|
     
   
|
LAKE CARMEL, NY RESIDENTS APPEAL TO COSTCO
CEO, JIM SINEGAL
We, the residents of Lake Carmel, NY are asking COSTCO CEO, Jim
Sinegal to live up to his reputation as an “ethical business leader
who doesn’t compromise values to increase company revenues” and to
withdraw his approval for locating COSTCO in our community.
We are a lake community of eight thousand, mainly blue-collar
workers, ethnically diverse who by dint of sheer hard work have
managed to purchase small homes of less than one-half acre in this
tightly-knit community. For the majority, it is our sole investment
in the American Dream. Sadly, our hope to raise our children and
grandchildren in a safe, quiet community where the air is fit to
breathe, is being shattered by the threat of noise and pollution
from hundreds of cars and trucks, the blasting and excavating of ov
er 550,000 cubic yards of rock and dirt, glaring lights, the
destruction of thousands of trees, crime, and the encroachment of a
400,000 Big Box development on 90-acres of forested land, in close
proximity to our homes.
It is this community’s misfortune to be located at the junction of
an Interstate, and also that the jurisdiction for the approval
process has devolved to an adjoining town, Patterson, that is
wealthier, more ethnically homogeneous and whose population center
is distant from the development site to feel the impacts of this
behemoth.
COSTCO is to be the anchor store for this unneeded and unwanted
development. Another similar shopping mall is located less than two
miles along the same Interstate and there are numerous shopping
opportunitiies in the areas including mom and pop convenience
stores.
Mr. Sinegal – knowing your reputation as a fair and ethical
businessman - we ask you to understand the devastating effects of
this development on our community, and to withdraw your decision to
locate COSTCO in Lake Carmel.
LAKE
CARMEL STOP PATTERSON CROSSING COMMITTEE
For better - and worse
07/24/2008
The proposed site for the Patterson Crossing Retail Center straddles
the border between the towns of Patterson and Kent in northern
Putnam County, along Route 311 at the intersection of Interstate 84.
The site consists of approximately 90.5 acres of "vacant" forested
land. Approximately 27 acres would remain as is and roughly 33 would
be replanted and landscaped. As such, 60 of the 90 acres would
remain "green" (in the old-fashioned sense) upon completion of the
development.
The existing forested area provides habitat for a number of common
species, including deer, raccoon, opossum, chipmunk and gray
squirrel. Bird species also likely to be present, include wood
thrush, owls, warblers and vireos.
The wildlife will be displaced, despite 60 "green" acres - but it
will have a place to go. Just northeast of the site is the roughly
800-acre Wonder Lake State Park, as well as other large properties
that will provide a contiguous habitat for the wildlife.
The mall would help to expand the commercial tax base for both
towns. It would create convenient shopping for county residents
(ostensibly saving them time and gas) and increase sales tax
revenue. But, the most powerful argument in favor of the mall is
that the economic benefit might help turn the tide of rising
property taxes.
In his 2008 State of the County address, County Executive Robert
Bondi stated that, "If county revenue does not increase ... real
property taxpayers will face a 22% property tax increase" in 2009.
Bondi specifically expressed support for the Patterson Crossing
Retail Center.
Of all the reasons residents have in opposing Patterson Crossing,
one of the most convincing seems to be fear of increased vehicular
traffic - the one issue that Patterson's just released SEQRA
(Environmental Conservation Law) statement does nothing to mitigate.
The statement makes the point that traffic would get worse whether
or not Patterson Crossing is built, but this is no help to the
gridlocked.
Over a period of years, environmental reviews, and many comments,
the project has been revised from the proposed 425,700 square-foot
retail center to 382,560 square-feet that includes a substation for
the Putnam County Sheriff's Department. The reduced square footage
supposedly will generate less traffic than previous proposals.
Putnam is beautiful and bucolic, but it's also chock-full of people
who need "stuff." Perhaps the new "Putnam Paradox" will be the fate
of the charming, time-consuming windy roads that one must travel to
get anywhere. Traffic is and will be a problem for quite a while.
Putnam County has its problems and Patterson Crossing could help
solve some of them. The projected tax income is mighty convincing,
especially in light of the dismal property tax situation. It's
estimated that the project will generate between $12.2 million and
$14.6 million in sales tax revenues.
To compare, Putnam County has projected collecting $48.7 million in
sales tax by year's end. Last year, the county collected $45.8
million. The projected $12-$14 million more would be a massive
addition to county coffers.
Patterson Crossing will increase county revenue, and help staunch
the need for continually rising property taxes.
The planning process has been meticulous, so build it. They will
come.
LAKE CARMEL RESIDENTS RALLY TO PROTEST PATTERSON CROSSING
In a display of community solidarity, 40 Lake Carmel and Patterson
residents rallied on Thursday, July 17, 2008, to protest the
Patterson Planning Board issuance and approval of findings setting
the stage for consideration of site plans for the 400,000 sq. ft+
mega, "equestrian-rural Big Box experience" to be located at the
edge of the 8,000 -resident Lake Carmel neighborhood.
It took the Patterson Planning Board three minutes to unanimously
reach their decision and then adjourned amidst signs and resident
chants of "Ho-Ho, Patterson Crossing Has Got to Go." Exiting
quickly and ducking resident disapproval were also Paul Camarda,
Ridgefield builder and his team of engineers, architects and
attorneys.
One jarring note which infuriated residents was a remark from a
Patterson resident commenting on the signs said, "Take your signs.
We Don't Want to Dirty Up Patterson." Whereby Ann Fanizzi, an
opponent of Patterson Crossing, responded, "But you want to dirty up
Lake Carmel."
Residents then repaired to the parking lot as did the Camarda team
and members of the Patterson Planning Board.
The Stop Patterson Crossing members pledged continued and vigorous
opposition with weekly demonstrations planned and other activities
to express this community's outrage to this mega project that
disproportionately harms Lake Carmel, subjecting the community and
its residents to blasting, noise, crime, air and light pollution and
traffic but essentially leaving the vast majority of Patterson and
its residents unaffected enjoying the peace and tranquility of their
homes. Many in the organization ask: Where is the fairness? Is this
what neighbors should be doing to each other? What happened to the
golden rule?
They were joined by Dr. Marian Rose, President Emeritus of CWCWC,
Fay Muir President and members of Sierra Club.
For events and updates, click on the StopPattersonCrossing site and
stand up for Fairness and Justice for Lake Carmel.
Putnam County - The Planning Board of the Town of Patterson,
as lead agency, has accepted a Final Environmental Impact Statement
on the proposed Patterson Crossing Retail Center. The initial action
evaluated in the draft Environmental Impact Statement involved
construction of a 434,050 square foot retail center on a 90.5 + acre
parcel which lies within the Town of Patterson and the Town of Kent.
The Patterson Crossing Retail Center revised plan presented in the
Final EIS consists of a 382,560 square foot retail center with
management and meeting space, a substation for the Putnam County
Sheriff's Department and a 28,000 square foot garden center. The
project is located on the west side of Interstate Route 84 and the
south side of NYS Route 311 in the Town of Patterson and Town of
Kent, New York, approximately 1,700 feet west of the Ludingtonville
Road intersection.
Contact: Richard Williams, Sr., Planning Board of the Town of
Patterson, P.O. Box 470, 1142 Route 311, Patterson, NY 12563, Phone:
(845) 878-6500, E-mail:
rdw@bestweb.net.
While Kent/Patterson officials have expressed
concern about the effects of blasting on residents, Carmel
Supervisor, Ken Schmitt in opposing the adoption of a blasting code,
placed his concern on projects and profits over people, a sentiment
enthusiastically shared by Councilmen DiBattista, Ravallo, O'Keefe
and DiCarlo.
This callous indifference to residents' health, safety and welfare
in addition to their efforts to silence residents who wish to
discuss this and other matters of public policy, only makes more
urgent that the petition drive succeed. As of 6:30 AM Tuesday,
about 75 residents have signed. Our goal is 200 by the end of the
day.
Please urge your friends and neighbors to sign. Carmel officials
must be accountable to the people not to the special interests.
Petition site:
www.restorefreespeechtocarmel.com
Sincerest thanks to all - Alone a voice, together a force.
Ann
Patterson, Kent work on blasting laws
By Michael Risinit
The Journal News • April 8, 2008
PATTERSON - The noise. The dust. The trembling.
That's what neighbor Johanna Groepl is concerned about, should the
Patterson Crossing shopping center receive approvals to build and
should explosives be needed to blast away at the site's rock. Groepl
lives next to the land off Route 311, near Interstate 84, where
about eight stores are planned. She said her home is about 100 feet
from the retail center's property line.
"I think that it would have to be a given," said Groepl of being
worried about blasting. "Not only for those that live as close as I
do, but even further away they will feel some effects of the
blasting."
The proposed shopping center's property straddles the Patterson-Kent
border. Groepl lives on Concord Road in Kent.
Both towns are trying to make sure their local laws govern the use
of explosives and blasting, in general, and the possibility of
Patterson Crossing's construction is on officials' minds in both
municipalities.
"I think that's a concern," Kent Supervisor Kathy Doherty said,
referring to the proposed shopping center. "But there are other
areas."
Doherty said the town's planner, building inspector, fire inspector
and attorney are revising Kent's existing blasting code. New rules
will include requiring contractors to use blasting mats instead of
allowing such safety gear to be discretionary. Details are still
being worked out.
In Patterson, however, officials have written a new chapter for the
town code, "Blasting and Explosives," and will hold a public hearing
tomorrow on the measure. Now, a contractor planning to use
explosives in Patterson needs a permit from the town that basically
acknowledges the contractor has permission to blast. Additional
oversight comes from state labor department rules and insurance
regulations.
Under the proposed code, neighbors within 1,000 feet of the site
would be notified, the condition of structures within the same
distance would be documented before blasting started and monitoring
would take place during the blasting. A blasting inspector hired by
the town would be paid by the contractor doing the blasting. Fines
can be levied for infractions and blasting would be limited to
Mondays through Fridays, from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
"If there's any blasting that needs to take place (at Patterson
Crossing), I would like to have our codes enforcement officer to
have some support there," said Patterson Councilman Ernest Kassay,
who is leading the effort.
Dan Kuchta, a Patterson resident, has reviewed the proposed law and
written four pages of comments on it to the Town Board.
"Basically, I think it is a good proposal. It has some minor
deficiencies and there are some things left out which I would like
to see included," said Kuchta, who, among other items, suggested the
proposal also cover building-demolition blasting and that violations
of the code be assessed daily instead of weekly.
Patterson Crossing's draft environmental study called for removing
119,000 cubic yards of rock from about a 10-acre section of the
shopping center's 90-acre site. Only about half that amount is
slated to be removed now, developer Paul Camarda said. According to
a map in the draft study, the shortest distance between a home on
Concord Drive in Kent and the proposed area of rock removal is about
112 feet.
Mechanical means would be used first to remove rock, but "some
blasting would likely be required for project construction,"
according to the study.
Camarda said he understood residents' worries about blasting. The
shopping center's draft study includes a blasting mitigation plan,
calling for inspections of structures within 500 feet and blasting
to occur from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays.
"People are always going to be concerned but it's very regulated by
the state, by insurance companies," he said. "People who do this
stuff are under a microscope."
Carmel officials in January decided not to enact a blasting law in
their town, worried it would make the town legally liable for any
mishaps and delay projects.
Reach Michael Risinit at
mrisinit@lohud.com or 845-228-2274.
|
