December 28, 2007

Lohud Forum post - Tilly Foster/Zumpano

Good morning all - just in case you may miss my latest post on lohud attached to the Elan article of Dec. 23rd,  "1 bidder left to take over Tilly Foster stables,"  it is attached below.

Sincerely,
Ann
There are several issues I personally wish to address:

1. Mr. Zumpano claims that the source of allegations against him were "disgruntled boarders."   If you had seen the pictures and heard the description of his River Edge Equestrian facility presented at the legislative committee meeting several months ago, you would have concluded that the true source of the disgruntlement was not the two legged variety of species but the four-legged unfortunate inhabitants of his facility, the 70 horses packed on 7 acres.

2. Mr. Zumpano has retained an attorney.  Have other respondents to the Request for Proposals done so? No.  And so I must ask myself why has Mr. Zumpano felt the necessity of doing so. Is it to intimidate and to silence possible protestors against this misguided attempt by the county to make profit on the backs of the defenseless and voiceless by raising the specter of being sued.  Will I be sued for writing my opinion in this forum?

3. There are some who say we'll put Zumpano on probation, write an iron-clad contract and if there are any complaints, he will be dismissed.  Really.  Will we now have the prospect of Zumpano engaging his attorney to sue and then the county  having to expend tax dollars to defend itself against the litigation?

It is a source of mystification to me how the County could have so botched pioneering open space acquisitions - Putnam National and Tilly Foster - that could have been the pride and envy of residents and visitors alike.

December 17, 2007

Good morning all - By now you have read the Journal News article re: the relocation of Town of Southeast offices to Rte 22.  Am sharing with you a comment that I appended to the article in the lohud Putnam Forum.

Sincerely,
Ann


Shall we exclaim - "Shocking, Shocking." It was no secret and those who now decry the move should have done so when the first whiff of relocation was detected.

Southeast has been threatening to move the town offices ever since the County as part of the Tilly Foster purchase, relinguished 10 acres on the opposite side of the street in the rear of the "Crystal Cathedral" aka Southeast Executive Offices. "Tilly Says Neigh to Town Offices" were sprinkled throughout the town by Coalition members; letters appeared in the Journal News and it seemed that the relocation was off the table.

About a year ago relocation arose at work sessions and town board meetings with the proposal that "The Temple" on Rte 22 house at least some of the offices and others housed in the present Town Hall. Articles appeared in the Journal News with a few residents citing the cost for rehabilitation and impact on the Village's viability. The uproar was more of a murmur so the town pursued its goal.

However, the final straw appeared to be that the Civic Center could not even maintain its certificate of "habitability" since it flooded and mold was everywhere imperilling health and records. Offices were moved to makeshift buildings.

What are the consequences? Aside from its possible arguable impact on the Village, it was bad enough to try to explain where and what the Town of Southeast was, with many demogogically confusing it with the Village of Brewster. But the present relocation with its arbitrary division of offices, undermines the very concept of a Town called Southeast. With planners urging Town Centers, officials however, have moved in the very opposite direction with shards of offices all over the geographical expanse of the Town and with it the possible loyalty and allegiance of its residents.

November 28, 2007

Southeast plans to move some offices out of Brewster
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: November 28, 2007)
SOUTHEAST - A plan to move many town government departments out of Brewster to the new Route 22 court facility has riled some community members who claim the eleventh-hour shakeup is disingenuous and unnecessary.

Southeast Supervisor John Dunford confirmed this week that the plan to relocate Town Hall offices, including the supervisor, clerk, assessor, accounting and receiver of taxes, from the village's Main Street to 1360 Route 22, by Dec. 20. The Southeast departments housed at the Main Street Civic Center, including building, planning, parking and code enforcement, would be transferred to Town Hall.

A decision on the logistics of the move is expected later this week, Dunford said.

"The whole goal is to empty out the existing Old Town Hall where the Civic Center is so that building can hopefully be restored to become a cultural center for the town of Southeast," he said.

Town officials expect to hire an architect by year's end to renovate Old Town Hall, Dunford said. The 1896 building, which holds an empty theater and the Southeast Museum, is on the National Register of Historic Places.

Residents long have complained that town officials have been trying to move out of Brewster, a departure, some argue, that would have a social and economic impact on the village. The planned exodus of some town offices - which surfaced this past week - has reawakened those concerns. In recent years, the village has seen many businesses and agencies leave or close, including the Brewster Chamber of Commerce, a bank, post office and the Boone Dog Coffee House.

"I'm disappointed that this was never mentioned before. I think it has blindsided everybody," Brewster Mayor-elect James Schoenig said. "I don't see this as a move that's going to save taxpayers money. I think there's things the village and town could have done to prevent this."

Supervisor-elect Michael Rights also disagreed with the shuffle.

"This plan to move the town government offices out of the village of Brewster is a desperate, last-gasp effort by the good ol' boys to gut the village," he said. "My administration will resist this plan and others and will promote instead the revitalization of Brewster."

In August, Southeast officials purchased the former synagogue, Temple Beth Elohim, for $875,000 to accommodate just the town's woefully inadequate court, now situated at the Civic Center. The courtroom, which has a capacity of 49, normally sees 100 to 150 people a session, town officials said.

The town later saw that the 6,200-square-foot facility had room to fit other departments, Dunford said. The matter, he emphasized, has been discussed at Town Board work sessions.

Town Hall has several deficiencies, he said, including no handicapped-accessible ramps, scant parking and hard-to-reach basement offices.

"While it's a beautiful building, it is not user-friendly," Dunford said. "This is a good opportunity to get the best use of the court building."

Still, some say they prefer the convenience of visiting town government in Brewster rather than traffic-riddled Route 22.

"Route 22 is OK for offices that don't come into contact with the public," said Southeast resident Mildred Nugent, 80. "The ones that do have contact with the people, like the clerk and the tax receiver, should stay in the village so people can walk there if they want to."

Others said the move entailed wasteful spending.

"It's sad, but not at all surprising, that our elected officials chose such a devious way to abandon the village," said Southeast resident Lynne Eckardt, also the Putnam County Democratic chairwoman. "Perhaps most galling is the complete waste of taxpayer dollars that were spent on recent renovations and additions to buildings that will now sit unused."

Eckardt was referring in part to a $50,000 modular unit that was installed in February 2006 to house court clerks and judges offices.

Dunford said there are many uses for the modular building, but that decision will be up to the new Town Board.

As far as other costs, Southeast established two accounts more than five years ago to pay for court and office facilities that have accumulated about $2.5 million through surplus funds, Dunford said. Monies to pay for the temple and its roughly $475,000 in renovations came from those accounts, he said, while moving costs are expected to be less than $20,000.

"There's no desertion of the village," Dunford said. "The town will still have an active role and an active building in the village."

November 26, 2007

A corner on the market

Good morning all - A second hard look at the High Court decision to uphold the Deans Corners project off Allview Avenue in the Town of Southeast.  There were a spate of comments on the decision in the Forum so I decided to weigh in.  The ramifications of this decision are far-reaching and might impact other legal challenges to projects presently proposed.   Comments are always welcome.

Sincerely,
Ann



Meadows (what there will be left of it after the construction of 103 houses) at Deans Corners like another proposed development, Campus at Fields Corners (143 houses off Pugsley Rd), saw the light of day in 1988. During that period, the developers of both projects gauging the economic winds of profit, decided not to go forward and so they both lay dormant.

In the interim, federal and state enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Act regulations in addition to the 1997 Memorandum of Agreement protecting the water quality of Croton and the coming of age of stringent amendments to Town of Southeast codes radically changed the regulatory environment.

In light of the above, the  court sustained our view that Planning Boards in arriving at their decisions need to take into account these altered conditions - a second "hard look" - and institute a Supplmental Environment Impact Statement. That action would not have doomed the project; it would have simply returned it to the Planning Board for further consideration. The applicant appealed and won.

The judicial decision was somewhat analogous to ignoring new found DNA evidence that would set free an unjustly sentenced prisoner on the grounds that past official action was sufficient even if it resulted in his continued incarceration. Does that make sense? No, and neither does this decision.

And lastly, those who carp on the cost of litigation, much of it borne by individuals themselves, have you calculated the cost to the community in terms of school taxes and need for additional staff and facilities that 103 families together with the 143 projected families from Campus, would bring? As everyone knows, the single largest portion of one's tax bill is school taxes. How much is the Brewster school budget and how much will it rise in a few years to accommodate this population?

November 19, 2007

Good morning all -166 acres saved from the maws - another victory for open space preservation, stemming the tide of commercial, retail sprawl that is threatening to engulf the entire Rte 312 corridor, especially Pugsley Rd, a wooded area of hundreds of areas and of wetlands and outcroppings which is under severe pressure of development.  The urgency to buffer the entire area of Tilly Foster Conservation area (also next to a State Highway - Rte 312) from this threat, will enable the residents of Southeast and Putnam County to retain and enjoy a reminder of the bucolic atmosphere that for many years was the rule not the exception. 

Although the area is zoned Rural Commercial, within the code, are suggestions that would compliment Tilly Foster not detract from it by the insertion of inappropriate retail similar to that seen on Brewster Highlands.

It is regrettable that Lynne Eckardt, a realtor and Democratic County Chair sees nothing but potentialities for paving the entire area because it is adjacent to a State Rd - Rt 312.  (Nothing like Tilly Foster ringed by pizzerias and another McDonald)  But then so is the Camarda's proposed sprawl retail development Patterson Crossing - Exit 18 off Rte 311.  So I imagine that she would approve of that project. also keeping uppermost the realtor's mantra - location, location, location.  Very smart growth.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com



Southeast buys 166 acres of open space, some meant for new animal shelter
By SUSAN ELAN
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: November 15, 2007)

Southeast has closed a $2.2 million deal on 166 acres of open space that abut the Putnam County-owned Tilly Foster Conservation Area.

"It's a wonderful opportunity for Southeast that took months of hard work," Southeast Supervisor John Dunford said. "It helps protect the aquifer leading into the East of Hudson reservoir system. It also adds to the inventory of land Southeast needs for future passive recreation."

Under an informal agreement between the town and Putnam County Executive Robert Bondi, 10 acres would go to house a new countywide animal shelter.

Southeast paid for the land, which belonged to the UJA-Federation of New York, using part of the $5 million in open space funds approved by town voters in a November 2006 referendum. Southeast would be paid for the 10 acres for a new pound after the land has been subdivided and appraised, Dunford said.

The Nov. 7 purchase increases the conservation area that already includes the 199-acre county-owned Tilly Foster Farm and an additional 94 acres of open space in Patterson.

Most of the land is zoned for rural commercial development and office parks requiring 2-acre minimum lots, Dunford said.

Matt Shurtleff, a project manager for The Trust for Public Land, which helped facilitate the purchase, said options on the UJA property had to be extended twice to keep the land, bordered in part by Interstate 84 and Pugsley Road, from going on the open market.

"UJA, a philanthropic organization, saw the value of preserving open space," Shurtleff said. "This transaction is going to protect water quality, allow recreation and protect habitat in one of the fastest-growing areas in Putnam County."

Some of the land will be reserved for walking trails, playgrounds and ball fields. About 67 acres is wetlands, he said.

It will cost Southeast taxpayers 3.5 percent of their 5.7 percent tax-rate increase in 2008 to pay for the bond used to buy the property, Dunford said. The increase will raise $79,000 to pay off the 2008 portion of the 30-year bond.

The nonprofit UJA-Federation had not applied for a tax exemption and paid $27,788 a year in school district, town and county taxes. Only $1,807 of that amount went to the town, with most of the money going to the school district, Dunford said.

Ann Fanizzi, a member of Southeast's open space committee, said providing a location for a new animal shelter and preserving open space in an area of town under pressure from development - the land is not far from the shopping center that includes The Home Depot - made the expense worthwhile.

"Developers are salivating over 1,000 acres off Pugsley Road," Fanizzi said. "This open space creates a buffer from a densely commercialized area."

Putnam Humane Society members and elected officials agree that the UJA-Federation property is ideal for the new shelter because it is centrally located but remote enough from homes to prevent nuisance noise from barking dogs. Allocating 10 acres for the shelter guarantees exercise space and provides a buffer for people who use the area for recreation, Deputy County Executive John Tully said.

Tully said private donors would pay for the land that would be leased to the Humane Society.

"New York state law requires Putnam to provide the services the Humane Society offers," Tully said.

A contentious animal-abuse case that twice led the Putnam Humane Society to defy a Kent town justice's order is not expected to change the arrangement.

Tully said the organization "has not done anything with malice or negligence that would warrant discontinuing our contract with them." Putnam pays $140,920 a year toward the shelter's operation.

"We spent years researching properties, only to see them fall through," Humane Society board member Courtney Aponte said yesterday. "Knowing we are moving forward is so exciting."

The society plans to intensify fundraising for construction and will sell its dilapidated shelter off Old Route 6 in Carmel to help cover the cost, she said.

Not everybody in Southeast is enamored with the purchase of the UJA property, however.

"It's commercial property that borders the highway and is not suitable for open space," said Lynne Eckardt, vice president of Concerned Residents of Southeast.

Reach Susan Elan at selan@lohud.com or 845-228-2277.

November 08, 2007

Ace Endico Vs. COSTCO

Hi all - Several months ago, I wrote concerning an item that I had seen in the PennySaver concerning Ace Endico, located on the same road as the Motor Vehicle Bureau in the Town of Southeast.  If you will recall, I mentioned their ad and their prices.  Subsequently, I received some e-mails commenting on my e-mail, not all of them complimentary to Ace Endico. 

Well, last week I saw another ad from Ace Endico and decided to go and see for myself.  They have limited amounts of produce, paper products, can goods, cakes, pies, meat, fish etc. All at very reasonable prices.  At least for the produce on that day, I can say that it looked fresh and I got a bag of radishes for 50 cents; a huge head of Escarole for a little over $1.25 and bananas for 50 cents.  It is a warehouse and a very unattractive one at that but close to Home Depot and Brewster Heights. 

But here is the kicker.  I spoke to someone who appeared to be in charge and told him that I was familiar with Ace Endico (we sued) and did they have any future plans to expand from their original 85,000 to over 200,000 sq. ft. They can.  He said definitely; that next year they plan to start another expansion not yet to the 200,000 figure by any means but getting there.

And then I said - giving COSTCO a little competition?  He smiled like the cat. 

So stay tuned and let the games begin.

Sincerely,
Ann

October 29, 2007

Town of Southeast Letter

Good morning all - here we have another instance of the "Demolition Derby" going on in Putnam.  The latest casualty will be Uncle Zip's Farm on Baldwin Place in Mahopac so that we can have another pair of cheap jeans and sneakers, more storage buildings and have China/India open up another sweat shop filled with underage kids, young women from the rural areas or prisoners working 11 hours a day for pennies so that CEO's can have millions in salaries.

Where is the morality in all of this?  Don't we have responsibility as citizens?

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Demolition plan for Southeast barn on hold
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: October 29, 2007)

SOUTHEAST - A historic barn slated for demolition may have gotten a temporary reprieve.

Town Supervisor John Dunford was about to release his hold on the 19th-century structure, which would have allowed the property owner - a Bedford developer - to start the demolition process. But Strazza Development has put the property up for sale.

The developers had proposed four homes on 47 acres off Doansburg Road, but had yet to receive final approval for the project, town officials said.

"Now I'm going to have to confer with the town attorney and the Town Board and get their input on what our position should be," Dunford said.

Neighbors have been fighting to preserve the circa-1820 barn, having once saved it from destruction after plans were foiled to erect a temple there. The barn was once part of Rocky Dell Farm, a 65-acre dairy farm.

"We've been holding the line on that barn for six years," said Katherine Dwyer, who lives next door.

Dwyer purchased her home 27 years ago and was interested then in buying the barn with it, she said, but the $90,000 price tag was too high. She would still like to acquire the barn, restore it and open it to the public for historic tours, she said.

"The fact that the property is for sale may afford me the opportunity to purchase the barn and rejoin it to the house," said Dwyer, 55, a freelance editor. "That has always been my goal."

But Strazza is selling the property as one package for $1.2 million, said Jackie Rosenberg, a broker with Sotheby's International Realty.

Strazza principals declined to comment on the matter.

The large wood-frame barn at 161 Doansburg Road sits close to the street and its location would have prevented proper access to the proposed homes, Dunford said.

Dwyer said there were other possible points of entry.

While local activists contend the barn has historic value, some officials do not.

Earlier this year, the town hired an architectural historian to evaluate the barn. The report showed that because the barn and the farmhouse were divided between two parcels in the mid-20th century, the building was precluded from qualifying for state and national historic status. The barn did meet two of the eligibility requirements, the report said. The town of Southeast Historic Sites Commission also recommended the barn not be considered a historic structure.

Even so, Dwyer said the barn's historical significance should not be diminished because it is no longer part of the farmstead complex.

"That's a lousy thing to hide behind," she said. "They are just not interested in saving our town's history. That's not logical at all."

The barn may have been constructed in stages, with the first part being built between 1820 and 1840, the report said. It includes hand-hewn timbers, a cupola and a side-gable roof, and some of its design is typical of English threshing barns built during that period.

Today, the barn's windows are covered with plywood and overgrown brush covers much of the exterior. While the exterior looks to be in disrepair, the report indicated the barn appears to be in fair condition with no major structural damage.

The Southeast barn and the farm it once stood on are among several in Putnam County that have fallen prey to development. Earlier this year, the dairy barn at Burdick Farm in Patterson was dismantled and moved to Hunter, N.Y., to allow for 34 new homes across the street.

"To me, the barn is symbolic of what is happening in Putnam County and the changes that are taking place," said Ann Fanizzi, chairwoman of the Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space, "and our inability to incorporate the past and the present."

Reach Marcela Rojas at mrojas@lohud.com or 845-228-2271.

August 28, 2007

Town of Southeast Letter

Attached is my letter to the town board on their proposed zoning change.

Sincerely,
Ann

March 20, 2007

Good morning all

Everyone should take a look at the Town of Southeast revised zoning code, principally to define areas of commercial activity (Gateway) so as "to avoid negative impacts on water quality, traffic flow and community character."   It is available on the town's website - www.townofsoutheast-ny.com.  

It is indeed far reaching and attempts to incorporate some of the LEEDS recommendations for "green construction and landscaping."  Town Supervisor Dunford and Town Councilmen and Lorraine Mitts should be commended for their efforts to preserve our community while at the same time codifying firm guidelines for applicants who propose small and large retail establishments for the town. 

For this purpose, they engaged John Imbano from IQ Associates who together with Town Planner, Graham Trelsheid,  did a a top-rate job in translating the town's recommendations to coincide with the latest thinking in design.  In color and to scale they are available so that residents can fully assess their impact. These include architectural details so as to mitigate  the often numbing cookie-cutter "large (read Big Box) retail" design; landscaping, redesigned parking lots and plazas, increased buffers, and building "connedness" to other established retail areas, something that is dreadfully lacking in the Brewster Highlands Retail Development where shoppers are compelled to use their vehicles in traversing from one area to the other.

That said.  last night, I raised several issues but wish to share just two for the moment.

1. Special Permits will still be granted albeit under much stricter guidelines.  The history is that yes, applicants must overcome this hurdle but usually they do.  When I raised the issue, Councilman Johnson said that Special Permits are usually given "with conditions" but I have found that these conditions are not so onerous that a determined applicant would not or could not meet them. 

2. No longer is square footage an issue - not the original 25,000 which we in the Coalition to Preserve Open Space supported but not others for fear of litigation did not; not 80,000 or even 50,000.  And this issue was the second I raised giving as an example, 137,000 sq. ft, the projected size of the proposed Stateline Retail anchor store, Target.  I asked Graham if I was correct in stating that size would not be the controlling factor but that size would be mitigated by architectural details, landscaping, parking etc.new code regulations that the applicant must meet.  He answered in the affirmative.

Needless to say, several members of the audience were more than happy.  Paul Jonke, who is the Carmel Tax Assessor and Town of Southeast resident heartily approved of the code and Stateline Retail in particular, citing the old chestnut of prospective school and town tax relief.

While I applaud these changes and the efforts of Town Officials to use best design elements to mitigate the worst of the dreadful architectural monotony that has blighted the landscape, projects such as Stateline pose serious fundamental issues that cannot be masked by color and design.  For openers, what will be the effect on the economic development of the Village of Brewster?

In many e-mails and letters to the editor, I have stated the basic opposition of the Coalition to simply relying on this type of development for the economic well-being of the towns and county, for that matter, and the resultant constriction of entrepreneurial activity on the part of the small businessmen.   And we have lately seen how dependent tax receipts are on what is basically a very volatile economic sector - retail - and berefit of other economic activity, that the only recourse is to raise taxes. 

There are many other subsidiary impacts just as compelling which I will deal in a subsequent e-mail.  We can be seduced by this code but we need to look at the fundamentals underpinning this type of economic activity and its consequences for all of us whether we live in Southeast, Carmel, Kent or Patterson. 

Is it all right just because it looks better?

Sincerely,
Ann

March 14, 2007

Good morning all - Cathy Croft's lame, short-sighted criticism of the open space purchase - cites "noise" - fails to consider the many benefits that will accrue to us all from this 166-acre acquisition.

And I wish to take issue also with Angelo Mantra:  there is criteria for purchase created early on in the Open Space committee's life in the same mold as that governing the acquisition of land in the 13 Westchester Towns, the majority of which passed bond referendi or tax surcharge on property.  

This purchase will not only provide protection and extension of contiguous environmentally and ecologically threatened land to the Tilly Foster Conservation Area and maintain acres free of development such as that occurred on Brewster Highlands off I84 on Rte 312 but it might also prove a god-sent for the Putnam Humane Society.  As mentioned in the article, the Putnam Humane Society whose selfless volunteers care for abandoned and abused dogs and cats, desperately needs to relocate from the deplorable location at their Old Rte 6 Shelter. 

I speak only for myself but I hope others will join me in applauding this purchase.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com


Southeast to buy 166 acres for open space
By SUSAN ELAN
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: April 8, 2007)

Southeast officials have committed to buying 166 acres of open space adjacent to the county-owned Tilly Foster Farm for $2.2 million.

"The option to purchase was scheduled to run out on March 31, and if it expired, it could have gone on the open market for possible development," Southeast Supervisor John Dunford said.

In a March 22 resolution, the Town Board authorized acquisition of the property owned by the UJA-Federation of New York. On the basis of that resolution, the UJA-Federation extended the option through June, Dunford said.

Southeast would buy the land using a portion of the $5 million in open space funds approved by town voters in November. Dunford said he expected Southeast to bond for less than $2.2 million because the town would not pay for a 10-acre parcel expected to house a new shelter for the Putnam County Humane Society.

The purchase would ensure preservation of open space in an area of Southeast where "a lot of development has occurred," Dunford said. Some of the land would be reserved for walking trails, playgrounds and ball fields, he said.

"This really represents a great open space opportunity," said Matt Shurtleff, a project manager for The Trust for Public Land, which holds the option on the property.

The national nonprofit land conservation organization had initially worked with Putnam County officials to buy the parcel, but the cash-strapped county bowed out under the burden of rising taxes.

County Executive Robert Bondi anticipated the Southeast purchase agreement in his March 14 State of the County address. And Bondi announced that private donors would pay for the land for a new county-owned animal shelter. Putnam County has tried unsuccessfully for several years to secure a location for a new facility to house the 100 dogs and 70 cats at the crowded, dilapidated shelter off Old Route 6 in Carmel.

"We have been able to secure donations from several interested parties to ensure that the purchase of this land will not cost Putnam County one penny," Bondi said. "In the future, we will begin a campaign to raise the funds necessary to build a brand new facility for the Humane Society, but our first priority is securing the land, and we are well on the way to accomplishing this goal."

Humane Society President Barbara Dunn said Friday that the UJA-Federation property is an ideal location for the new shelter because while it is centrally located, there are no nearby homeowners to be disturbed by barking dogs.

But not everybody is enamored with the selection process for the town's first purchase of open space.

Cathy Croft, a master gardener from Southeast, said the proximity of the property to Interstate 84 makes it too noisy.

Angelo Matra, chairman of Southeast's seven-member open space advisory committee, said the group had not completed an inventory of undeveloped land in the town, used a scoring system developed to evaluate available parcels or advised the Town Board on sites chosen for acquisition. Matra, who made his criticisms of the purchase in writing, said they represented his views alone.

There are about 5,100 acres of vacant land in Southeast that constitute potential acquisitions, Town Assessor William Ford has said.

Dunford conceded that communication between town officials and the open space committee before the vote had not been all that it should have. But Dunford said the cause was the state of urgency created by the expiring purchase option.

"I take the blame for the miscommunication," Dunford said. "I should have told them before (the vote)."

Ann Fanizzi, also a member of Southeast's open space committee, said that although the handling of the matter could have been smoother, the outcome was the right one.

"There was a compelling urgency to take action," she said. "The land could have been open to all kinds of development. We wanted the land saved. Development would have been a threat to Tilly Foster."

The UJA-Federation property abuts the 199-acre county-owned Tilly Foster Farm. By purchasing the land, Southeast will also be out a total of about $36,000 a year in taxes paid by the UJA-Federation. The nonprofit organization did not apply for a tax exemption.

Former Brewster Trustee Michael Santos, who once worked in real estate management, called the purchase a solid investment.

"It's a good move to preserve rural land, and the tax sum is not staggering," Santos said.

Reach Susan Elan at selan@lohud.com or 845-228-2277.

March 14, 2007

Just a Barn - So What

Good morning all

Throughout Putnam County, our historical artifacts and patrimony - farms, barns, stone walls - are under assault by development projects - residential, commercial, ballfields - ready to demolish rather than preserve. History is getting in the way of profits.  Little by little all vestiges of the County where the Country begins is disappearing - Burdick Farms in Patterson; Hill-Agor Farm in Mahopac (presently in litigation); barns in Southeast, several already demolished.  Miraculously the 245-year old Belden House in Carmel has been preserved no thanks to legislators whose first instinct was to tear it down but County Executive Bondi together with the DEP and Friends of Belden House saved it.  And, of course, Tilly Foster.

Last week I attended a Public Hearing of the Southeast Planning Board on just such a development which would involve the destruction of a barn to make room for another single family home.  The Strazza project or as is now ironically  called -  Rocky Dell Farm off Rte 22 on Doansburg Road, is small and seemingly benign - being reduced from 10 to 4 lots but it does contain a barn, the provenance of which is in dispute.  Tear it down, say the engineers; leave it be say some of the residents. Unfortunately, too readily Planning Boards simply accept the word of "engineers" and look no further. But if we are serious about our history and the value of preserving it as a legacy for those who come after us, then it behooves our Planning Boards to do more and take a "hard look" at this aspect of the SEQRA Environmental Assessment Form.  And that is what I urged in the attached letter together with a plea that we find ways to integrate our historical treasures in development plans.  Your reaction to it will be most appreciated.

Sincerely,
Ann

Putnam reaches deal with watershed council to use Tilly Foster Farm
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: December 6, 2006)

SOUTHEAST - Putnam and the Watershed Agricultural Council have
concluded an agreement that will enable the county to develop plans
for the future uses of the county-owned Tilly Foster Farm.

Fred Huneke, chairman of the watershed council, said the agreement,
signed Friday, prevents development at the 199-acre farm but allows
Putnam to use the land for agricultural activities as long as they do
not have a negative impact on water quality.

"The county tells us what they want to do there and WAC tells them
how they can do it," Huneke said. The council is a nonprofit
organization that supports the economic viability of agriculture and
forestry in conjunction with the protection of water quality and the
promotion of land conservation in the New York City watershed region.

County Executive Robert Bondi said this week that with the agreement
completed, Putnam and the council could now determine the number of
animals that will live at the farm. In addition to the 18 horses
boarded there now, Bondi, who owns a farm in Steuben County, said
Putnam would consider adding small animals such as sheep and calves
to draw more families with children to Tilly Foster.

In the spring, Bondi initiated the search for a private operator to
run the horse barn and expand riding opportunities after complaints
from some residents that Tilly Foster was draining taxpayer money for
the benefit of a few. The county acquired the farm in 2002 to keep it
from being developed. It paid for it with $3.9 million in New York
City watershed protection money.

The county can move ahead with plans to lease the horse operation
after the number of animals permitted there has been determined, Bondi said.

Horse boarders at the farm say they want to a chance to run the
operation themselves and Bondi and several county legislators said
yesterday that they would consider the proposal as long as Putnam did
not have to subsidize it.

"There is no reason it (the horse barn) has to cost the taxpayers
anything," said Cynthia Crosby of Carmel, who owned and operated
Pendleton Farm in North Salem until 2001 and now boards a horse at
Tilly Foster. "The number of boarders there now can sustain it, but
there would not be a profit."

The county would need to continue to maintain the buildings, fences,
pastures and equipment at the farm just as it would if no horses
remained there, said Crosby, who has 35 years of experience in the
horse business.

"We never bought it to make money," said Legislator Terry Intrary,
R-Kent. "We bought it to save it from developers and to preserve a
piece of history in the county. The amount of money it costs the
taxpayers is minute."

The horse barn is at capacity with 18 horses and there is a waiting
list of about 20 boarders, barn manager Kaycee Czyzak said.

Reach Susan Elan at selan@lohud.com or 845-228-2277.

Visit www.newyorkwater.org

The Open Spce Debate
(Original publication: December 13, 2006)


Voters had facts on referendum
After reading Michael Bottalico's Dec. 6 letter concerning Southeast's open-space referendum, I feel I must comment.

As a taxpayer, I went into the voting booth fully informed on this referendum, as did Mr. Bottalico. He knew, as I did, that taxes would increase, that surrounding towns that passed similar referendums had tax increases, and open space owned by a municipality is removed from the tax base. No surprises so far, and I do not feel misled at all by the Open Space Advisory Committee. I weighed the positives and negatives, and felt that overdevelopment and associated infrastructure costs outweigh the slight tax increase. I'm tired of my drive to the post office taking longer and longer due to more traffic and traffic lights. I'm tired of watching people come in from outside the area and telling me I need more big-box stores. This bond money, in the hands of the citizens of Southeast, will put a valuable resource in the hands of the community.

I am not rich, and I don't like tax increases. The one factor that puts me over the edge was the anonymous mailing sent out to local residents just days before the Nov. 7 vote. I figure if people can't at least put their name on something that argues against an issue, they are either embarrassed or don't have a leg to stand on. The voting majority has spoken, and talk of a "repeal" is just sour grapes.

Jerry Halter
Southeast
 

Town can't afford losing revenue source
As I read Mike Bottalico's letter "Repeal Southeast open-space bond," I am also reminded of an earlier letter regarding the same Southeast open-space issue where the writer recommended utilizing the open space for a recreational facility that everyone can enjoy. Both letters beg the question, "C'mon people, are we paying attention here?"

The Concerned Residents of Southeast are constantly complaining about something. Even with the rising taxes in this so-called "bedroom community," they protest the development of commercial property that would generate significant tax revenues. They work together with the Town Board to mislead the public to agree to referendums that take property off the tax rolls and put money in the pockets of developers who hold property they can't develop! Hm?

It's time to call Supervisor John Dunford and the CRSE on their shady politics and demand some real action. A 30-vote victory is hardly a mandate. Do the members of CRSE have a blank check to support the $5 million open-space bill that will cost tens of millions of dollars more to support? What makes more sense, property that generates revenue or property that adds to our tax burden?

The deer and the squirrels have enough tax-free space to play in. Stop blaming rising taxes on families with children and the schools. It's simple mathematics: Without the revenue source (properties that pay and generate taxes) there's just that - no revenue!

Mike Biondi
Brewster
 

Protecting land won't raise taxes
I'm uncertain if Michael Bottalico actually believes what he is saying about the cost of open space, or if he works for a developer and is trying to spread disinformation, but I need to correct the mistaken impressions with which he may have left readers.

While it is true that land designated as open space is removed from the tax rolls, it is also true that the same land does not cost the taxpayer any money in maintenance. Additionally, undeveloped land has no children living on it who need to be educated. At something like $18,000 per student per year, the cost of educating one child is not nearly covered by the taxes paid by one homeowner. Most families have more than one school-aged child at any given time.

Commercial development is no free ride, either. It's no coincidence that our taxes were much lower when there was significantly less residential and commercial development. Businesses cost in added infrastructure, police, ambulance, road maintenance and stormwater management. Additionally, businesses generate residential growth as they bring employees from other counties to our town. Our quality of life, clean water and air are threatened, but who can put a price tag on invaluable assets such as these?

Look to the profit motive and you'll understand who is telling the truth. Open space advocates as well as Supervisor Dunford are not making a cent. Surprise, surprise: Developers are raking the bucks in with both hands. Follow the money trail, people.

Lisa Aurello
Brewster

Good morning all - I've copied this letter from last Wednesday's Journal News wherein the writer accuses me of "hoodwinking" the town board and the residents.

Well - who's hoodwinking who?  The Town of Southeast has over 435 vacant parcels totalling over 5,200 acres of land, ready to be developed.  Using 4-acre zoning (the town has one, two and three acre) and per pupil expenditures of $18,000 per child, how much would each resident have to pay in additional taxes if all the land was developed. And let us not also miss the increase in police, fire, emergency services, infrastructure, installation of costly stormwater and their maintenance, school construction and staffing.  The list is unending.    

Take the hood off your eyes,  Mr. Bottalico. 

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com


Repeal Southeast open-space bond

It is time for the people of Southeast to fight back and demand a repeal of the $5 million open-space referendum. The Open Space Advisory Committee led by Ann Fanizzi hoodwinked the taxpayers with erroneous estimations on the total cost to the taxpayer. The real cost of this boondoggle will be between $12 and $15 million. It was deceitful to not advise the taxpayers that once this land is acquired, it is removed from the tax rolls, costing the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost tax revenue each year.

Our neighbors in North Salem as reported in The Journal News saw their taxes go up over 6 percent largely due the $1.5 million open-space acquisitions. I can only imagine how high our taxes will rise once this $5 million is spent.

Why did the Southeast Town Board allow Ms. Fanizzi and her committee to intentionally mislead the taxpayers? Also, why did the Concerned Residents of Southeast join in the deception via a mailer sent out just two weeks before the referendum? Maybe the CRSE members should start to question their own leaders who are being influenced and misguided by Ms. Fanizzi.

It's time for the Town Board to accept the fact that Ms. Fanizzi and her co-conspirator, Lynne Eckardt, hoodwinked them. Residents of Southeast have to seriously question the decisions of the Town Board led by Supervisor Dunford.

Michael Bottalico

Southeast

Good morning all

Southeast residents approval of the Open Space Bond Fund brings to mind an old Chinese proverb: One Generation Plants the Trees, Another Gets the Shade."  All who worked so hard and long to have this pioneer initiative passed, will rest surely in the knowledge that they have given future generations a priceless gift that only nature can bestow.

A blessed and happy Thanksgiving to everyone.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

 

Southeast open-space referendum passes by 30 votes
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: November 18, 2006)

SOUTHEAST - A referendum for the town to spend $5 million on open-space acquisitions just passed, according to unofficial results from the Putnam County Board of Elections.

Absentee ballots that were counted Thursday night showed that the bond measure was approved by a mere 30 votes, officials said.

Ballots totaled 1,879 in favor and 1,849 against. There are more than 10,000 registered voters in Southeast.

"I'm very thrilled about it," said Cherie Ingraham, a member of the town's Open Space Committee. "We worked hard trying to get the word out and educating people on why open space is important."

The seven-member committee, formed by the town in 2004, recommended the proposition following the favorable results of a telephone survey conducted by the Trust for Public Land, a national nonprofit land-conservation organization.

The measure is expected to cost the average town taxpayer an estimated $75 annually for the bond's 20-year lifespan. Ingraham said the committee will now work with the town in identifying properties to purchase.

There are some 5,100 acres of vacant land that are potential acquisitions, Town Assessor William Ford had said.

The initiative marked the first time a town in Putnam County had placed an open-space measure on the ballot. An anonymous mailer, distributed the weekend before Election Day, tried to dissuade voters, saying the bond was wasteful. A similar approach was used last year to oppose a $20 million countywide open space referendum that voters defeated.

"I'm very happy that the residents of Southeast have spoken, and that they approve of us having an open-space fund to secure properties in balance with whatever commercial growth happens," said Richard Honeck, town councilman and committee liaison.

Reach Marcela Rojas at mrojas@lohud.com or 845-228-2271.

Good morning all - just a bit of background to this news article.  The entire Pugsley Road area, an unimproved road adjacent to Tilly Foster,  which many are finding as a short cut to Fair St. to avoid congested Rte 312, is about 1000 acres, is slated for commercial and residential development (zoned Rural Commercial), the most prominent being the Campus at Fields Corners, a project of 143 single family homes and some still unspecified commercial development on 327 acres, a school tax breaker if ever there was one for Town of Southeast residents and a magnet for future residential and commercial sprawl development. (The Town of Southeast sued the developer but unfortunately was not sustained in the courts).   On behalf of the Coalition, I proposed that the property be included in a Forest Legacy grant in 2004/2005. 

The UJA property is but one of the pieces that the county has sought to purchase to provide a buffer to Tilly and stanch the tide of development, along with other pieces some  owned by Open Space Institute.  It is unfortunate that the purchase has become embroiled in the messiness between the legislature and the County Executive.  Many of the issues of concern to the legislators (since resolved) were contained in an outdated March letter by DEP Deputy Commissioner, Michael Principe, who has since resigned and centered on the payment of the $5 million bond issued for the purchase of the Putnam National Golf Course and as the article states, an overdrawing of East of Hudson (EOH) funds account.  

During a three year period, County Executive Bondi had proposed an innovative solution that would have reduced the 143 single- family Campus complex, suggesting to the developer an equestrian centered proposal of 50 homes that would harmonize with the setting and focus of Tilly Foster.  The County Executive had the full support of environmental and community organizations, including Riverkeeper, Trust for Public Land and Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition.  Unfortunately, he did not have the support from the developer who is now rumored "trolling" for a buyer, who would take the land and  project of over 17 years duration off his hands - Troll Brothers.  By the way, the asking price for outright purchase escalated from $4 million to $20 million. 

Daily we note instances where if the County-wide Open Space Referendum of $20 mllion had been accepted by the public (a change of 176 votes ) seed money would have been available to provide the initial down-payment for a host of open space preservation candidates which if joined with other funding sources - TPL, DEP, etc, would have enabled, if not outright purchase of entire areas, at least, would have preserved portions of the land.  Shortsightedness trumped long-term benefits, at least for the time being.  The UJA proposed purchase should not be another on the list. 

Sincerely,
Ann

 

Putnam Legislature blocks land purchases
By SUSAN ELAN
selan@lohud.com
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: August 24, 2006)

SOUTHEAST — Putnam legislators have taken steps to rescind permission for the county to buy 166 acres next to the Tilly Foster Farm Conservation Area.

The legislators say County Executive Robert Bondi has failed to show how Putnam would pay for the two parcels and has yet to firm up an agreement with the county Humane Society to build a new animal shelter on the property owned by the UJA-Federation.

But Bondi is downplaying the move, saying he can meet the Legislature's requirements.

"We're going ahead with it," Bondi said. "We have written them (Legislature members) a letter addressing all their concerns."

In 2002, when Putnam bought the 199-acre Tilly Foster Farm, the Legislature gave Bondi permission to spend what was expected to be about $2 million from the New York City Department of Environmental Protection to buy the adjacent UJA parcels. Putnam spent $3.9 million in DEP money to protect the watershed by keeping the farm undeveloped.

The Legislature's Land Acquisition Committee last week rescinded that support. Its resolution goes to the full nine-member board for a Sept. 5 vote.

Legislature Chairman Dan Birmingham, R-Brewster, said the board might reconsider the purchase in the future, but for now the deal is off the table. The action was taken in part because Putnam has spent more money on land purchases than allowed by its agreement with the city, he said.

According to the resolution, Putnam has spent more than $15 million. The DEP provides funding as part of a program to protect the city's reservoir system.

Before the Legislature would reconsider renewing support for the UJA purchase, the administration would need to meet three conditions

• Complete an agreement with the Humane Society to use 10 acres of the property.

• Gain New York City approval to pay 90 percent of the purchase price, about $2 million.

• Gain approval from the Legislature for the other 10 percent.

"Making a decision to reconsider later doesn't mean allowing or rejecting it," Birmingham said.

Bondi said he was optimistic that the conditions can be "satisfied in a very short time."

A combination of interest income earned on watershed funds already given to the county, and the county's payback of $5.2 million to New York City in December of this year toward the purchase of the Putnam National Golf Club property will reduce what Putnam has spent on land acquisition, Bondi said.

"We are fully in compliance with the DEP memorandum of agreement and the open-space acquisition protocols," Bondi said.

Ann Fanizzi, chairwoman of the Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space, said the UJA property was critical as a buffer to protect Tilly Foster from development.

Tilly Foster Advisory Board members Greg Wunner of Brewster and Betsey Ryder, who runs an organic vegetable and flower operation in Southeast, said they hoped for a resolution of the matter so the open space can be preserved.

"We support the county's effort to purchase the property and help the Humane Society," Wunner said.

Putnam Humane Society President Barbara Dunn said the organization has been struggling to care for an increasing number of abandoned and abused animals and hoped to have land designated for a new shelter soon.

Good morning all -

And it is indeed a good morning.  The Appellate Court has reversed a lower court's decision in the matter of Meadows at Deans Corners.  This was a four-year battle waged by determined, united residents and organizations (CRSE, Riverkeeper, CWCWC, Coalition to Preserve Open Space) here in Putnam County.  I am forwarding the Press Release from Riverkeeper Lead Attorney, Chris Wilde.  Many thanks to Chris, Jim Bacon and Dr. Marian Rose who stood with us even when all seemed lost. 

As Chris states, all of us should take heart. And friends there are other battles on the horizon in Kent and in Southeast and it is good to go into them with this victory under our belts.

Sincerely,
Ann, Chair
Coalition to Preserve Open Space
www.putopenspaces.com

  == Attached Message ==

Hello everyone,

Those battling for the protection of the Croton Watershed and quality of life in Putnam County achieved a significant victory yesterday when a state appellate court issued a decision requiring preparation of a supplemental environmental impact statement for the Meadows at Deans Corners subdivision project, reversing the lower court. The appellate court found the lead agency had not adequately considered a variety of changed circumstances since the last EIS was finalized well over a decade ago. This is truly a momentous decision, and should give heart to all those fighting the good fight throughout the Hudson Valley! Attached you will find a press release on this, and below is a link to the decision itself for those who are interested.

Chris Wilde

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2006/2006_06160.htm

Hi all - Here we go again - another round with Camarda, this time in Southeast.  By the way, I urge you to look in on the Journal News and the continuing resident opposition to another of Camarda's gems -Patterson Crossing in Kent/Patterson.  Like the grim reaper, just going from town to town.

I am sharing my letter on Stateline Retail with you and please feel free to share it with neighbors and friends.  But first a word about the focus of the letter.

I am a Board member and Putnam County representative for the Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition and have been privileged to know and learn from its President, Dr. Marian Rose.  We now have an Executive Director, Oreon Sandler, whose expertise in the field of water quality is unmatched.  I have left stormwater issues to these experts and instead have focused on the issues I addressed at the Planning Board Public Hearing e.g. economic impact and zoning with only a nod to traffic which Joe Schaub and others have indicated they planned to address.  Repetition is not productive at times.  I hope my comments on behalf of the Coalition to Preserve Open Space, will be helpful.


Take care and have a good weekend.

Sincerely,
Ann

July 11, 2006

Good morning all -

Last night I attended the Town of Southeast Scoping public hearing for Stateline Retail and brought up the fact that a huge development, the name of which escaped me, was being planned in Danbury.  That statement was confirmed by the Chairman Rohrman of the Planning Board and Joe Schaub who sent me this informational article on the development in question.  I am including it in this e-mail for your review.

There is no doubt in my mind that Camarda deliberately located Stateline on Rte 6 not to provide shopping opportunities for Putnam residents but for those projected to live between Exit 1 and Exit 2 in Danbury.

It is unrealistic to think that Carmel senior residents would routinely patronize this project as one commenter suggested.  Brewster Highlands is much closer than the 7 to 10 miles needed to traverse from west to east along winding roads and narrow streets of the Village of Brewster.  And even with bus transportation, the limited nature of the project - one big box and three small stores, would not entice the majority of Carmel residents who have far greater choice of stores on the Highlands.

I will scrutinize closely  the DEIS to ascertain whether Camarda factored in the traffic impact of the Danbury development on Rte 6 and its adjacent roads - Joe Hill, Dingle Ridge, etc.

Additionally, the suggestion of "green roofs," while seemingly attractive and evironmentally friendly, is still in its infancy and a very expensive proposition even for a small home, let alone a 137,000 sq. ft. Big Box, and will not camouflage the very real quality of life deficits of this development - traffic, noise, air and light pollution, proximity to the phosphorous impaired East Croton Reservoir and the Village of Brewster, for openers. 

It is regrettable that whether misguided or enablers of the profiteer, Camarda, those who opposed the zoning code revision limiting retail development to 25,000, on the grounds that it would subject the Town to litigation  (Councilman Bonano, Honeck and resident, Lynne Eckardt) did a disservice to the people of the Town of Southeast and to Putnam County.  It would have put a period to the hucksterism surrounding "Big Box" development as the panacea to the tax problem and would have emboldened the residents from other towns facing similar challeges, such as Lake Carmel in Kent - Patterson Crossing. 

However, we must now confront this development.  The Scoping Document is the first step.  It will be online or available via FOIL from the Planning Board and also at the Brewster Public Library.  Comments from residents are crucial.  Please do not hesitate to write.  There are many topics of concern;  however, the deadline for submission to the Town of Southeast Planning Board is July 20th.  The Planning Board address is 67 Main Street, Brewster, New York 10509.

Should you have any questions, please e-mail me or call 228-4265. 

Sincerely,

Ann Fanizzi, Chair
Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space
www.putopenspaces.com







Sincerely,
Ann


-----------------

Subject: [StatelineRetailCC] Fairfield County Business Journal July 10, 2006 - Reserve in Danbury

Midyear Review : Luxury housing heads to market -
Complex is one of three projects under way at the 546-acre `Reserve' in Danbury
By BOB CHUVALA

About 180 new luxury apartments should be ready to go on the market next month, the first of more than 2,130 apartments and condominiums being carved out of a square mile of woodland that once secluded the former Union Carbide headquarters on Danbury's west side.


Known as The Reserve, the property is broken into three projects that will turn the site into a suburban retreat of condos, apartments, office buildings, shops and restaurants. In the middle is The Corporate Center, Carbide's 1.2-million-square-foot headquarters on 100 acres of woodland. The building is almost fully leased after languishing on the office market for years after Carbide's demise.

The Reserve hugs the New York state border and stretches between I-84's exits 1 and 2. The 546-acre site has its own entrance directly from exit 2.

The first of the three projects to break ground was the luxury one- and two-bedroom apartment complex called Crown Point Reserve, and "the first residential building and club house should be ready in August, hopefully," said Fitz Anderson of Whiteco Residential Co. in Merrillville, Ind., developers of the apartment complex. When completed, the Crown Point Reserve complex will have 468 apartments in several two- and three-story buildings.

Anderson said Whiteco is "just starting to hire a team to get the marketing effort going" to begin renting the apartments, which are on property across Saw Mill Road from the largest chunk of Carbide land.

Village center

A second parcel of 95 acres has been approved for 650,000 square feet of offices on 60 of the acres, and 470 condominiums on the remaining 35 acres, both being developed by Building and Land Technology, (BLT) of Norwalk.

"We're processing permit applications and that type of thing," said Carl R. Kuehner III, president and chief executive officer of BLT. Each developer must create its own infrastructure of city water, sewer lines and power and gas feeds, and BLT is concentrating on that process.

"We have no site plans for approval and nothing is under construction," Kuehner said. The company is sorting through various local and state permits needed to develop the site, and once all the permits are issued, BLT will decide the size and scope of its portion of the development, he said.

The largest of the projects is a complex of 1,200 condominiums and townhouses and a village center of restaurants and shops on 321 acres stretching along the north edge of The Reserve. The developers, WCI Communities of Bonita Springs, Fla., call the project Rivington, "The New American Village," and it has already pre-sold 50 condominiums from its temporary sales office.

Woods remain

The first phase of the three-phase WCI project will be 93 one- and two-bedroom condominiums ranging between $300,000 and $400,000, and 194 townhouses ranging from the upper $300,000s to the low $600,000s. Crews are taking down trees, cutting in new roads and preparing to bring in infrastructure services.

Adjacent to the project, which WCI calls "The Hills," are two tracts of property totaling just shy of 28 acres and zoned for commercial use the developer wants to sell. The sites are approved for a total 221,000 square feet of commercial space. "We have been marketing the properties for WCI for a couple of months," said Garland Warren, senior vice president of Coldwell Banker Commercial Scalzo Group in Bethel.
"We've had a lot of inquires about it, particularly from developers trying to figure out how they can use it," Warren said. "WCI would prefer it be professional offices, but the zone allows for other commercial uses such as financial institutions, conference centers and medical offices. This is one of those things where they'll say, `"bring me a buyer and tell me what their use is, and we'll see if it's compatible with our development."'

Despite the scope of planned construction throughout the 546 acres, "more than 50 percent of it will remain in its natural wooded state," Warren said.

Good morning all - just some background - as a result of the narrow defeat of the county-wide open space referendum last year (370 votes - if 180+ has gone the other way, it would have passed), the Southeast Open Space Committee explored the possibility of a survey with the Trust for Public Land in order to assess the sentiments of town residents. 

By a mere 66 votes, Town of Southeast residents turned down the referendum but in conversations, I learned that the vote reflected more a distrust of county stewardship rather than outright opposition to funding open space preservation. (You recall that there were a spate of very negative, unhelpful comments made by one legislator in several news articles)

But most importantly, many residents indicated that theTown of Southeast had not been treated equitably by the county and trusted the Town Board more since as their elected representatives they would be held accountable for decisions made respecting preservation of open space parcels.

The Open Space Committee is continuing to gather data on possible candidates for open space acquisition. Consideration for acquisition will be based on application of strict criteria developed by the Committee. 

I am personally hopeful that other towns will follow the pioneering steps taken by the Town of Southeast and form town-wide open space committees.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com


Don't hang up — it's just a Southeast phone survey, not a telemarketer

By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: June 27, 2006)

SOUTHEAST — If the phone rings in the coming days and a voice on the other end starts asking questions about putting money toward protecting open space, you may want to think twice about hanging up.

It's not a telemarketer.

The Trust for Public Land, a national nonprofit, land-conservation organization, is conducting a telephone survey to determine whether residents would support spending tax money to preserve land in Southeast. The town is looking at different financial mechanisms to buy undeveloped land, including placing a referendum on the November ballot, officials said. No dollar amount has been fixed on the possible bond measure.

"This is about giving the citizens a voice as to how important open space is to them; to ascertain the general level of support," said Matthew Shurtleff, the land trust's projects manager for New York.

About 300 residents will be polled, and the results should be completed in the next two weeks, Shurtleff said. The trust will then make a recommendation to the Town Board based on its findings.

Resident Cathy Croft said she was polled last week. Some questions asked, she said, included whether she would spend $76 a year to preserve open space, pay $6 to $7 a month in support of an open space bond and whether the Southeast Town Board was doing a good job. The call was cut short due to a thunderstorm, she said.

"Having the survey is fabulous," said Croft, a gardener. "But I also think everyone needs to be better educated on open space."

Land trust representatives met with the town's Open Space Committee two months ago and offered to do the poll at no cost to the town. The town committee, the only one of its kind in Putnam County, was formed in 2004. It seeks to educate the public on the importance of preserving land and prioritizes which parcels in town to protect, said Cherie Ingraham, one of seven committee members.

Officials were uncertain of the total acreage of open space in Southeast, but Ingraham said some sizable tracts include about 500 acres off Dingle Ridge Road and land behind the Southeast train station.

"The idea would be to connect parcels so that you can make biodiverse corridors and not interrupt natural habitats," Ingraham said.

Town Supervisor John Dunford said Southeast was one of the larger towns in the county facing development restraints.

"We felt that we needed to look and see how much open space land should be protected," he said.

The Trust for Public Land was formed in 1972 and provides a variety of conservation services, including land acquisition and working with agencies to secure funding. In Putnam, the organization negotiated the county's purchase of Tilly Foster Farm in Southeast and helped the state buy two parcels at Wonder Lake State Park in Kent, said Susan Clark, its director of public affairs.

Good morning all -

I couldn't helping thinking how many good and bad things have come about by squeaker votes.  There was the one-vote that stopped the Andrew Johnson Impeachment; the 1/2 of 1% that elected Jack Kennedy to the Presidency and of course, the 2000 vote that brought Bush to the White House.  And locally, it was a 3-2 vote that paved the way for Brewster Highlands.  And Stateline Retail now joins that dubious distinction of entering the local history books by a squeaker. 

Although Marcela Rojas quotes Dick Honeck, a long-time proponent of "Big Box" commercial development - a true believer.  Who she did not cite but should have, was the lawyerly, politically crafted statement by Councilman Pat Bonano (candidate for the legislature that includes the Town of Patterson - proposed future home of  Patterson Crossing, another of Camarda's civic enterprises for the betterment of the residents of Putnam County). " I'm against the project but am voting against the zoning code on "procedural factors," entoned Bonano, brows furrowed and hands firmly clasped on the table.

And so under the convenient cover of "procedures," Bonano squirmed his way out of a decision that would have had a huge impact not only on Southeast - blessed and cursed by interstates - but on the entire direction of commercial development and discourse on the proper role of retail in Putnam County.  It would have sent an unequivocal message that town boards have the power (and the courage to exercise it) to determine land use by adopting  modest, yet pioneering, zoning proposal not to ban retail but to impose restraints on the sheer size of such enterprises.

As I commented at the Town Board meeting on Thursday.  It was a lost opportunity for Southeast, the Big Box Capital of Putnam, to signal that the conductor of this train was now the Town Board not over the Stateline developers. 

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com
 

Southeast board opens way for big shopping center
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
How they voted

Yes votes

Supervisor Paul Dunford
Councilwoman Lorraine Mitts
Councilman Paul Johnson

No votes

Councilman Pat Bonanno
Councilman Richard Honeck
 

(Original publication: May 27, 2006)
SOUTHEAST — The Town Board has rejected a zoning amendment that would have limited the size of commercial developments in some areas of town, paving the way for a potential shopping center on Route 6 near the Connecticut state line.

The Town Board voted 3-2 Thursday in favor of the 25,000-square-foot limit, but the measure required four votes to pass after a petition initiated by developer Paul Camarda called for the "super majority" vote.

"I voted the way I felt I should have voted," said town Supervisor John Dunford, who favored the amendment. "I think the Town Board is going to go back and look at other alternatives to have the zoning code coincide with the master plan."

Dunford said the town's master plan calls for smaller, less-intensive uses in its "gateway" zones, such as the spot where Camarda wants to build a 183,000-square-foot shopping center anchored by a 135,000-square-foot retailer.

The developer argues that his proposed Stateline Retail Centre, a mile from Danbury, Conn., is in an optimal location and would keep dollars in Putnam County that are now going to Connecticut and Westchester.

"We are pleased that the effort to pull the zoning and derail the Stateline Retail Centre was unsuccessful," said Bill Madden, a Camarda spokesman. "The Stateline Retail Centre will generate new tax revenues that will help stabilize rising property taxes while creating new jobs and shopping convenience."

Camarda had accused the Town Board of fast-tracking the zoning amendment because of his project. His proposal, as submitted, complied with Southeast's master plan and required no zoning variances or wetland incursions, Camarda said.

Still, some residents are not thrilled with the potential for a big-box venture in their community.

"We all put a lot of money into the way we live here," said Joe's Hill Road resident Vivien Landau. "Putting a shopping center at the end of the road is not going to bring down our taxes. It will destroy the neighborhood. I hope they don't let him build it."

Councilman Richard Honeck said he voted against the 25,000-square-foot limitation, not for Camarda's sake, but to broaden the town's commercial base.

"I voted no because there are very few spots left for good commercial development," Honeck said. "This particular site (Route 6), because of its four-lane highway and access to (Interstate) 84, I think is an excellent location for good, clean commercial growth. Retail is sorely needed to help our taxes."

But others argued that tax relief did not come with large-scale development.
 

Good morning all

The clouds parted and the sun appeared as over 60 - it might have been 70 - folks gathered under billowing white tents for the opening on Saturday of the Tilly Foster Community Gardens.  Applications were ready and several people came with spades, hoes and plants ready to begin tilling. It was indeed heartwarming to see children and parents together.

Kudos to Chris Ruthven, Director of Parks and his staff for the exemplary manner in which they organized this event (and for all the work in preparing the area) and the Putnam County Police for managing the traffic and crowds.  It is still not too late to obtain applications and plots - 20X20 - are still available - 225-3650.  Sign-up sheets are also available for membership in the newly-established Friends of Tilly Foster.   A bulletin board located outside the perimeter of the Community Gardens has all the information.

This activity is but one of many that the Tilly Foster Advisory Board recommended.  Please take advantage of Tilly Foster's 199 acres - hiking trails, fishing or just plain strolling, imbibing the fresh air and scenery of this magnificently preserved land.  And you will be pleasantly surprised by all the updating and renovations (shining roofs; stalls repaired; buildings painted) that have taken place despite and inspite of the vocal naysayers who have been featured in the local papers.  However, there is still much to be done.  Steps taken have been deliberate but as the saying goes - haste makes waste. 

Tilly Foster is open daily to the public from 10AM to 4PM.  Horse watching but not feeding is encouraged  So bring your camera and easel if you paint.  The view from elevations on the farm of the Middle Branch is breathtaking. 

And finally, thanks to County Executive, Bob Bondi who has persevered through many obstacles in saving this jewel for all of Putnam County's present and future residents and children.  He is currently attempting to expand the Tilly Foster Conservation Area by obtaining property (over 100 acres) adjacent to the Farm on Pugsley Rd. to buffer the farm against development. (Recall that Pugsley Rd is about 2/10 of a mile from Brewster Highlands and Exit 19 ).  

Sincerely,
Ann

PS - Next Saturday, will be the grand opening at 9:00 AM of the Farmers' Market on Tilly.  The location will be next to the Community Gardens on Prospect Hill.   So come one, come all.

 

Good morning all - agree with letter writer except to say that "it is not too late" - the zoning change is urgent since Camarda is the stalking horse for bigger proposals on Rte 22 and only zoning has the force of law. 

Having been checkmated in terms of residential development thru moratoriums and upzoning, developers such as Camarda have found new avenues - a huge loophole in the zoning code that would permit "Big Box" development anywhere, including Rte 22.   Our only tool which has the force of law is zoning. 

Camarda has sought to intimidate the Town Board by threatening a lawsuit.  Zoning changes can be adopted anytime before Preliminary Approvals are given.  We are nowhere near that point. 

Urge the Town Board to adopt the 25,000 sq. ft limitation unanimously.  Don't let any town board member off the hook on this one.  (Tel - 279-4313 - Town Supervisor, Dunford).  As Joe Schaub urges, "Let's Take a Stand Against Big Box Projects."


Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.org

Take a stand against big-box projects

(Original publication: April 27, 2006)
I was quite disturbed to read "Developer says he wants to fill a void in Putnam County" (April 23 article), which shows the extent of Paul Camarda's developments in Putnam and how he belittles readers' intelligence by saying that his projects won't affect the county's landscape. As if this statement is not enough, he goes on to say: "Don't think these little footprints are going to forever change Putnam County."

I have been following to some extent Stateline Retail Centre and it is clearly not a little footprint. Instead, it is a big-box retail center about half the size of Brewster Highlands/Home Depot. Ostensibly, Mr. Camarda proposes to develop Stateline for our convenience and benefit. However, in the neighboring areas east of I-684, aside from two parties on Route 6 who have endorsed the project and possibly stand to gain financially from it, I know of no one who supports it.

Mr. Camarda's latest tactic is a flier sent to neighboring communities touting the benefits of Stateline as well as attempting to garner support against a proposed zoning amendment limiting the size of retail development. While some would say this amendment is a day late and a dollar short, I say let it be passed. Take a stand on big-box development that is neither wanted nor warranted and that will forever change the county's landscape. It is time to stand up and be counted.

Joe Schaub, Southeast

March 31, 2006

Good morning all

Last night at a packed meeting of the Town of Southeast Work Session, Camarda presented his proposal (similar to that which was presented at the Planning Board a couple of weeks ago) with some additional information. It was replete with a full dress media presentation.

Camarda's Track Record - Town Board member, Johnson persistent questioning elicited a begrudging Camarda admission that he lacked any experience in completing a  commercial development either in the Town of Southeast or anywhere in Putnam Country. 

Comment: Camarda started his career as a small-time residential developer (River Run - 4 houses on John Simpson Rd); then graduated to 71- residential units - Willow Ridge and 54-units - Centennial Ridge and his latest foray into the housing market has been the approved 381 unit market value senior housing complex off Stoneleigh Avenue in Carmel. 

His first testing of the commercial waters has been the Gateway/Fairways project consisting of a hotel/offices/ retaurants and senior housing.  Comments by Riverkeeper, Watershed Inspector General, CWCWC attorney and Coaltion-engaged engineer concerning water quality issues, sent Camarda scurrying to Albany to modify his development.  Town of Carmel has yet to grant approvals. 

His second testing of the commercial waters is a proposed  439,000 sq ft Big Box project on the Kent/Patterson border - Patterson Crossing (COSTCO; Lowes, sports store, etc.) He submitted the DEIS to the lead agency, the Patterson Planning Board.  Scathing comments by the town planner and engineer, sent Camarda back to the drawing boards. 

In light of his "experience," Mr. Camarda failed to recognize the well-known term "FAR" (Floor to Area Ratio) when queried by Town Board member Johnson.  HMMM. 

Master Plan - According to Camarda, the development is consistent with Master Plan and Zoning (ED2 - Economic Development).  Camarda claimed that the Master Plan did not have the force of law - only the zoning code did.

Yet he continually referred to the Master Plan as if it did.  Projected on screen, Camarda read carefully selected excerpts from the plan that appeared to support his contention that the development was consistent with Town objectives for the area.  Accused the Board and Supervisor Dunford of belatedly pursuing a zoning change (limit commercial development to 25,000 sq. ft) to deliberately thwart his development and violate his private property rights to develop his property (not his - he is a contract vendee).  Supervisor Dunford caught Camarda and replied that Camarda, realizing that a zoning change was in the offing, hastily submitted his proposal to beat the deadline for adoption of the code and had gathered 20% of district petition signers to further frustrate town board intentions.

Camarda then threatened lawsuit to which Supervisor Dunford cooly retorted "I have been sued by the best of them." (May I immodestly say, that CWCWC, Coalition to Preserve Open Space, Riverkeeper were among the organizations that filed lawsuits i.e. The Terravest development).

Mr. Camarda' s selectivity was exposed by Town Board member and attorney, Lorraine Mitts and Paul Johnson for what it was a selective reading and personal interpretation of the Master Plan

Under the revised Master Plan, Rte 6 had been designated a Gateway to the town and therefore, developments were subject to particular scrutiny in order not undermine the objectives of maintenance and enhancement of town character and aesthetics. Such objectives would be realized by scaling down the size of developments and enforcing stricter landscape and architectural requirements. 

During the audience comment portion, I stated that I had been present at several work sessions within the past year and a half wherein all the elements of changing the zoning code had been discussed between and among town board members, the Town Planner and residents. Foremost of those elements were the reduction of the size of commercial development which would not only be applicable to the Gateway District but also to the so-called HC1 (Highway) - heavily congested Rte 22, a most significant and imperative change, given the reported designs of another developer, Leplar, on the remaining developable areas along with the Rte. 

(Parenthetically, this was further confirmed by Supervisor Dunford's and Town Board Mitts  response to Ms. Eckardt  concerning the applicability of the zoning change to the HC-1 zone.  The zoning change had town-wide applicability, thereby avoiding what could have been a legal challenge - the charge that it was "spot zoning."  Also, Ms. Eckardt elicited the information that aside from Paul Johnson, none of the current members were sitting members of the town board at the time of the Brewster Highlands approvals). 

Ms. Eckardt also discussed other matters tangential to the topic and then stated that the project was the best she had seen but under questioning from Supervisor Dunford as to her position, stated that she opposed it.

Lastly, Supervisor Dunford stated that the Board was presently reviewing the validity of the petitions  and that a Public Hearing on the zoning change would be scheduled either sometime in April or May.

Development - Camarda contended that the only feasible, economically viable 186,000 development was to have an anchor store (130,000 + ) that would attract customers to the other smaller stores of 10,000; 30,000 and 3,000 sq. ft.  However, again during the comment portion, I asked what store achored the Exit 2 Danbury retail center (Staples. Trader Joe etc),  They didn't have an anchor and the development was a financial success.  He countered by saying that the situation was not comparable - the stores were at the exit; Stateline was not.  It wasn't?

The total 46-acre area is divided with approximately 15 acres of impervious surfaces (parking and buildings); 15 acres of septics, ponds and 15 acres vacant.  In response to resident query concerning the 15 vacant acres, Mr. Camarda said that he could possibly deed restrict so that it remains forever undeveloped.

Location of Development - According to Camarda, the nearest residence would be at least 1/2 mile and some even a mile from Stateline and therefore, the quality of life of residents would not be adversely impacted  However, one resident who lived on Tulip for over 40 years, challenged that assertion as did her neighbors.

Environment - Development of approximately 46 acres is optimally located - will not affect reservoirs; separated by Rte 6 and I84 buffers; wetlands non-existant.

Design of Development -  Camarda had photographs which showed some architectural tweakings of Big Box formula design elements - colors, awnings, softening of lines.  Town could demand and Camarda would support changes to meet town character and aesthetic requirements.

The stores and parking lot would be hidden from view from I84 and Rte 6 by berms.  You might say they would be located in a trough.

Significantly, this development aggravated auto dependency and traffic.  The design of the development situated the "Big Box" store at one end of the development while clustering the smaller stores at the other end, forcing customers to drive. 

Modern planning designs sensitive to the environmental impact of auto emissions and traffic have sought to lessen auto dependency by encouraging auto-free zones, sidewalks, walking paths, etc.  And here, within one development, a customer is compelled to use the car to gain access to stores.  This is the same lamentable situation that exists at Brewster Highlands.  You cannot go from Home Depot to Kohls without driving; nor can you go from either Home Depot or Kohls to the strip mall, euphemistically called "Brewster Square" (Applebees, etc.) without again driving. 

Traffic -drew the greatest amount of resident response and criticism  -  two lights and left-turning lanes needed.  Had DOT traffic volume figures which contrasted  Rte 6 traffic volumes at a mere 10% of capacity with sections of I84 to Rte 22 at 80% of capacity and  I84 and Rte 312 at 170% of capacity.  According to Camarda, the volume on Rte 6 would increase to 30%. 

However, Mr. Dunford informed the public that those numbers were misleading since they did not account for the presence of a proposed project on the Ct. side of the Rte 6 border which he described as "huge."

Residents strongly objected Camarda's description of the traffic volume and patterns; They enumerated numerous examples of NY and Ct residents using local roads - i.e. Joe's Hill, Rte 121 to bypass mounting traffic either from Connecticut or I84. 

Just as a comment: I dare anyone to find in the Brewster Highlands Traffic Study admission by the DOT or the developer  that traffic on Rte 312 in just a few years would be over capacity but ask anyone who today drives that road on a daily basis.  Traffic studies have notariously underestimated usage to the advantage of developers and, of course, residents are paying the penalty in idling; increasing auto emissions and air pollution; lost time and increasing incidences of accidents and road rage.

Lighting - Very sensitive to  resident concerns.  Will not duplicate incompetent Brewster Highlands design - Demonstrated with a pole - could have few or have many and lower, reducing light pollution.

Economic Benefits - In response to resident comment that Brewster Highlands did not bring the expected touted tax relief, Camarda replied that without it, the resident would have seen his tax bill balloon beyond the $1000 a year increase; that the project had brought millions into the county, town and school coffers and that further development such as Stateline would add to the county coffers now straining under increasing financial pressures to cover resident services and employee insurance and retirement benefits.

Impact on Village of Brewster - one resident pointed out that Stateline's location might undermine village efforts toward revitalization (a factor that I had mentioned in my letter) which was a cue for Greg Ball, the presumptive candidate for Assembly, opposing the current occupant, Will Stephens.  The residents quickly recognized that this represented nothing more than a campaign stop with campaign talk.   

Comment:  Some additional development may well occur on Rte 6, even with the change in zoning and restrictions.  There are a variety of business already there - warehouses; retaurants; auto shops; beer distributeship; veterinary and medical offices, etc. and some scattered residences.  The question:  Are there viable mixed-use or commercial development alternatives to Stateline Retail consistent with Master Plan objectives and proposed zoning limitations? 

Stay tuned

Sincerely,
Ann

March 31, 2006

A Winner - Biotic Corridor Zoning

Good morning all - At the Town of Southeast Open Space meeting on Wednesday, we discussed the experience of five towns in Westchester County that joined together to form a Biotic Corridor to protect the environment and wildlife.  Proponents of the corridor include Dr. Michael Klemens, head of the Metropolitan Conservation Alliance and former Lewisboro Supervisor, Nordgren.  His letter is attached below and appears in Thursday's Journal News.

Dr. Klemens has long been an advocate of such intermunicipal agreements and issued a 46-page document entitled -  Technical Paper Series No. 3 - Conservation Area Overlay District - a Model Local Law.

In the Forward to the Paper, Dr. Klemens stated the following: "Most ecosystem and wildlife protection efforts are accomplished by using sets of legal tools that were not specifically designed to accomplish these goals.  For example, we protect wetlands (and wetland-dependent species) through a myriad of laws and review processes that are designed to permit activities within wetlands.  Although we achieve de facto protection through such reviews, they occur on a site-by-site basis and do not address issues imperative to overall ecosystem health (such as habitat scale and connectivity).  In fact, our current land-use review system, by taking a "hard look" at relatively small parcels of land (usually less than 100 acres) is actually a contributing factor to habitat and ecosystem fragmentation.  The ultimate result of such fragmentation is that ecosystems lose species and vitality of functions."

And he continued - "The Metropolitan Conservation Alliance seeks to develop innovative tools to ensure that wildlife populations, and the habitats vital for their existence remain, while human communities strive to achieve a balance between community character, economic development and the protection of natural resources. "

One of our functions as an Open Space Committee has been to obtain an overall view of the town's parcels employing the latest GIS techology, thereby enabling us to assess their value on varying criteria measures, including those advocated by Dr. Klemens'  i.e. the maintenance of connectivity of open space and avoidance of fragmentation that imperil ecosystem viability. 

Putnam County and its towns are indeed blessed and unique and that uniqueness characterized by its rivers, streams and mountains and the wildlife that inhabit them, must be preserved.   

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com


Biotic corridor zoning a win-win

(Original publication: March 30, 2006)

Property values rise with biotic corridor zoning ("Biologists seek to add Bedford to wildlife area," March 20). I understand the concern the Building and Realty Institute has about the biotic corridor, but our experience here suggests it is a win-win for residents and developers. Hunt Farm in Lewisboro is typical of the kind of conservation that cluster-zoning the biotic corridor will encourage. Prices in Hunt Farm have appreciated 45 percent more than prices in conventional subdivisions here in Lewisboro. (I checked prices of over a dozen homes that resold in Hunt Farm vs. Indian Hill, both built in the early 1980s in Lewisboro, and calculated the price appreciation over the last 20 years.)

Homebuyers, voting with their pocketbooks, are showing their preference for conservation subdivisions. Why? Because 75 percent of Hunt Farm is preserved as open space. And it's not leftover, useless open space. It's the village common that residents use and enjoy. It's open space laced with hiking trails around streams and wetlands, all of which connect to neighboring nature preserves. The abundant wildlife and clean water are proof that Hunt Farm-type communities are good for the environment. Developers we worked with told us they preferred certainty to long, drawn-out legal battles. The biotic corridor will give them the certainty they need. As they build environmentally sensitive developments, they win, the wildlife and our water win, but most important, our residents win.

Jim Nordgren, South Salem

March 20, 2006

Stateline Retail - Urgent Notice

Good morning all

It has been a busy weekend as a result of the doings at the Southeast Town Board meeting on Thursday night.

Good morning all - Let's send Camarda a message - why don't you stay on your side of the stateline.   Please note letter below by Southeast resident, Lisa Aurello.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com


Shopping center not appropriate for area

(Original publication: March 17, 2006)
Sorry to be a fly in the ointment to developer Paul Camarda and letter-writer Norman Marino (Saturday) — two nonresidents busily making development plans for the Town of Southeast — but I do have a problem with those plans. I know the fact that a four-lane uncongested roadway sitting there unmolested is too good to pass up for those who envision shopping centers and bumper-to-bumper traffic and become intoxicated with dollar signs, but that area currently is home to abundant wildlife, as well as some beautiful viewscapes.

I think most of us in the Town of Southeast would not object to a very small development cropping up along that road, but to begin so big is just to invite more misery for everyone. And as Brewster Highlands has so efficiently pointed out, big-box retail does not cure our tax woes. Quite the contrary — since my taxes have consistently gone up despite unchecked development in the town and county (can anyone say school taxes?). Why can't these people turn to blighted areas for redevelopment instead of always ripping up our natural beauty for big, ugly buildings? "Yes" to a bookstore and maybe a restaurant; "No" to a Brewster Highlands-type of nightmare. Can't Camarda find anything in Ridgefield to spoil?

Lisa Aurello, Brewster

 

Good morning all - in light of the comments below by former Town of Carmel Councilman Marino, perhaps he would like to move to Southeast and become a Town Councilman here, so that he "can help fast track this development."  And then when he's finished in Southeast, there is always Patterson Crossing in Lake Carmel. 

Mr. Marino's stance is not really surprising - he wanted Wal-Mart et al to come to Carmel -  off Stoneleigh where the Carmel Senior housing complex is to be located.  Another Camarda bright idea. 

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

SOUTHEAST PERFECT LOCATION FOR CENTER
(Original publication: March 11, 2006)

I have to say that Mr. Camarda's new plan to build a shopping center on Route 6 in the Town of Southeast near the Connecticut state line (Feb. 25 article) hits the nail right on the head. It is the perfect place to do so. I can't count how many times I have said to myself, my wife and others, "Why doesn't someone build a shopping center along this road? It's the perfect location."

The facts are, it is a four-lane roadway located in an uncongested area with exits off of Interstate 84 in New York state and another exit right across the state line in Connecticut. There are not many residencies located along the roadway. It's the ideal place for anchor stores that we need to keep people in Putnam County, to shop Putnam, as the signs along our roadways ask them to do, year after year, not withstanding the fact that there really aren't too many places to shop Putnam.

Mr. Camarda and I have had our disagreements and agreements from time to time when I was sitting on the Carmel Town Board. This is an agreement. I believe this is a home run for the Town of Southeast and the citizens of Putnam County. I only wish that the Town of Carmel had a business location like the one Southeast has. Maybe some Connecticut shoppers will return Putnam's money spent in Connecticut. Fast track this one to stop the ever-increasing property taxes for all of Putnam County.


Norman Marino, Mahopac
 

Hi all - about ten days ago, I wrote a summary concerning this development - here is the story in this week's Putnam Courier. Oh yes, we are certainly growing "smartly." from one end of Putnam to the other. Have we missed any interstate exits?

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Camarda's Stateline Retail Centre hopes to reverse the Putnam paradox
By: Eric Gross
03/02/2006

SOUTHEAST - Putnam developer Paul Camarda hopes to reverse the Putnam paradox.
In announcing plans for the 183,000 square-foot Stateline Retail Centre Monday, Camarda told members of the Southeast Planning Board the 45 acre parcel off Route 6 about one mile from the New York-Connecticut border was the "perfect location. The four mile stretch of state highway from Route 684 to the Danbury border is the most overbuilt road found anywhere in Putnam County. The road is 46 feet wide-wider than Route 84. It carries only 7,000 vehicles a day as compared to Route 22 - a highway only 24 - feet wide that carries in excess of 25,000 vehicles a day."

Camarda told the board that he had done his "smart growth homework. The idea of smart growth is to develop where existing infrastructure is found. The location of Stateline Retail Centre will also reverse the Putnam paradox since the plaza will give residents of Westchester and Connecticut their first opportunity to easily shop in Putnam where for many years, Putnam residents have been shopping in Westchester or Connecticut. The center will result in an economic boon for Putnam County with very limited impact since on the four mile stretch of road there are only about a half dozen single family homes."

Camarda called the location of the proposed plaza "the right place. Stateline Retail Centre will be a great success."

The shopping center will include one major anchor retailer plus several smaller chain stores. Camarda described his plan as a "medium-sized center. It is about half the size of the Brewster Highlands located off Route 312 and I-84."

Camarda promised that the new site would consist of proper architectural treatment on both front elevations as well as rear viewing. "The proposal encroaches no wetlands, no wetland buffers and doesn't require any zoning variances. It meets the existing zoning criteria for Southeast," he told the planners.

Camarda predicted the center would generate millions of dollars of sales tax revenue each year for county coffers as well as substantial school tax revenues for the Brewster School District.

Camarda said the construction of the center would result in some 350 construction jobs as well as dozens of permanent full time and part time positions.

The board will now initiate a scoping session and begin the environmental review process.

Neg Dec on Southeast Zoning Changes

March 02, 2006

Good morning all

Yesterday, I wrote concerning Mr. Camarda's proposed "Stateline Retail" development in the Town of Southeast, one mile from the Connecticut border on Rte 6. Town officials in the face of intense pressure and threats of lawsuit, have courageously moved forward with a change in the code to protect our Gateway and limit the size and thereby, the type of commercial development advocated by developer Camarda and if, you have seen this morning's Journal News article, by County Executive Bondi and Marie Zarcone from Putnam Valley and I may add other town and county officials ie. Legislator Tony Hay.

Putnam County is experiencing the consequences of exponential population growth with costs for services spiraling beyond the ability of the county or towns to "catch-up" without either serious cutbacks or increases in taxes. Development, either residential or commercial, is not a free lunch. The reliance that "Big Box" development will provide the necessary boost for "catch-up" has not been borne out by the overblown expectation of sales revenue increases totaling $47 million.

We must ask "Why is it that 2/3 of the county's residents do not spend their disposable income in Putnam? " Is it perhaps that over 70% work outside of Putnam (Westchester, NYC, Fairfield) to obtain the disposable income needed to live here and therefore, may shop in the communities where they work? Aside from Putnam Hospital, the major employer or the Watson Pharmaceutical Company off Stoneleigh, what other major corporate entity is there for our highly skilled workforce to obtain gainful employment. Or is it because the retail choices offered are not commensurate with the tastes of residents. especially new arrivals with high disposable income. Or perhaps, it is that Connecticut has a much lower sales tax (6.25%) and tax-free days and for big-ticket items or specialty items, it pays to shop there? Has anyone really studied the consumer habits of our residents and matched their responses to the type of retail development proposed. If there is such an independent, credible study, please let me know.

I pose the above questions to begin a discussion. As residents, we came to realize the devastating effects of unbridled residential development on our quality of life, open space and of course, taxes. And we imposed moratoriums and initiated zoning changes to curtail such development. We are now faced with unbridled "Big Box" development which will stretch the entire length and breadth of I84, if its advocates succeed. Is that what we want? Is there another way?

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com
PS - If you wish to comment or to send a letter of support to Supervisor Dunford and to Town of Southeast Board members, the address is at the bottom of the notice.

From the ENB -
Negative Declaration

Putnam County - The Town of Southeast, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed Adoption of Amendments to Chapter 138, “Zoning” of the Town Code will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. the Town Board of the Town of Southeast embarking upon a process of updating local land use regulations to protect the community character and environmental quality of the Town. The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code are intended to achieve a number of objectives defined within the Comprehensive Plan and which are more fully described in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared for the Proposed Action.

Contact: John Dunford, Town of Southeast, Town Hall, 1 Main Street, Brewster, NY 10509, phone: (845) 279-4313.

Visit www.newyorkwater.org

"I Wanna Go Shoppin" - Camarda Style

March 01, 2006

Good morning all -

Wednesday night, Mr. Camarda really outdid himself. After a salute to "Smart Growth," he began his presentation. It was quiet, camera, action and there I was like a movie goer watching the old movie "North by Northwest." with Cary Grant. A plane swooped over I 84 and Rte 6, skimming trees and grassy meadows of the Connecticut Highway and there before us was "Stateline Retail", a 45-acre expanse, soon to house 183,000 sq. ft. of shopping delight, ready to slacken the thirst and lighten the pocket books of those poor Putnam shoppers laboring under "The Putnam Paradox." all that $100,000 median income
paycheck going to Connecticut.

And for what? Well it was a little vague - 135,000 sq. ft of Target (maybe); a bookstore - Borders (maybe); a sporting goods store (maybe); a warehouse - Sam's Club or Bee Jays (maybe) and what about the little 3,000 sq. ft. one - a restaurant out of the question - too much sewage.

Irresistible. Flat land; buffered from the East Branch by over 750 ft; retail lowest creater of sewage; soils great; no variances needed; little residential impact and consistent with the Master Plan. A couple of problems: The Town Board is presently considering a change that would limit the square footage of commercial development and thereby send Camarda's plans to the shredder. It is a proposal that the Coalition has vigorously supported and, as might be expected, that Camarda finds so egregious that he is threatening legal action against the town. I'll give him a copy of the "Home Town Advantage."

And there is another. Contrary to Camarda's assertions, Rte 6 on the road to Connecticut is not the infrastructure engineer's dream that it is cracked up to be. While touting its lack of traffic (only 7,000 cars a day), it appears, according to two impeccable observers - the Planning Board Chairman, Mr. Rohrman and a Planning Board member, Mr. Mateo, that the road is not only prone to traffic buildup from I84 but is dangerous. A little fly in the oinment but major as anyone would know who has tried to cross the highway from 121.

But Mr. Camarda remained undaunted - he is a veteran. When asked what was his track record in Southeast, he mentioned, again vaguely, a small residential development. To which, Mr. Rohrman, put on some flesh, looking over in my direction. It was "River Run," on John Simpson Road - four houses, two of which were so pecariously situated that enormous amounts of fill were required so that they would not topple into the Middle Branch below and at least one of which, lies so close to the road, that I fear some day a major accident will occur. So that's his track record. And I might add, that he is also responsible for Centennial Ridge, a 54-unit residential development right over the border in Carmel on Fair St. that obliterated the vistas we had become so accustomed.

But as I said he remained undaunted as he now pulled out pictures, pictures of "Big Boxes" their appearances modified by awnings, cute architectural details to break up the monotony of "formula architecture," and "green roofs."(Hmm - Patterson Crossing deja vu). No, not "green roofs but they will be part of an irrigation system.

According to Camarda, the companies need to understand that the old "Big Box" architecture is a no-no and if the town stands firm, they'll give in. And Camarda will be with us. A bemused smile crossed Planning Board member, Dan Armstrong's lips, as I am certain he recalls the battle he waged with Kohl's simply to soften the lines of that hideous building on 312. (As an aside, it was my baptism in the total power of corporate America to impose its will on a town. Altho approvals for Brewster Highlands occurred in the late 90's and Riverkeeper, Karen Argenti and community activists had commented principally on stormwater issues), I did not become involved until the design stage for Kohls in about 2001 and I have never forgotten that experience).

And now on to sidewalks. Camarda wants to give the whole enterprise "a village feel," lining the entire edge of the property with sidewalks. To which, Mr. Rohrman asked and where are you going to put them? Another fly, You might need Department of Transportation permission. If that what needs to be done, Camarda is going to do it.

Then Rohrman brought up the whole issue of lighting - "critical" they all chimed. "It's a simple issue, countered Camarda, "money." No obstacle.

And speaking of money, there is always the economics. $100 million in sales; 200 full-time employees - the young and the old need jobs; and I know the inbetweeners can sweat it out doing commuter time on the highways going to good jobs in Westchester, Connecticut, and points south so that they can earn the $100,000 needed to spend in his Statelines and Patterson Crossings Retail Centers. And then when they are all tuckered out, they can retire to his Retirement cottages on Stoneleigh and get buried in Gilead Cemetery up the hill. One-stop living and dying.

Continuing with the economics: $500,000 for school and town taxes and, most importantly, another $3.5 million for the county. On the road to the $47 million that everyone is projecting.

Lastly, Camarda is the contract vendee - as he is with all of the properties. But first he needs to clean up the EAF; some items according to Chairman Rohrman "were either glossed over or omitted" and triggered the completion of Part 3 of SEQRA which they hadn't done.

It's going to be a slog and as Tim Miller, Camarda's sidekick on so many of his ventures commented ( responsible for Cortlandt Center (Wal-Mart, etc) - Mohegan Lake and is presently raising t howls from Cold Spring residents over efforts to develop the town - he's the town planner there), we know "the Coalition will comment." Yes siree.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Good morning all - carmel/mahopac has a senior center; putnam valley has a senior center; patterson has a recreation center and southeast might have a senior center in the future. No town left behind without a senior center. Whose left? Kent.
Sincerely,
Ann
http://www.putopenspaces.com

Southeast vies for new senior center
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: February 15, 2006)

SOUTHEAST — Sylvia Welsher said she hopes she lives long enough to see a senior center built in her community.

Welsher, 86, said she has been a proud member of Southeast Senior Citizens for the past three years. But with growing membership and once-a-month meetings at the Lakeview Manor Recreation Building, the group needs something more substantial, she said.

"We need a senior center so badly. There are so many things we could do," the Marlin Road resident said. "We're all so anxious for one. I'll hang on as long as I can."

Welsher may perhaps get a state-of-the-art senior facility in her lifetime. Town officials are working toward becoming the next recipient of a county-owned senior center, similar to ones built in Mahopac and Putnam Valley.

Surveys were mailed this week to 1,100 Southeast seniors to gauge what sort of services they would use. They are due back by Feb. 24, Southeast Councilman Richard Honeck said. There are five potential sites in Southeast under consideration, said Honeck, though he would not disclose the locations.

"It's important that we have a center to service our increasing senior population," said Honeck, Putnam County's risk manager. "We're ready."

The decision of where to build another county senior center, however, is not up to Southeast. County officials are exploring other suitable locales, including Kent and Philipstown, said William Huestis, executive director of the Putnam County Office for the Aging.

A decision will be made in the coming weeks, he said, since a grant application for the New York State Small Cities Program is due April 3 and public hearings must take place before then.

Location, cooperation and proximity to public transportation will be among the determining factors, Huestis said.

"Southeast seniors are very active," Huestis said. "They have been advocating for a center in their town and that will be taken into consideration."

The Southeast Senior Citizens has about 200 members, with more people joining each year, said Theresa Korn, the group's vice president. Along with monthly meetings, there are weekly aerobics sessions and arts-and-crafts activities. The group organizes two trips per month to various destinations, Korn said. Members pay $10 a year in dues.

In 2000, the county opened the William Koehler Senior Center in Mahopac, a 12,000-square-foot building on Route 6. The roughly $3 million project was funded by county dollars and the $600,000 small-cities program grant, Huestis said. The $5 million Putnam County Senior Center at Putnam Valley was unveiled in the fall. The 14,000-square-foot building was paid for with a $240,000 federal grant, a $600,000 small-cities program grant and county funds, Huestis said.

"A senior center would be a great thing for the community to become closer," said Margaret Flannery, 67, of Vails Grove. "There's so much enthusiasm for it."

Hi all

The Coalition last year tried to get at the root of the Root Avenue subdivision. And again it is one of those horrid little developments that are cropping up everywhere in the Town as more and more buildable land diminishes, leaving only marginal land i.e. Waterside, Enoch Crosby, etc.

It is located where John Simpson Rd meets Root Avenue and a more problematical piece of property could not be had.

So on November, 2004, I wrote to John Dunford, Supervisor and subsequently in February to George Rohrman, Chairman of the Town of Southeast Planning Board. I am attaching the letter to Mr. Dunford wherein I state that I have contacted an engineering firm, Dufresne-Henry from Pawling to look at the road and stormwater problems, steep slopes that are evident for all to see.

In February of 2005, they issued a 13-page report examing the 5-lot subdivision lot by lot. You guessed it, there are significant problems and I hope that the Public Hearing before the Planning Board in late February, will expose them and dispose of this sorry development once and for all.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

01/05/06 07:30 PM
Civic Center
67 Main Street

DRAFT AGENDA
TOWN OF SOUTHEAST
JANUARY 5, 2006
SPECIAL MEETING
ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING 2006, 7:30PM

Notation of Exits
Pledge of Allegiance

SPECIAL MEETING

ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING:

1) Motion to Adopt Rules of Order.

2) Motion to Set Town Board Meeting Dates.

3) Motion to Set Roll Call Voting Order of the Town Board.

4) Motion to Designate Official Depositories for the Town of Southeast.

5) Motion to Designate Official Newspaper.

6) Motion to Set Town Board Committees -

a) Putnam County Liaison
b) Brewster Village Liaison
c) Watershed - Croton Plan
d) IDA Liaison
e) Special Districts
f) Recreation
g) Personnel
h) Parking Facilities
i) Cable j) Code Enforcement
k) Landfill Closure
l) Planning Board
m) Zoning Board of Appeals
n) Conservation Board
o) Tonetta Lake Advisory
p) Open Space Committee

7) Announcement of Town Clerks’ Appointments of Deputy Town Clerks

8) Motion to Appoint Registrar of Vital Statistics.
9) Motion to Appoint Handicap Issuing Agent.
10) Motion to Appoint Records Management Officer.

11) Motion to Appoint Marriage Officer.

12) Motion to Appoint Receiver of Taxes and Deputy Receiver of Taxes.

13) Motion to Appoint Town Historian.

14) Motion to Appoint Town Facilities and Special District Administrator.

15) Motion to Appoint Wetlands Inspector.

16) Motion to Appoint Fire Inspector.
Motion to Appoint Assistant Fire Inspector.
Motion to Appoint Safety Coordination Officer.

17) Motion to Designate Town Counsel.
Motion to Designate Town Engineer.

18) Motion to Appoint Delegate to Annual Association of Towns Meeting and Alternate.

19) Motion to Appoint Fixed Assets Officer.

20) Motion to Set Mileage Rate.

21) Motion to Adopt Standard Work Day.

22) Motion to Appoint the Dog Control Officer.

23) Motion to Accept the Amended Fee Schedule for 2005 and Special Districts
Rates for 2005.

24) Motion to Authorize Putnam County to Levy Taxes.
25) Announcement of Supervisor’s Appointment of Deputy Supervisor.
26) Motion to Adopt Procurement Policy.
27) Motion to Appoint Parking Enforcement Officer.

28) Motion Appointing the Following Board Seats:
Board of Assessment Review Ellie McCaughey 09/30/10
Historic Sites Commission Peter Tringali 12/31/12
Library Frederick Voss 08/05/10
Zoning Board of Appeals Thomas Costello 12/31/10
Architectural Review Board Thomas Frasca 12/31/08 Virginia Stephens 12/31/08 John Goudy 12/31/08
Open Space Committee: David Bruen 12/31/06
Don Burrows 12/31/06
Kerry Cunningham 12/31/06
Ann Fanizzi 12/31/06
Cheri Ingraham 12/31/06
Angela Matra 12/31/06
Mildred Nugent 12/31/06
Tonetta Lake Advisory Board:
Michael Langley 12/31/06
Ralph Woodgate 12/31/06
Robert Lund 12/31/06
Karl Lebitsch 12/31/06
Karen Ratajack 12/31/06
Margaret Papp 12/31/06
Robert Zubrycki 12/31/06
Donald Hazen 12/31/06

29) Motion to Appoint Open Space Committee Chairman
30) Motion to Appoint Tonetta Lake Advisory Board Chairman
31) Motion to Appoint Planning Board Chairman
32) Motion to Appoint Planning Board Vice Chairman
33) Motion to Appoint Zoning Board Chairman
34) Motion to Appoint Zoning Board Vice Chairman
35) Motion to Appoint Conservation Commission Chairman
36) Motion to Appoint Architectural Review Board Chairman
37) Motion to Appoint Acting Building Inspector

SPECIAL MEETING

1) Resolution - Grant Application - Peach Lake
2) Motion - To Refer Zoning Amendments to Putnam County Planning

Hi all

Please note following positions available and deadline for application. These are critical positions and hope that you or a friend who might be interested, will consider applying.
Sincerely,
Ann

The Town Board of the Town of Southeast is currently seeking applicants for openings on the Town's Planning Board, Conservation Commission and Architectural Review Board. All applicants must be residents of the Town of Southeast. Please send resumes by January 12, 2006 to:

John J. Dunford, Supervisor
Town of Southeast--Town Hall
1 Main Street
Brewster, NY 10509

October 05, 2005

Long-delayed bridge in Southeast finally nears finish - New York Journal News Article

September 1, 2005

Southeast Senior Housing Letter/Carmel Senior Housing

Good morning - A little late but am sharing the Coalition's comments of August 18th to the Town of Southeast Planning Board on the proposed 168 senior housing units to be built off Rte. 22

And just a word. The entire issue of senior housing is bedeviling many towns in Putnam County and action needs to be taken. Because of the numbers totaling over 1000 units and their compression within a 2-mile area in the Hamlet of Carmel, further stressing limited infrastructure and severely impacting the quality of life not only of residents of the Hamlet (I live within 500 ft of the border of Carmel and Southeast and am a taxpayer in both towns) but also affecting residents of the Town of Southeast who must use Rte 6 to shop or use medical services, the Coalition has taken a very strong proactive stance, going so far as to litigate a senior housing development of over 375 units.

Yet, as you will read, we are equally concerned about Senior Housing in Southeast and have gone as far as litigating the Terravest development, one of whose components is senior housing and have spoken before the Town Board, strongly criticizing what I characterized as the "stripped down" version without community room and amenities. Again, we are gratified that Supervisor Dunford and the Town Board heard us and included these amenities as a condition of the project's approval.

Whether we will prevail at the court level is problematical but we have been successful in our campaign urging Carmel Town officials to scrap the current Multi-Family Senior Housing Law; the issue of senior housing has become a 2005 campaign issue; a member of the Town Board, Mr. Marino, Candidate for re-election has urged a moratorium as has the Candidate for Supervisor, Connie Munday and last night at the Work Session all members of the Town Board and Supervisor agreed that the law was broken and had to be fixed for the sake of all of us.

We are indeed gratified but hope that a moratorium will be finally declared.

Sincerely,

Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Good morning all - question - does Carmel or Kent have such a law and what about the other Putnam towns? Remember, the house fires on Rte 6. How many slumlords are there enriching themselves at the expense of life and limb? By the way, what happened to Carmel's proposed adult store law? The Giggles windows get raunchier by the minute, not 500 ft from Reed library and houses of worship and about a half mile from the Camarda proposed 5-story overnighter, the Staybridge, on Rte 6. Welcome to the Hamlet of Carmel.
Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Southeast to tackle illegal housing
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: August 8, 2005)

Southeast officials are looking to crack down on illegal housing, a widespread problem that has begun to take a toll.

After two years of deliberation, the Town Board drafted a rental registration bill last week that puts the burden on landlords to get permits and inspections of their rental properties.

"The intent is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Southeast," said Councilman Richard Honeck. "This will give the inspector the right to go in on a more frequent basis."

The initiative, which still requires town approvals, would be a first in Putnam County. In the last few years, there have been several fires throughout the county in single-family homes occupied by an excessive number of tenants.

"There have been instances of two dangerous fires in the last two years in houses that had 25 people in them," said Deputy Supervisor Paul Johnson. "This is not a perfect solution, but it's a step in the right direction. We are leading the way."

There are roughly 1,300 rentals in the town, including those in the village of Brewster, Honeck said. The town's law would not extend to the village, though officials there are looking at enacting a similar regulation, said village Trustee Mike Santos.

At the moment, there are no rental laws in the town, Honeck said. An inspector may only enter a property with permission from the landlord or if there is probable cause for illegal activity, he said.

The proposal would require landlords to register their properties with a building inspector. Upon registration, an inspector would then examine the apartment or home. Property owners must renew their permits every two years, requiring re-inspections during each renewal, Honeck said.

Some landlords support the proposal.

"I think it's a great idea, as long as it's enforced and not a way for them to generate fees," said Robert Morini, a real estate agent and landlord of several Southeast properties. "There are definitely apartments where there is overcrowding. Municipalities have been reluctant to pass legislation or enforce it for fear they are going after one particular group."

Some say overcrowding has largely resulted from the influx of illegal immigrants, many of them Hispanic, to the area in the last decade and the lack of affordable housing.

On Long Island, where the problem has existed for several years, officials in municipalities have passed rental regulations. Honeck said Southeast is following similar laws enforced in the towns of Brookhaven and Riverhead.

Brookhaven officials passed the Neighborhood Preservation law in 1999 that requires a property owner to register their rental unit with the chief building inspector and obtain a rental occupancy permit that is good for two years.

Inspections, however, were deemed illegal by the state Supreme Court, said Brookhaven's Chief of Staff George Hoffman. A building inspector may only enter a dwelling with the consent of the owner and a warrant issued by a court, according to the town's codes.

Brookhaven's permit fees include $150 for a one-bedroom and $450 for a four-bedroom unit.

"We have a big problem with illegal apartments and landlords cramming 40 to 60 people in houses," Hoffman said. "It really impacts the quality of life for everyone."

Good morning all - in the event you may have missed this article, an excellent one on the frustrations of citizen boards, trying to be representatives of the people and express their wishes, especially for Tilly - just be a mini Muscoot Farm for families to enjoy.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Land-use boards voice concerns
By SUSAN ELAN
selan@thejournalnews.com
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: August 7, 2005)

Recommendations

Putnam National improvements would include nine more holes of golf, a swimming pool, tennis courts, ballfields and restoration of the Hill-Agor farmhouse.

The Tilly Foster Farms advisory board suggests the creation of hiking trails and a community garden plus a visitors center, a small museum, and a weather station.
_______________________________________________

County Executive Robert Bondi now presides over two advisory boards set up to ensure that Putnam residents enjoy the benefits of being stakeholders in the county-owned Tilly Foster Farm Conservation Area in Southeast and Putnam National Golf Club in Mahopac.

The Putnam County Legislature voted last week to delegate oversight to Bondi of the panels charged with planning how to improve public use and access at properties Putnam spent roughly $15 million to acquire.

But some board members say they are frustrated by the failure to implement their recommendations — the fruit of dozens of meetings and hundreds of hours of work. Some also worry that the committees will be disbanded and their proposals for educational and recreational opportunities ignored.

County administration officials say the concerns are unfounded.

"We will implement the recommendations to the extent funds are available," Bondi said. "We face a very significant challenge with the 2006 county budget. And a lot of other groups also want money from the county."

Implementation, or the lack of it, is what convinced legislators to assign responsibility for the committees to Bondi, Legislator Vincent Tamagna, R-Philipstown, said Friday.

"The frustration is justified," said Tamagna, former chairman of the advisory boards. "Many people gave a lot of time. We should be a lot further along."

Don Cuomo of Southeast, a Tilly Foster advisory board member and a hydrologist, agrees.

It wouldn't take much time or money to clear land for a community garden or set up a weather station that school children could access via a Web site and later visit, Cuomo said.

Those are two of the board's recommendations to make the 199-acre farm usable by more than the small number who currently pay to board horses there. Others include a visitors center, a small museum and nature trails.

The county used $3.9 million of its watershed protection money from New York City to buy Tilly Foster, a 19th-century farm threatened by development. Since purchasing the 199-acre property in 2002, the county has added more than 100 acres.

"Success is gauged by how many people from the county get through the door," Cuomo said. "Our submissions to the county have languished. I think the change (of oversight) may mark the end of the Tilly Foster advisory board."

Deputy County Executive Frank Del Campo said Friday there is no plan to disband the advisory boards.

"Now they can play a more critical role by being closer to the county executive because we do the implementation," Del Campo said.

And while the pace may not please everybody, progress is being made, he said.

The community garden will be ready for planting by residents in the spring and drainage needed to provide a parking area for visitors to the hiking trails is being installed, Del Campo said.

In addition, Putnam has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars replacing leaky roofs at the farm, he said.

To offset some of its expenses, the county hopes to lease buildings at Tilly Foster, to among others, the Cornell Cooperative Extension, which would provide educational programs, Del Campo said.

Southeast resident Ann Fanizzi, who heads the Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space and serves as a member of the Tilly Foster Farm Advisory Board, said she fears the county may lease too many of the buildings, interfering with plans for the visitors center and museum.

"We sit and recommend, but we do not have the power to do anything," Fanizzi said.

For the Lake MacGregor advisory panel at Putnam National Golf Course, the future doesn't look much brighter.

"I'm disappointed that nothing is being done," said William McCormack of Mahopac, a member of the board that has suggested improvements, including an additional nine holes of golf, a swimming pool, tennis courts, ballfields and restoration of the historic Hill-Agor homestead.

The county spent $11.35 million to purchase the 375-acre property, which already has an 18-hole golf course and banquet facility, the former Mahopac Airport and the Hill-Agor farm.

Del Campo said negotiations to lease 35 acres for athletic fields to the town of Carmel are moving forward and the county is trying to obtain grants to pay for other improvements instead of funding them with taxpayer money.

But McCormack, who describes himself as an enthusiastic supporter of county ownership of the property, said taxpayers who don't play golf should be provided with ways to enjoy it, too.

"Why did we buy it if we don't use it?" he asked. "I want to see things move forward as soon as possible."

August 3, 2005

Developer quietly unveils plans for Southeast - New York Journal News Article

Plans, plans and more plans by Southeast's Master Developer, Lepler.
Ann Fanizzi

Good morning all

A bit backed up and realized that I hadn't shared this letter sent on the 5th of July to Supervisor Dunford concerning the development and the Southeast Planning Board actions

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Good morning all - here's something to keep in mind when we think about the future of Tilly Foster. Put your $$$ on live flesh and blood steads rather than on dead brick and motar offices. Tilly says "Neigh to Offices."

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Study: Horses Are $39 Billion Industry
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: June 28, 2005
Filed at 6:46 a.m. ET

RICHARDSON, Texas (AP) -- Freya Warren scooped up a handful of hay on the floor of her 21-stall horse barn.

She turned the yellow shoots over in her palm, satisfied that the mixture had enough large stalks -- too fine and the horses will swallow the hay without chewing, causing digestive problems.

Warren had reason to be picky. She had just taken a delivery of fresh hay -- $5 apiece for 261 bales, or more than $1,300. And that's just the start of Warren's expenses, including the salaries of four employees, $5,000 a year for insurance, $800 a month for feed, and $300 a month to haul away all the manure.

It's the same story across Texas, the nation's No. 1 horse state, and hundreds of stables, breeders and training farms around the country, who support a network of veterinarians, farriers and tack shops.

Deloitte Consulting LLC estimates that the horse industry contributes $39 billion to the U.S. economy. That covers everything from the cost of saddles and salt blocks for backyard ponies to the earnings of millionaire jockeys and trainers at the nation's thoroughbred racetracks.

When indirect costs are included -- the money spent at grocery stores, car dealers and dry cleaners by people who work in the business -- the economic impact is $102 billion, according to the consultants.

Several horse racing groups paid for the study, which the American Horse Council planned to release Tuesday.

According to the report, the owning, showing and racing of horses supports 1.4 million jobs. The consultants say there are 9.2 million horses in the United States.

That would be an increase of about 2 million since the last survey of this type nearly 10 years ago. Horse fanciers say there is a nostalgic yearning for simpler times, when horses were a part of daily life, doing chores and providing transportation.

''Even though they're not used as much in commerce as they once were, horses are still an important part of many people's lives,'' said Jay Hickey, president of the horse council. ''It's an agribusiness. It's a sport. It's gaming. It's a breeding industry.''

Hickey said the horse groups had no particular aim for the study other than getting fresh research on their industry. However, trade groups in Washington frequently use such studies when lobbying Congress and the executive branch for policies that would help their industry, and the horse lobby has several of those.

Equine groups are pushing for more favorable capital-gain tax treatment of horses. They want to be eligible for federal disaster relief. Several states allow slot machines at racetracks, and racing interests in others, including Texas, want to do the same. They generally oppose laws that would ban or limit Internet betting.

The groups are also lobbying for more public land to be available for riding trails. In urban areas, from Long Island to Dallas, stables and other operations are being pushed out to make room for homes and other development.

Horse farms line the horizon in Pilot Point, about 40 miles northwest of Dallas, and account for nearly half the agricultural commodity production in Denton County. The horse farms began replacing cattle ranches in the 1970s.

''After the horse industry moved in, land prices started to escalate,'' said J. Raymond Davis Sr., chief executive of Pointe Bank. ''It's had a real large impact here.''

According to the Deloitte study, owners spend an average of $2,900 per year on their horses -- double that for racers.

David O'Connor, who won gold medals in equestrian events at the 1996 and 2000 Summer Olympics, said cost is a challenge for the sport.

''Not everybody can afford to own a horse, especially in urban areas,'' O'Connor said. ''We've got to build up clubs so people don't have to own a horse but can come out and enjoy riding as a family experience, like soccer or tennis.''

NYState DOT in the News
July 26, 2004

NYSDOT: $410,000 to Improve Access to Terravest Corporate Park
Funds Will Facilitate New Ace Endico Facility Creating 61 New Jobs

New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Commissioner Joseph H. Boardman today announced $410,000 in Industrial Access Program (IAP) funds for the Putnam County Economic Development Corporation to improve access to the Terravest Corporate Park in the Town of Southeast. The funding will facilitate construction of a new 80,000-square-foot warehouse by Ace Endico, a distributor and processor of food and grocery products, retaining 150 jobs and creating an additional 61 jobs by 2005.

“The Industrial Access Program has helped hundreds of businesses meet their transportation infrastructure needs, resulting in thousands of new jobs for New Yorkers all across our great state,” Commissioner Boardman said. “We are proud to lend our support to the expansion efforts of companies like Ace Endico, and at the same time help the Terravest Corporate Park attract businesses to their facility, bringing with them even more jobs for the people of Putnam County and the Hudson Valley.”

The Industrial Access Program (IAP), administered by the State Department of Transportation, is a reimbursement program that provides a combination of grants and interest-free loans on a 60 percent/ 40 percent split to municipalities, or associations sponsored by municipalities, for transportation access projects that promote economic development, encourage investment and help create and maintain jobs. The IAP award to Putnam County consists of a $246,000 grant and a $164,000 interest-free loan.

IAP funds will be used to construct a turning lane within the right-of-way of International Boulevard, upgrade the intersection of International Boulevard and State Route 312, and install traffic signals where State Route 312 intersects with International Boulevard and Zimmer Road. These improvements will safely accommodate truck and other vehicular traffic exiting from the Terravest Park and facilitate the free movement of local traffic within the park’s vicinity.

The new Ace Endico warehouse will replace the company’s facility located in the Village of Elmsford, Westchester County, a warehouse deemed too small to efficiently handle expanding operations. Ace Endico considered re-locating to sites in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and Mahwah, New Jersey, but chose Terravest Corporate Park as its most viable option. The company is investing $9.5 million in private funds to develop the new warehouse, with an additional $3.5 million being invested by the Town of Southeast-based Covington Management Company, LTD, developer of the Terravest Corporate Park. The proposed 80,000-square-foot facility could also be expanded to 220,000 square feet in the future.

Ace Endico Vice-President Michael Endico said, “I am honored to have received the support from NYSDOT and Putnam County that will make it possible for Ace Endico to remain here in New York State, helping us grow and create new jobs and opportunities for the people of the Hudson Valley.”

Roadway improvements are expected to be completed by the end of 2004.

Campus at Fields Corners - Commnets

Good morning all - isn't it splendid before any comments have been received, the DEC in their official ENB Notice tells you that they have already decided. This is what we are up against. And the residents of Southeast will have live with roads that are "improved;" a Rte 312 that is congested beyond endurance; the school tax implications of an additional 143 homes to the housing stock; the destruction of habitat and corridors for homeless wildlife and all this next door to Tilly Foster Conservation Area that the DEP is retrofitting for its own private quarters. Perfect.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Putnam County

Applicant: Putnam Seabury Partners LP
C/O Schulweis Realty Inc
9 West 57TH St 50TH Fl
New York, NY 10019
Facility: Campus at Field Corners
NY Rt 312 & Pugsley Rd
Southeast, NY
Application ID: 3-3730-00155/00001
Permit(s) Applied for: Article 24 Freshwater Wetlands
Article 15 Title 15 Water Supply
Article 17 Titles 7 & 8 Private/Commercial/Institutional SPDES
Article 17 Titles 7 & 8 Stormwater Discharge

Project is Located: Southeast, Putnam County
Project Description:

The Department has made a tentative determination to approve this application for a new SPDES permit for an initial surface discharge (Outfall 001) of 54,340 gallons per day (gpd) of treated sanitary wastewater in conjunction with the construction of the proposed Campus at Field Corners project. The SPDES permit will also allow the discharge to increase in the future up to 68,000 gpd.

The residential project includes construction of 143 single family homes with associated internal roadways, a new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) with outfall to Beaver Brook, Class C(ts), stormwater management facilities including five stormwater detention basins, and various other improvements on a 327-acre parcel.

The applicant also proposes to widen Barrett Road and construct improvements to the intersection of Pugsley Road and NYS Route 312, install utility lines and grade portions of Freshwater Wetlands LC-18 (Class II) and LC-28 (Class II) and the associated 100 foot adjacent areas of these wetlands. The total area of disturbance to the two NYS Freshwater Wetlands is 0.09-acre; the total area of disturbance to the adjacent areas of these wetlands is 3.13-acres. Approximately 3.25-acres of adjacent area of these wetlands will be replanted with native vegetation at the project site as mitigation.

Construction of the WWTP component of the project includes construction of primary, secondary, and tertiary clarifiers, equalization tanks, and sand filtration, aeration, and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection systems. The proposed project has been approved by New York City Department of Environmental Protection for participation in the Phosphorus Offset Pilot Program. Potable water is proposed to be supplied by two new wells at a rate of up to 78, 010 gpd. The proposed water supply system includes disinfection, storage and distribution systems. The project is located on the west side of Pugsley Road and is bisected, east to west, by Barrett Road in the Town of Southeast, Putnam County. Draft Water Supply and SPDES permits are available for inspection and comment at the regional office.

State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
A draft environmental impact statement has been prepared on this project and is on file.
SEQR Lead Agency:
Southeast Town Planning Board
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
A cultural resources survey has been completed. Based on information provided in the survey report, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) has determined that the proposed activity will have no impact on registered or eligible archaeological sites or historic structures. No further review in accordance with SHPA is required.
Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.
Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Jun 17 2005.
Contact: R Scott Ballard
NYSDEC Region 3 Headquarters
21 South Putt Corners Rd
New Paltz, NY 12561
(845)256-3054
r3dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us

Campus

From: Edie Keasbey <edie.keasbey@verizon.net>
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: Campus
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 15:51:14 -0400

Putnam County
 

Project Description:
The Department has made a tentative determination to approve this application for a new SPDES permit for an initial surface discharge (Outfall 001) of 54,340 gallons per day (gpd) of treated sanitary wastewater in conjunction with the construction of the proposed Campus at Field Corners project. The SPDES permit will also allow the discharge to increase in the future up to 68,000 gpd. The residential project includes construction of 143 single family homes with associated internal roadways, a new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) with outfall to Beaver Brook, Class C(ts), stormwater management facilities including five stormwater detention basins, and various other improvements on a 327-acre parcel. The applicant also proposes to widen Barrett Road and construct improvements to the intersection of Pugsley Road and NYS Route 312, install utility lines and grade portions of Freshwater Wetlands LC-18 (Class II) and LC-28 (Class II) and the associated 100 foot adjacent areas of these wetlands. The total area of disturbance to the two NYS Freshwater Wetlands is 0.09-acre; the total area of disturbance to the adjacent areas of these wetlands is 3.13-acres. Approximately 3.25-acres of adjacent area of these wetlands will be replanted with native vegetation at the project site as mitigation. Construction of the WWTP component of the project includes construction of primary, secondary, and tertiary clarifiers, equalization tanks, and sand filtration, aeration, and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection systems. The proposed project has been approved by New York City Department of Environmental Protection for participation in the Phosphorus Offset Pilot Program. Potable water is proposed to be supplied by two new wells at a rate of up to 78, 010 gpd. The proposed water supply system includes disinfection, storage and distribution systems. The project is located on the west side of Pugsley Road and is bisected, east to west, by Barrett Road in the Town of Southeast, Putnam County. Draft Water Supply and SPDES permits are available for inspection and comment at the regional office.
State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
A draft environmental impact statement has been prepared on this project and is on file.
SEQR Lead Agency:
Southeast Town Planning Board
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
A cultural resources survey has been completed. Based on information provided in the survey report, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) has determined that the proposed activity will have no impact on registered or eligible archaeological sites or historic structures. No further review in accordance with SHPA is required.
Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.
Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Jun 17 2005.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paving would disrupt a community
(Original publication: April 6, 2005)

As a resident of Enoch Crosby Road for the last nine years, I have come to see Maple Road as much more than a utilitarian conduit from point A to point B. It is a roadway that serves automobile traffic on a curving dirt surface beside the Middle Branch Reservoir. It is also a walkway (and bikeway) where people take in the water view and the fresh air and the dappled shade along this mile-long jewel that remains amazingly unscathed from the frenzied development of recent times.

As more people have moved to the Enoch Crosby area, automobile traffic as well as foot traffic has increased on Maple Road. The increased foot traffic is especially evident on weekends. It seems an extension of our community — a Main Street on the Middle Branch.

If Maple Road gets paved (partially or fully) this natural community of people reveling in the beautiful dirt road beside the sparkling Middle Branch will be trashed — pushed aside for the petty convenience of our machines. Is shaving 20 or 30 seconds off the trip over Maple Road that important?

If the current 20 mph speed limit over the unpaved segment of the road was observed, I believe the concerns about safe handling and wear and tear on cars would be moot.

We have a beautiful life over here near the shore of the Middle Branch. Each of us needs to look inside our hearts and figure out what is really important.

Charles Azzaretti, Brewster

Paving will threaten local water supply . . .
(Original publication: April 6, 2005)

I live on Maple Road and work as a water resource professional, including the management of drinking water supplies. I write regarding Saturday's article on Maple Road by Marcela Rojas. I was concerned with one omission: The Middle Branch Reservoir supplies drinking water to sections of Southeast in addition to its contribution to New York City. New York City has the distinct advantage of mixing Middle Branch water with the Croton system, and the Croton with the much-larger West of Hudson system. The residents of Southeast do not have that luxury. For them, anything going into the Middle Branch Reservoir ends up in their drinking glasses and baths.

Paving pervious surfaces creates storm water runoff issues. Storm water is widely considered the most prevalent source of surface water contamination. The close proximity of Maple Road to the reservoir, a feature that makes it so unique, exacerbates the storm water potential. To make matters worse, pavement will increase the amount of traffic this road sees.

Maple Road is used by hundreds of pedestrians as a "linear" recreation area. It is home to charity events and running races throughout the year. I remain optimistic the Southeast Town Board will not pave over a scenic road, compromise the drinking water of residents and destroy a successful linear park, all to keep the mud off a few cars. Further, the fact that the entire town will be footing the bill for this questionable "improvement" seems grossly unfair.

Donald J Cuomo, Southeast

"Paving it Over"
Debate heats up over paving of Southeast's Maple Road
By MARCELA ROJAS
THE JOURNAL NEWS

What's next

The town will host an informational meeting on the Maple Road paving proposal at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday at Lakeview Manor Recreation Center, 215 Shore Drive.

Concerned residents against paving Maple Road will have an information booth at the corner of Maple and Enoch Crosby roads throughout the day today and tomorrow, weather permitting.

(Original publication: April 2, 2005)
SOUTHEAST — As town officials move forward with requests from some residents to pave a section of a country road, other longtime homeowners are fighting to preserve it.

The town is hosting an informational meeting Tuesday evening to go over the proposal and costs with the public. Meanwhile, several concerned residents will be at the intersection of Maple and Enoch Crosby roads today and Sunday, weather permitting, handing out information protesting the project. Many say they oppose paving the scenic road, citing environmental and driving hazards.

"My fear is, if they pave that road, it will give more people an incentive to take Maple Road and go faster. People already don't respect the speed limit," said Stephen Shea, who has lived at the corner of Maple and Enoch Crosby roads for 15 years. "There are blind curves and hills. It's very dangerous. If it means having a dirty car or someone killed, I'd rather have a dirty car."

The proposal to pave about 2,500 feet of the road's northern end — from Enoch Crosby Road to an existing paved portion on Old Route 6 — was spearheaded by Sergio Martini, an Enoch Crosby Road resident. Martini said he gathered more than 50 signatures from neighbors and presented the petition to the town in the summer of 2003.

"It's bumpy and slippery, and it's not maintained right," said Martini, a seven-year resident of the area. "It's dangerous for people to drive on, and it ruins the cars. There's wear and tear on the shocks and the tires. I have nice-looking cars, and I don't want to ruin them."

From its southern end, the 2-mile stretch starts from Drewville Road and runs as pavement for about a half-mile. It then becomes a dirt road for about a mile and then finishes as pavement near the Carmel border. The town of Southeast has 10 miles of dirt road, Lawlor said.

"The toughest part to maintain is the intersection of Enoch and Maple because there's a lot of turning motion, and that creates a lot of potholes," said Lawlor. "We're still going to have that center section as dirt, so it doesn't make a big difference to us. I just want to address what the people want to do."

A rough cost estimate of paving the northern half-mile stretch is about $250,000, Lawlor said. A walkway that would run the length of that section is about $30,000, he added.

The paving of dirt roads has stirred some controversy in the county. Some Patterson residents are battling plans to blacktop Couch Road. Public outcry resulted in the revoking of a $75,000 federal grant that would have been used to pave the historic 1-mile road. Town officials and residents are due in court on the issue April 15.

Because of Maple Road's proximity to the reservoir, the town submitted a storm-water control plan to the DEP last year that addresses erosion and sediment control, turbidity, fencing and other concerns, said Ian Michaels, a DEP spokesmen. An environmental review of the paving's impact has yet to be presented, he said.

"The plan has addressed what we require," said Michaels. "They have been very cooperative, but we can't issue a final decision until (the environmental study) is completed."

Lawlor confirmed the town has not pursued an environmental review yet but will wait until after the meeting to assess whether residents and officials want to move forward with the project.

Roadways within 100 feet of a waterway cannot be made impervious, or paved, according to a law established in the 1950s and later updated in 1997, Michaels said. But in this instance, the rules exempt pre-existing roads, he said.

Good morning all

Well how did it go? The ending tells the story as Mr. Trincalli (sic) of the Conservation Board lauded the applicant, who in the face of his private property rights and "at great cost and great effort," nevertheless sought to cooperate to meet some of the reservations expressed by members of the Board and the community.

It was an unseemly, congratulatory spectacle. The upshot was that 4 members voted for the project; 1 against (Don Cuomo) and 2 were abs.

Just some highlights:

Mr. Cuomo cited Criteria for Approval (78.4G) and stated that the applicant had not met the standards on Issues 1,2,3 and 5. These issues were: that the project will affect the wetland; change the dynamic of watercoures; degrade the quality of water and exacerbate erosion, sedimentation and siltation problems. He cited the problems occurring at Brewster Highlands - the applicant was fined for erosion and sedimentation. He ended by stating that "there were no compelling reason to believe that the devices handled these stormwater issues."

All of this was refuted by Terry Hahn who trotted out the professional opinions of the experts contracted by the applicant and of course, the DEP and the DEC. The applicant had used appropriate methodology sanctioned by the DEP; the project would undergo weekly monitoring (you remember how residents reported flooding and I took pictures of flooding in January - who was minding the store then?) As for the Highlands situation, it had occurred early in the construction phase - the devices had not been properly installed - quickly remedied.

And the final witness for the applicant, Attorney Rossi, who stated that "no evidence had been submitted to refute" Mr. Hahn's assertions and that the project had undergone "Third Party Court Review" and had been sustained much I may add to the dismay of CWCWC and the Coalition and the residents who were party to the suit.

Further discussion ensued spurred on by Mr. Cuomo who focused on the function of the wetland buffers as contributing to the health of the wetland, especially the course of water with significant deforestation. Chairman Fasano then expressed his concern as to the long-term impact of impaired buffers. Ms. Hahn and Rossi countered that the information provided was based on riparian buffers. Mr. Fasano then cited the new regulations and proffered the opinion that the "majority of the land would not have even been regulated but that the new law subjects additional land to regulation." Mr. Hauser also stated that 20, 40" foot trees would remain as buffer for a resident's property and that the applicant had made significant compromises in adjusting the access road line to the Town Park.

And finally Mr. Fasano recapitulated the grounds for granting the Positive Declaration: Removal of structures out of the buffer areas; communication from DEC's Pat Farricane and DEP's Giammetti; found in January no violations concerning flooding. And he reiterated, the Conservation Board is an advisory body and it is the Town Board that makes the ultimate decision in terms of further modification.

I want to be kind; it was a most disappointing statement. The Coalition has focused on the role of the Conservation Board and we believe its obligation to uphold the wetlands law and where possible to recommend modification. For ex, Even tho I had a letter from the DEP giving the figure of 47 vs. the 60 proposed - cited that letter at the Public Hearing - for the first time, last night I heard the figure of 33 slip from Mr. Fasano's lips. Could he have said that the 33 senior housing unit figure would significantly remove any buffer impacts and obviate the most destructive features of the project - deforestation on a huge scale and that the Conservation Board would recommend that the Town Board look into such a modificiation?

However, a couple of acres, was all the Board could squeeze out of an applicant for whom maximization of profits is the goal and the residents property values, enjoyment of their property and the landscape be dammed. And for this he received the Medal of Honor from Mr. Trincalli.

Sincerely,

Ann
Coalition to Preserve Open Space
www.putopenspaces.com

Good morning all - I am sharing with you a post that I wrote for carmelresident.org. Several pertinent issues are addressed vital to the interests of the residents of both the Town of Carmel and Town of Southeast. They are: 1. Regional impact of development and 2. Town of Carmel Supervisor Pozzi's efforts to erect artificial walls between residents by restricting comment and dissent, the lifeblood of a democracy.

Sincerely,
Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

During the Town of Southeast Work Session on Mar. 10th, the issue of the effect on Southeast roads of development on Route 6 was discussed. It occurred in the context of the Transportation Improvement District around Route 312. The observation was made that the roads in the Town of Southeast would be impacted since the natural route of arrival to the Gateway/Fairways development on Route 6 in Carmel would be Exit 19, Route 312.

And the question arose: Should the Towns of Southeast and Carmel form a Transportation Improvement District that would extend beyond town boundaries and could the two towns reach some kind of intermunicipal agreement? Southeast Supervisor Dunford wrote a letter to Supervisor Pozzi on the issue of traffic impact on Southeast roads.

Comments by the Coalition to the Planning Board have also centered on the impact of this large development on limited infrastructure "stating that there appears to be a disconnect between applicant's development plans and the infrastructure and traffic congestion that would be engendered."

The discussion was important since it recognized the regional implications of development on the quality of life of residents from an adjoining town and that Town of Southeast residents have a legitimate interest which must be part of the equation.

It is a proposition that Supervisor Pozzi has a hard time in swallowing. So much so that he has restricted the March 30th New England Town Meeting to solely residents of the Town of Carmel.

Perhaps, we who are residents of the Town of Southeast should petition our elected officials that travelers on our roads show proper resident identification. The notion of course is ludicrous since public officials in the 19th century recognized that the free flow of commerce and traffic was essential to the health of a growing US.

And so is the free flow of information, comment and dissent essential to the health of a democracy, Mr. Pozzi, especially when town action affects the lives and property of nearby residents.

In the words of the late President Regan, "Bring Down that Wall, Mr. Pozzi.

Ann Fanizzi, Putnam County Coaliton to Preserve Open Space
www.putopenspaces.com

So now we'll study traffic generated by avoiding traffic.

What to do about Route 22 in Southeast has been studied for 20 years ? by politicians, environmentalists, businesses, independent groups, the state, the town and, certainly, the drivers backed up on it during rush hours. So what's another study?

A plan for addressing the traffic on Route 22, including consideration of widening it from two to four lanes on a 3-mile section in Southeast, has been on the agenda of the state Department of Transportation, which is responsible for the highway, for 10 years now. So what's another study?

The state's proposal is to widen the road to four lanes, which a 2000 draft environmental impact study focused on, with two alternatives. One envisions a median in the road, forcing drivers to make left turns and U-turns at intersections with traffic lights. A second alternative would use a center left-turn lane that drivers could access from both directions.

Assemblyman Willis Stephens, R-Southeast, recently sent a survey to local residents asking them how often drivers seek alternative routes because of the Route 22 congestion and how much time those choices add to their trips, staff writer Michael Risinit reported this week.

The survey, according to Stephens, is meant to supply the state DOT with information on how residents deal with the traffic.

Here's our guess: Barely.

It was 1992 when the state DOT proposed expanding Route 22 from two lanes to four between Interstate 684 and Doansburg Road. Since then, objections have centered on the possible negative impact on the region's reservoirs and the nearby Great Swamp, and concern that any road widening would bring in even more traffic.

"As you know, Route 22 is a controversial project. So, we're progressing slowly," Bob Dennison, Hudson Valley regional director for the state DOT, told Risinit. "Most of us believe there's a project here somewhere."

That was in January of this year.

It is a difficult balance, but surely the experts at DOT can come up with a plan that balances environmental impacts with the obvious need to address the stalled traffic ? itself harmful to the environment. Likely, it will have to include at least some turning lanes, additional traffic lights and perhaps some widening at key points. And no doubt it will have to call on localities to restrain future growth, which will have to be taken seriously.

Dennison has applauded a collaborative approach to improving Routes 120 and 22 near New York City's Kensico Reservoir in Westchester County, which involved environmental groups, the state, the city and the federal government. As for Putnam's Route 22, Dennison also said back in January that "what we don't want to be is mired in a long, drawn-out court battle. Our goal is to come up with a project everybody can get behind, and we're not there yet."

It seems nobody's there yet.

The congestion in Southeast and nearby is spreading. Nobody sitting in traffic on or near Route 22 needs a survey to tell them that. Does the state?

August 9, 2004 Letter to the Editor - Journal News

To the Editor:

Approximately five months ago I wrote that several ponds on Welfare Road
were being inundated with storm water runoff from a single-family home
under construction. Well guess what, we are still waiting for the
problem to end and a remediation to begin. To make matters even worse
the Town of Southeast is currently in the process of approving two new
neighboring developments.

What concerns me about one subdivision is that the Southeast Zoning
Board is considering issuing a variance from the Resource Protection
Plan. This would allow the developer to build four houses, when even the
developer calculates that only three houses should be permitted. Keep in
mind that the plan clearly states that one does not round up when
calculating the number of houses that can be built, so that 3.51 equals
three houses that can be built. The property in question has no direct
access from Welfare Road unless the town allows the developer to build
his access road across the wetlands. Not along the edge of the wetlands
in the buffer zone, but directly through it necessitating the filling of
wetlands to build the road. Amazingly under the older, less strict
regulations the previous developer was told to call the Army Corps of
Engineers and get a bridge built across the wetlands.

Let's forget that there are poor sight lines to access Welfare Road and
that Putnam County Conservation lands abut the property. It would seem
to me that any logical person would realize that three equals three and
end the ongoing battle. But no, the town continues to spend money by
continuing the planning process. Why?

The other development has been in the works for five years now and it is
getting the quick rush through the planning board. Seems the developers
are claiming the DEP lost the paper work and the planning board doesn't
think they should be penalized for this. Well, doesn't the town or the
developer have copies of the tests? There has to be a record somewhere
of the tests, or is it that the DEP after three years of inactivity
closed the application. Yet, if as the developer states the DEP lost all
the tests then why are there letters from the DEP to the planning board
in the file, letters from the DEP to the developer's engineering firm
suggesting changes and indicating that the DEP is still on the case and
they have not lost any records.

What is the real story here? And why is it that every time someone sees
the plans they are different. The project started out eight houses went
to six and then to seven. Originally there were no houses in Patterson
and now there is one house in Patterson. Yes this project encompasses
two towns and who knows how many houses when the final project is
completed. And why only one public hearing in over four and one half
years of this project when it keeps changing dramatically?

Again let's forget the wetlands where detention basins are planned,
let's forget buffer zones, and let's forget that the towns own engineer
questioned how the 275-foot sight lines were figured. This project just
continues in spite of its failings.

But even more important is the fact that this entire area of the Town of
Southeast was neglected in the recent town master plan. That's right, an
entire area within three-quarters of a mile of the East Branch of the
Croton River was neglected. Or is it that it was purposefully left out
to allow projects like these. If the town master plan was designed to
protect watershed, shouldn't it have radiated out from the watershed's
most important areas? Shouldn't this area have been reviewed? Isn't our
section of town important? We think so, and we refuse to see it ignored
and ruined.

Brian Alberghini
Brewster

Sign regulation is long overdue
(Original publication: June 3, 2004, New York Journal News)

In response to a May 20 letter-writer's complaint regarding the Town of Southeast's plans to regulate signage, my reply is, hooray for the Town of Southeast! Under the careful and visionary planning of Supervisor John Dunford, Southeast has begun taking bold yet measured steps toward making our town a better place for residents and visitors alike.

Heretofore, the rule of thumb has been "anything goes." For some time now, it has been clear to those of us who care about how our town looks that we need to do something about signage. Some of us have even been pressing for much more stringent requirements as to sign material, size, color, etc. It may seem minor at first, but in the long term it will go far in cultivating a more dignified and inviting Southeast that will benefit everyone, residents and retailers alike. A small sign that is well-designed and well-placed will be just as effective as those giant loud, tawdry ones currently assaulting our senses everywhere we look.

As far as Kohl's sending a representative to the public hearing to plead the case that sign regulation will cause them severe hardship: One doesn't need signs to direct one to Kohl's. One merely needs to look up to where the mountain full of trees used to be and where there is now a humongous box to know that Kohl's has come to our town. Please, is there anyone who can address this complaint of economic hardship with a straight face?

Lisa Aurello, Brewster

Tilly Foster Farms' future debated again
By CARA MATTHEWS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: May 21, 2004)

SOUTHEAST — Now that Putnam Family and Community Services workers have moved out of their temporary offices at Tilly Foster Farms in Southeast, people are wondering what's going to happen to that space.

County Executive Robert Bondi gave the approval for the handful of employees with the mental-health agency to move to the 199-acre farm in January 2003. The arrangement was supposed to be for several months, while members of the Department of Highways and Facilities repaired a building at 1816 Route 6, Carmel.

On Monday, nearly 17 months later, the caseworkers moved into the renovated structure that is adjacent to Putnam Family's headquarters at 1808 Route 6, said Edythe Schwartz, executive director of the organization that contracts with the county to provide mental health, chemical dependency and rehabilitation programs.

Bondi faced protests from legislators and community activists who had fought to preserve the farm when Putnam Family moved into the small building in 2003 and again early this year, when he told legislators he was considering moving part of the Health Department there. He has not made a formal proposal on the issue.

Some legislators are angry that part of the picturesque horse-breeding farm off Route 312, which Putnam bought for $3.9 million in October 2002, could become just another county office site. It wasn't purchased with the intent of alleviating the county's office space crunch, said Legislature Chairman Robert McGuigan, R-Mahopac.

"There's a resolution on the books that nothing can be done until he comes before us," he said.

Legislators voted a year ago to require that Bondi consult with them before determining any new uses for Tilly Foster.

"I don't want to see it tampered with in any way right now," McGuigan said of the farm.

Deputy County Executive Frank del Campo said yesterday that certain areas of Tilly Foster were omitted from the whole farm plan for the property so that offices could be placed there. Tilly Foster is in the New York City watershed, and the plan details strategies to protect water quality there.

The county used watershed protection money from New York City to acquire Tilly Foster, and the city pays taxes on the land that's included in the farm plan.

"We're hoping that the Legislature will approve a viable tenant or office of some kind that would be a great fit with that property," Del Campo said. "We believe there are a number of offices that would be an appropriate fit."

Del Campo emphasized that Bondi's administration has not made any formal recommendations to lawmakers about which employees should be at the farm. Bondi wants to work with the Legislature to decide what would be appropriate, Del Campo said.

Besides the Health Department's environmental health division's relocation from the Terravest Corporate Park off Route 312, other possibilities that have been discussed include moving Cornell Cooperative Extension's offices from that complex or the Soil and Water Conservation District from its Patterson location to the farm.

Members of the Tilly Foster Farm Advisory Board have come out against putting government offices at the farm, and said it should remain agrarian.

McGuigan said he knows that there is a space problem with offices, but said the county should do a space study of all its offices and develop a master plan, rather than moving departments piecemeal.

Legislator Tony Hay, R-Southeast, said Bondi is aware that nothing should go on the Tilly Foster premises that is not related to agricultural services. "Hopefully, he will adhere to that," he said.

Send e-mail to Cara M

Putnam Courier

Judge orders Southeast junkyard to reduce its size
By: Eric Gross 04/29/2004

SOUTHEAST - Supervisor John Dunford issued an ultimatum to those breaking the laws of Southeast. "If you are in violation, we're going after you.

Southeast's chief elected official reacted to a decision handed down by State Supreme Court Justice John Sweeny last week ordering Simon's Auto Wreckers to reduce the size of its business as a result of the town's ordinance limiting the size of junkyards in greater Brewster.

The judge's three page ruling acknowledged that Southeast's zoning code in 1960 was amended to restrict increases in pre-existing and non-conforming uses. Sweeny ruled that Southeast had demonstrated that the defendant had "exceeded the boundaries" and as a result should be compelled to "reduce the footprint of the junkyard-auto wrecking operation and clean up all of the junked cars to its 1960 dimensions."

A hearing May 11 will determine what the dimensions will be.

Southeast Councilman Paul Johnson called Sweeny's decision a "big win for all residents of the region. The ruling will result in a substantial reduction in the size of the operation, resulting in the removal of thousands of cars around the historic and world-renowned Tilly Foster Mine."

Johnson said the junkyard was not only an "incredible eyesore, but is surrounded by the Middlebranch Reservoir which supplies water to millions of people."

The councilman commended the former Lois Zutell administration for planting the seed that led to the judge's ruling. "The former administration addressed the Brewster Auto Wreckers junkyard off Route 312 and now continues under the John Dunford administration with this larger operation," said Johnson.

Southeast's code enforcement timeline began in early 1996 when the town initiated an inquiry as to whether junkyards in greater Brewster were abiding by local laws. Maps and photos were collected and Southeast was successful in rehabilitating Brewster Auto Wreckers in Dykeman's, resulting in a 60 percent reduction in its footprint and eventually coming into full compliance with Southeast's ordinance.

In April 1998, the Southeast Town Board rejected a junkyard license application submitted by Simon Auto Wreckers. Last April, the board authorized litigation commencing an order to show cause seeking to enjoin the defendant from continuing his operations as a junkyard. Prior to commencement of this civil action, the town commenced criminal prosecution in Southeast Town Court, which is still pending.

As a result of the judge's decision, Simon Auto Wreckers will have to come into compliance with Southeast's Junkyard ordinance including the construction of a town approved opaque fence around the entire perimeter of the operation. Simons must also remove all junked cars within 10 feet of the fence to create a fire lane and must locate fire-fighting equipment at set intervals within the operation.

In addition, the company will be required to construct suitable sanitary facilities for employees, demonstrate an adequate safety and security plan as well as arrange all auto materials in an orderly fashion.

During a visit to the junkyard last week, a sign on the office door indicated the facility was closed. Calls made to the company were not returned.

A passerby told of the judge's ruling said he was pleased that the eyesore would be removed. Antonio Pellegrino of Lake Carmel said he enjoyed fishing in a reservoir near the junkyard. "The place always smelled of oil and gasoline. It's a real nasty looking place," he said.

Hello All:

Getting to the Root - Development pressures put strain on Southeast Roads. And more is to come - Root Avenue feeds into Rte 6 in Carmel where Mr. Camarda is proposing retail, restaurants, assisted living housing and anything else he can fit plus Hotel Conference Center and 100 + units of senior housing off Rte 6 leading into Fair Street. Help! Is there any regional land use planning occurring between Southeast and Carmel? Or is everyone hiding behind Home Rule? While Putnam burns gasoline and degrades air and water quality, commuters are doing a slow burn idling on ever congested roads.

Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Taking the back roads
By MICHAEL RISINIT
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: April 25, 2004)

SOUTHEAST — Traffic has passed by Bob French's rambling Colonial in Southeast for parts of four centuries, both on what is now nearby Route 6 and Root Avenue, on which it sits.

A narrow, still-country road, Root Avenue rolls past overgrown fields and fairways carved from former pasture. Minivans and SUVs now travel the road, their number and speed far outpacing the horses and carriages that once plied the byway.

"The road was pretty quiet," said French, who moved into his pre-Revolutionary War home in 2000. "Now everyone is trying to beat the light and the traffic at the other end."

The other end is where Root Avenue hits Route 6, just west of where the state is replacing a bridge over the Middle Branch Reservoir. The $4.2 million widening of one of Putnam County's worst traffic choke points — a section of roadway that provides easy access to four towns — has sent vehicles scurrying elsewhere. The project has further clogged the 600-yard stretch where Root Avenue, John Simpson Road and Route 312 meet Route 6. The busy series of intersections includes two traffic lights and occasional lane closures because of construction.

"The mornings aren't bad," said James Searles of Carmel, who heads to his job at Ridgefield BMW at 6:30 a.m. "It's the evenings, where the volume backs up and things slow down."

Commuters fill routes 312 and 6, heading to or from Interstate 84 and into Southeast, Carmel, Kent or Patterson. The roadway over the reservoir will eventually be widened by 12 feet and new turning lanes installed. A state Department of Transportation representative couldn't be reached for comment Friday. Previous estimates predicted the work would be finished by late this year or early 2005.

Putnam continues to be one of the state's fastest-growing counties. Between the 2000 census and July 1, 2003, the county's population jumped 4 percent — from 95,745 to 99,550. Many of those new residents, said another Carmel resident, are seemingly behind the wheel.

"(New houses) are all stuck away in the hills," Kris Nelson said. "But they're there, and they have to use the roads."

Root Avenue is just one of the area's short cuts or back roads sought out by drivers looking to avoid routes 6, 312 or 22. Others include Brewster Hill, North Brewster, Old Milltown, Maple and Pugsley roads.

"It's outrageous," said Duane Pugliese, who for 23 years has lived on Pugsley Road, which remains partially dirt. "It's tripled in the past five years. It's a race track."

Like Pugsley Road, Root Avenue attracts drivers seeking an easier way. In this case, those heading from Carmel on Route 6 and intent on getting into Kent or Patterson can bypass the light at John Simpson Road by making a left onto Root Avenue. Likewise, those heading south on John Simpson destined for Carmel avoid the light by making a right onto Root Avenue then a right onto Route 6, just past the intersection.

"They use it as a shortcut. All the time, cars go through here now," said Ann Bellotti, a 40-year resident of Root Avenue.

Bellotti's home, a 1961 Cape Cod, is about 600 yards from French's home. The two are the only ones on Root Avenue's north end, separated by the Centennial Golf Club. The 27-hole club opened in 1998 on a former horse farm owned by Duke & Benedict, major county landholders.

The next development in the neighborhood, and one that might cut down on traffic, could be a proposed five-lot subdivision on about 24 acres between the Belottis' home and Middlebranch Veterinary.

The animal medical practice sits on Route 6 between Root Avenue and John Simpson Road. A state-approved plan submitted to the town last week as part of the review process for the homes prohibits through traffic on Root Avenue. It also bans left turns from Route 6 and right turns from John Simpson Road onto the road.

Southeast Supervisor John Dunford said he wasn't aware of any complaints about Root Avenue. But, he said, the county's burgeoning population, as well as that of neighboring Fairfield County, Conn., is putting more drivers on the road.

"I would say on all these roads, traffic is a concern," said Dunford, a lifelong town resident. "This is not a quiet little county anymore."

Send e-mail to Michael Risinit

April 16, 2004

Good morning all -

After a eight-year battle to reduce the Simon Junkyard eyesore at the juncture Rtes 6 and 312, (south of Tilly Foster Farm) and adjacent to the Middle Branch Reservoir, the Town of Southeast finally won. In an April 12th decision, Judge Sweeney upheld the town's position that the amended 1960's Town's Zoning Code restricted increases in pre-existing, non conforming uses. The decision is contained in the Town of Southeast Press Release.

This is a significant victory: for Town officials spanning two administrations, for residents of the area and for members of Coalition to Preserve Open Space who have lobbied for the preservation and rezoning of the entire area surrounding the Tilly Foster Mine and wrote and spoken against efforts of Mr. Simon to delay, postpone and obfuscate.

Sincerely,

Ann
www.putopenspaces.com

Officials pushing same old plan . . .
(Original publication: February 11, 2004)

Anyone wondering about alleged interference in local development issues from environmental groups and associated litigation costs and delays can refer to the Feb. 8 article concerning a letter sent to Gov. George Pataki regarding the expansion of Route 22 in Putnam County signed by numerous local elected officials. Despite the best efforts of opponents of the project to negotiate alternative solutions, despite the nearly unanimous opinions of informed individuals that such an expansion would do nothing to solve the current situation (and might, in fact, make it worse) and despite assurances that these same local officials were committed to finding a consensus solution that everyone could accept, we discover, once again, that such promises are worthless.

For the past two years, under the able guidance of a regional consensus-building firm, parties from both sides of the issue have worked to develop a plan that would improve traffic flow on Route 22. Opponents' concerns include the safety of drinking water for millions of New Yorkers, the impact extensive roadwork and redesign would have on businesses in Southeast, wasting taxpayer money on an expensive fix without exploring less expensive solutions and ensuring roadway expansion does not lead to increased development in the region - effectively putting us right back where we started. The signatories to this misguided missive clearly have one objective - a four-lane highway running from I-684 to Pawling. It is the same plan that they have tried to sneak past opponents and Watershed Inspector General James Tierney for the past 12 years.

The end result? See you in court, gentlemen.

Ken Harper, Patterson

. . . Widening may promote development
(Original publication: February 11, 2004)

Assemblyman Willis Stephens and several local officials wrote to George Pataki on Feb. 4 requesting the governor's assistance to expedite Route 22 expansion. Conspicuously absent were the signatures of Sen. Vincent Leibell and County Executive Bob Bondi.

The three-page letter noted the school buses and emergency vehicles delayed, residents inconvenienced and the reservoirs, the Great Swamp and local air quality suffering from pollution. These are legitimate concerns, and the environmental community would also like to see them corrected. But our officials won't consider signing off on a plan that does not include widening the road to open it for further development.

The 3-year-old draft environmental impact statement outlines the wishes of Southeast officials. In addition to multiple driving and turning lanes in both directions, their plan called for wide medians, sidewalks, bicycle paths, and extra-wide unpaved shoulders. It also called for a portion of Bog Brook reservoir to be filled in and paved over. Environmentalists do not cause problems on Route 22. Poor planning and overdevelopment cause them. The fear is that, once widened, development will continue unabated to reproduce the same problems in a few years.

Mr. Stephens' letter assured us that those concerns are well-founded when he stated: "Completion of this project will enhance our ability to attract quality business development, which is vital to this region." Currently, commercial development in the Town of Southeast provides more than half of the total sales tax revenue for all of Putnam County. Just how much more development does this town need?

Denis Castelli, Southeast
The writer is an executive board member of Concerned Residents of Southeast.

Environmentalists support correcting safety issues on Route 22
(Original publication: February 29, 2004)

To the Editor:

Local public officials are blaming environmentalists for the onerous delays by the Department of Transportation (DOT) to alleviate the traffic and safety woes of the three miles of Route 22 in Southeast. On Feb. 4 in a letter from Assemblyman Willis Stephens' office to Governor Pataki, officials asked the governor to "assist in our efforts and compel DOT to issue the FEIS for this project without further delay." The supervisors and village mayors from Southeast to Dover signed this letter.

Environmentalists are aware of the delays and safety issues and we support their correction. Recently, environmentalists from Putnam, Westchester and New York City met with DOT requesting an update on their progress. DOT assured us they are working diligently to answer all the comments raised in the public hearing of three years ago and comments generated by all the stakeholders at the hearing and interviews by the Consensus Building Institute. DOT stated they have not completed this task.

For environmentalists the issue is the protection of the drinking water of 9 million residents of New York State and the Great Swamp, headwaters of the Croton reservoir system. For public officials, the issue is their "ability to attract quality business development, which is vital to this region." It is a fact that commercial development spurs more residential development and even today's public officials admit residential development costs residents in higher taxes.

Thus we are on a merry-go-round. It's about Campus at Field's Corner, Meadows at Dean's Comer, Terravest and Ace Endico, Wal-Mart, Burdick Farms and Patterson Crossing. It's about four lane highways slashing through our drinking water resources. It's about saving the Great Swamp and the Croton system. It's about upholding and enforcing our regulations.

On Jan. 14, the Patterson Town Board, responding to a direct request from developer Paul Camarda, rezoned residential acreage to industrial prior to Mr. Camarda making any formal application before the town. This lack of backbone by towns and agencies results from fear of legal actions and is a perfect example of why these highly touted new Comprehensive Master Plans and updated new zoning ordinances do not work. This is why we need an enforceable regional land use plan.

Edie Keasbey
Patterson

Regional plan needed to combat sprawl
(Original publication: February 26, 2004)

Contrary to the opinion of Patterson Supervisor Michael Griffin in a Feb. 21 "Community View," we need an overall state or federal plan to control development and urban sprawl. Some property owners may lose the right to profit from developing their land, but many residents came to this area to live in the country only to have their environment changed by the developers, with no recompense. An overall plan for the state would allow residents to know what to expect from future development.

The traffic problem on Route 22 is the result of the lack of an overall plan. Unless development to the north of Southeast is controlled, it will demand a dual highway extension of Route 684 running many miles north, and the noise and pollution will increase accordingly. We have seen Route 22 turn from a quiet country road to a traffic jam that encourages drivers to use the lanes and streets of residential areas.

Some developments in the area have been strongly opposed by the residents, but if the developers comply with the local rules, they cannot be stopped. Unfortunately, it is difficult to recognize the effects that development in one area can have on its neighbors. Traffic, pollution, water problems are all the result of uncoordinated development. An overall regional plan would take all of these things into account.

When someone decides to live in a certain area, it must be with some confidence that their way of life will not be challenged in the near future by unwelcome development.

No-growth' plan would stall Route 22 progress
By MICHAEL GRIFFIN

(Original publication: February 21, 2004)

I'm glad to see that we have finally been able to refocus attention on one of the most serious problems in eastern Putnam County: the need to make major improvements to Route 22. (News articles, including Feb. 8: "Route 22 upgrade stuck in slow lane: Putnam leaders ask Pataki to help push DOT to widen road''). There has been a great deal of information, misinformation and emotion in this debate for more than 15 years.

According to the New York State Department of Transportation, more than 30,000 cars a day use Route 22; approximately 9,000 cars an hour during "peak hours." To anyone who drives the road every day, lately it seems like peak hours all the time. The statistics for accidents and fatalities are appalling.

Currently, there is no stormwater management in the 3-mile section of road that is under consideration for improvement. Everything that leaks out of those 30,000-plus cars, trucks and buses, drips out of the tailpipes or is deposited on the road is washed untreated directly into the New York City reservoir system. Every day as more and more people become frustrated with the standstill traffic and the road rage while merging at Doansburg Road, they are looking for alternative routes. The alternative routes being used are through residential neighborhoods, where children are waiting for school buses and people are backing out of their driveways while dodging speeding cars who don't want to wait 25 minutes to go less than 3 miles on Route 22.

Now, with stormwater design issues resolved, the watershed inspector general, with the support of the environmental community (most of whom do not live in the area or drive the road even occasionally), have decided that no improvement to Route 22 will go forward until they are satisfied that a regional "no-growth" land-use plan for the corridor from I-684 to Dover is agreed to by all of the municipalities in the corridor.

A "no-growth" scenario for the corridor would require the municipalities to agree to, and bind in perpetuity future town boards to, summarily and arbitrarily usurping the private-property rights of thousands of people in what has yet to be defined as "the corridor." Regional land-use planning certainly has merit but should not be part of holding significant safety, environmental and road improvements hostage.

The position of watershed inspector general was created by the agreement known as the New York City Watershed Memorandum of Agreement. This agreement was signed by all of the towns and counties in the city's watershed as well as the State of New York, the federal Environmental Protection Agency, New York City, Hudson Riverkeeper Fund, Open Space Institute and The Trust for Public Land; 92 signatories in all. The second page of Volume 1 of the watershed memorandum states: "It is the intention of the parties to enter into a new era of partnership to cooperate in the development and implementation of a watershed protection program that maintains and enhances the quality of the New York City drinking water supply system and the economic vitality and social character of the watershed communities."

Nowhere in the document does it state anything regarding the watershed inspector general being in charge of land-use planning or road and traffic engineering. The only duty assigned to the watershed inspector general is to prosecute violators, such as the individuals who created two toxic waste sites in Patterson that have been ignored by his office since it was created in 1997.

Anyone who believes that three, five or 10 more years of "do nothing" debate or a protracted court battle is going to protect the drinking water for 8 million people, and enhance the economic vitality or social character of the watershed communities, needs to get more separation between their headquarters and their hindquarters. Only in expeditiously moving this process forward are all the objections going to be met.

(The writer is Patterson supervisor.)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Dan Birmingham

Monday, February 16, 2004 917-834-1692

BIRMINGHAM: “TILLY FOSTER SHOULD BE PARKLAND”
Such Designation Will Preserve Tilly Foster’s Unique Character

CARMEL -- Putnam County Legislator Dan Birmingham (R- Brewster/Mahopac) has introduced a resolution last Thursday at the Land Acquisition Committee meeting of the County Legislature to designate the recently-acquired Tilly Foster property as parkland. Such designation will prevent the property from being used as County office facilities.

“When the County purchased Tilly Foster, the community expected that it would remain as a farm and retain its rural setting,” Birmingham said. “Unfortunately there has been a movement to place county office facilities on this site. While there may be a legitimate need for certain county offices to expand, we should not jeopardize and negate the very reason Tilly Foster was purchased -- to preserve open space and protect this charming property.”

If the County Legislature designates the property as parkland, only the state legislature would be able to remove that protection and allow any non-conforming uses.

Birmingham notes that there remains much research to be done with respect to making such a designation. “The Tilly Foster Advisory Committee has been meeting to come up with uses that fit into Tilly Foster’s mission,” Birmingham said. “We in the Legislature must be careful that a parkland designation will not interfere with such appropriate uses. We also have to consider other issues such as New York City’s role in the property purchase. New York pays taxes on a portion of the property, so any parkland designation should not jeopardize that either.”

“When the County purchased Tilly Foster, we made a promise to our current residents and future generations,” Birmingham continued. “Tilly Foster should be held in trust so that, as the rest of the region grows and sprawl settles in, Tilly Foster will become an oasis where our children and grandchildren can come and enjoy. If we do our ‘due diligence’ and have a thoughtful process, we can meet those expectations and protect this property”

Birmingham will continue to push for the parkland designation of Tilly Foster and looks forward to working with the administration, his fellow legislators, the Tilly Foster Advisory Committee and the public to preserve this jewel of Putnam County.

# # # #

Do not forget to visit DanBirmingham.com for updates. Also, please do not forget to sign up the District 7 Mailing List located at the bottom right hand corner of the homepage to be kept up-to-date on this and other issues.

Residents say Biondi doesn't listen
By CARA MATTHEWS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: February 14, 2004)

SOUTHEAST — Residents asked to give their advice about how Tilly Foster Farms and Conservation Area should be used are disappointed and angry that County Executive Robert Bondi wants to put government offices on the 199-acre Southeast landmark.

"We've been ignored," said Ron Fischmann of Patterson, who serves on the panel that recommended the horse-breeding farm remain agrarian.

The board is preparing a strongly worded statement to Bondi that will "put him on notice" they are unhappy, said county Legislator Vincent Tamagna, R-Philipstown, and a non-voting member of the advisory board. The group is scheduled to meet Thursday to finalize the correspondence and send it to Bondi Friday.

"Nobody's going to beat around the bush. They're going to be very direct that they are dissatisfied," Tamagna said yesterday.

Putnam purchased Tilly Foster Farms for $3.9 million in the fall of 2002. The money came from watershed protection funds New York City gave the county.

Bondi said recently that he might move part of the Health Department, possibly the environmental health section, to the farm off Route 312 to relieve overcrowding at its nearby base of operations on Geneva Road in Southeast. He has not made a formal proposal.

Advisory board members said at a meeting Thursday that they sympathize with the lack of office space, but Tilly Foster is not the appropriate venue to help solve the problem. The farm was named for Tillingham Foster, a 19th-century farmer who owned most of the land in that area. It is adjacent to the Middle Branch Reservoir, part of New York City's water supply.

Ted Kozlowski of Patterson, who is drafting the statement, said he is particularly frustrated because he served on a panel that recommended steps the county should take to fix up the Michael Ciaiola Conservation Area in Patterson. That advisory board made recommendations in late 2002 for improving a section of the park that had been torn apart in 1998 and 1999, allegedly by former publishing magnate William Ziff Jr. of Pawling. According to Kozlowski, Bondi and his administration have ignored the report.

"My experience with Ciaiola park was a big waste of time. Nothing was ever done," Kozlowski said Thursday.

Bondi did not return telephone calls yesterday. The Ziffs didn't admit wrongdoing but gave Putnam $9.25 million. As of last July, county workers had completed some restoration at the Patterson nature area, such as connecting trails to the makeshift roads and planting trees and ground cover, Deputy County Executive Frank Del Campo said at the time.

The Trust for Public Land, which helped Putnam officials negotiate the purchase of Tilly Foster, believes it's up to the county to decide what to with the farm's structures, said Erik Kulleseid, state program director. The trust's main concern has been preserving the land around them, he said.

"It was always contemplated that those buildings would get some use," he said yesterday.

Legislator Tony Hay, R-Southeast, said he's not sure how successful the advisory board's protest will be. Legislators so far have not changed his mind, and the county executive has the authority to move employees to the farm.

"Bob Bondi's going to do what Bob Bondi's going to do," said Hay.

Advisory board member Ann Fanizzi, who was instrumental in the campaign to save the farm from development, said Thursday that Bondi needs to understand that "just because he can do it doesn't mean he ought to."

Legislator Michael Semo, R-Patterson, said he is not in favor of offices at Tilly Foster unless it's something that is related to agriculture. An example is Cornell Cooperative Extension, a private group that is housed in the same building as the Health Department and receives county funding.

Although he could not be reached yesterday, Bondi has said that the plan all along was for the county to make use of the buildings.

Advisory board member Don Cuomo and others on the panel said they need a public outcry in order to persuade Bondi not to relocate offices to the farm.

Tamagna said legislators are going to hire a consultant to review the advisory board's report and make recommendations. This year's county budget includes $40,000 to pay a consultant, he said.

The board's recommendations include expanding the animal inventory, setting up community gardens, developing a meteorological station and surface water monitoring station, and establishing a space for public community-outreach programs. They said the farm's main residence — the cantina and the lodge building — could be used for outside parties, meetings and other events
 

Send e-mail to Cara M

Good morning all - please take a minute to save Tilly. Stop the farming out of county health offices to the Tilly Foster Farm. Ann

Everyone thought that once Tilly Foster was purchased, that the job was done. We could all go home and enjoy. But the work had just begun. All of that open space and government offices stretched to the max. Very convenient for anything that comes along. If Mr. Bondi succeeds, we will have not only a Terravest Corporate Park but a Tilly Foster Corporate Park. For ex. The "Lodge," exquisitely crafted by Mr. Guaudilli, should not be used for county offices nor should other buildings but for activities consistent with the history of Tilly- a home for meetings and small conferences/dinners to promote Tilly and community events. The Tilly Foster Advisory Committee proposed such a possible use.

Disappointedly, Mr. Bondi is perverting his own creation and is breaking faith with the residents who fought for Tilly's preservation and lauded his efforts. Mr. Bondi should not succumb to pressure but look for a comprehensive, long-term solution to the growing office needs of a growing county.

Cheers to Legislator Hay, Tamagna and Oliverio who are leading the fight. The other legislators should come forward and publicly denounce this ill-conceived band-aid proposal.

You're Right, Mr. Nordstrom "It is not a done deal." We the residents helped save Tilly, we the residents can do it again. Here's How!

1. Phone Mr. Bondi's office at 225-2212 express your concern and dismay over this proposal.

2. Write or phone your county legislator and thank them for their support or encourage their oppostion (40 Gleneida Avenue, Carmel, N.Y. 10512; 225-3641 ext. 204-209)

3. Letters to the Editor - Journal News - Fax # - 1-914-696-8396) - max - 250 words) and Putnam Courier - Fax # 677-6337 (sent by Saturday for publication in the following week's paper)

4. Speak to your neighbors and friends. Enlist them in the campaign.

Please don't delay - continue to stand up for Tilly. Say "Neigh" to offices.

Thanks so much.

Sincerely,

Ann

Not only do we need a regional land use plan but we need a regional transportation plan which includes Connecticut. Ann

Regional land-use plan necessary
(Original publication: February 12, 2004)

Local public officials are blaming environmentalists for the onerous delays by the Department of Transportation to alleviate the woes of the three miles of Route 22 in Southeast. On Feb. 4, in a letter from Assemblyman Willis Stephens' office to Gov. George Pataki, officials asked the governor to "assist in our efforts and compel DOT to issue the (Final Environmental Impact Statement) for this project without further delay."

Environmentalists are aware of the delays and safety issues and we support their correction. Recently, environmentalists from Putnam, Westchester and New York City met with DOT requesting an update on their progress. DOT representatives assured us they were working diligently to answer all the comments raised at public hearings, and they haven't completed this task.

For environmentalists, the issue is the protection of the drinking water of 9 million residents of New York state and The Great Swamp, headwaters of the Croton reservoir system. For public officials, the issue is their "ability to attract quality business development, which is vital to this region." Commercial development only spurs more residential development, and today's public officials admit residential development costs everyone in higher taxes.

It's about upholding and enforcing all regulations. Recently, Patterson's Town Board responded to a direct request from developer Paul Camrada and rezoned residential acreage to industrial prior to Mr. Camrada making any formal application. This is a perfect example of disregarding recently enacted town water-protection strategies. This is why we need an enforceable regional land-use plan.

Edie Keasbey, Patterson

Debate on TIlly Foster Farm's fate heats up
By CARA MATTHEWS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: February 9, 2004)

The debate over how Putnam will use Tilly Foster Farms in Southeast, including whether it will house some county offices, has devolved into a mass of miscommunication and confusion between legislators and County Executive Robert Bondi.

Bondi said recently that he wanted to use some of the 199 acres at Tilly Foster to reduce overcrowding. In particular, he is considering moving the environmental division of the Health Department there, but he has not made a formal proposal to the Legislature.

Some legislators are angry that part of the picturesque horse-breeding farm off Route 312, which Putnam purchased for $3.9 million in October 2002, could become just another county office site.

But Bondi said lawmakers have known all along that moving some employees there was in the offing. A number of buildings at the farm were omitted from the recently completed whole farm plan so offices could go there, he said. The plan outlines strategies for protecting water quality at Tilly Foster, which is in the New York City watershed. Putnam used watershed-protection money it received from the city to buy the farm, and the city pays taxes on the part of the Tilly Foster property that's included in the whole farm plan.

"If the Legislature never intended that we would use these buildings for offices, we would never have taken them out of the whole farm plan," Bondi said.

Legislator Sam Oliverio, D-Putnam Valley, said Bondi never mentioned the office space idea before Putnam bought the farm. The situation illustrates that relations are not great between the Legislature and Bondi, he said.

"Bob Bondi is not communicating with us. There is a gap as wide as the universe between us and the man down the hall," he said.

Legislature Chairman Robert McGuigan, R-Mahopac, said he was surprised when he heard about the Health Department proposal. McGuigan said it would behoove Bondi to give out more information about his intentions to all legislators. Legislators want master plans for Tilly Foster and other newly acquired county properties, he said.

"I work on the information that's given to me, and too much stuff comes down half-baked," McGuigan said. "Bob has to learn to share."

Legislators got upset a year ago when some employees of Putnam Family and Community Services, a mental-health agency that contracts with the county, moved to a small office at the farm. The move is temporary until the county completes renovations on a Route 6 building in Carmel for the agency.

Legislator Arne Nordstrom, R-Kent, said he is willing to listen to whatever Bondi proposes and is keeping an open mind.

Legislator Tony Hay, R-Southeast, said he might consider moving Cornell Cooperative Extension and the county Soil and Water Conservation District to the farm because they work in the environmental field. The Health Department's divisions should not be separated, he said.

"It's up to the Legislature, and at this point in time, the public to protect the integrity and the spirit in which that farm was purchased," Hay said.

Bondi accused Hay of being hypocritical because he voted to separate 10 acres on Tilly Foster for Southeast to build a Town Hall and now is against county offices at the farm.

Hay pointed out that the 10 acres is near The Home Depot, not the main farm area. Bondi's attack on him, Hay said, is a "vintage Bob Bondi" response.

"When things don't go his way, he acts a bit immature. Nine legislators and he picks on one. I'd better go back and look at the credentials of the new county doctor. I hope he has a degree in psychology," Hay said.

Bondi said he was not attacking Hay, just pointing out an inconsistency.

"My job is to try to find offices for all the county employees and I would think that's the same job as the county legislators'," he said.

The whole farm plan's objectives include maintaining economic viability by leasing barn space and paddocks; expanding educational programs; and providing a safe and enjoyable educational experience for the public. Building a composting facility, part of the plan, would cost $75,000. Building more fences would run about $25,000.

The Watershed Agricultural Council, a private group funded by New York City, worked with the county to develop a plan for how farming practices at Tilly Foster can have the least impact on the New York City watershed.

Ann Fanizzi of Southeast, a member of the Tilly Foster Farms and Conservation Area Advisory Board, said she does not favor having county offices at Tilly Foster. She led a campaign a few years ago to persuade county officials to buy the farm, which was for sale, rather than let it fall into the hands of developers.

"It's too bad that this property that was birthed in an ideal has now become a political pawn," she said. "Everybody agrees that it's a beautiful property, but obviously everybody had their own agenda about what to do with (it)."

Gregory Wunner of Southeast, a fellow board member, said Cooperative Extension could fit in well at the farm. Most of the buildings that are not farm-related are housing.

"I don't really see any of them being suited for real office space without a lot of alteration and creating parking," he said.

Send email to Cara M

Officials want action on Route 22 project
By MICHAEL RISINIT
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: February 8, 2004)

Fed up with delays on the road and on the drawing board, local officials have written to Gov. George Pataki asking him to speed up the state's long-awaited widening of Route 22 in Putnam County.

In a Feb. 4 letter, the leaders of Brewster, Southeast, Patterson, several Dutchess County communities and Assemblyman Willis Stephens, R-Southeast, asked Pataki to step in because they are afraid the project — officially proposed in June 1992 — is mired in the environmental review process.

Specifically, the group expressed dismay with the rescheduling, again, of the project's start date — this time from 2005 to 2007 — and protested that the state's watershed inspector general was holding up the project. The longer the project is put off, according to the letter, the more residents' quality of life, the environment and the area's economy will suffer.

"Given the compelling circumstances in which we find ourselves, we ask you to assist in our efforts and compel the (state Department of Transportation) to issue the (final environmental study) for this project without further delay," the seven leaders wrote.

The state DOT has proposed expanding Route 22 from two lanes to four between Interstate 684 and Doansburg Road. Traffic in that 3-mile section backs up during rush hours. The agency issued the project's draft study in September 2000 and held a public hearing that December.

Since then, the DOT said it has been trying to develop a project to satisfy drivers seeking less congestion, assure environmental advocates the expanded roadway won't bring more growth to the area and protect two of New York City's reservoirs. The agency says it is still reviewing comments on the initial study.

"We're aware of the issue and are reviewing it. While we recognize the need to reduce congestion in the area, the road is located in an environmentally sensitive area, and we need to be aware of that concern," DOT spokeswoman Jennifer Post said on behalf of Pataki's office.

According to the officials, who met last month with DOT representatives, the transportation agency is afraid to produce a final plan for fear it will be scrapped at the last minute by "misplaced concerns that environmental concerns have not been adequately addressed." The desire by Watershed Inspector General James Tierney and other environmental advocates to control population growth as part of this project is a misplaced one, Patterson Supervisor Michael Griffin said.

Tierney said the road's widening presents serious environmental issues. An assistant attorney general under state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Tierney is supposed to make sure the 1997 watershed agreement among the state, city and local governments is followed. The document is essentially a set of land-use regulations and rules meant to protect the city's reservoirs.

Road expansion induces growth, Tierney said, and growth ruins water quality. That section of road winds past New York City's East Branch and Bog Brook reservoirs. Making sure an expanded Route 22 doesn't increase the pollution in the reservoirs will be a difficult task to accomplish, he said.

"I can't make any apologies for trying to protect the drinking water of half the state," said Tierney, referring to the 9 million people served by the city's water supply, including most of Westchester and part of Putnam.

Denis Castelli, a board member of Concerned Residents of Southeast, an environmental watchdog group, said those sincerely interested in improving traffic flow on Route 22 would have no objections to implementing some land-use controls.

"I believe the officials across the board are misrepresenting the situation," Castelli said. "Everybody in Southeast wants to see Route 22 improved. That means the timing of lights, the addition of lanes in particular spots."

Southeast Supervisor John Dunford said the DOT has a good chance of being sued no matter what it did — either by environmental advocates upset with the final proposal or the towns dismayed with the apparent lack of progress. The letter, Dunford said, was seen as a way of dissolving the existing stalemate.

"What plan they come up with, that's their story. But something has to be done about Route 22, " Dunford said. "It's unacceptable to take this long to come up with a plan."

Send e-mail to Michael Risinit

Why bother purchasing farm?

Journal News

(Original publication: February 4, 2004)

Environmentalists were thrilled to see Putnam County finally taking a step forward to preserving the environment by purchasing Tilly Foster Farm two years ago. Finally we thought, County Executive Bob Bondi was seeing the light and realizing that there is real merit in preserving open space. A little treasure on Route 312, Tilly Foster Farm offers a brief glimpse into the past, showing us what life was like here in Putnam County a century ago. It gives us a chance to catch our breath after passing the decimated hillside, less than one mile up the road from Tilly Foster, that has recently been converted into a mass of concrete and pavement for the new homes of Linens and Things, Home Depot, Kohls, Applebee's, Marshall's — with more development to come.

Hallelujah! But now we find out the politicians' true intention all along. They always seem to be three steps ahead of us. Bondi now wants to convert some of the buildings on the Tilly Foster Farm into county office space — not open space. Were these his true intentions all along, or does he really not get the concept of open space? Gosh, I really thought he did when he was running for office and used his purchase of Tilly Foster as a trophy, touting his environmental activism. The $3.9 million that we spent for that farm (from open-space funding, mind you) was with the understanding that it would be used for preserving this farm for its pristine beauty and its historic worth.

Have we the public been duped once again?

Ray Mainiero , Kent

February 2, 2004

VIA FAX AND MAIL

Hon. George Rohrman, Chairman and
Hon Members of the Planning Board of the
Town of Southeast
67 Main St.
Brewster, N.Y. 10509
RE: Omnipoint Proposal
Dear Mr. Rohrman:

January 12th’s meeting of the Planning Board was an example of public officials listening and responsive to the concerns of residents of Hillside Park and its environs (zoned R-160) re: the Omnipoint proposal to erect a monopole on Marvin Mountain. May I express my personal appreciation to you, Mr. Rohrman and to members of the Board who consented to the 20-day time extension of the comment period and to the suggestion that Omnipotent seek to find an alternative site, less aethetically intrusive and certainly less destructive than Jan. 30th’s letter by Thomas McAliney in the New York Journal News recounts.

I reviewed the Omnipoint file and discovered that in the EAF (Item 11), the applicant has responded “No” to the question of aesthetic impact. The response should have been in the affirmative. Photographs provided by the applicant of various views on Main St. And Hillside, clearly evidence visibility on Marvin Mt.

In an effort to discover whether good faith efforts were made by Omnipoint to seek alternative sites, Frequency Engineer, Conroy’s Affadavit, lists three: the NYSEG facility, water tower and Crown tower. However, it also mentions the possibility of further sites needed “to provide the necessary coverage to remedy the gaps in coverage that will remain along Routes 6 & 36,” raising the specter of Marvin Mountain being renamed “Monopole Mountain.” Is this the first of several appearances by Omnipoint before the Planning Board, obtaining approvals in piecemeal fashion of future sites for towers on Marvin Mountain? If so, then the applicant must clearly say so.

Although the Board sought to find a resolution by re-locating the tower deeper into the site, upon reflection that may prove even more destructive since a road would have to be constructed.

Finally, I am reminded of a similar occurrence several years ago of a cellular tower being proposed much to the dismay of Mr. Edward Heelan and other residents on Turk Hill Rd. After careful investigation and the mediation of former Southeast Supervisor, Lois Zutell, another location was suggested to the satisfaction of everyone. I hope that such a happy result will also be the experience of the residents of Hillside.

Thank you for your kind consideration of my comments.

Sincerely,

Ann Fanizzi, Chair
Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space
CC: Hon. John Dunford, Supervisor, Town of Southeast and Members of the Town Board.

GUEST OPINIONS

Perspectives on the Route 22 problem

by Paul Johnson and Richard Honeck

For anyone living in eastern Putnam, the 3-mile segment of Route 22 in Southeast from Doansburg Road to Route 684 is a critical quality of life issue. unaddressed for decades. Here is our perspective on this issue.

-History –

The New York Stale Department of Transportation (the DOT) first raised the possibility of widening Route 22 in the early 1980s as it anticipated growth along this major transportation corridor, not to mention growth in neighboring Connecticut. This project languished until 1996, when after petitioning by the Southeast Town Board, the DOT commenced its planning process. Based upon recommendations of the town and its planners, as well as input from several public hearings, a comprehensive plan was developed to address the primary safety issues of head-on collisions and poor line-of-sight, as well as the need for turning lanes to facilitate traffic flow and maintain speed through this corridor. The plans also included a number of storm water best practices to control storm water run off into the reservoirs.

Opposition, particularly from the Jerome Park section of the Bronx and other watershed advocacy groups, pressured the DOT to delay this project due to perceived notion that improvements on Route 22 will lead to uncontrolled development. While DOT has continued to make every effort to resolve misunderstandings and misconceptions of this project, state funding for widening the Route 22 could be jeopardized with continued delays.

-Pollution –

Today, after every rain and snowstorm, storm water run-off contaminates the reservoirs unabated. This includes sediment, salt, oil, gasoline and other pollutants that foul the water. The Route 22 plan endorsed by the town is environmentally responsible, as it will treat storm water before it flows into the reservoirs. The DOT estimates that average daily traffic between Route 312 and Milltown Road is about 26,000 or 9.5 million cars per year. The emissions coming from millions of cars sitting in traffic is a contributing factor to the American Lung Association's grading of Putnam's air quality as an `F.' The longer this project is delayed, the more water and air pollution we will have to endure.

-Double Standards-

Throughout the region, roads are being expanded along or in the midst of reservoir property. Look at the bridge widening project at Route 6 and Simpson Road. Where is the outcry'? And yet the Route 22 expansion plan, which has no encroachment on reservoir property, is opposed.

- Commercial Development –

Opponents blame the Route 22 congestion on commercial development between Mill Town Road and Route 312. This is misleading, as the vast majority of traffic is thru traffic coming, from our north and Connecticut. The 26,000 cars that pass through daily are not all pulling into the A&P. If development to our north is an issue, the appropriate strategy is the modification of zoning codes, not perpetuating congestion and polluting the reservoirs. The Town of Southeast has already taken measures to reduce the amount of future residential development and is currently working to enact a new Route 22 overlay zone to ensure that future development on Route 22 is of a lower density. Southeast is the only town in the region which has instituted building moratoriums in commercial areas (Route 6Route 312 and this segment of Route 22) in order to lower the density of development which is more consistent with our rural heritage.

- Safety –

Human beings are being killed and maimed on this dangerous road. In the last seven years, there have been five fatalities and approximately 600 accidents (some estimate that 90 percent occur on clear, dry days) on Route 22 in Southeast because of congestion and the lack of safety improvements.

- Brewster Schools –

Ask any parent in the Brewster School District and they will tell you that having school buses pick up children at 7 a.m. to avoid traffic is a major inconvenience. They will also tell you of their consternation when the school bus in the afternoon is 45 minutes late due to the traffic on Route 22. Will our children have to be picked up at 5 a.m. 10 years from now`? Obviously the Jerome Park section of the Bronx doesn't care.

- Backroads-

The traffic on Route 22 is forcing drivers to take alternative routes, like Minor Road and Brewster Hill Road. These are country roads that were never intended to accommodate congestion and speeding. Improving Route 22 will keep traffic off our local roads and help retain the rural character of these residential areas.

Making Route 22 safer and environmentally friendly is a critical quality of life issue for eastern Putnam that cannot be postponed any longer.

(Paul P. Johnson and Richard B. Honeck are councilmen for the Town of Southeast.)

Hi Paul, I find your article off the wall..Your planning board allowed Route 22 to become what it is today..Some of the fixing should be your responsibility, plus if you need refreshing on why the current DOT plan will not work perhaps you should go back and read the letter from the Watershed Inspector General and a few others who are professionals and know what they are talking about. Your attack of Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir is outrageous. They drink the water we all pee in with our faulty septic systems, inappropriate development and to hell with NYC and it's watershed attitude of local government. Your direct attack on them is an attack on all of us who care about water quality, quality of life and the care of our land. I know it was a political ploy to make residents mad at NYCity, but perhaps the education of residents that if we continue our irresponsible ways we will only further damage the drinking water of New York City, but our drinking water FIRST! But, lets face it, you will never espouse that idea! Get real, friend. Edie

Tilly Foster plan assailed

By CARA MATTHEWS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: January 30, 2004)

People may glimpse more car traffic and activity in addition to horses and open fields as they drive by Tilly Foster Farms in Southeast if a proposal to move some county Health Department employees there comes to fruition.

Putnam County Executive Robert Bondi said the Health Department is one of several that is overcrowded, and there are unused buildings on the 199-acre farm on Route 312.

"There are many buildings over there, and they're all available for county administration," he said.

Legislator Arne Nordstrom, R-Kent, mentioned what Bondi's proposal at a recent legislative meeting, and the idea has sparked some opposition.

"To the average taxpayer who supported the purchase of Tilly Foster Farm, when they ride by those buildings and barns, they want to see horses, cows and sheep, not human bodies and cars," Legislator Tony Hay, R-Southeast, said yesterday.

The county bought Tilly Foster Farms in October 2002 for $3.9 million. The property is named for Tillingham Foster, a 19th-century farmer who owned most of the land in that area. It is a former dairy and thoroughbred horse-breeding farm.

Legislators adopted a resolution last year requiring Bondi to consult them for approval to assure that anything he wants to use Tilly Foster for conforms to the property's whole farm plan. They were reacting to his moving a handful of Putnam Family and Community Services workers there a year ago.

The employees, who work for a private agency that contracts with Putnam, moved into a small building renovated by the county Department of Highways and Facilities. The move is temporary until the county finishes revamping a building next to Putnam Family and Community Services' main offices on Route 6. Completion is expected later this year.

Bondi said yesterday that the whole farm plan, completed this month, states the conference center building and houses on the property were excepted from the plan. That means they can be used for office space, he said.

In a Jan. 21 memo to Bondi, Hay asked him to reconsider.

Nordstrom said he's willing to discuss whatever proposal Bondi comes up with. Moving anything else to the farm would not likely happen until the mental health workers are gone, he said.

"It's not a done deal," Nordstrom said yesterday. "We'll wait for his proposal."

Besides, Nordstrom said, Bondi has the authority to "move anything anywhere."

Bondi said one of his responsibilities is to ensure all employees have adequate work space. So far, he has asked the Health Department for a recommendation on what could be transferred to the farm. He said he had not received one as of yesterday.

On Tuesday, legislators are expected to approve the appointment of Dr. Eugene Schwartz as public health commissioner. This will mark the first time a physician has occupied the county post.

The Tilly Foster Farms and Conservation Area Advisory Board does not want to see more offices on the property, said Legislator Vincent Tamagna, R-Philipstown, a nonvoting member of the panel.

Ann Fanizzi of Southeast, another board member, said the county didn't buy Tilly Foster Farms with the intention of putting offices there. The county's intention was to prevent development of the pristine property.

"Tilly is to be maintained and preserved as open space," she said.

Putting more offices at Tilly Foster would take Putnam a step back, Fanizzi said, especially in light of the Preserve America Award the county recently received from first lady Laura Bush. Putnam was recognized for its efforts to safeguard the cultural and natural heritage of the Hudson Valley.

"Is this what we're going to show President Bush and Laura (Bush) as the model of Preserve America?" Fanizzi asked.

Legislator Sam Oliverio, D-Putnam Valley, said he would agree only to moving certain offices there temporarily. He said more space should open up in the county after the planned $18.5 million courthouse is built. Bondi said he didn't think there would be enough extra space at the county office building on Route 52 in Carmel to accommodate the Health Department.

"This was never purchased to supplement office space for the county, and Bob (Bondi) knew that," Oliverio said.

Send email to Cara M

January 27, 2004

Letter to the Editor or OP-ED Piece

The first thing we need to do is stop delusional thinking as exhibited in the Councilmen Johnson and Honeck OP-ED piece “Perspectives on Route 22.” Rural Southeast is no more. We have full-blown case “Suburanitis, the primary symptom of which is traffic congestion, infecting the entire Rt. 22 corridor from Southeast to Dover.

Incubating for almost a half-century since the fateful Federal Department of Transportation decision to connect urban and then rural regions through a vast system of interstates and subsidiary arterials, the resulting 684 interstate and its subsidiary artery, Rt. 22 became a magnet for “competing needs.” Consensus Builders final report (p. 14) states “any proposed redesign must take into account the competing needs of commuters using Rt. 22 as a thru-way, consumers using it as a commercial corridor, and truckers using it as a north-south arterial.” Omitted in the past DOT calculus was the impact on the environment: Rt. 22 “runs through critical environmental areas --- NYC drinking watershed and the Great Swamp -- any expansion plan must take into account and mitigate all environmental impacts.” (p.14)

It is obvious that the unintended and unpredictable consequences of that half-century decision has been a skewing of commercial development away from village centers, concentration of strip mall development run amok without rational planning and coherence in design and unparalleled threat to the region’s water supply and quality. Compounding the DOT’s adventure in road building, has been Town of Southeast officials bias as reflected in commercial and residential land use decisions that “environmental concerns while not unimportant, should be secondary to economic development.” And it is this bias ( Brewster Highlands and Terravest International Corporate Park on Rt. 312, another candidate for widening) that continues to inform present town board members who are reaping the whirlwind of the ill-considered, short-sighted decisions of their predecessors. In the face of their better late than never moratoriums on development, their solution to “expand” Rt. 22, ignores the scientific fact that voids are quickly filled and the lamentable experience of Rt. 9 in Dutchess County and the notorious LIE in Long Island. The estimated 26,000 or 9.5 million cars per year will increase exponentially as will frustration and pollution- inducing and health-threatening idling, the very threats cited by Honeck and Johnson. Widening is not a cure but an attempt to lengthen the prospects of a mortally-ill patient.

However, have we truly diagnosed the disease? Do the symptoms mask other causes?
Hidden within their piece, Messrs. Johnson and Honeck may have hit upon an overlooked phenomenon: the impact of Connecticut commuters on aggravating the traffic congestion on Rt. 22 stating “the vast majority of traffic is thru traffic coming from our north and Connecticut.” Yet, there is no communication between NYS DOT officials and Connecituct officials; no DOT study of exactly what is the percentage of Connecticut commuters using Rt. 22 as a short-cut to 684. While proposing a solution how can this significant variable be ignored.

DOT, town officials in Southeast and points north, we need to look East and truly adopt a regional solution to what is being portrayed as a local problem.

Ann Fanizzi, Chair
Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space
2505 Morgan Drive,
Carmel, N.Y. - 228-4265
 

Putnam, preserved
(Original publication: January 26, 2004)

"We're thrilled that our incredible history has been nationally recognized."

Recognized indeed: Putnam County is one of only eight communities nationwide to be acknowledged by a presidential award for its efforts in safeguarding America's cultural and natural heritage, specifically the Hudson Valley's.

Among the "thrilled'' are Shannon Risk, executive director of the Putnam County Historical Society and Foundry School Museum in Cold Spring. She reacted in a recent story to news that her facility is one of several in Putnam that helped the county garner an award from the White House's Preserve America program.

The new federal program designates localities that have been especially diligent in preserving local history and, by extension, American history. Equally important, it makes honorees eligible for grants from a $10 million federal preservation fund President Bush has proposed for federal fiscal year 2005.

Joining Putnam as the first Preserve America honorees are Dorchester County, Md.; Augusta, Ga.; Castroville, Texas; Delaware, Ohio; Key West, Fla.; Steam Boat Springs, Colo.; and Versailles, Ky., according to the U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

"Preserve America communities demonstrate that they are committed to preserving America's heritage while ensuring a future filled with opportunities for learning and enjoyment," Laura Bush said in a statement. The first lady handed out the awards last Thursday in Washington, D.C.

Accepting were county Legislator Vincent Tamagna, R-Philipstown, and James M. Johnson, director of the Hudson River Valley Institute.

Credit Tamagna for preparing and submitting the county's application to the program and the county Legislature for supporting Preserve America. The national recognition of Putnam County only enhances its lure as a place that cares about its past.

For more information, visit the program's Web site at www.preserveamerica.gov.