Construction is due to begin on the Bronx River Parkway in Scarsdale on a new bridge at Crane Road to replace the 1924 bridge that is now, according to Westchester County, in “poor condition.” The entire project will take almost three years, (34 months) and will start by on June 1, 2012.

In order to accommodate the construction equipment, Scarsdale granted Westchester County an easement to use approximately 17 parking spaces, or half of the Merchant’s Lot next to the Scarsdale Train Station for the entire length of the project. The County paid the Vilage $267,000 for the use of the space.

Approximately 10 months from now, in March 2013, the north and southbound Crane Road exits from the Bronx River Parkway to Scarsdale Village will close for two years. In order to get to the Village from the Parkway, drivers will need to exit at Harney Road and drive up Scarsdale Avenue.

This means that for the next three years, it will be even more difficult to access Scarsdale Village and park once you get there. Merchants who parked in that lot will need to enter into a lottery for the remaining available spaces. Those who are not given a space there can apply for a spot on Scarsdale Avenue or in the Freightway Garage on the Village website .

It is puzzling why the Village would allow the County to take over half of one of the much-needed parking lots in the Village at a time when the bridge work will make it difficult to get to the Village. Though the Village needed the funds they were paid for the easement, the benefit does not go directly to the retailers who will bear the brunt of the inconvenience. Shoppers and merchants, who are already suffering from the lengthy construction project on the Popham Road Bridge, will now have to withstand three more years of disruption.

Perhaps a hundred concerned Edgewood residents showed up at Village Hall on Tuesday night May 15 to make a plea to save a beloved and historic home from demolition. Ironically, 9 Hamilton Road, the 1921 Mediterranean that sits on a third of an acre had been listed as worthy of preservation in a recent Historic Resources Survey commissioned by Scarsdale Village. Architects Li-Saltzman described the home as follows: “Although relatively small in scale, 9 Hamilton Road is a picturesque and whimsical example of Mediterranean-inspired residential design with its stuccoed façade, Spanish-tile roof, and arched loggia. The massing is especially well conceived as different masses, each clad in Spanish tile, build up to a hip-roof tower-like level.”

However, the same week the architects made their presentation at Village Hall, 9 Hamilton Road appeared on the agenda for the CHP when developers sought permission to raze it.

The Committee held over the decision on the home from the April 17 to the May 15 meeting to allow concerned residents to do some research and determine whether the home met any of the criteria for preservation.

Residents did some digging and unearthed information about the home’s original owners that ultimately saved the day. The home was originally owned by Ida Ruggiero. She immigrated here from Switzerland in 1906 and married Mr. Ruggiero in 1910. He was Scarsdale’s first policeman and was gravely injured on the job in 1918. When he retired in 1920 and he his wife bought the land and built the house in 1921. Once retired from the police force, Ruggiero opened an auto shop on Post Road where he repaired, sold and leased cars with chauffeurs.

Tom Giordano from Montgomery Road added that the house had “special character” and “aesthetic value” and urged the Committee to prevent the demolition of the home which was one of only four in Edgewood on the preservationist’s survey.

Bill Giddins of 14 Hamilton Road said that the home is “a beacon of joy to all who live here,” and said that “its’ demolition would damage the interest of neighboring landowners.” He noted that the sale price, listed at $999,087, was well below market rates.

John Hagerty, a 26-year resident of Rodney Road drew applause when he called 9 Hamilton Road “a gateway home for our community” saying, “it would be a crime to tear it down.”

Another Hamilton Road man urged the committee not to move forward with allowing the home to be demolished before the Village Board could formulate a new policy on preserving homes listed in the Historic Resources Survey.

Kristen Lewis of 24 Barry Road called the home a beautiful example of Mediterranean revivals with elements of eclectic style. Saying, “Scarsdale is known for homes built in the 1920’s,” she added, “it doesn’t make sense to tear down a good example of why we all moved here. There are many opportunities to move into a new house. This is a rare house getting more rare every year.” She urged the committee to “think about what we value.”

Committee Chair Robert Scheibe reviewed the criteria the committee considers to preserve the house:

• Is it of substantial historical importance?
• Is it more than 100 years old?
• Did a person of historic importance live there?
• Did it represent the work of a well know architect or designer?
• Is it an example of a significant style?
• Is it listed on the national, state or county register for preservation?

He noted that yes, a person of importance had lived there and it was perhaps an example of a significant style. He told the group that 4 out of the 7 committee members would need to vote yes to save the house.

A discussion ensued among the committee about whether or not the home had been renovated or modified. Jill Serling, a Committee Member said they she did not buy the argument that since it was one of only four homes in Edgewood it should be saved, saying, “I can’t buy into the Edgewood vs. the rest of Scarsdale argument.”

Ultimately Chair Scheibe asked for a motion to vote. Three hands went up to make the motion and there was a moment of silence and suspense before he called for the vote. Scheibe then asked for a show of hands to vote for the motion. Five hands went up in favor of preventing demolition and immediately there were loud cheers from the audience.

It was a historic moment for the committee, which in recent years has failed to save homes at 1 Duck Pond Road, the Marx Estate and more recently at 3 Sherbrooke Road. The newly formed Committee for Historic Preservation appears to be more sympathetic to appeals to save Scarsdale’s oldest homes. Perhaps this will send a signal to the Village Board when they consider how to adapt the Village Code in response to the Historic Resources Survey.

The Scarsdale 2012-13 school budget passed handily with little opposition from the community on Tuesday May 15. 725 votes were cast, 573 in favor and 152 opposed, for a total approval rate of 79%. Voter turnout was lower than last year when 877 votes were cast and the budget passed by 70%. The count was comparable to 2009 when 722 votes were cast and the budget was approved by 76%.

The approved 2012-13 school budget is $141,790,579 which is a 2.42% increase over last year. The tax levy will go up by 2.89% and complies with the state mandated 2% cap as certain items, including capital improvements, are exempt. For Scarsdale residents, the tax rate will go up 3.39% and for those in Mamaroneck the increase will be 2.22%. For more details, click here.

When budgeting began in the fall of 2011, the Board and Administration wrestled with the tax cap legislation and there was much debate about whether or not to override the 2% cap. If the Board had opted to exceed the cap, the new state law dictated that the budget would need to pass by a 60% vote. However, in the end savings from the 2011-12 budget, projected enrollment reductions for next year and the use of reserve funds allowed the Board to present a budget that fell below the cap. To pass, it only required a simple majority. But the vote today, with 79% in favor far exceeded the simple majority.

Unlike previous years the community was relatively quiet during the budget process. From the start, no programs were in peril, class sizes were slated to remain the same and there

Linda Purvis and Mike McGill

After parents of high school students raised concerns about class sizes in some sections, the Board designated two additional teaching positions for the school, to be assigned once students select classes for next year.

There was some back and forth about the decision to apply $6.3 million from the undesignated fund balance to the 2012-13 budget as some believed that this move could reduce the Board’s flexibility in the future. Members of the Coalition for Scarsdale Schools feared that the use of these funds would make it more difficult to comply with the tax cap next year and could force the Board to make tough decisions down the road when these surplus funds were no longer available. However the Board decided to take a first step toward reducing reliance on fund balances to fund subsequent year's budgets.

School Board Members Lew Leone, Jr. and

Mary Beth Gose

Commenting on the vote, Superintendent of Schools Michael McGill said, “The Board proposed a responsible budget that allows the community to move forward. I am gratified that they supported it, as they always do.”

In Edgemont, the $50,149,261 2012-2013 school budget passed by 83% of the vote. A total of 607 votes were cast with 505 in favor and 102 votes against . The .58% increase over the 2011-12 school budget is the lowest increase in Edgemont’s history. Due to decreases in the tax base of almost $1 million, taxes will go up by 3.35%.

In order to keep increases to a minimum and comply with the cap, the district did make some curriculum changes and cut staff. Edgemont High School lost 5.5 teaching positions and

District Clerk Lois Rehm

School Board candidate Jennifer Darger received 494 votes and Brian Yarrington, 491. Both are newcomers to the Edgemont School Board.

(Pictured at top: Board President Jill Spieler with Superintendent McGill)

I usually agree with what I read in the New York Times, but two recent editorials on the affordable housing settlement left me wondering if the authors know their turf. One was an editorial called “ The Battle for Westchester,” that appeared in the Sunday N.Y. Times on May 13, 2012 and the other was a column by Peter Applebome on April 3, 2012 . Both pieces discussed the August 2008 affordable housing settlement where Westchester County was ordered to spend $51.6 million to build 750 affordable housing units by 2015. The ruling is punishment for misdeeds during the Spano years when his administration received funds from HUD for affordable units that were never built.

Current Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino inherited the consequences of the suit, as well as a mandate from taxpayers to cut county taxes, which are the among the highest in the country. The state exacerbated the county’s money troubles by enacting the 2 percent tax cap that prevents municipalities and counties from raising taxes above 2 percent, while at the same time, billing them for state-mandated programs whose costs grow beyond 2% per year.

Given the economic straits Westchester towns and villages now face and what I know about Scarsdale, where I have lived for 22 years, I thought the Times assertions were off base and ill informed.

Westchester County is ahead of schedule on the construction of affordable units with 206 approved and 196 financed. But that’s not good enough for the NY Times who charges that the units in Chappaqua will be built in a “no-man’s land between railroad tracks, a highway and a bridge,” and in Rye, near “largely minority Portchester.” In Larchmont, they complain that 46 units will be built behind a strip mall, squeezed against railroad tracks and Interstate 95.” What the articles do not mention is that residents of these units will enjoy town and county services and recreational facilities and their children will be “integrated” into fine public schools, all at a very reasonable cost. Since the settlement requires that the units be accessible to public transportation, it is odd that the Times objects to their proximity to the train station.

As a Westchester resident, it’s no wonder to me why the units have been placed in these locations. In Scarsdale we are built out and there is virtually no open space for construction. In order to build a new unit, an existing unit would need to be demolished. Furthermore, when property does become available, it is priced at a premium. First-rate schools and an easy commute to Manhattan make living here highly desirable. It is difficult to imagine how it would be economically feasible to build apartments or homes for $68,000 each when the average home sale price in Scarsdale in 2011 was $1,529,000. Furthermore, the settlement stipulates that for a family of four, the rent plus utilities cannot exceed 60% of the AMI of $63,900 in 2011. This translates to rents just below $1,600 per month.

According to the Times, it’s not good enough that Chappaqua, Rye and Larchmont have found ways to finance, build and incorporate these very affordable units into the community. The Times wants them located among “the Tudors and the glades,” in single-family neighborhoods on prime plots of land.

In November 2011 in an effort to comply with the settlement, Scarsdale adopted the model code recommended by the monitor. The new code requires the inclusion of an affordable unit in developments of 5-9 units and 10-14 units and the inclusion of 2 affordable units in developments of 15-24 units. And even before the code was adopted, the Village Board required the developer of a property at 2-4 Weaver Street in Scarsdale to include an affordable unit. However, one unit will do little toward appeasing HUD.

Even more startling was the NY Times claim of racial discrimination. The editorial states that the case is about “doing something to end deeply embedded segregation patterns and “affirmatively furthering fair housing,” The editorial calls for the county to take “communities to court to stop them from blocking integration through restrictive zoning” and “rental discrimination.”

In my 22 years in Scarsdale I have seen no evidence of racial discrimination. The Scarsdale schools are attended by children of every skin color and nationality. Asians, Indians, African Americans and Hispanics are fully integrated into the community ---in fact, this diversity is a given that is rarely discussed. Foreign cultures and traditions are celebrated in the schools with international fairs and special events. On the tennis courts I find people keeping score in many languages and the Scarsdale Golf Club, once an exclusionary country club welcomes members of every race and background and is a model of diversity.

If this perceived “racial discrimination” is really a stepchild of economic discrimination, then there needs to be a feasible way to pay market rates for affordable housing. The community is already stretched to the limit to finance schools and services and there are no extra funds available to subsidize affordable housing. To me, this suit seems to be more about economics than race. To charge Westchester towns with racism because housing prices are steep, seems off the mark to me.