’s legacy Response computer software (circa 1985), in order to maintain a seamless transition for the pharmacy’s existing patrons. “We’re not what I call a ‘McDonald’s pharmacy,’” he says. “We’re keeping traditions alive.”

Klein’s concerns stem not only from Walgreens’ proposed move next door and how it will affect his business, but he also questions the ethics involved, saying he’d feel better about the plan if it were occurring on what he calls “a level playing field.”

Klein points out that out of the approximately 100 prescription plans available to clients, many choose AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) due to name recognition. Walgreens has a national contract as the prescription benefit manager to handle all claims for AARP. What this means, Klein says, is “they [Walgreens] know a lot about my business. They know the demographics of my customers.” He then produced a check he had received that same day from Walgreens Health Initiative for claims he had filed with the firm (Klein gets paid for every prescription Walgreens Health Initiative processes). “Every time I bill a claim, Walgreens processes it,” he says. Walgreens also gets a percentage of the claim. “They get a fee; no one really knows how this works. They’re making more money than I am even in my own store, because they’re processing the prescriptions.” By processing these prescriptions, Walgreens gains personal information about his clients, and is able to easily ascertain his level of business.

Klein mentions that Walgreens previously had “no medical presence” until Medicare Part D was introduced this year. (Since Jan. 1, 2006, everyone with Medicare, regardless of income, health status, or prescription drug usage has had access to prescription drug coverage.)

“This [proposed] location is not a typical Walgreens location,” Klein says. “Walgreens usually wants corner stores at major intersections,” he says, noting that the 1205 Mamaroneck Ave. location is neither of those things.

Rosedale Pharmacy employs three other pharmacists besides Klein, plus one other employee. Their Web site is www.rosedalepharmacy.com ; the phone number is (914) 948-4818.

Walgreen’s corporate communications representative, Carol Hively, had no information on this location at press time.

240 Rosedale Avenue
Tuesday night’s Planning Board meeting originally had nine proposed items on the docket, but only two were addressed before the event was temporarily adjourned at 10:15 p.m. (Many in the audience erroneously thought the event had ended for the night and departed.) The meeting started 45 minutes late due to an unscheduled private meeting outside Common Council Chambers in which the entire board stepped out with legal counsel to discuss the environmentally sensitive nature of the proposed site plan application for 40 Reynal Road, specifically as it pertained to preserving the wetlands on the property. Many residents were perturbed that when the meeting started, voices were barely audible.

When the proposed five-lot subdivision scheduled for 240 Rosedale Ave. (White Plains Times, Sept. 15, “Architect Fights to Protect Historic House” by Sharon Kennedy) was brought up, Dr. Steven Horowitz of 250 Rosedale Ave. along with his engineer and attorney and other neighbors, voiced concerns over the loss and replacement of surrounding trees, drainage issues, and the possibility of blasting.

When Horowitz’s engineer, Leonard Jackson, asked that the applicant make a screening plan available in order to accurately determine the proposed development’s visual impact to Horowitz’s property, Habel was surprised to hear that the developer had not yet staked out the property or the proposed dwellings to be built there. “Limited Disturbance needs to be done right away,” she said. “I thought this had been done already.”

Finally, local architect John McLean, who designed an addition to the house that currently sits on 240 Rosedale (originally designed by Edward Durell Stone), made an impassioned plea to the Planning Board to save the Rosedale House. He pointed out that “nobody is saying ‘no,’ but there has to be a way to preserve the house. We can’t re-capture it later.” He maintained five lots was “too much” for the site and asked, “Where do we want our city to go, and how fast do we want it to go?”

Gina Martini D’Onofrio of Saccardi and Schiff, a planning and development consulting firm representing the applicant, responded, “I think more lots could have been proposed [to the site]. That’s not what we’re doing.”

Acting chairman of the board John Garment adjourned the meeting until October 10 (a rescheduling from October 17).