SPRINGFIELD — After hearing from Springfield town attorney Mike Trosset, "Advocates for Springfield" founder Harry Levine stated that the town granted a 60-day extension for them to file suit with regards to Brookfield, the recently approved motel/lodge on the shore of Otsego Lake.

Because of on-going discussions with the town, and Brookfield developer Bill Miller, about an Article 78 petition filed by Brookfield's neighbors, Paul and Davia Batista, the "Advocates" sent a letter to the town and Miller stating that they would not file an Article 78 petition if they could get the extension, said Levine.

"Unless we're forced, there is no need to file a petition right now," said Levine, a part-time resident of the area, who last year was named the Otsego County Conservation Association's Conservationist of the Year.

He stated that they would originally have had 30 days from the filing of the planning board minutes which states the planning board approved the Brookfield project.

That would only have allowed people until June 18 to file

As of Wednesday afternoon, Levine stated he had not heard from Miller's attorney.

Miller said Wednesday morning that he received a letter dated June 7 from the law firm of Green & Seifter stating the Advocates intentions.

"Levine contends the Springfield Planning Board, comprised of seven Springfield residents representing the town of Springfield, improperly approved the Brookfield project because 'site plan approval violated the express provisions of Local Law #3',"' said Miller.

Miller stated that Levine's action of filing a duplicative lawsuit will cost the taxpayers of Springfield.

According to the petition prepared by the Batista's attorney John Privitera, the Batista's are asking that the court annul and vacate the Negative Declaration which was adopted during the SEQRA process by the planning board on Feb. 5.

"The planning board failed to address the impacts of the resort on density of land use and community character - two significant areas of SEQRA concern and review," Privitera included in his petition.

He also requested that the courts demand the planning board complete an environmental impact statement (EIS) of the project.

No judgment has yet been rendered.

The planning board did however approve the Brookfield project during their meeting in May with the stipulation, along with others, that construction will not begin until they received a determination about current litigation from Judge William F. O'Brien.