by Kathy Savolt -
The Mamaroneck Dam has long been a topic of discussion among Village officials but has heated up over the past three years since New York State (NYS) sent the Third Notice of Violation regarding the insufficiency of the Dam. It is undisputed that Westchester Joint Water Works is the owner of the Dam. Since the Village does not own the Dam, a handful of residents have questioned using Village taxpayer funds for the future of the Dam. The Mamaroneck Observer decided to take a hard look at the issue and how we got to the point where the Village spent $28,762 in 2023 and recently contracted to spend $82,000 more.
History of the Dam
The history of the Dam is critically connected to the growth of the Village of Mamaroneck and the need for a safe water supply. Early residents drew water from private wells and fires were fought with a bucket brigade. Proper sanitation was not in place and waterborne diseases such as dysentery and typhoid were common.
In the late 1800s, the organization of fire departments led to a need for a safe public water supply. Prominent residents created the Mamaroneck Water Company and installed pipes from the Mamaroneck River through the Village to carry the water. This early water company acquired the property of a sawmill on the Mamaroneck River on Winfield Avenue. Apparently there was a dam on the property that the company improved. Reports refer to it as “an earthen dam with timbers.”
The Mamaroneck Water Company was acquired by the New York Inter Urban Water Company in 1903.
For many years, the Mamaroneck River was the sole source of water for the company and its customers. Then around 1915, reportedly due to upstream development which filled critical wetlands, the water supply was insufficient, and pipes were installed to connect this part of the County to the New York City (NYC) water supply.
The Westchester Joint Water Works (WJWW) was formed in 1927 as a tri-municipal organization by the Towns of Harrison and Mamaroneck and the Village of Mamaroneck. WJWW was approved as a public benefit corporation by the NYS legislature in 1928. When it was formed in 1927, WJWW purchased the assets of its predecessor, the New York Inter Urban Water Company, for the sum of $1,273,245.39. This purchase included all the land, including the dam on the property, and all the water mains, valves, fire hydrants, meters, and permits from NYS allowing the operation of a public water company.
The current concrete dam dates back to 1928 – right after WJWW was formed. This new dam, like the one before, was designed and constructed solely to ensure a consistent water supply to the customers of WJWW.
The history of the need for and development of a public water system is very interesting and more information from the Mamaroneck Historical Society can be found HERE.
Clean Water Becomes a National Priority
In 1972, the Federal government passed the Clean Water Act which was implemented in several phases. By 1977, WJWW could no longer draw water from the Mamaroneck River because it was deemed unsafe. Luckily, infrastructure had been put in place years before that allowed the purchase of water from NYC. Currently, WJWW purchases water from NYC.
WJWW eventually determined they no longer needed the Mamaroneck Dam, and they apparently wanted to decommission it. With several severe floods in the 1970’s and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on board to study flooding of the Mamaroneck River, Village officials believed the Dam aided flood control. The Westchester County Planning Department was also involved and commissioned a study of the dam from Hazen & Sawyer. The findings in this study, dated August 1977, apparently led to the installation of conduits in the dam which required a legal agreement between the Village of Mamaroneck and WJWW, owner of the Dam. See excerpt of report HERE.
This agreement, dated December 12, 1977, refers specifically to the Hazen & Sawyer report. It allowed for the installation of two conduits for flood control purposes and specified that the Village of Mamaroneck “shall have control and custody of the dam and related pond areas for maintenance purposes which includes but is not limited to:
a) Operation, maintenance and repair of the 24” valve.
b) Maintenance and repair of the 24” pipeline and intake structure.
c) Maintenance and repair of the twin conduits and screens, including periodic cleaning thereof.
d) Maintenance of the access way to the interior of the dam, and keeping same secure.”
There is no explicit mention of the Village taking responsibility for maintenance of the entire structure, but the Agreement does state the purpose of the changes to the Dam were for flood control. See agreement HERE.
1977 - 2024
Over the years, several inspections of the Dam have found it insufficient due to the lack of an adequate spillway structure. The Dam has never been found to be unsafe. However, every inspection has indicated that the spillway structure is inadequate to handle flood waters when the Dam overtops. Sometimes, these inspections led to actions to address the issues; at other times, nothing happened. Regardless, nothing was done to the Dam to address the spillway. A spillway is a structure used to provide the controlled release of water downstream from a dam or levee.
US Army Corps of Engineers Evaluates Dam
As part of their overall analysis of the Mamaroneck River, USACE examined the Dam and released a report dated August 5, 1981, that showed “the dam and its appurtenant structures did not reveal conditions which constitute an immediate hazard to human life and property. However, the dam has some deficiencies that require further investigations and remedial action.”
USACE “determined that the spillway structure is inadequate for all floods in excess of 23 percent of the Probable Maximum Flood Overtopping (PMFO) of the dam. Overtopping of the dam could cause breaching of the embankment section of the dam. This would significantly increase the hazard to loss of life and property. The overflow section is therefore judged to be "seriously inadequate and the dam is assessed as unsafe, non-emergency.” This means that there appears to be an inadequacy in the spillway capacity, such that “if a severe storm were to occur, overtopping would significantly increase the hazard to life downstream of the dam.” See HERE.
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Now Involved 2002 - Present
In 2005, the Village and WJWW jointly commissioned a study of the dam from Stearns & Wheler (now GHD). This was after the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) inspected the dam in 2002 and 2004 and requested Maintenance and Emergency Action Plans. The Stearns & Wheler document reports that the inspections found that: 1) the conduits were partly clogged, 2) the outlet drain was open, and 3) there was some surficial spalling and cracking on the dam. Stearns & Wheler were engaged to discuss the use of the dam for flood control purposes and to outline options and remedial actions. This is the last time WJWW and the Village jointly commissioned (and presumably paid for) Dam-related work.
After hydraulic analysis, the engineers concluded that the Dam provided only limited flood control for downstream areas – up to a 3-year, 24-hour rainfall event of 4 inches. This finding was similar to the 1981 USACE findings. The report presented two options: maintaining the structure or decommissioning it and details on how to proceed for both. No follow-up was done.
The firm also created an Emergency Action Plan for the Dam on behalf of both the WJWW and the Village. See an incomplete copy of report HERE.
Village Goes it Alone
After the catastrophic flooding in 2007, the Village needed to update their Emergency Action Plans (EAP) and hired Stearns & Wheler once again. At the 12/10/2007 meeting of the Village Board of Trustees (BOT), then Village Manager Len Verrastro informed the BOT that earlier studies regarding the decommissioning of the Dam were never followed through on and he estimated the removal would cost around $2 million, to be paid by WJWW. Since this was an update to the Village’s EAP, the study was financed by the Village without any involvement by WJWW.
Another study was conducted for the Village in late 2007 by Leonard Jackson Associates. In a January 2008 report, Jackson again presented his findings that the Dam could not be used for flood control, but everything was put on hold as the USACE was now involved again due to the severity of the 2007 flood. See report HERE.
NYSDEC issues Notice of Violation; Village Continues to Work Alone
On March 30, 2015, NYSDEC issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to both WJWW and the Village in which they assigned a condition of “unsound-fair” and noted that the Dam has been “generally neglected.” NYSDEC reported that the spillway was inadequate as required by dam safety guidelines. They repeated the findings of the 1981 USACE report and noted that the spillway capacity is inadequate to pass current dam safety guidelines.
The Village commissioned another feasibility study, now from GHD, to analyze the options regarding the Dam. A search of minutes from Village Board meetings did not yield any discussions regarding seeking funding from or involving WJWW.
During their analysis, GHD reported that a visual inspection of the Dam did not yield any structural issues and referenced the 1981 report.
In their report dated September 2015, GHD once again presented two options: remediating the Dam or decommissioning it. Remediation entailed reclassifying the Dam from a Class C to a Class B or A, a seismic analysis, more inspections, a construction project and ongoing maintenance. Total Remediation project costs were estimated between $1.9 and $2.8 million. The second option, Decommissioning the Dam, was estimated at between $1.6 and $2.85 million. See report HERE.
Minutes from the WJWW Board Meeting of 1/26/2016 (see HERE) reflect that WJWW was aware of this report and there was an open issue regarding the “responsible entity.” No further discussions are reflected in minutes.
USACE: Dam Not Effective Flood Control
In January 2016, USACE released a draft Main report that indicated the Dam and reservoir were analyzed and even with extensive and very costly renovations it would not provide any significant reduction in peak water flows. Utilization of the Dam was not included in the final recommended solutions. See report, page 84 HERE.
NYSDEC: Dam a High Hazard
In 2017, NYSDEC officially classified the Dam as “High Hazard.” NYSDEC defines High Hazard as “a dam failure may result in widespread or serious damage to home(s) damage to main highways, … buildings, and/or important utilities… such that the loss of human life or widespread substantial economic loss is likely.” See HERE.
The minutes of the Village BOT’s 3/13/2017 Work Session indicate that Village officials discussed what to do and who was responsible – WJWW or the Village. No decisions were made. A month later, at the 4/12/2017 Work Session, the BOT referred the matter to then Village Attorney Linda Whitehead who was attending her last BOT meeting that night and leaving her position.
At the 5/8/2017 meeting Robert Spolzino was present as the new Village Attorney and on 6/19/2017, he presented the BOT with his priorities. The Dam is not included on the list. See HERE.
By the end of 2017, in addition to a new Village Attorney, there’s also a new Village Manager, Robert Yamuder, and a new Mayor, Tom Murphy.
NYSDEC: Third Notice of Violation Prompts an Emergency
No mention of the Dam was found in a search of the minutes until 2022 when NYSDEC issues the Third NOV dated April 13, 2022. See HERE. This notice was sent to both WJWW and the Village and explains that “it is (the author’s) understanding that you are, or represent, the owners of the structure.” The notice also includes the dates of the first two such notices: April 14, 2015, and December 10, 2020 (during the pandemic).
On 4/22/22, then Village Manager Jerry Barberio declared a state of emergency See HERE and GHD is hired again to update the Dam Feasibility Analysis and Emergency Action Plan. NYSDEC’s classification of high hazard is because of the inadequate spillway, as revealed in the 1981 report. There is no record of the BOT approving this contract nor any record of any discussion about who was responsible for commissioning the work and related expenditure.
The minutes of the 4/26/22 meeting of the Trustees of WJWW show that Mayor Murphy requested the WJWW General Counsel review the 1977 agreement and current situation. We found no further mention of the matter in subsequent minutes. See HERE.
GHD presented their findings as the 3/27/23 BOT meeting (See previous article HERE). Their analyses focused on the spillway and this time they presented four alternatives: apply for a variance from the regulations, decommission the Dam and two alternatives regarding the spillway.
At the 12/9/2024 BOT meeting, the BOT was presented a contract for approval with Ramboll to develop and evaluate concepts to increase spillway capacity. They would evaluate alternatives along with an option to decommission the Dam. The BOT was informed by Spolzino that the work was “required” and that “New York State was holding us responsible.” The BOT voted 4-0 to approve. However, members questioned whether the Village was the responsible party. At the 1/13/25 BOT Work Session, Spolzino reported that he believes the Village is responsible for maintenance of the Dam and that by ignoring that responsibility over the years it possibly contributed to its subsequent inadequate condition.
(Editor’s note: Thank you to Village Historian John Pritts, and Sue McCrory for providing some of the background material used in this article.)
Comentários