Politics & Government

Tarrytown and Sleepy Hollow Reach Long-Fought Agreement on GM Development

After an executive session meeting of the Tarrytown Board Thursday night, on Friday morning the Sleepy Hollow Board met to approve and proclaim an agreement between the villages at last.

"I am pleased to announce that the Village of Sleepy Hollow has arrived at an agreement with our sister village regarding the pending litigation that has halted the development of the General Motors site," Mayor Ken Wray said in a statement.

Trustee Bruce Campbell read the agreement -- shown in part in this video above -- to the full board present. In the audience were Sean McCarthy of the building department and Gregory Camp, Chief of Police, eager to hear the news at the early morning meeting.

The villages -- operating under the threat that Tarrytown might still appeal the judge's ruling that dismissed their case against Sleepy Hollow and its proposal for GM -- finally settled on a mitigation sum to address Tarrytown's longstanding traffic concerns.

A future developer for the site will have to agree to pay $384,000 to Tarrytown for the following mitigation measures as laid out in the agreement signed by both mayors:

  • Elimination of up to four parking spaces on the southbound side of Broadway just north of Main Street, and/or on the northbound side of Broadway just south of Neperan Road, and moving an existing fire hydrant on the southbound side of Broadway,
  • completing a study for and, if approved by the state DOT, the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Broadway and West Franklin Street,
  • implementing "traffic calming measures" in the Miller Park neighborhood of Tarrytown,
  • installing two traffic signals on the H-Bridge on both on both the east and west side of the bridge where the ramps connect to the overpass,
  • and installing a traffic signal at the intersection of West Franklin Street and White Street.
A brief (recent) history of the story goes as follows:

On January 25, 2011, the Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees adopted a supplemental Environmental Findings Statement for the GM development.

On May 24, 2011, the village of Tarrytown filed a lawsuit against Sleepy Hollow, alleging an "insufficient review of the traffic impacts of the project on Tarrytown."

On June 7, 2011, the Board, calling the lawsuit "frivolous," granted a special permit approving a "Riverfront Development Concept Plan." The plan calls for over 1,000 residences, a hotel, a movie theater, riverfront park, shops, and more in the nearly 100 acre brownfield at the end of Beekman Avenue. 

On September 12, 2012, Judge James Hubert of the Westchester Supreme Court dismissed the petition

On October 2, 2012, Tarrytown filed a notice to appeal the decision.

On February 15, 2013, the court denied a motion to reconsider its decision. Tarrytown would still not disclose if they planned to proceed with an appeal anyway. 

The prospect of more litigation to come hung heavy on Sleepy Hollow officials. They blame this tangle for the lack of news from GM, who was meant to announce prospective bidders on the site back in the fall of 2011 with ownership transferred to the developer as soon as February 2012. 

Before all this, was a series of the same back in 2007, a history that has many citizens thinking an end will never come. The village of Tarrytown filed a lawsuit in October of 2007 against the Village of Sleepy Hollow, GM and then-developer Roseland over the impact the development could have on the neighboring village. Roseland ultimately dropped out. 

Mayor Wray expects the end of a long history of litigation now will mean things will move along. "Our lawyers will be letting GM know," he said. "And that's been the hold up." 

"It has always been our wish to build a project that both Villages can be proud of," Wray said. "Sleepy Hollow is thrilled that this development can now move forward to the next phase, the site plan review."


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here