LETTER TO POUGHKEEPSIE JOURNAL

December 1, 2006

Re: 11/30/06 article by Leigh Gomez, “Historical Group Seeks State Review of Depot”

To the Editor:

I am writing to clarify a few points in the recent article about the Fishkill Supply Depot petition.

In New York State, a municipal government can request that the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) comment on a proposed construction undertaking under SEQRA (the State Environmental Quality Review Act). One result of this comment can be that in order to receive a construction permit, a project proponent must show that a development will not impact significant archaeological resources, that are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

In the case of the Fishkill Supply Depot, the original 70-acre site once contained a small city of facilities that were essential to American victory in the American Revolution, and also a cemetery that has never been located. Today, only a small fraction of the site remains undeveloped. There is newly found evidence that important archaeological remains of the Depot complex may still survive in the undeveloped area where the “Crossroads” development has been proposed.

One objective of the petition is to urge the Town of Fishkill to request a SHPO comment on “Crossroads” under SEQRA. Many of the signatories of the petition are local residents, but it has also been signed by historians, archaeologists and other concerned citizens throughout the region. It is not only the Fishkill Historical Society.

The project proponent claims to have a 1999 SHPO letter that “writes off” the Crossroads project area with regard to significant archaeological resources. However, it is entirely possible for such a case to be “re-opened” if evidence comes to light that indicates that important resources went undetected by previous archaeological surveys.

In the article, a member of a historical re-enactment group offered his opinion that “because there is no fort, there is no sense of urgency to protect the land” at the Supply Depot Site. Actually, the real question is whether there are any National Register-eligible resources left in the project area. A wide range of archaeological resources may be determined significant, not simply those related to forts. As the petition demonstrates, many people do feel a great sense of urgency in this case.

Further archaeological survey is merited to determine what survives in the proposed development area. It is hoped that the pending review and permitting process will require such an investigation. Much more information on George Washington, the Supply Depot, and the on-line petition is available to your readers at this Website: www.fishkillsupplydepot.org

Respectfully,

Timothy Binzen
South Hadley, MA