Letter to the Editor: Opposition to inclusion of Philipse Manor Streets in Assembly Bill A616-A and Senate Bill S7555
To: Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees and Mayor
Mary Jane Shimsky, New York State Assembly
Andrea Stuart-Cousins, New York State Senator
New York State Assembly Transportation Committee
New York Senate Transportation Committee
Other interested parties as listed in attachment
Dear Mayor, Trustees and Legislators,
We are a group of concerned residents and registered voters of the Village of Sleepy Hollow. We reside in an area or neighborhood known as Philipse Manor. We are writing to once again inform all of our opposition to the inclusion of any and all Philipse Manor Streets within these Bills.
Local lawmakers are attempting to generalize conditions across the village and apply them to areas where such conditions clearly do not exist. We do not oppose the legislation as it pertains to other areas of the Village of Sleepy Hollow in that there appears to be truth and justification for Home Rule and a Permit Parking System in those areas. However, the facts and circumstances relied upon in the Justification and Section 1 of each bill are not present in Philipse Manor and our streets.
Our summary reasons are as follows, and are subsequently elucidated with further detail:
1. The inclusion of our Philipse Manor streets have no rational basis or actual demonstrated justification for their inclusion rather the inclusion of Manor streets will increase pollution and congestion, increase hazards and further reduce safety;
2. A demonstrated majority of Philipse Manor residents oppose the inclusion of our streets in these Bills;
3. There have been no resident, vehicle and traffic, or impact studies, nor any implementation plans, commissioned or completed, with regard to Philipse Manor’s inclusion in these Bills;
4. Philipse Manor residents’ repeatedly stated desire for dialogue and engagement on this topic with the Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees has not been appropriately addressed; and
5. Any perceived parking-related issues within Philipse Manor can be addressed through implementation of Village of Sleepy Hollow Parking Ordinances instead.
6. **There is no justification or need to institute permit parking on Philipse Manor streets. The draft legislation’s Justification and Section 1 statements are demonstrably false and misleading, as they clearly do not pertain to Philipse Manor streets.**
* Philipse Manor is not densely populated.
* Zoning is R2 One Family Residence – Low Density Village of Sleepy Hollow Code 450-5 A.
* The neighborhood has about 341 homes across nearly 200 acres (est.).
* Philipse Manor does not lack sufficient off-street parking.
* All homes have off-street parking (driveways and/or garages).
* Minimum lot size is .23 acres, and the estimated average lot size is in excess of about .3 acres.
* All homes have off-street parking for 2 or more vehicles; most homes can accommodate 4 vehicles.
* Overflow parking spaces are available to residents on property owned by the Philipse Manor Improvement Association (PMIA) and the Philipse Manor Beach Club. Pursuant to their respective bylaws and charters, all residents of Philipse Manor are entitled to membership and access to such common parking areas.
* Village parking lot located at the Philipse Manor train station has approximately 65 spaces.
* 1 Riverside Drive, also located next to the Philipse Manor train station, has approximately 15 dedicated street-side spaces, as well as off-street parking.
* The neighborhood of Philipse Manor does not have a seasonal tourist parking issue.
* Current prohibition on street-side parking already obviates the reason for additional rules or regulations to prevent tourist parking.
* The southeast corner of Philipse Manor is adjacent to the Philipsburg Manor Restoration, The Old Dutch Church and Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. Each of these historic sites already have substantial off-street parking for visitor needs. Overflow parking is also available at Philipsburg Manor Restoration. Substantial open acreage on the East Parcel, owned by the Village of Sleepy Hollow, could potentially be utilized to provide thousands of additional spaces, if necessary.
* Any tourist-based seasonal parking issue is a matter of convenience with regard to the tourists and does not pertain to a lack of supply or access to off-street parking for Philipse Manor residents.
* Philipse Manor does not have an excess of traffic hazards, congestion, air and noise pollution resulting from a purported lack of residential parking.
* The existing no-parking ordinance of Philipse Manor already protects against _all_ of these qualitative claims/ observations. The implementation of a Permit Parking System in Philipse Manor will _increase_ traffic hazards, congestion, and air and noise pollution.
* Permit Parking will introduce on-street curbside parking, which is well-documented to increase both hazards to pedestrians, and the occurrence of vehicle accidents.
* Permit Parking will introduce transient and commuter traffic into and through residential Philipse Manor streets, which were neither designed, nor intended to be used, for thru-traffic needs.
* Philipse Manor streets leading into public parks and the train station area already require vehicle speed control obstacles.
* Speed humps were installed to reduce unsafe transient vehicle activity creating a hazard and danger to our community.
2. **A majority of Philipse Manor residents are not in favor of Permit Parking on streets. Three separate initiatives have been undertaken by Philipse Manor residents in direct opposition to the proposed legislation. These petitions and communications with the Village of Sleepy Hollow and in some cases, with State legislators, are clear and unambiguously in opposition to the legislation’s applicability to Philipse Manor streets.**
* Participants’ voices (consolidated across all three efforts) conclusively establish that a majority of Philipse Manor homes are in clear opposition to Permit Parking.
* 363 individual participants across 461 total responses opposing permit parking (excluding 155 missing electronic signatures, noted below) that also opposed permit parking.
* 182 homes represented out of about 341, or 53%.
* Spring 2025 Petition in Opposition to Philipse Manor streets’ inclusion in proposed bills.
* The petition clearly states its position as being in opposition to Philipse Manor streets’ inclusion in the legislation.
* Contains 342 total signatures, including 187 written signatures, representing 94 residences, and an additional 155 electronic signatures (missing).
* The petition and signatures were presented to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees’ Work Session of April 1, 2025. A recording of that Work Session references the petition from minutes 21 thru 28, during which the Deputy Mayor references 342 signatures to the petition.
* Email campaign conducted in Spring 2025 to Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees and certain State Legislators.
* The campaign clearly states its position as being in opposition to the Philipse Manor streets’ inclusion in the legislation.
* 43 residents are represented across 23 homes.
* Approximately 50 emails were referenced by the Deputy Mayor at the April 1, 2025 Work Session from minutes 21 to 28.
* It must be noted that it is unclear if the FOILA response from the Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees included _all_ email communications that it received (some are duplicate copies, some are incomplete, and the total number does not match verbal representations).
* * Winter 2026 Petition in Opposition to Philipse Manor streets’ inclusion in proposed Bills.
* The additional petition once again clearly states its position as being in opposition to the proposed legislation.
* 230 electronic signatures received, representing 130 residences, which is notable for a petition that has not been hand-delivered to individual homes and has relied solely on electronic distribution between neighbors.
3. **Required, prerequisite work to support the proposed legislation, which has the demonstrated potential to have a severe and permanent impact upon the entire Philipse Manor community, has not been undertaken by the Board of Trustees.**
* No traffic, environmental impact (SEQRA), feasibility or implementation study has been completed and/or presented to Philipse Manor residents for their consideration.
* No surveys, petitions or compilations of responses from Philipse Manor residents have been presented by the Village of Sleepy Hollow to illustrate a clear desire or need for Permit Parking in Philipse Manor.
* The Village of Sleepy Hollow has not conducted any organized study of resident opinion.
* The Village of Sleepy Hollow has tasked a Parking Committee to address this issue. This Committee has, thus far, had two meetings with opaque content. The Mayor has touted the inclusion of three Philipse Manor residents to serve on the Committee. However, there are _eight additional, non-Philipse Manor residents_ who also serve on the Committee, including two Trustees, both of whom are proponents of the proposed legislation, and one of whom is the Chairperson of the Committee. Any position held solely by the three Philipse Manor members of the Committee has little meaningful power, in effect.
* The Village of Sleepy Hollow has failed to respond to Philipse Manor residents’ and organizations’ repeated requests for proposed implementation plans for Permit Parking, or to provide detailed information related to potential applications for such Permit Parking, or the required parameters impacting implementation plans.
* The sole known source of information relied upon by the Board of Trustees, regarding Philipse Manor residents’ opinions on this topic, is an informal PMIA (Philipse Manor Improvement Association) survey, prepared in Summer 2025, which:
* Did not address Permit Parking;
* Was premised on the idea that NO Permit Parking would be implemented on Philipse Manor streets;
* Asked respondents to state whether their desire, if any, for potential parking restrictions would be full, modest or limited;
* Provided that 70% of respondents replied with in favor of some level of street parking restrictions;
* Provided that 30% of respondents replied in favor of “other” restrictions;
* Did not reveal significant underlying data, such as the number of Philipse Manor households that responded to the survey;
* Underlying data is not available for inspection and validation of results or summary conclusions;
* Was limited in participation and is not a survey of the entirety of Philipse Manor residents in that it was only distributed to PMIA membership which represented about half of Manor households at that time.; and
* Only provided summary conclusions, which were not shown to be supported by any disclosure of means or methodology.
4. **Philipse Manor residents and members of the PMIA have reached out to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees in an effort to open dialogue, gain discovery and participate in the process, but have received little meaningful response.**
* The Mayor is in possession of a letter from the PMIA, requesting engagement and time to further discuss this matter and conduct a valid study to determine whether Permit Parking is indeed necessary in Philipse Manor. The Mayor’s position, in sum and substance, as far as can be determined from numerous verbal conversations with her: the process of implementing Permit Parking in Philipse Manor will move forward, with no meaningful information to be sought or shared (short of engaging the aforementioned Parking Committee), prior to the enactment of the legislation.
* Certain Village of Sleepy Hollow Trustees who are proponents of the legislation, when asked for their implementation plans regarding the legislation, have stated, in sum and substance, that the Home Rule Permit Parking legislation will first be passed, and _then_ the Board of Trustees will determine how it is to be implemented.
5. **The application of the Home Rule legislation and the implementation of a Permit Parking system on Philipse Manor streets is a clear overreach by State and local government. Any perceived modest issue(s) can be explored and likely resolved through the enactment of local legislation** **modifying already-existing restricted and prohibited parking ordinances.**
* The only perceived parking-related issues at hand in Philipse Manor pertain to the residents’ need for commercial and service vehicles to gain temporary access to street-side parking, in order to render services to residents and their homes, as well as the residents’ occasional desire to receive guests.
* The Village of Sleepy Hollow has not defined, on the record, who is a “resident” for the purposes of Permit Parking in Philipse Manor.
* The Village of Sleepy Hollow has indicated that, should this Home Rule legislation be enacted in Philipse Manor, the 20% of parking that is required for allotment to “non-residents” will already be encompassed by existing parking spots located at the Philipse Manor train station and Kingsland Point Park; however, the streets to which those locations correspond are not included within the proposed legislation, thus calling the conclusion of the Village on this matter into question.
* There already exist municipalities within New York State that have addressed similar limited issues through local, common-sense ordinances. Various such ordinances have been upheld by State courts. This alternative to the proposed legislation has been summarily dismissed by the Board of Trustees, without explanation.
* Responsible and effective governmental entities will utilize the least intrusive means available in order to address a perceived problem; in this case, the Village of Sleepy Hollow Mayor and Board of Trustees are doing the exact opposite.
Given the facts and circumstances enumerated above and supported by the attachments to this letter, responsible lawmakers must recognize the lack of need or justification for Home Rule or the implementation of a Permit Parking system to be applied to Philipse Manor streets. Further, lawmakers must recognize a majority of residents oppose inclusion of Philipse Manor streets and the fact that their inclusion will increase hazards, congestion and air and noise pollution and reduce safety. Finally, local lawmakers lack evidence supporting any request for Permit Parking on Philipse Manor streets and have not engaged in an informed and constructive process.
Sincerely,
Linda Perlmutter
Adam Straus
Robert Welch
Carrie Welch
Tom Andruss
Harry Tucker
Jane Tucker
JimPiereson
PatPiereson
Roberta Straus
Letter to the Editor: Opposition to inclusion of Philipse Manor Streets in Assembly Bill A616-A and Senate Bill S7555 To: Village of Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees and Mayor Mary Jane Shimsky, N...
#Letters
Origin | Interest | Match