Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Drains topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants outline multi‑stage drainage fixes for Washingtonville; design phase estimated at nine months
Summary
SLR Engineering presented a draft Washingtonville and industrial area drainage study recommending three types of interventions — repair/replace aging storm infrastructure, install new drainage where none exists, and roadway repaving/regrading — with preliminary design costs and schedules and recommendations to pursue all three tracks where appropriate.
SLR Engineering laid out a multi‑part plan to reduce nuisance street flooding in the Washingtonville neighborhood and nearby industrial area, telling the Village Board the work will combine targeted pipe and catch‑basin replacements, new drainage installations on streets that currently have none, and repaving/regrading to improve roadway pitch.
“My name is Mark Carabetta. I’m with SLR Engineering,” said Carabetta, who presented the firm’s mapping, closed‑circuit inspections and recommendations. He said much of the drainage mapping dates to the 1930s and that CCTV inspections were used to assess pipe condition.
SLR classified recommended work into three categories: (1) replace or enlarge existing catch basins, pipes and manholes and restore roadway grading (SLR cited Waverly Avenue as an example); (2) install new drainage systems on streets such as Washington Street where no formal system exists; and (3) repave or reconstruct streets to improve slope and lateral drainage where that is the more effective measure. Carabetta said the firm followed New York State DOT drainage and paving standards when forming recommendations.
The presentation included preliminary cost examples. Carabetta said the study and pre‑design work for an identified project were estimated at about $650,000 for planning, review and permitting before construction. He showed an illustrative line‑item estimate that put a full street reconstruction and drainage installation in one area at about $1,900,000; he cautioned these are planning‑level numbers that would be refined in design and bid competitively to contractors.
On schedule, the consultant estimated roughly nine months for design work and said construction could begin as soon as late next year, with projects staged rather than built simultaneously. “We do recommend all three of those,” Carabetta said when asked whether recommendations were prioritized as alternatives.
Board members and residents pushed for more technical detail about modeled storm events and the study’s assumptions. Carabetta said the draft report delivered to the village engineer includes hydrologic modeling (for example, five‑ and ten‑year events) and that the firm will summarize those outcomes in the final report. He also said the team is coordinating work on local drainage with larger riverine issues tied to the Sheldrake and Mamaroneck rivers, which can limit where local pipes can discharge during high‑water events.
Residents at the meeting stressed the day‑to‑day impacts of standing water on sidewalks and driveway access, and asked that the village prioritize projects that relieve frequent neighborhood puddling even if they do not solve extreme riverine flooding. Engineers and some residents said the local drainage improvements address immediate quality‑of‑life problems while larger river channel and regional resilience work will be required for major flood events.
Next steps identified at the meeting: SLR will finalize the report for the village engineer, the board will consider design funding and seek grant opportunities, and staff will return with refined scope and cost details when available.
