Dear Friends & Neighbors,

First, thanks to all who came to the Aug 1 and Sept 5 Town planning board meeting to share concerns.  If you could not make either of the meetings you have until close of business Mon Sept 16th to respectfully express concerns to the Town Planning board via phone (845.564.7804), or e-mail (planningboard@townofnewburgh.org).  THIS WILL LIKELY BE THE LAST OPPORTUNITY THE PUBLIC HAS TO SUBMIT CONCERNS on this project.  You DO NOT need to be a town resident to send a comment to the board and all concerns will be documented and must to be addressed before the Environmental Impact survey can be finalized.

Due to the detailed nature of the concerns brought up to the board at the last 2 meetings, and how many topics were covered I’ll do my best to consolidate what was discussed into topics below referencing the corresponding page numbers in the draft environmental impact survey (DEIS), and am also attaching the 2 written statements Matt and I submitted to the board on Aug 1.  To read a detailed account of the concerns brought up at the Aug 1st meeting you can find the official recorded minutes from the meeting here:  https://www.townofnewburgh.org/cn/Meetings/?tpid=4729 under recent meetings.  The minutes should be posted in another week or two for the Sept 5th meeting (also under the recent meetings tab) but most likely after the 16th and deadline to submit concerns.  At the very bottom of this update will be a link to access the full draft environmental impact study submitted by Ross Winglovitz of Engineering & Surveying Properties on behalf of the Farrell Building Company to the planning board.  

For those of you just joining us, a quick review of the project:

This will be for an 11 building luxury apartment complex completed by the Farrell building group who has recently built several other luxury facilities and industrial park/warehouses in and around the Newburgh area (https://www.farrellcommunities.com/  The developer does not reside in the community—they are based out of the Hamptons.  The proposed development (48 acres over several town and city parcels) sits in the Quassaick Creek watershed basin and is .6miles from Washington Lake, .5miles from Crystal Lake. The property backs up to Harrison Pond/the Quassaick Creek.  The 3 adjacent neighboring homes to this development are all historic in nature, additionally nearby is a set of historic lime kilns dating back to the mid 1800’s.  The development estimates it will add an additional 500+ cars to our roadways and requires tying into the city sewer main at Unity Place.  Residents of this facility will be on the Town water supply (pg.78).  However, the water main that supplies city residents with clean drinking water currently runs along these parcels concurrent with a similarly old and shallowly buried sewer main (pg.79) which are fragile and subject to disruption during blasting and land regrading.  The developer believes the build out will take 3 years although, “the actual length of construction will depend upon economic and market conditions” (p. 42). 

Brief Recap of concerns discussed Aug 1 & Sept 5:

Problems with the traffic study:  

·       Traffic study is based on an outlying data point chosen because traffic volume was lower than average on Tuesday 25 April 2023 due to the fact the road had a modified traffic pattern and was partially closed and had posted detours for pothole repair.  All subsequent data based off of this point is not indicative of normal traffic flow.  Also, rather than looking at average traffic flow on this road why not base future projections off the busiest times of day?  April historically is also the safest month in terms of road accidents, largely due to less traffic volume vs July or August peaks. (pg.75)

·       Accident list was inaccurate (pg.70) and failed to include several major accidents along Little Britain road both in the time period studied and during the subsequent 2024 year after the study had been completed to include at least 1 fatality.  Town of Newburgh police and Goodwill Fire departments report, “Only 6 accidents were reported in the study for Little Britain and Old Little Britain rd.  Fire department records have indicated an additional 5 accidents at that location in the past 2 years and over the past 4 years there have been at least 70 reported accidents that have occurred between the city line (near Corwin CT) and Old Little Britain Rd”.

·       The study assumes NY state will have added a traffic light to the Old Little Britain/Little Britain intersection based on a project currently in proposal from 2018 (pg 67, 77).  The county has emphasized there are more projects than funding available and therefore cannot give an accurate estimate when funding for such a project would become available and whether that’s in a few months or a few years.  “The design approval is expected by June of 2024 with letting in March 2025” according to the DEIS.  When we contacted NYSDOT they claimed funding still had not been secured for this project and offered no suggestion on if/when the project would be finished.  

·       Current projected traffic volume numbers only use a multiplier to guess what the traffic generated by the new Stonegate apartments (recently sold to Jehovah’s witness), and future Unity Place Warehouse as well as two hotels (Old Little Britain Rd and former Steak and Stein location) would generate and did not consider traffic generated by the new Jehovah’s witness building on Old Little Britain Rd. (pg.71)  Traffic study in the report also shows the majority of the morning traffic generate by the Stonegate apartment/JW shows traffic arriving to the apartments (appendix F pg 14) rather than departing from.  Representatives from Goodwill fire also point out, “traffic is consistently heavy between Dewey Dr and D’Alfonso Rd from 10a-6p”.   

·       Accident mitigation strategy the developer (Farrell) offers is to paint white “stop bars” on the road at Old Little Britain Rd/Little Britain Rd and Wisner/Little Britain Rd intersections proposing this will increase safety and mitigate road accidents. (pgs 14, 21, 76, 77)

·       AASHTO chart used to determine sightline breaking distance had been modified in the report and was missing 3rd column showing that preferred distance required should be 550’ not 300’ as stated by the report.  (pg.74, figure 3.6b)

·       Intersections placed on curved portions of road, where the development entrance is currently being proposed, are statistically 35% more dangerous than intersections on a straight and level roads.  The study does not take into account angle of the sun in drivers’ eyes during fall/winter months coming from the city heading towards New Windsor, or that most cars exceed the speed limit on this road by 10+ mph, and fails to account for an increasingly older driving population which would require greater stopping distance due to slower reaction times.  

·       Traffic study completed also does not account for current driving culture on this road where it’s not uncommon for drivers to pass slower vehicles crossing over double yellow lines as they leave city and enter the town/higher speed limit zone.

·       Several residents along the road have complained of nearly being or being rear-ended as they slow to turn into their driveways and the lack of ability already to exit their driveway due to the currently volume of traffic.  4 residents have had cars run off Little Britain Rd into and through the fronts of their properties.

·       Developer should consider the use of the 2nd entrance on plans for safe entrance/egress and make the currently proposed western exit a right-turn-only.  The entrance not being considered is currently for emergency vehicle access with no intentions of paving due to the city’s concern about shallowly buried water/sewer mains (and possibly to save the builder money). 

·       School buses currently DO NOT enter apartment facilities but drop students off roadside in front of the complex.  Due to Newburgh being a right to bus school district students could be coming from any number of buildings but those coming from the New Windsor side of town would be required to cross oncoming highway traffic in order to access their home. (pg.74)

Sewage- Proposed 4,000+’ forced main sewer line will run across residential properties along Little Britain Rd and Old Little Britain Rd to pump sewage uphill from facility to connection point at Unity Place.  (Pages 22, 81, 82 and appendix I3)

·       Statement on pg 66 and figure in appendix I3 are incorrect and show the sewer and water still being run in the same trench along one side of the road despite previous discussion with planning board that water and sewer cannot be run in the same trench according to town code.  Homes on the south side of Little Britain Road are likely to have the pressurized sewer main installed on their right-of-ways.

·       Currently there’s no agreement who will own/maintain the sewer line once installed.  Could be privately owned by the builder which brings up concerns about who to call if/when a leak develops or what happens to the line if the developer goes bankrupt or sells to another party at a future point.  For instance, Farrell recently sold their Fishkill apartment complex in June ‘24, and according to their property manager in charge of the remaining 3 properties Josephine Formisano, “facilities like these are always on the market”.  How do we know this property won’t immediately get sold like the Stonegate apartments in New Windsor to another group immediately upon construction completion?

·       what will happen if the generator powering the pumping mechanism fails (during a storm or due to maintenance issues) since facility isn’t planning on storing more than 1 days worth of sewage on-site. (pg.82) Will apartment residents be told to use public toilets off site and not be allowed to flush their toilets while sewer main is being depressurized and repaired?

Blasting- The report claims blasting is not anticipated (pg. 43) but in other areas it states (pg.13, 38) they expect, “to remove 20,000 cubic yards of rock through blasting” in order to regrade land and steep slopes.

·       blasting from quarrying in the past has resulted in damage to building and road foundations leaving many homes with visible cracks according to another resident.

·       water supply line going to the city are shallowly buried at 4’(pg.79) and one of the reasons the second entrance to the facility is limited to emergency vehicles only for fear that continual traffic weight would damage/rupture the same water pipes that supply city residents with clean drinking water.  Vibrations incurred during blasting will surely do the same.

·       historic surrounding properties (closest 3 homes are all built between mid 1800’s and early 1900’s).  The historic lime kilns from the 1800’s on adjacent property are currently in crumbling condition and according to the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) eligible for national historic registry status (appendix E2).  Current proposal to protect lime kilns from blasting and construction vehicle traffic is to erect a barrier in front of the kilns (pg. 65, 66).  How will this help prevent damage from vibrations?

Environment

·       study states the wildlife evidenced in the area are limited to only deer and rodents and that, “the project site is located in an area that is not known to contain any rare, endangered or threated plant and animal species” (pg. 16, 53).  Page 44 mentions the waters of the Quassaick Creek are suitable for fish, shellfish and wildlife propagation and survival but there’s no mention of other wildlife that call the Harrison/Millers Pond/Crystal Lake/Washington Lake area home and part of their habitat.  They currently include:

o   bald and golden eagles (NY endangered species list and threatened list) springtime migratory patterns.

o   spotted turtles, woodland turtles, coopershawks, sharp shined hawks, red tails hawks, red headed woodpeckers, new England cottontail (species of special concern list)

o   Eastern meadowlark, olive sided fly catcher, rusty blackbird, little brown bat (species of greatest conservation need list)

o   Not to mention the flock of wild turkey, 2 bears, a litter of foxes, raccoons, skunks, coyotes and snakes that just call our property home.

·       DEIS states the majority of the runoff from the project (not just during build but through the life of the complex) will flow directly into Harrison Pond/Quassaick Creek (pg.82-83, 48-49, 55, figure 3.2D). This is disconcerting considering extensive efforts to clean and rehabilitate the creek by groups like Scenic Hudson, River Keeper, Quassaick Creek watershed Alliance and Quassaick Creek Greenway, Outdoor Promise and the Newburgh Wants a Park Campaign.  The environmental scientist Peter Torgenson (also from the Hamptons area) hired by the developer also incorrectly notes the area is, “isolated with no connection to a larger system” despite being in the Quassaick Creek watershed and Harrison pond being part of the Quassaick Creek pond system (pg. 3/34 Appendix C1).  

·       Removal of wetlands within the Quassiack Creek pond system through filling (pg.19, 45 &46)

·       Over the last 2 years the 4 most recent projects in this area have totaled 102/500 acres or roughly 30% of this areas undeveloped land just in this ½ mile radius

·       Residents of Stoneybrook Condos shared concerns about removal of trees and access through their property (see Appendex D).  Note to Stoneybrook Residents: Visit Stony Run Rd in Newburgh behind the Farrell Community at Gardnertown to see the nature buffer that was left in their last project.   

Find the full draft of the environmental impact survey submitted by the Farrell building co here:

https://dl.ep-pc.com/BritainWoods/

What’s Next? 

The Planning board will continue to accept public concerns until Sept 16th.  After that the public WILL NOT have an opportunity to comment, unless the current plan is significantly changed and the planning board deems it necessary to include the public.  The board and involved agencies meanwhile will continue their investigation of the current proposal.  The architect/developer then needs to show potential mitigation solutions to the concerns brought before the board.  Once the board agrees those changes are sufficient, they will vote on whether to approve as is or if other contingencies need to be met before building can begin.

What can you do?  

   Help us spread the word, if you know someone who would be impacted by this development please pass along a link to this petition or share it to social media.  You can also write or call the town planning board, town supervisor, city mayor and city engineer and let them know your concerned about this project and the unintended consequences poor planning could have on local residents.  You can also help us encourage the Town Supervisor and Zoning board to consider rezoning these areas to R1