first
  
last
 
 
start
stop

Monday, May 29th

Last updateThu, 25 May 2017 11am

You are here: Home Real Estate Building Department Under Fire at Scarsdale Village Hall
first
  
last
 
 
start
stop
first
  
last
 
 
start
stop

Building Department Under Fire at Scarsdale Village Hall

trustees2-23In response to a petition about the Scarsdale Building Department filed by Ruth Frankel and signed by over 200 residents, the Scarsdale Board of Trustees scheduled a meeting of the Municipal Services Committee to hear the public’s complaints. The meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, February 22, which rankled some who felt that the meeting should not have been called during a vacation week.

In fact, Frankel herself was out of town and asked her friend Phyllis Jay to read a note she had written to the committee in which she told the committee, “Most people are away … they will be back. I am receiving new signatures every day (to the petition) We are crying loud and clear – look at the Building Department record and open your eyes.” Trustee Stacey Brodsky assured the group that the meeting had been scheduled as quickly as possible to address resident’s concerns and that the timing was not intended to limit attendance.

Nunzio Pietrosante, who heads up both the Village’s Engineering and Building Departments revealed some statistics that demonstrate that the department is besieged by complaints. According to Mr. Pietrosante, last year the department received 750 complaints that resulted in 226 violation notices, 37 stop work orders and 9 court appearances. The staff includes six-seven NYS certified inspectors who investigate the complaints.

The residents who spoke at the meeting aired a myriad of complaints, some which were levied at the Building Department while others concerned the Village’s stormwater management code, zoning code and decisions made by the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Planning Board and the Board of Architectural Review. Since these Boards are manned by volunteer residents the Village is charged with enforcing not making these rulings.

Robert Falk spoke and charged that the Building Department has failed to enforce stormwater management requirement and does not adequately test new projects. In addition, Falk said that there are no checks on the suitability of private stormwater management systems and “no safeguards for the public, or downstream residents, once a system is installed.” He told Trustees that the department has “no accountability or transparency in regard to storm water management plans and will only discuss storm water issues with licensed professionals.”

Lena Crandall made some suggestions on how the Village could be more proactive about dealing with storm water issues for new building projects. She urged the Village to fast track the good projects, increase side yard setbacks to require more permeable surfaces, come up with a meaningful tree replacement formula so that builders replace large trees with equally sized trees and to post a map of wetlands in Village Hall so that residents who build in these areas are aware of the negative impact of their projects.

Harvey Jay of Cayuga Road complained that builders of four homes in his area had raised the grade of their properties by trucking in dirt and fill. According to Jay, he never had a water problem in his home until four years ago when these projects had an impact on his property. He cited the Building Department for failing to police development to safeguard neighboring homes.

Toril Hanna of 138 Saxon Woods Road spoke about a project going up on a 7,500 square foot lot at 140 Saxon Woods Road. She says she brought up prospective water issues before the project was approved and was ignored and received with disrespect. She claims that she now has ponding in her yard and that the drainage system that was approved for 140 Saxon Woods Road can’t be built due to rock underneath the house. Her husband contended that the builder raised the grade of the new house due to the rocky site, sending the water streaming into their yard.

Village Planner Elizabeth Marrinan explained that since 140 Saxon Woods Road is a non-conforming lot, the builder needed a variance to build outside the existing footprint and for setbacks for the larger home. The Board of Appeals granted both.

At this point in the meeting, Pietrosante attempted to answer every one of the Hanna’s issues but Mayor Flisser asked him to stick to a discussion of general issues rather than specific projects.

On the flip side, Elyse Tretter, a neighbor of Ruth Frankel’s spoke about the increased scrutiny her home construction project has received from the Building Department due to her very vocal neighbor. Referring to Frankel, she said, “Just because we’re doing something you don’t like, doesn’t mean we’re doing something wrong.” She encouraged the department to weigh her rights against the rights of her enraged neighbor.

In response to the residents, Trustee Richard Toder said, “the boards and departments try and get it right.“ He added, “We are pleased to have your comments and we will think about measures and procedure to make it better, but I promise it will not be perfect”

Pietrosante was still smarting from the petition and criticism and suggested that a hearing be held where residents could air their complaints and get a response from the department. Unable to contain his anger, he said that Frankel had libeled him and suggested that “he was taking money from contractors.”

The Trustees agreed to think about what they had heard and meet again to consider what measures could be taken to improve the situation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HLChristieSmallFeatured Listing: 12 Withington Road12WithingtonNew
Stunning sun-filled Tudor nestled in the heart of the prestigious Cotswolds offering the perfect blend of sophisticated style and old world charm. This pristine 6 bedroom,3.5 bath home features classic proportions and fine architectural details throughout,with many interior and exterior updates.Enjoy the comforts of home and perfect flow for entertaining. Magnificent landscaping enhances the level private yard and patio List Price: $1,399,000  Learn more here:

HLChristieSmallFeatured Listing: 5 Carstensen Road5carstensen_copy
Enchanting sun drenched Collet-built Tudor in Fox Meadow on .51 acres of gorgeous grounds with complete privacy. Five bedrooms. Three full baths and a powder room. Cook's kitchen with a large center island, desk, top appliances and a fabulous family dining area. Stunning leaded windows, fine details, gleaming oak floors. Beautifully maintained. A botanical garden in Scarsdale with specimen trees, abundant flowers and water features. List Price: $1,495,000 Learn more here :

 

 

Comments   

0 #4 Kingston Rd. 2012-02-25 23:31
Sour grapes. You lost your now go away.
Quote
0 #3 Toril U. Hanna, 138 Saxon Woods Rd 2012-02-24 06:38
Ref. Scarsdale Resident, February 24, 2012, comment: Thank you for your supportive comment. We are looking for specific cases involving developers' construction in Scarsdale which have adversely affected neighboring properties. Appreciate you contact me to establish communication regarding these important issues. Thank you with best regards!
Quote
0 #2 Toril U. Hanna, 138 Saxon Woods Rd. 2012-02-24 05:58
"I just want to clarify the following statement in the above article: "She says she brought up prospective water issues before the project was approved and was ignored and received with disrespect.". This concerns the Scarsdale Village Hall Building/Planni ng Department only.

I would like to shed some light on events leading up to granting of variances applied for by Parma Construction Corp., 140 Saxon Woods Rd:

Water issues were brought up at the first Board of Appeals meeting (04.13.11) and the Committee members did take them seriously and responded by requesting the developer to undertake and provide 1. hydrological survey as wells as 2. survey of the lot with regard to rocky terrain and 3. grade elevations of neighboring properties, and present these at the next meeting before variances were granted. These surveys, however, were dismissed and never done.

At the 05.11.11 Board of Appeals meeting the concerns regarding the 140 Saxon Woods Rd proposed construction were discussed at length. The Scarsdale Village Hall Building Inspector, Mr. Pietrosanti, advised the Committee members that the proposed construction's storm water management plan would take care of any water issues.

I believe the Building/Planni ng Department did not give sound advice to the Board of Appeals.

As per the 05.11.11 Resolution to case #13 (140 Saxon Woods Rd) of 2011 " ...the Board determined that such application, the construction or expansion of a single family house is a Type II Action....and no further environmental review is required pursuant to said regulations;... " (meaning the regulations of the Department of Environmental Conservation).

The variances were granted, but with a finding and condition, as stated in the 05.11.11 Resolution: " ...4. The requested variances will not have an adverse effect on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood as a storm water management system will be installed to provide for better drainage in the area." .

It was the Village Hall Building/Planni ng Department (and none of the Village Boards) that ignored and dismissed concerns that I (and other concerned neighbors) raised before the proposed construction was finally approved and granted the 12.07.11 Building Permit. In hindsight, the necessary terrain inspections should have been done, which might have prevented the situation in which the developer, Village Hall Building Department and we now find ourselves.

Thank you for your attention to this important fact and circumstance."
Quote
0 #1 a scarsdale resident 2012-02-24 04:11
I've had a very similar experience with the SBD as Ms Hanna and others. There is zero accountability or transparency and the staff is rude and non-responsive. Classic arrogance of an entrenched bureaucracy. The reason everyone assumes these guys are on the take (besides the stories) is because the entire process seems so skewed to accommodating and favoring the builders over the incumbent residents that one must naturally assume there's an "unholy alliance" greased by "considerations ". You need to apply for "Freedom of Information" act approval just to view plans even if you suspect changes. Changes and updates are negotiated and approved in closed door meetings without alerting neighbors. On site enforcement appears to be random, inconsistent or nonexistent. The prevailing protocol is to depend on the builders to POLICE THEMSELVES. You must be kidding! The standard response (clearly encouraged by Gatta) is to quote lots of regulatory BS that the Building Dept staff knows the average citizen is totally unable to refute or even understand. Instead current homeowners are required to hire lawyers and engineers if only to defend the status quo on their own properties. I had no water in my home for 12 years; in the last 4 months since new construction went up next door I’ve had to replace carpeting 3 TIMES because of water damage. I’m sure the Building Dept will call it coincidence or “unknowable – the vagaries of water flow”. The reality is that it’s almost certainly a result of the large project next door where regrading HAS CLEARLY taken place even though it’s theoretically not allowed by law. The BD could care less (it’s not their house that’s being damaged after all). These guys are either totally incompetent or on the take.
Quote

Add comment

first
  
last
 
 
start
stop