Camarda’s Crossing Delayed

PATTERSON—Developer Paul Camarda is hopeful that 2010 will be the year when ground will finally be broken for Patterson Crossing.

The project has been on the drawing board for the past decade and while officials in Albany, New York City, and Patterson have all approved the project, Camarda has charged that officials in the Town of Kent continue to stand in the way of the shopping center project of which less than one-half of one percent of the retail space is found within the town’s borders.

The 400,000-plus square foot shopping center is proposed for the Route 311/I-84 corridor at the Patterson-Kent line.

During a New Year’s Day swearing in ceremony in Patterson, Supervisor Michael Griffin reported that Patterson Crossing had received “conditional final approval” from the town’s planning board. Griffin said his town was “waiting on Kent to approve a very small portion of the proposal—a driveway—and the first shovel will be in the ground.”

“If Mr. Camarda has been able to keep his anchors in place this long and has committed to the project along with the fact that 80-85 percent of the people of Patterson want the project, cool minds will eventually prevail and realize the benefits of the project to our entire county,” Supervisor Griffin said. “Personally, I believe that Mr. Camarda has done an outstanding job in making an effort to address all of the concerns to the greatest extent practical. He has completely redesigned the project from the original plan and has moved all of the buildings and loading docks as far away from the residential neighborhood.”

Griffin also said that Camarda “has gone to great lengths to bring in designs which have made Patterson Crossing pedestrian friendly, user friendly, and green friendly. Once completed Patterson Crossing will put Putnam on the map. The benefits derived from this project will far outweigh any of the negatives.”

On Monday, the Courier sat down with Camarda who expressed great frustration over Kent’s delays in approving its portion: “It took us seven years to get SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) approval,” he said. “My staff and I worked extremely hard to dotting every ‘i’ and crossing every ‘t.’ I wanted everyone—supporters and naysayer alike to know that we were doing everything above board. As a matter of fact, we exceeded the regulations.”

SEQRA was approved 18 months ago by the lead agency appointed by the state—the Town of Patterson. The Town of Kent along with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection were deemed involved agencies.

Camarda said site plans were submitted to both Patterson and Kent within one day of each other in 2008. The Patterson site plan constitutes 74 acres of the land and 406,000 square feet of the stores. The Kent portion of the plan constitutes 15 acres as well as 2,000 square feet of shopping, which Camarda said represents “one half of one percent of the project.”

Camarda alleged the Kent site plan review should have taken no more than a “couple of months.”

“Instead, 18 months have passed and nothing has taken place,” he said. “Patterson wrapped up the project in a reasonable time. Kent told us ‘we’re not ready to review it!’ Months passed and still nothing. A new chairman was appointed to the Kent planning board in January, 2009. The project was finally placed on the agenda. However, certain members of the planning board testified at a hearing in Patterson in opposition to the project. How can they serve on the Kent planning board? Why are they ruling on the application when they should recluse themselves?”

Camarda called for the town to appoint alternative members to the board last March. The legislation didn’t pass until November and the appointments were finally made on Monday at the Kent Town Board’s organizational meeting when Michael McDermott and Michael Rose were named to the board.

Camarda charged there was “no excuse for the constant delays.”

“The DEP has approved the proposal. The only thing holding up Patterson Crossing is the Town of Kent,” he said.

Camarda’s attorney Charles Martabano of Mt. Kisco called Kent’s actions “regrettable that the board would continue to engage in revisionist history with targeted obfuscation and omission of relevant facts.”

Kent Supervisor Kathy Doherty answered Camarda’s criticism: “Mr. Camarda should realize when dealing with government everything has a process. We are going through the process.”

The supervisor denied any allegations that her town was stonewalling the project: “Mr. Camarda took himself out of the public hearing,” she said. “This town will not select alternate members to any board for one project. The board decided it was a good idea to select alternate members in general and that’s what we did Monday at the organizational meeting.” The two alternate planning board members appointed were Phil Tolmach and Lori Hylton.

Martabano charged that “four out of five town board members were predisposed to appoint planning board individuals with record predispositions against the Patterson Crossing project. Facts must be dealt with objectively. The board must provide Mr. Camarda a level playing field for review of the application as required by law.”

When asked if she was in favor of the Patterson Crossing, Supervisor Doherty replied: “Remember the county doesn’t share sales tax with its towns and villages!”

Camarda estimated that he has expended more than $2.5 million to date in “paper soft costs not including the land purchase. Between planning, engineering, soil-testing and traffic consultants, the price has skyrocketed with one million dollars of that being spent on planning alone.”

Patterson Crossing’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement was approved after the developer answered more than 1,100 questions from the public in writing which became the Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Camarda has come under attack from residents of the Lake Carmel area who fear for the safety of their lake should the project reach fruition.

Camarda assured residents of Kent that the project has gone beyond the regulations by making sure that water quality

of Lake Carmel actually improves. Camarda said his engineers have devised a plan that will treat water running from I-84 and Route 311. “Water will be taken from the two ramps and will be treated before it reaches Lake Carmel. This alone will be a tremendous improvement to the water quality. The water quality in Lake Carmel will be better off once the project is completed than it is today,” he said.

Camarda called the hysteria being created by “a few residents and organizations not supported by the facts.”

Despite Camarda’s assurances and the endorsement of the project by Supervisor Griffin, a number of Lake Carmel and Patterson residents have protested the Patterson Planning Board’s issuance and approval of the findings opening the door for Patterson Crossing to proceed.

Ann Fanizzi of Southeast forecast that “Stop Patterson Crossing” members would continue to vigorously oppose the project.

Fanizzi charged that Patterson Crossing would “disproportionately harm Lake Carmel by subjecting the community and its residents to blasting, noise, crime, air pollution and traffic leaving the vast majority of Patterson unaffected enjoying the peace and tranquility of their homes.”

Other opposition has been generated by George Nikitovich of Cross River. Nikitovich forecast should Patterson Crossing become reality “Putnam’s motto of ‘Come to Where the Country Begins’ will change to ‘Come to Where the Rats and Run-off Begin’.”

Paul Spiegel of Lake Carmel believes bringing a project of this magnitude to Putnam County would “attract the criminal element. Leaving our cars and homes unlocked will be a memory.”

Adam Greene of Brewster charged that Southeast’s “stupidity” 25 years ago cost Putnam County hundreds of millions of dollars in sales tax revenue when local officials failed to approve a major shopping complex that later became the Danbury Fair Mall. “It was ours for the asking. The mall was proposed not once or twice but three times for Southeast. Finally, the developers got sick and tired of the ridiculous Southeast administration and moved a mile across the border into Connecticut that welcomed the mall with open arms. I hope we haven’t forgotten about that expensive mistake,” he said.

Kevin Bailey, president of the nonfor profit Putnam County Economic Development Corporation, lauded Patterson’s decision: “People want commercial development in strategic locations such as along the I-84 corridor to help the overly burdened Putnam County property owner. Projects of this type do not destroy communities. They add to the lifestyle of a town.”

Bailey predicted that Putnam will always remain beautiful due to the New York City watershed which allows for limited development: “Route 84 at Route 311 is the perfect location provided the residents of Patterson are desirous of the shopping center.”

Bailey also said the town’s decision coincided with e-mails and correspondence received by his office from residents of Kent concerning the proposal: “The majority of the e-mails from Lake Carmel residents are fearful yet many received each week want the project.”

Camarda firmly believes Patterson Crossing is in the best interests of the residents of Putnam County. “We are talking about generating millions of dollars of sales tax each year. Sales tax is a viable solution in easing skyrocketing property tax,” he said.

Camarda said the project would not succeed until all avenues were thoroughly reviewed: “Outside interests including the Clean Water Coalition and Trout Unlimited are hiring people to do anything they can to fault my work.”

Plans call for the shopping center to be constructed on land adjacent to Exit 18 along Interstate 84. Forty of the acres will be used for the center while the remainder will remain green. Camarda hopes to locate a Costco warehouse store, a Lowe’s Home Center and several other shops on the property.