Scarsdale swimmers did a double take on Friday morning July 29 when they found a lifeguard chair on top of the pool house. No one knows who got into the pool complex the previous night -- or how they managed to hoist the guard chair from the baby pool onto the roof. The Scarsdale Police were called to investigate.

Until pool personnel could figure out how to take the chair down later Friday morning, flying friends had a bird’s eye view of all four pools from atop the roof.

If anyone has a theory about who did it or how, please share in the comments section below.

Last week a majority of the members of the Scarsdale Committee on Historic Preservation (CHP) failed to find that a house at 140 Saxon Woods Road had historical significance. Neighbor Toril Hanna along with Scarsdale Middle School Librarian Elizabeth Waltzman and descendents of runaway slave Robert Purdy contended that the home should be spared as it was part of a community of ex-slaves in Scarsdale, dating back to the 1860’s. At a meeting on June 23, they presented CHP members with census documents, land deeds and maps to demonstrate the historic merit of the home that is among the last of the original structures on the 5-acre tract purchased by Purdy from George A. Willets.

Despite considerable evidence and testimony, and a vote of 3-2 vote in favor of deeming the home historically significant the house now stands to be demolished. Why? According to Village Attorney Wayne Esannason, the committee has seven members, five of whom attended the July 19th meeting. The meeting requires a quorum of four to vote. Since a quorum of five members attended and the applicant has a right to a decision within 30 days, the committee met, deliberated and voted. In order to deem the house historically significant, four favorable votes, or a majority of the seven possible votes were required, and since only three voted in favor of preservation, the home will go down. Esannason said that all committee members should do their best to attend all meetings so that each decision is given consideration by the complete seven member panel.

In this case, the applicant is the Parma Construction Company who bought the .19 acre lot for $320,000 and has applied to demolish the home to build a new house. Parma could have asked the Committee to hold over the decision until a later meeting when more members could be present. However, the representative from Parma wished to move forward so the committee voted.

Contacted in Norway, Toril Hanna expressed her disappointment and the following letter to Scarsdale10583.com. She had hoped that the committee would vote in favor of preservation, moving the fate of the house to the Board of Architectural Review. Now that it appears that the home will be torn down, Hanna will need to consider the impact that the new home will have on her property. The Board of Architectural Review is scheduled to meet in early August to review plans for the new house at 140 Saxon Woods Road.

Here are Hanna’s comments on the Committee’s voting procedure and decision:

It has been confirmed to me that "an affirmative vote of the majority of the constituted board is required for the property to be upheld as historic. The CHP consist of seven voting members. Therefore, at least four (4) votes are required for the property to be declared historic under chapter 182 of the Village Code." With all due respect I acknowledge the veracity of the laws that rule the Committee for Historic Preservation (CHP).

However I find it hard to believe and understand how a favorable majority vote of 3 to 2 which clearly acknowledged the 140 Saxon Woods Rd as having historic significance, did not constitute a majority due to a technicality. There are 7 CHP voting members, a quorum is a majority which is 4, and 5 were present. How does a 3 to 2 vote in favor to pass the motion put forward not constitute a democratic majority? If that is not the case it seems the by-laws should at least be reconsidered with a view towards representing a more democratic process, and in particular when considering the significant history which has been put into evidence.

It seems irresponsible to reject the historically significant findings without having fully considered any outstanding questions as well as how to deal with the facts and the possible preservation of the home. Once the home is torn down, it is gone forever. I think that in retrospect society will regret not having fully pursued options for the home's preservation.

I also wonder about the legal voting procedure of the CHP. What do the missing voting members have to say? I believe that the case should have had a hearing at the Board of Architectural Review, who, according to the Scarsdale Village Code, have far greater capacity and scope to deal with determining a viable decision regarding an historically significant structure.

Best regards,
Toril U. Hanna

For the fifth time, Westchester County’s plan to comply with the 2009 Affordable Housing Settlement has been disapproved by HUD. This time in addition to rejecting the plan, HUD has added new demands to the original agreement.

In a letter dated May 13, HUD lays out their reasons for the disapproval and makes far-reaching demands for corrective actions to bring Westchester into compliance. In response, County Executive Rob Astorino called HUD’s actions “unprecedented bureaucratic overreaching” and said that the demands were an “unwarranted trampling of local zoning rights.”

Astorino has scheduled a meeting with Shaun Donovan, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in Washington to review the letter and to ask HUD to retract the demands that are “economically and legally” impossible to meet.

Some of the requirements in contention are as follows:

Zoning: the May 13 letter calls for County to overcome exclusionary zoning practices and challenge local zoning ordinances. Furthermore HUD is asking for an outline of steps the county will take if a municipality fails to remove a prohibitive ordinance including “funding suspension, termination and litigation.”

However, according to former Mayor Carolyn Stevens who has studied the issue, economics, not restrictive zoning has been the problem in providing affordable housing. She said, “The impediment to building affordable housing in Westchester has never been zoning, but rather one of economics. Without substantial subsidies, the land cost and the taxes in Westchester make it economically unfeasible to build traditional affordable housing.”

Source of Income Legislation: The HUD letter demands that Westchester ban “source of income” discrimination in housing. This refers to a practice where if the source of a prospective tenant’s income is revenue other than a traditional pay check, landlords might deny a prospective tenant a lease. The Board of Legislators passed legislation prohibiting source of income discrimination, but Astorino vetoed it. HUD is now demanding that the legislation be reintroduced, promoted and passed. In the interim, HUD has stopped funding Community Development Block Grant projects which could potentially cause the loss of 18 jobs, and puts $6 million of funding at risk.

Increase of housing for families with children: Beyond legislative changes, the letter calls for the County to provide more housing for families with children. The original settlement called for 750 units and did not dictate the sizes or number of bedrooms. Now HUD is seeking to require the County to make 50% of those units three bedrooms or more! No additional funding is required and Astorino estimates that 375 units would cost $56 million. Since the total subsidy for 750 units is $51.6 million there would be no money left to build the remaining 375 units. Furthermore, the letter does not consider who will be eligible to rent these larger units. In fact, according to Carolyn Stevens, those who rent the larger units will need to have a “higher income level making these units less rather than more affordable.”

Astorino reported that the County is moving forward with affordable housing. To date, 164 units have been approved by the federal monitor which is ahead of the agreed upon timeline. In addition, an additional 102 units are pending approval.

It should be noted that the settlement agreement is the subject of litigation, under the jurisdiction of the United States District Court. If the County and HUD cannot reach an agreement the Court will have the last word.

Lindsay agrees with Stevens that the major obstacle to affordable housing in the County is financial.  Acquisition of land, construction costs, and the tax level are all prohibitive. At the July 21 meeting Lindsay said, “it was quite clear that the Board of Legislature has no appetite for allocating more money than called for in the Settlement Agreement for this purpose. “

So, where does this leave us? In Scarsdale, the Planning Board will continue discussions on the adoption of the model code ordinance at their July 27th meeting. Upon approval, the code will be considered by the Board of Trustees. And to deal with the County’s woes, Astorino will go to Washington to speak to Secretary Donovan with the goal of “getting affordable housing built in Westchester.”

Drunk driver: At 2:26 am on 7/8 Greenburgh Police responded to an accident on Rockledge Road in Hartsdale. They found a 2009 black Honda Accord with heavy damage to the front of the car. A man was leaning into the car to remove the keys and an airbag had been deployed. Police spoke to the man who identified himself as Jeffrey Strauss and admitted to being the driver. He said “I was going to fast around the bend to get the parking spot and just lost control.” Strauss appeared to be drunk and stumbled when he walked. He failed sobriety tests, was arrested and found to have a BAC of .16%.

Underage drinkers: Two 19 year-old Scarsdale boys were stopped in the parking lot of 763 South Central Avenue at 8:20 pm on 7/7. Both were found to be carrying Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage. They were charged with unlawful possession and released.

Fight: Police were called to Colony Drive in Hartsdale on the afternoon of July 5th to intervene in a dispute between 19 year-old Coty Everly and Priscilla Hamilton, age 20 of Hartsdale. The two were fighting about money when Hamilton scratched the trunk of Everly’s 2009 Honda Accord. Hamilton claims that Everly kicked and scratched her. Neither party wished to pursue charges.

Disputes: A Hartsdale man, who was missing a trailer since January, 2011, spotted the trailer in the driveway of his ex brother-in-law in White Plains on July 5th. He got in touch with the man who was unwilling to return the trailer. Police also saw the trailer and attempted to contact the brother-in-law about returning it but they were unable to reach him.

Thefts: The manager of Panera Bread had her cell phone stolen while she was at work on July 7th. She placed it in a secure place but when she returned her iPhone was gone.

A White Plains man had his bike stolen from the Hartsdale Train Station where he had locked it on the morning of July 7th. When he returned for the bike at 7:30 pm the $400 mountain bike was gone.

Christian Vidal, age 33 of Whitestone New York was caught shoplifting at Best Buy on Central Avenue on the evening of June 9th. Vidal came to the store with a media storage box that the store security office marked paid. He then returned the media box and put the “Paid” pink sticker on a set of speakers. When he attempted to leave the store without paying for the speakers, store security detained him and he was arrested.