FASNY: Cinderella's Golden Carriage is Still a Pumpkin

The French-American School of New York has submitted multiple proposals to construct a school complex on the site of the former Ridgeway Country Club. The recently submitted new proposal to build only on Parcel A is a smaller version of previous proposals, the main change being the elimination of the Pre-K/Lower School on Parcel D which reduces student enrollment, fewer parking spaces, and the elimination of the North Street entrance to the property. However, there is no Fairy Godmother to wave her magic wand and change the plan into something it can never be – an acceptable use of this property in the midst of a residential neighborhood. At the end of the day, the new plan is still a pumpkin, not a golden carriage.

Two critical issues remain unchanged. They are the designation of this property as environmentally sensitive, and traffic on Ridgeway.

Environmentally Sensitive Site

In its latest iteration, FASNY is now claiming that Parcel A is notenvironmentally sensitive, having hacksawed it from Parcels B, C and D to stand alone. This blatant attempt to change the classification is an obvious ploy to circumvent the super majority vote required when a property is designated as an environmentally sensitive site. The entire property has already been determined to be environmentally sensitive by the parties involved in the application process – FASNY and The City of White Plains. Parcel A is part of the New York State watershed. It has a documented underground stream which flows downstream into the Mamaroneck River which then empties into Long Island Sound. In its DEIS, FASNY's itself has documented this stream in its Wetland Delineation Report Appendix E-1. It states that “An historic USGS topographic map from 1899 shows a surface water drainage (stream) on the southwestern portion of the Site. It is this stream that was presumably piped/buried and which resurfaces south of Ridgeway Street just east of Fairway Drive, within a narrow rip-rap channel on the grounds of the Westchester Hills Golf Club. By 1949, this stream is no longer mapped on the Site, but only south of Ridgeway.” It also submitted a copy of this map identifying the stream.

The Gedney Association has submitted a report to the Common Council from an expert that it hired to verify whether Parcel A, on its own, is indeed environmentally sensitive. The report by Steven Danzer, PhD & Associates, LLC, dated 11/29/16, shows several reasons why this designation applies. The most incontrovertible one verifies that an underground piped stream on Parcel A emerges on the south side of Ridgeway 61 feet from the parcel, on the Westchester Hills Golf Club. The Danzer report states that “Parcel A is an environmentally sensitive site due to its proximity to a watercourse located off site.” The watercourse is well within the 100 foot threshold for qualifying Parcel A as an environmentally sensitive site. The watercourse qualifies as a “water resource” as defined by The City code as a perennial or intermittent watercourse. It is not an irrigation ditch as FASNY proponents claim.

This finding alone reaffirms that Parcel A is an environmentally sensitive site. FASNY can jump up and down and yell all it wants. It is simply making up its own facts, contradicting its previous submission. Facts are facts and FASNY cannot change them. And by the way, you don't have to be an expert to know that Parcel A is wet. If you live on Murchison or Hotel Drive, you know that there is flooding after heavy rain, causing serious ponding. Have you seen the pictures of the ducks swimming contentedly? Flooded basements are also a well known problem, and that is withoutcovering over the land with this massive project.

Further confirming that Parcel A is an environmentally sensitive site is the conclusion of Commissioner of Planning, Christopher N. Gomez, in his report to the Mayor and Common Council members dated 3/10/17. He states the following:

“Based on the analysis above, it is recommended that the Common Council make the requisite
finding that the subject property, 336 Ridgeway (Section 131.4, Block 9, Lot 3, a/k/a “former
Parcel A”), is located within approximately 70 feet from a stream and therefore meets the water
resource threshold of Section 3-5-3 (a) “Any site, property or location which is traversed by, on
the bank of, or within one hundred (100) feet of any river, creek, stream, brook or other flowing
watercourse,” to be classified as an environmentally sensitive site pursuant to Chapter 3-5
Standards and Regulations to Protect and Preserve Environmentally Sensitive Sites and
Features of the Municipal Code.”

The above finding by Commissioner Gomez unequivocally puts this issue to rest. Therefore, a super majority vote is required on the FASNY application.

Traffic

The Common Council has already declared that Ridgeway cannot be used to enter FASNY property. As a collector street, it is not intended to nor does it have the capacity to handle the school's traffic, which remains FASNY's Achilles heel. That is why FASNY's alternative proposal was to enter from North Street. The current proposal has basically resurrected FASNY's original desire to enter from Ridgeway. While the actual entrance is now to be from Hathaway Lane, it is the same as having the entrance on Ridgeway, as all school traffic must turn off Ridgeway onto Hathaway Lane and vice versa. The same bottleneck will remain. Furthermore, the reduction from 530 to 415 vehicles during morning and afternoon peak traffic times offers no real benefits. The combined a.m. and p.m one way trip total is 830. The grand total of daily round trips is 1,660. If this figure does not include staff vehicles or delivery trucks, the figure is even higher. No matter how much FASNY tries to downplay the numbers, it is still too much traffic for Ridgeway, which is already heavily traveled during these time periods, especially in the morning. Only the most minuscule amount of added traffic would have no impact.

The Incredible Shrinking Conservancy

What is the meaning of the reduction of the Conservancy from 78 acres to 51 acres? Surely the new proposal should add to the size of the Conservancy, not reduce it. The entire original property is 130 acres, rounded off. Deducting Parcel A's 29 acres and the 51 acres for the Conservancy leaves 50 acres unaccounted for. What is FASNY planning for the remaining acres? Will FASNY attempt to expand in the future? There is speculation that FASNY plans residential development. If this is so, we should be informed of such an intention. There is also speculation that should FASNY get its permit, at some future time, it will submit a proposal to build the lower school after all on Parcel D. Why else does the footprint for this building remain on the site plan diagram submitted by FASNY?

Location, Location, Location

I understand why FASNY wants to build in Gedney Farms. It is not far from where most of the students live and it's a really nice neighborhood. Plus, the property was purchased dirt cheap from a floundering golf club during an economic downturn. Those opposed to the FASNY plan are not against the school, just to the chosen location. You, Mayor Roach and Common Council members, have a responsibility to consider the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of White Plains to be of the utmost importance. Thankfully, some of you have. Factoring in the long-term negative impact FASNY will have on the immediate and surrounding neighborhood – in fact the entire south end of White Plains – as well as the financial impact on the entire city due to FASNY's tax-exempt status, all of your votes must be against building this project on Ridgeway. Anything other than a no vote will show that money and power means more to you than the people who look to you to protect them from harm. A no vote is the correct vote.

Respectfully,
Ellen Alzerez