Philipstown Town Board Adopts $325,000 Bond Resolution To Fund East Mountain Road North Paving
Work faces delay from litigation and Mother Nature
by Nancy Wareham Gordon and Claudia Gibson
December 16, 2001

The Philipstown Town Board took a step closer to paving East Mountain Road North when the Board adopted a $325,000 Bond Resolution at their December 6 monthly meeting, however, the actual paving could be delayed for some time, pending the outcome of legal action against the Town, as well as the onset of winter.

As discussed at previous Town Board meetings, the improvements to East Mountain Road North involve drainage, widening and paving the road from its intersection with Esselborne Road to its intersection with East Mountain Road South, approximately 3.5 miles.

The bond resolution allows for funding the paving project (including drainage, gutters, landscaping, grading or improving the rights-of way and other incidental improvements) by the use of a bond originally prepared by bond counsel Tom Meyers in October.

In commenting on the bond resolution, Supervisor William Mazzuca said that while the original estimate for the East Mountain Road North Paving Improvements was $300,000, "We will end up using all $325,000."

Mazzuca said that the Town Board was required to hire Tim Miller & Associates, as well as Badey & Watson, to complete work requested by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).

This work adds an additional $15,000 to $16,000 to the project’s cost. Mazzuca added, "I’m not sure [what the DEC requested] was required for any other road in our town, or for any other town to do, but it’s been done".

When asked about the project’s total cost, Supervisor Mazzuca responded, "It’s a five-year finance, so we will probably pay $70,000 a year for five years." When asked why the Town is not bonding the cost of a topcoat that would be required the following year, Supervisor Mazzuca replied, "The Town might have some money on its own to enable us to do [that]."

Although the Town is proceeding with the bonding portion of the project, several obstacles to paving remain.

The action to halt the work, brought by Richard Szypula, Arthur Lehman and the Philipstown Dirt Road Association against the Town Board and Highway Department Superintendent Roger Chirico, is still before State Supreme Court Justice S. Barrett Hickman in Carmel.

Although both sides met in court on Friday, December 7, Judge Hickman did not dismiss the case, as Richard Goldsand, the attorney representing the Town had requested. Judge Hickman "took no action, pending the receipt of the Wetlands Permit from the DEC," said Supervisor Mazzuca in a subsequent interview with the PCN&R. However, Judge Hickman did give the Town and Highway Department Superintendent Chirico permission to remove some rock outcroppings on the road, said the Supervisor.

In a separate interview, Arthur Lehman said that Judge Hickman had given the Town the opportunity to obtain a Wetlands Permit from the DEC by the end of business on Thursday, December 13. Both parties are scheduled to meet with Judge Hickman again on Friday, December 14. Maintains Mr. Lehman, "If no Wetlands Permit is received by that date, then the paving will not occur until the spring."

Even if all legal approvals are in place, Mother Nature could have the final say. Supervisor Mazzuca observed that asphalt plants close down for the winter. Winter weather conditions might prevent the paving, as well as negating much of the prep work completed by the Town’s Highway Department.

"It’s a big concern," said Mazzuca. "The [prep] work has been done – but if we end up with a tough winter, we could lose what we’ve done, and have more material washed into the wetlands."

Mazzuca also said that the rising cost of item four, the roadbed material, is a big worry, as the project drags on. "The longer it goes on, the more money it will cost the Town," he said. He feels that as costs continue to rise for materials and labor, all Town residents could be affected by the delay. Mazzuca also feels that safety of the road’s residents is of some concern. "I’ll be very disturbed if it can’t get done before winter," he said. "I hate to think that people up there will go through another winter with the road the way it is."

At the December 6 Board meeting, Town Attorney Ed Doyle said that the Notice of Intent for the Town Board to become the Lead Agency had been circulated to the two other relevant agencies: the Town of Philipstown Wetlands Committee and the New York State Department of Conservation (DEC).

Observing that the thirty-day comment period had expired without objection, Mr. Doyle said, "We haven’t received an objection from either one." Following his remarks, the Board approved a resolution declaring the Town Lead Agency, and not finding any significant impact on the environment regarding the East Mountain Road North improvements.

The Town Board also agreed to accept the full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). In reviewing the EAF, Supervisor Mazzuca asked the Board and members of the public to "pay particular interest to the issues that were raised by the DEC in their letter to us".

Supervisor William Mazzuca said, "At the October 4 meeting of the Town Board, the full Environmental Assessment Form was presented and reviewed." The Town’s engineer on the matter, Gary Tretsch, noted that an application was filed with the DEC for a wetlands permit, as the proposed improvements would take place within 100 feet of a State wetland.

The Town was required to provide additional information to the DEC to support the Wetlands application, such as the EAF plans of the proposed improvements, topological plans from the Putnam Engineers and letters of support from Tim Miller Associates. The Board voted to adopt a Negative Declaration, with an effective date of October 6, 2001, stating the Town Board’s finding that the proposed direct action would not have significant effect on the environment, and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement would not be prepared.

When questioned by audience members as to whether there would be a hearing or opportunity to ask questions regarding the EAF, Supervisor Mazzuca said that there was previous discussion about the EAF at the October 4 meeting. He maintained that the EAF just adopted was nearly the same as the EAF presented in October. Supervisor Mazzuca said, "The only changes which were made were those that the DEC had requested."

When asked whether the October 4 meeting was a public hearing on the EAF, the Supervisor replied, "It’s not a requirement. There was never a public hearing; it was a public discussion."

The questions to pave or not pave is not settled yet and time is running out weather-wise but the Town is positioning itself to be able to act quickly if all the legal hurdles can be made before winter sets in for good.