Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Ardsley Road sidewalks continued---# of accidents

Sgt. Maguire of the Greenburgh Police ran an accident report involving pedestrians and vehicles on Ardsley Road from 1988 to the present. There were five accidents in 19 years. Checking for injuries such as slip and fall is more difficult because of the way ambulance calls are entered. However, on 2/14/2007 there was a report of a broken leg.
I continue to believe that the current policy is not working -- and am very concerned everytime I observe a pedestrian walking up or down Ardsley Road to the Scarsdale train station --especially after a snow or ice storm.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

The problem here is that Feiner won't comply with the law which makes the cost of removing the ice and snow from sidewalks along county roads, like Ardsley Road, a town-wide charge.

Edgemont's civic associations have been telling Feiner for years that section 140(18) of the state Highway Law makes the maintenance of sidewalks along county roads, like Ardsley Road, the town's responsibility, authorizes the town to remove the ice and snow from such sidewalks, and further provides that the costs in doing so are to be a town-wide charge.

And every year Feiner refuses to comply because, even though the law requires it, he doesn't want town residents who live in the villages to pay any share of these costs.

Feiner's refusal to comply with the law -- and remedy a situation even he admits is incredibly dangerous -- puts Edgemont residents at risk of death or injury, and puts the entire town at risk should that ever occur.

Feiner needs to get his priorities straight.

If the state says these costs are to be a town-wide charge, then the town should comply with the law.

Feiner should therefore stop politicizing this issue, which creates needless animosity between town and village residents, and announce once and for all that he's in favor of removing the snow and ice -- even if it means the cost must be a town-wide charge.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 4:10 has a point, but the situation is even worse.

Not only is Feiner refusing to spend town-wide funds to remove the ice and snow from the Ardsley Road sidewalk, but the town last week began ticketing Edgemont residents along Fort Hill Road for now shoveling the ice and snow off the crumbled blacktop that the town now claims is a "pedestrian walkway."

The maximum fine for a first offense in not shoveling the snow and ice is $750.

And where does that money go? To the town-wide fund, of course.

In other words, taxpayers in Greenburgh's villages, the very people Feiner doesn't want to offend by making the cost of removing the snow and ice from Ardsley Road a town-wide charge, actually get a financial benefit every time an Edgemont resident gets a ticket for not shoveling!

Who thinks that's fair?

This is what happens when you have a town supervisor who thumbs his nose at the law when he thinks it is politically expedient to do so.

Anonymous said...

That cheap, crumbled blacktop is pretty embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

I don't like the idea of it being a town-wide charge, but hey, you have to follow the law. The law could (and should, in my opinion) be challenged, but in the meantime, end the drama and just obey the law.

Michael Kolesar said...

As Mr. Bernstein (?) has pointed out (Anonymous 3/6 4:10 PM), the cost should be a Town wide cost. As I have pointed out, this is much ado about little other than the real cost of more litigation.

If the Town followed the law, it would probably take about 1 man hour per snow event to clear all the required sidewalks, which on this road go all the way to the Village of Ardsley border. Ok, maybe 1 and 1/2 hours. Assume 13 snow events per typical yeat and one is looking at 20 man hours at say $50 per hour (fully loaded costs with benefits) and we are now up to $1,000. What's the big deal? As Mr. Bernstein has pointed out, the Town Council needs to take the action. The Town Supervisor is just one of five votes, yet no one has introduced the resolution, yet alone voted for it. Where is the "Gang of Four"? (And please don't label me a "supporter" of the Town Supervisor - my record in this regard was very public two years ago) Nevertheless, he (the Town Supervisor) is not alone in failing to protect all concerned parties. Gang of Four????

PS Why won't all of you identify yourselves?

Anonymous said...

The town council doesn't want to take up this cause. That's sad.

Anonymous said...

If I were on the town council, I wouldn't want to take up this "cause" either. It's a management issue, not a board issue. Perhaps the board just needs to issue a directive to the management: "Obey the law and stop creating drama. Otherwise we'll initiate termination proceedings."

Michael Kolesar said...

Dear Anonymous (3/7/07 7:01 AM),

I respectfully disagree that it is a "management" issue. The Town Council, like a Village Board of Trustees, acts to oversee policy and give direction. While the Town Board members (other than the Supervisor) have no direct operational responsibilities, they (A) control and set the various budgets, and (B) enact legislation or make other policy considerations.

My first hand experience says that a Board member gets action if one just makes an inquiry, forget gives a directive. In most Villages, they have a Village Manager or Administrator. That person is effectively the COO, overseeing the daily activities of the municipality. If I, as a Village Trustee asked about something, you can be sure I got some kind of answer. Case in point, after my election and even before I took office, I contacted the Village DPW about a missing street sign that a resident had complained to me about during the campaign. A new sign was up in less than 12 hours. I didn't direct the DPW to do anything. I just pointed out the situation.

The entire Town Council needs to step up and do the job or step aside. That includes obeying the law. If the law is unfair, work to change it. In this case there are two possibilities to work on. One, is to get the County to remove the designation of Ardsley Road as a County street. That just removes the "legal" issue about clearing the sidewalk, but doesn't addrss the individual safety issue, which the Town Council also needs to address. The other is to secure funding to clear the path as the Village of Ardsley receives for this explicit purpose.

It is a shame that the Town lacks broad leadership. Many, not just one, are part of this.

Beware of wolf in sheep's clothing said...

Kolesar's comments really can't be taken seriously.

He suggests that if Feiner won't comply with the law, and he won't, then it's up to town council members to do so.

That's fair enough.

But then Kolesar forgets that in this politically-charged climate -- a climate that Kolesar himself has contributed to -- any effort by the town council to do what state law requires by imposing a town-wide charge to cover the cost of a public safety measure for unincorporated areas will be attacked by Feiner and village officials as "anti-village."

Nevermind that, should there ever be a death or severe injury as a result of the town's failure to maintain the sidewalk, that the resulting liabilty would be a town-wide liability.

Kolesar says not to worry, that the town council should still get the town to comply with the law, and that he, a former village official, will back their efforts if they do.

Sure he will. But what about other village officials?

The former pro-village SCOBA chair who claims to speak for the villages, and is leading a one-man campaign against the town council, has said it's wrong to make this a town-wide charge and, like other state-mandated town-wide charges that Feiner refuses to impose, he's drawn a line in the sand on this one too.

Kolesar then suggests, perhaps in the spirit of compromise, that the town should work to change the law so that Ardsley Road is no longer a "county road." He seems to forget that, by keeping this a county road, the county reimburses the town for the cost of removing the ice and snow from the roadway itself.

Maybe that's not a problem for Kolesar. He'll gladly add that cost to the taxes already paid by unincorporated area taxpayers because it's no skin off his nose.

And what about the fines paid by Edgemont area taxpayers for not removing ice and snow from their sidewalks?

The silence is deafening. Kolesar evidently has no problem with the town continuing its practice of depositing that money in the town-wide fund so village residents can continue to benefit.

Anonymous said...

e. hartsdale ave. sidewalk to the trainstation in Hartsdale is faithfully cleared when in snows - who deoes this/pays for this?

Anonymous said...

East Hartsdale is cleared, under threat of fines, by the merchants and building owners.

Anonymous said...

East Hartsdale is cleared, under threat of fines, by the merchants and building owners.

Anonymous said...

With the library issue ,Feiner was outvoted. there's something wrong with this picture.What's happening to the dumb four?Do the only take part in certain problems?yes they are dummies taking our tax monies,or are we just as dumb as they are,in approving what they do.

Anonymous said...

HOW MANY HOMES ARE ALONG THIS PATH.? I THOUGHT HOME OWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES. I have never traveled this route,so will someone enlighten me as to what's going on.

Anonymous said...

Even though homeowners are responsible, not every homeowner has done what they should be doing. Some Ardsley Road residents might be away on vacation or on business trips when it snows. The town has issued violations. We're not interested in the fines that are imposed. There are real safety issues.