Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 06 June 2024

Created: 06 June 2024

Last Updated: 06 June 2024

Hits: 996

The Scarsdale Business Alliance (SBA) is thrilled to announce that the 2024 Summer Sidewalk Sale will take place Thursday, July 25th through Saturday, July 27th in Scarsdale Village, from 10am-6pm, rain or shine.

The SBA is now accepting applications for vendor participation. Click here to contact them. www.scarsdalebusinessalliance.com

In addition to our Village center brick and mortar store members, we welcome other SBA members to participate again this year, with designated spaces provided on Boniface Circle, which will be closed to vehicular traffic. Participation of home-based business members and members located outside of 10583 will be available by lottery.

Vendor participation and placement is on a first-come, first-serve basis. All participants must submit a Hold Harmless form and Certificate of Insurance.

For more information, visit www.scarsdalebusinessalliance.com or email info@scarsdalebusinessalliance.com.

We look forward to offering the community incredible shopping deals, delicious dining options, and fun activities, all while supporting our local retail merchants.

Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 13 June 2024

Created: 13 June 2024

Last Updated: 13 June 2024

Hits: 1124

Racing to have new land use code in place so that Scarsdale’s Building Moratorium can be lifted, the Village Trustees held a work session prior to the 6-11 Board of Trustees meeting where they reviewed suggested revisions to the proposed code with consultants BFJ. See the memo here:

The consultants were originally charged with making recommendations to:

-Reduce stormwater flooding
-Reduce the appearance of home bulk

They came back with a long list of small adjustments to current Village code and new requirements for Planning Board Review for projects where there would be land disturbance above specified thresholds. They also suggested new “open space” percentages to guarantee more permeable surfaces and recommended that the Village change the definition of gravel surfaces to impermeable for lot coverage calculations. That means that gravel driveways would now count in lot coverage calculations and would limit the size of other structures and paved areas on a site.

The current code offers bonuses in interior space for setting back homes beyond the required minimum. As of late, homes appear to be too large. The consultants recommended maintaining these bonuses for increased setbacks but reducing the square footage of those bonuses by zoning district.

At a prior meeting, a resident asked what the cumulative effect of changes in lot coverage, FAR, and bonuses would be. The consultants came back with this response. “We determined that the recommendations would result in an average decrease of 1.25% for FAR overall and an average decrease of 32% for the FAR side yard incentive. “

So it is yet to be seen if a 1% change in Floor Area Ratio and some decreases in bonus square footage make a noticeable impact.

Zoning District vs. Lot Size

Some of the discussion on Tuesday centered around regulations based on zoning district, vs. lot size. As all lots in a district are not uniform, some of the larger lots in one district exceed the size of those in the next, so trustees questioned whether or not it was fair to homeowners for example who might require Planning Board approval for a lot in A4, which is actually larger than a lot in A3 that would not require Planning Board review.

After much discussion, the Trustees opted to maintain these threshold numbers by zoning district.

Tree Canopy

Other changes were made due to resident comments. The provision for Planning Board review was amended to include consideration of impacts o the tree canopy. The new text says, “The location and characteristics of the different areas of vegetation, including the identification of all individual trees 6 or more inches in diameter at breast height (“DBH”), protected trees of any size, as well as stands of trees, wooded areas, and tree canopies within areas of proposed disturbance.”

Construction Management Plan

Another new provision is the addition of a construction management plan to the code. So when applicants file they will need to demonstrate how the building site and neighbors properties will be safeguarded during construction.

Impervious and Pervious

Now that gravel driveways will be considered as impervious, there was considerable discussion about the use of permeable pavers. Should they be considered pervious or impervious? Some have suggested that over time, the permeable pavers settle and the grout between them hardens into an impervious surface. Consultants recommended allowing permeable pavers to be considered as “pervious” surfaces though it was noted that they are far more expensive than gravel. And requiring their use might incentivize people to move homes closer to the street to avoid a long driveway.

Removed from the proposed code was a provision that would have allowed homes built in the flood plain to be 3 feet taller – so that they could be built above the water table. The Planning Board feared that this would encourage building in the flood plain so it was removed.

Non Conformities

There was considerable discussion about the new regulations causing existing properties to become non-conforming. For instance, if you have a one-story home that is currently set back 10 feet, and the new requirements are for a 12 foot setback, you would need a variance to build a second story on your existing house.

How big is this issue? Village Planner Kellan Cantrell said he reviewed 50 applications to the BAR and believed that only 3% of these applications would require variances under the new code.

Toward the end of the discussion Trustee Karen Brew expressed some skepticism about whether these changes would tackle the original issues that brought the Village to declare the building moratorium. She said, “There is general concern with the appearance of bulk in the A5 district (lots of .11 acres or less). She referred to the proposed regulations and said, “We are not changing a thing. The setbacks are not changed. The FAR is the same. The open space (requirement) will not make a difference. And we are still giving a FAR bonus (for additional setbacks beyond the minimums.)

The consultants responded saying, “Smaller lots are challenging. Middle size lots will be more impacted.” They added that the bonus square footage for the FAR incentive in the A5 zone would be reduced by 80 square feet.

Brew continued, “If you drive around A5 and you see what is being built, they are massive. It makes the whole neighborhood ugly. It is destroying the neighborhood. The whole idea was to decrease bulk and change stormwater management. And this is not going to help this.”

Mayor Arest asked the consultants to “look at other neighborhoods. And take another look at that.”

Penalties

Closing the work session, Mayor Arest asked the Village Attorney to look into drafting stricter penalties for those who take down homes without a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Committee for Historic Preservation. He asked, “Could they be required to rebuild the original home?:

Similarly could penalties be increased for those who clear cut properties without a permit. He wondered if the Village could require the offender to replant with similar sized trees.

Events

In other news from the Village Board, Mayor Arest reminded registered voters to vote in the primary on June 25, 2024 or to vote early, beginning Saturday June 15 at local locations. See the list of locations and voting times here.

Trustee Ken Mazer announced three events for Scarsdale seniors including a pizza party at the Scarsdale Pool on June 20 from 12-3, a Father’s Day celebration at the Girls Scout House and a Safety Expo at Scarsdale Library on Thursday June 27 at 11 am.

Trustee Gruenberg relayed that she had attended a ceremony at Wayside Cottage on Friday June 7 to commemorate slaves who resided there in the 1700’s. Witness stones were placed to remember Rose and her seven children who were slaves and residents of the cottage.

Resolutions

Trustees passed resolutions to furnish mobile radios for the Scarsdale Police Department, to purchase radio equipment for the Scarsdale Police for use in the MTA regional radio system and to purchase a Zetron Radio Console for the Police Department.

They agreed to an amendment of the CSEA Local contract to include Juneteenth. (June 19th) as a paid holiday.

They appointed Randi Culang to the Board of Architectural Review in place of current member Raul Mayta who will now serve as an alternate.

Tax Collections

Though Treasurer Ann Scaglione was not at the meeting, Mayor Arrest was pleased to report that the tax collection rate for County, School and Village taxes have all exceeded the five-year average and are all above 99%.

Village Tax Bills will be mailed out on July 1, 2024.

Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 29 May 2024

Created: 29 May 2024

Last Updated: 29 May 2024

Hits: 2918

Mayor Justin Arest said it all at the close of the public hearing on May 28 about proposed building code changes in Scarsdale when he said, “More than half think it doesn’t go far enough and another think it goes too far.”

He was referring to a long list of revisions to Scarsdale’s building code, recommended by Planning Consultants BFJ. The recommendations were first presented to the public at a meeting on Tuesday May 14.

On May 28 consultants presented their recommendations again, and the public had the opportunity to comment.

In brief, the consultants propose to use the following tools to reduce lot coverage, increase open space and improve stormwater absorption. Each alone would not have a great impact, but consultants say the combination of these factors together should have a meaningful result.

Here are the changes they are suggesting:

-Planning Board Review for site disturbances at defined thresholds by lot size, for building in flood hazard areas and on corner lots.

-Open space percentage requirements by zoning district.

-Slight increases in side yard setbacks for some zoning districts excluding the smallest and largest lots.

-The addition of side and rear yard setbacks for accessory buildings (like garages).

-New maximum floor area ratio (FAR) requirements as defined.

-Change in the definition of “impervious” surfaces to include gravel and asphalt, thereby reducing the amount of impervious space on a lot.

-Sky exposure plane for lots two acres or greater which would permit the maximum height to go from 32 to 36 feet provided that the front of the house is setback a minimum of 75 feet.

The consultants have received comments from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board and those changes will be incorporated into future drafts of the proposal.

This initial proposal addressed house bulk and lot coverage, leaving aside issues of tree removals and subdivisions. So for some it did not go far enough to protect Scarsdale’s tree canopy which has seen tremendous losses in recent years. Others feared the new requirements would prevent them from adding on to existing homes and they were not clear on how they would be impacted.

Here are excerpts from some who commented:

Jordan Copeland said, “Sky exposure plane is important. Why not include this provision for other houses as well. My wish is that you can’t build a house with more than 110% of the sky exposure plane of all the other houses on the street. Taller structures right up to the setback are a concern. Expand the sky exposure plane to all neighborhoods.

Paul Diamond, a builder, asked for a clarification of “the definition of disturbance so you don’t necessarily have to go to the Planning Board” for review. He also said the new setbacks would result in non-conforming lots.

Anne Hintermeister said, “This is the board’s answer to bulk and stormwater. I think it’s an insufficient answer to either of these. I think the Planning Board agrees. Fish says “he hopes it will have an impact.” These are modest changes to existing laws. They don’t address subdivisions and replacing 2 homes with one. I don’t think we should pass a law based on what you hope. What will be the changes to runoff – how would this impact situations like Chase and Church Lane? The tree canopy is a huge issue – it is a community asset that makes us special. I don’t think we should allow the diminution of the tree canopy. Preservation of the tree canopy should be mandated. Please read the Forum report.”

Deborah Russel said, “I am disappointed that there is no acknowledgement of the cost of flooding to residents that results in street closures and downed power lines. There is no acknowledgement that its taxpayers who are paying the costs. I don’t hear anyone connecting the dots. I don’t hear them saying that what they are proposing will reduce the problem. Why are we using Mamaroneck as an example? Look hard at the cost of these problems – and show how these proposals are designed for the benefit of Scarsdale’s taxpayers.”

A comparison of a building plan under the new and the old code.

Jim Detmer said, “On the surface these proposals make sense. But it is difficult to envision how these measures would impact stormwater runoff. A minimal decrease? Is there any way to model an overbuilt lot against what would have been there (under the old laws.) Why do we need building bonuses and far incentives? We must control bulk appearance. We will inadvertently create a townhouse effect with 32 foot houses only 10 feet apart. This is leaderships opportunity to do this – let’s be bold.”

Joan Weissman said, “The proposed amendments are a step in the right direction, but they must be strengthened to have any real impact. The open space requirement is a welcome addition, but a more comprehensive explanation as to how this proposal relates to setbacks and lot coverage is necessary. In any event, in order to truly increase green space, all setbacks and the open space requirement should be increased beyond what is recommended.

The inclusion of porous asphalt and gravel in the definition of impervious surface is long overdue. But, the use of permeable pavers as a substitute is not the answer. Permeable pavers over time lose all or most of their ability to allow water to soak through unless proper maintenance is conducted so that the voids in the joints do not become clogged. This issue is raised in the NYS DEC Stormwater Management Design Manual as well as by NYC and the US Dept of Energy and Environment. There is no feasible way for the village to assure that the requisite maintenance, which may be required several times a year, is carried out. The use of permeable pavers will have the same negative consequences that are experienced with the use of gravel and porous asphalt.

The proposed requirement that the issuance of a certificate of occupancy be based on the Village Building Inspector and Engineer’s review and approval of the As of Built Survey does not address the problem it seeks to solve. By the time construction is completed, it is too late to discover that plans have not been followed. It is imperative that village staff be mandated to review measurements and calculations contained in submitted plans prior to any permit approvals and to carry out inspections throughout the construction process to confirm that approved plans are being followed.

The legislative intent and purpose of the law establishing the moratorium states that among the adverse impacts of development in Scarsdale are the “negative environmental impacts such as the destruction of mature trees and natural habitats.” We all know the crucial role trees play in providing a healthy environment. The recommended code changes do nothing to preserve our village’s trees or natural habitats. The proposed amendment that simply requires certain site plans include a description of the location of different areas of vegetation and of certain trees provides no protection for any vegetation, including trees. I urge the Board to address Scarsdale’s ongoing canopy loss as well as the loss of our natural habitats by making the necessary changes throughout the village code.”

Madelaine Eppenstein discussed the “ongoing exploitation of the Village tree canopy.” She said, “Responsible development should protect the Village tree canopy and not help to destroy it. Trees mitigate stormwater runoff. The last time the tree code was updated was 2018-19 and there were many compromises made. I suggest we go back to this code and protect our environment.”

Linda Killian said, “Most of our community was developed in the early part of the century as a railroad suburb. Our neighborhoods were put together with a lot of thought to setbacks and style – no two were alike. People are objecting to the new cookie cutter houses, that are too large. Would these proposed changes prevent subdivisions like that? On 27 Woods Lane, would these new rules prevent two out of whack, out of context houses from being built there?

Cal Petrescu who is an architect and resident said, “Wider driveways would affect the open space provisions.” Referring to the decrease in the setback bonuses he said, “Without the bonus, developers may increase the width to increase curb appeal. Buyers count on these bonuses. Losing a small bedroom is drastic. Reducing setbacks makes lots non-conforming. Houses will be non-conforming and less likely to sell.”

Barry Abramson said, “These revisions are only a small first step and don’t address the issues of our stormwater infrastructure. I don’t see how this will address our flooding. Even if every new house is in compliance, they will still be larger than the old house it replaces. No one goes smaller in Scarsdale.”

Cathy Liu who is a stormwater engineer said, “The Village has changed the code about gravel several times. I hope in the future we don’t need consultants to tell us that gravel should be considered as impervious. I am also concerned with pervious pavers. They have to be maintained.”

Elaine Weir said, “I am concerned about flooding. The land use proposal does not address this. It does not increase our flood plain which is obsolete. We need a realistic flood map and then we need to increase it to account for climate change. We need to prohibit subdivisions in flood prone areas. It poses risks to the surrounding homes. This causes neighbors costly clean ups – especially when the new house is on landfill. Spacious neighborhoods keep property values up for everyone. We need to prepare Scarsdale for the future by not overbuilding. The current proposal needs to be stronger.”

Claudine Gecel who lives on Kent Road said that a house on her street is flooding. She said, “It’s next to a subdivision and the land for the next house was clear cut.” She said referred to homes built on Fox Meadow Road and Paddington Road using cultecs to store the water. And said “they did not hold the water and a month ago the road needed to be shut down due to flooding.”

Addressing Gecel, builder Eilon Amidor said, “We have a plan to resolve the flooding.” He said, “Every decision limiting development will hurt the Village. We have to make a referendum because it’s a big decision for a lot of people with a lot of money. I am sure the people would vote no. I build in Mamaroneck They need to resolve their flooding issues. I would not use any examples from Mamaroneck. We will have a catastrophic jam at the Planning Board. You’re making problems for designers. You’re making smaller houses. I did a three-lot subdivision – people told me it will look like Queens.”

Sean Danahey said, “Everyone is speaking about changes in our designs. There are unintended consequences. Not being able to expand the house could have serious economic consequences.”

Tom Shorter said, “A lot of homes are being torn down changing village character.” He asked the board to “Protect the ability of homeowners to make changes or else these homes will be ripe picking for the contractors. I don’t see the young residents here. They will find out in a year when they want to expand and find these changes can’t be done.”

Joe Zakierski said, “The proposal is long, difficult to digest and to understand. Many are unaware this is happening. Information is harder to come by. I am concerned that the trustees have the power to sign off on this without wider community input. It is imperative to get more people educated. I like the idea of a town wide vote. Perhaps we should have separate regulations for existing homes and new builds. To make these changes you need to be sure.”

Emilie Cordell asked the consultants to visit some of the properties that are of concern.
She discussed “extraordinary noise caused by rock blasting. Saying “There is no parameters around this.” She said, “Take a look at a street. I live in Edgewood – they are maxing out the lots.”

Mayor Arest replied to Cordell saying that a noise ordinance had recently passed that regulates noise from construction.

Michelle Sterling said, “Permeable pavers are a misnomer. They are impermeable but there are gaps between them. They have to be properly installed. The gaps need to be kept clear of silt and over time those gaps fill up. It takes extensive maintenance. Pavers retain and emit heat while grass cools. Permeable pavers are not permeable.”

Miriam Petrescu said, “Look at all the homes that will become non-conforming. You need to advise the residents.”

Jon Spivak called in and said, “I have barely skimmed this document. I don’t know if this is good or bad. We have to know what this means for us and our homes.”

In comments from the trustees, Dara Gruenberg replied to Joe Zakierski. She said, “I want to address the “lack of transparency.” She said, “We created Scarsdale Official. There is also personal responsibility You need to educate yourself and spend the time. Maybe we can make it more digestible. These are complicated issues that takes time to digest.”

Karen Brew said, “We need to make enough of a difference -and I question whether these go far enough.” She asked the Village Planner to take a look back at houses that have been built and how this would affect those plans.

Ken Mazer asked for an analysis of a random sampling of past BAR applications for home additions and what the new regulations do to these applications.

Jeremy Wise said, “It is complicated. My head is spinning. I would like to see a summary…. one document that is an official document of the board.”

A second work session is planned for June 11 with a vote on the new code on Tuesday June 25, 2024.

See the proposed code and the presentation here.