To the Editor:

Feb. 17, 2016:  For several decades, I have made the following suggestion as a solution for the "elephant in the room," which is 100 Pondfield Road, or the former Morgan Manhattan warehouse.

Over the years, several developers have brought forth unsuccessful proposals for "redeveloping" this property, and once again the planning board is spending hours listening to a developer who faces increasingly difficult problems when the threat of adding to the school population is added to the obvious traffic problems that developing this property imposes on Bronxville's commercial district.

It's well established that the problems created by development of 100 Pondfield Road for multifamily residential use are insurmountable. The auto and pedestrian traffic flow on Pondfield Road absolutely prohibits ingress/egress from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm, and, as noted above, this plus the potential impact on school enrollment are but two of the critical adverse effects of development for residential use. Additionally, there is a parking burden, as deliveries to the building take up space in the commercial district's loading zones. The commercial district in our village is fragile enough without adding to the current problems. All it takes is to walk around downtown during the day and to see delivery trucks of all kinds double-parked or waiting to be parked and the introduction of eleven new apartments without any additional parking for deliveries would only serve to foul up the traffic and make pedestrians more vulnerable to accidents.

The best solution available to the board of trustees is to condemn this property and to convert it to parking for the benefit of village residents and merchants. Taking this positive step is more than a reasonable solution to the problem, and I argue that in the long run it will be profitable for the village. It is a "win-win" solution.

My estimate based on long experience is very preliminary, but it lays the ground for further investigation for a very desirable outcome.

The first step would be to give notice to condemn the entire property (including the Pondfield Road entrance) and also access from the Cedar Street parking lot). The next step is to prepare a bond issue from a parking commission, not the village, of about $1.5 million dollars. This would require an annual cost of about $75,000 (5% per annum) or less. The $1.5 million would be used as follows: Up to $1,000,000 to pay for the fair value of the condemnation; and about $400,000 to demolish the building and replace it with parking and have $100,000 in reserve.

Part of the debt could be covered by selling the 15-foot-wide access from Pondfield Road for at least $100,000 to build a retail store on the site that would have a back door to the parking lot and parking for the liquor store and the bakery in the back.

This would leave about 70 spaces for parking. Using a rental income of $60.00 per month per space (approximately the price merchants now pay), this would yield about $50,000 per year plus additional income for any spaces not taken up by merchant parking. This would also be reason to raise the taxable assessments of adjoining owners. Incidentally, this total would be about the same amount the village would net from the proposed building plan. A parking analysis would establish the demand for this parking facility, which could also benefit apartment tenants in the downtown area.

If there is a deficit, it would not be large, and the village could pay this in the early years but with confidence that the future would make that up with increased parking charges and pay off the bonds or extend their term.

As I have said before, the above numbers are preliminary and came off the top of my head. They require more extensive and detailed analysis provided by qualified experts. It could be done when the planning board turns down the application and the trustees announce their intent to condemn this property. This would avoid what would be a disastrous redevelopment for the village, its residents, and its merchants.

I am happy to meet with any or all of you to answer any questions or comments you have about this proposal.

Charles J. Urstadt
Bronxville Resident

Editor's note:  MyhometownBronxville does not fact-check statements in letters to the editor, and the opinions do not necessarily reflect the thinking of its staff. Its objective in publishing letters to the editor is to give air to diverse thoughts and opinions of residents in the community.