A Scarsdale couple is suing the village architectural board to stop an adjacent property owner from building retaining walls that they claim will diminish the value of their home by as much as $194,000.
Mark and Victoria Nadler petitioned Westchester Supreme Court on March 25 to annul the Board of Architectural Review decision approving “massive, fortress-like retaining walls” that would loom over their backyard.
The dispute concerns two properties in the Greenacres neighborhood.
The Nadlers own a 2,452-square-foot house built in 1951 on a 0.39-acre lot at 171 Brite Ave.
EJK 4 Kingston LLC, a Bronx company managed by Edward Ciarletta, owns a 3,564-square-foot house built in 1924 on a 0.6-acre lot. EJK bought the property in 2019 for $1.15 million.
On March 1, the village architectural board approved EJK”™s application for the retaining walls and landscaping.
The board”™s job is to preserve and promote the character and appearance of the village and to conserve property values, according to the petition.
It must take into account the natural features of the site and the character of the neighborhood. It must make specific findings on whether a proposed structure will impair the use and enjoyment of nearby properties, and whether the structure would be visually offensive.
The architectural board made no findings, according to the petition, and EJK did not explain why the walls are needed.
The Nadlers submitted expert reports that depict the proposed walls as massive. A lower wall would run for 81 feet and a higher wall for 94 feet. Trees and vegetation would be removed from the hillside.
The Nadlers would feel walled in, the petition states. They would have less privacy. Instead of a view of a wooded hillside, they would see an institutional-like structure “having no place in a residential zone in Scarsdale.”
An appraiser who valued the Nadler”™s home at $1,290,486 estimated that the walls would diminish the property value by 10% to 15%, or $129,000 to $194,000.
The Nadlers allege that the architectural board abused its discretion and they want the court to nullify and reverse the decision.
Village Attorney Daniel Pozin did not reply to an email message asking for the village”™s position.
White Plains attorney Clifford L. Davis represents the Nadlers.
