The results are in on the Clapper Road feasibility study about the possibility of a new Thruway interchange in Selkirk, but many questions are still out.
The town board listened to a presentation by Mark Sargent from Creighton Manning Engineering about the financial feasibility to creating a new alignment in the Clapper Road area and the state’s Thruway.
We were not asked to do an interchange justification study, he told the board and concluded that a new interchange would be `revenue neutral or better` in terms of being financially feasible.
Sargent said the Clapper Road bridge over the Thruway has been deemed usable in a possible new interchange and discussed two possibilities of an E-Zpass-only interchange on the bridge or a `full access` interchange located 1,500 foot north of the bridge.
Concerning the Clapper Road bridge, Sargent said, `We’ve concluded that it could be used as part of the interchange.` The E-ZPass option would cost around $21.1 million while the full tollbooth option would be $37.1 million, he said.
During the public comment period, two residents who have been vocally opposed to any type of Clapper Road interchange spoke to board members and asked to end all future planning and studies on the matter.
`I request that this matter be done away with and immediately,` resident Al Penk said. `Why is this a priority? End this attack on the residents of the Clapper Road area.`
Penk said he requested information from the Thruway and said it was the town that was pushing for the interchange and not the Thruway Authority.
Carol Penk reiterated her husband’s comments about the Thruway Authority, stating Clapper Road doesn’t meet `desirable standards` for an interchange.
She said the `thunder of the traffic` would destroy the `tranquility` of area homes and churches.
Carol Penk also said she took issue with quotes made by Bethlehem Planning
Board Chairman George Leveille in a Feb. 25 Spotlight article about people not being disturbed by what goes on in the town’s industrial zone. She also stated Leveille’s previous position as director of economic development and other dealings with the town constituted `a conflict of interest` with his role as planning board chairman.
The Penks cited petitions signed by hundreds of residents opposed to a Clapper Road realignment or interchange for truck traffic from the Bethlehem industrial zone.
During the actual presentation, Penk asked several questions that led to some back and forth between Sargent, the board and Penk. Supervisor Jack Cunningham interjected at a couple points stating, `This is not a debate,` and
`Mr. Penk, can we continue the presentation, please?`
Sargent said that some of the concerns about traffic flow and traffic alleviation that Al Penk asked about were also concerns expressed by the Thruway Authority.
`The Thruway [Authority] has the same exact question,` he said. `They did not reject the interchange idea outright, but would like to see more information.`
Traffic on Route 9W was of particular concern, with questions about where people would be accessing the Thruway and how much of the already-congested thoroughfare would be helped by a new interchange.
The Thruway, Clapper Road and Route 9W would need to be `reconstructed` to make the project work and would most likely have to include a roundabout on Route 9W.
Councilman Sam Messina called site a `multiple need area` and that there were certain buildings and churches of interest on Clapper Road.
`I would like a re-look of what the economic development goals are,` he said.
Councilman Kyle Kotary noted that none of the current board members were in office when the possibility of a new truck route came about in 1989, stating it was `good to get a historical perspective.`
Cunningham said that nothing is in proposal form, and the feasibility study is a very preliminary process to see if it is even a possibility for Bethlehem at this time.
`The Thruway is basically saying, ‘We’re OK with the study, but we’re not sure about some of your conclusions,’` he said. `We have to look at this a lot more, and we have talk with the Federal Highway Authority to see if there is anything to prevent this.`
The supervisor described the project as being in `incremental studies,` and that problems must be mitigated before moving to the next step. Cunningham stressed that nothing is finalized at this point and all plans are preliminary.
“