.

Can Villages Resolve GM Dispute Out of Court?

Fixell: Tarrytown wants firm assurances—from 'the judge or Sleepy Hollow'—of traffic mitigation.

Tarrytown stands ready to settle out of court a costly, long-running legal dispute with Sleepy Hollow over the Lighthouse Landing project, Mayor Drew Fixell said Monday.

While expressing little optimism over prospects for negotiating a deal, Mayor Drew Fixell said that “we . . . have always been, and continue to be, open to resolving our differences with Sleepy Hollow outside the courtroom.”

"It is our hope," Fixell said, "that either the judge or Sleepy Hollow will provide some real assurances that there will be some true mitigation of the enormous traffic this project will create."

His remarks were contained in a prepared statement the mayor read at Monday night’s board of trustees meeting. They followed a Patch report last week that Tarrytown has already run up a legal bill of almost $100,000 while unsuccessfully suing to halt the large-scale redevelopment of the General Motors site.

State Supreme Court Justice James Hubert dismissed Tarrytown’s lawsuit in September, clearing the way for a proposed $800 million complex that would blend residential, commercial and other uses on 96 acres overlooking the Hudson River. But Tarrytown filed notice that it might choose to appeal Hubert’s decision.

At issue is the “unacceptable traffic” such a mixed-use complex would generate, Fixell said in his statement, which must inevitably impact Tarrytown’s “already overburdened roads.” Saying village officials “do not believe that the traffic mitigation measures [proposed by Sleepy Hollow] would be very effective,” Fixell suggested that only a smaller-scale project would be likely to reduce traffic to manageable levels.

The centerpiece of Sleepy Hollow's traffic-mitigation proposal, Fixell said, would require Tarrytown to remove 35 parking spaces from various points on Broadway, providing room in which to create bypass lanes. That proposal, he made clear, was a non-starter. "Sleepy Hollow also proposed a few other minor mitigation measures, all of which were again to be done in Tarrytown," Fixell said.

“Although we have made clear our willingness to talk about solutions,” Fixell said, “Sleepy Hollow has refused, and continues to refuse, to take a serious look at the alternatives suggested by Tarrytown or to propose any other reasonable mitigation measures that would bring traffic impacts down to acceptable levels.”

In addition to Tarrytown’s legal and associated expenses, which the Patch report put at $98,921.03, Sleepy Hollow so far has spent $64,835.08 to defend against its neighbor’s lawsuit.

Asked Monday whether the two villages, which share a common school district, have ever discussed their Lighthouse Landing differences, Fixell said he has had conversations with Sleepy Hollow officials. But he acknowledged that the villages’ respective boards have never sat formally to try to hammer out a compromise resolution of their differences.

After Tarrytown’s notice of appeal was made public, both Sleepy Hollow Mayor Ken Wray and Trustee Brian Campbell deplored the outlay of multiple “thousands of taxpayer dollars” pursuing what Wray predicted would be “a fruitless and costly appeal.”   

The lawsuit and its costs have also inspired some murmurs of discontent among the public at-large. Still, no residents turned out to speak Monday as trustees briskly wrapped up an 18-minute meeting in a virtually empty village hall chamber.

Addressing an abbreviated agenda, the trustees also:

SET a fee of $10 for cabbies to obtain a village version of the driver’s license issued by the Westchester Taxi and Limousine Commission, this one enlarged and laminated to meet Tarrytown’s requirement for its “conspicuous” display. 

APPOINTED Joseph G. Hynes, a partner in the Tarrytown law firm of Kissel Hirsch & Wilmer, to the Ethics Board, succeeding David Cellante, who was named last November to a term expiring in 2014.

ADOPTED regulations to govern the handling of leaf loads at the organic-waste transfer station. The board also advised residents that do-it-yourself leaf-mulching by mower could prove an effective alternative for ridding a lawn of autumn’s castoffs.

Like us on Facebook  |  Follow us on Twitter  |  Sign up for our newsletter

wanda October 17, 2012 at 03:14 AM
If Tarrytown won the Law Suit do you think they would st down with Sleepyhollow? Drew Fixell would have never sued if it was using his Daddy's Money.But it's Ok to waste Taxpayer's Money.Fixell who is your advisor? You talk first and then you take a position.Keep looking down at Sleepyhollow Drew cause 1 day you will have no choice but to look up.By the way who was the Rocket scientist who put the tennis courts in the middle of a parking lot ?
Mystery Man October 17, 2012 at 07:30 AM
The mayor and Trustees are only worried about themselves and love spending money as long as its not theirs. They are upset that this project will trump theirs at Hudson Harbor. Its all right to add extra traffic for Yankee parking. The real reason they don't like it is that it will inconvience the residents of Hudson Harbor whom they bow down for. The Board has alienated the rest of the village by placing Hudson Harbor above the common residents. Memorial trees were removed, the park was redone for them and new basketball courts were put in taking away parking spaces along with room that is needed for fireboat boat calls.
Lighthouse October 17, 2012 at 01:23 PM
Excerpt from the court case: "The assertion that the Respondents failed to adequately consider, recommend and adopt appropriate traffic mitigation, not only for Route 9, but for all conceivably impacted tributary roads and access routes, also lacks merit" ..... "It is worth noting that this Court can find no evidence in the record that any of the Route 9 mitigation approved by Tarrytown for Ferry Landings was ever implemented by Tarrytown. Accordingly, this is not a situation where Tarrytown's actual experience with Ferry Landings has informed what now appears to be a contrary conclusion by Petitioners as to the instant Project. It is unreasonable for Petitioners to assert that those measures deemed acceptable by Tarrytown for Ferry Landings, are now unacceptable or ineffective when proposed by Respondents for Lighthouse Landing."
Gargamel October 17, 2012 at 08:14 PM
and more money is being thrown out the windows of both village halls. I will ask again, how much has this cost BOTH villages since mid-2005, at least? The number being thrown around so far is only for the last 18 months (?) at best. Bet it is much more!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »