Cayuga Road Resident Urges Planning Board to Turn Down Development on Garden Road

This letter was submitted to the Scarsdale Planning Board by Robert Reiffel.

August 18, 2024
Re: 80 Garden Road Proposed Subdivision

Dear Members of the Scarsdale Planning Board,

I have resided at 15 Cayuga Road since 1985. There was one flood in our neighborhood before we moved in and two since then. During the flood of 2007, we had 5 feet of water in our house, as did virtually everyone in the neighborhood. The flooding was so severe that the neighborhood was roped off, meaning that ambulances could not access it to assist a young boy, who got an electric shock from water in the basement and another woman who broke her leg.

After that storm, the village of Scarsdale contracted with D & B, spending more than $250,000 to study flooding in the Village. Our area was determined to be one of the most severely impacted. Since then, one culvert was improved, but virtually nothing else was done to help our area.

Although we, personally, took steps to mitigate the effects of flood damage by moving the location of our downstairs door after the flood of 2007, in 2021, we had 2 ½ feet of sewer water come out of the downstairs toilet, flooding us again. Similar to the events for which the residents of Barry Road petitioned the Village in 2019, this demonstrates the inadequacy of the Village’s sanitary sewer system.

In approximately 1985, Richard Haggblad, the Village Engineer, told me that he had warned the Village that, when our area was developed in the 1960s, the infrastructure was inadequate. Since then, there has been more and more development of houses, pools, and other impervious surfaces, without any corresponding improvement in infrastructure.

Therefore, there are several reasons why it is imperative that the proposed 80 Garden Rd. development be rejected, once, and for all.

First of all, what is the objective of this meeting? According to the Scarsdale Village website, “The planning board also controls construction activity on Village- designated wetlands lots through a procedure designed to protect the ecological character of the surrounding area.“ That means the responsibility of this board is not simply to allow the developer to proceed at will, but also to protect the neighborhood.

In this instance, the developer proposes to build a number of houses in an area that is already a wetland. Recognizing that, he proposes to add 4 feet of fill to allow the construction of dry wells. This will be inadequate, since the recommended height of a drywell, itself, is 4 feet and the recommended minimum clearance to the seasonal high water table beneath that is an additional 2 feet. Therefore, the drywell will take up the entirety of the 4 feet of fill and the additional 2-feet of clearance between the bottom of the drywell and the underlying wetland will not be met. Moreover, there must be topsoil on top of the drywell to allow grass or other vegetation to be planted. Therefore, the 4 feet of fill well not be adequate. Furthermore, a drywell is supposed to empty completely within 72 hours. Therefore, any emptying of the drywell will only be at the expense of making the wetlands worse.

In addition, the developer proposes to drill wells for freshwater, because Scarsdale’s municipal water supply is not adequate to reach the area.

There are two kinds of wells to be considered: A ground water well sucks up groundwater and uses it for supplying the house with fresh water. Some of that water will do down the drain, and some will be used for watering lawns. Since the water was harvested from groundwater, the net effect on flooding will be nil.

However, the most common type of well is an aquifer well, which is drilled hundreds of feet deep and specifically excludes ground water. This means that whatever water is brought up to the surface will only increase the ground water, thereby increasing the flooding. This happened when Fenway Golf Club was allowed to drill deep wells for golf course irrigation, exacerbating flooding of all the streets downhill from it.

In addition to the inadequacy of the Scarsdale water supply to provide fresh water to the area, the addition of multiple new houses would add an even greater burden to a sanitary sewer system that has already proven inadequate, as evidenced by the sewer back up described above, and to the homes in the Barry Road and other areas. It would be unconscionable to allow this to happen.

Finally, a number of years ago, the Village enacted regulations regarding removal of trees, understanding how such activity exacerbates flooding by removing the absorptive capacity of the trees. The proposed subdivision at 80 Garden Road will remove hundreds of trees, thereby further exacerbating the flooding problem. It will take a minimum of 10 years for newly planted trees even to begin to approach the absorptive capacity of the trees removed in construction.

Therefore, for the above reasons, and because it is your responsibility to protect us, this proposed project must be denied approval, once, and for all.

Yours Sincerely,

Robert S Reiffel
15 Cayuga Road
Scarsdale, NY