Vincent Ferri prepared the following which is now posted on the Democratic Alliance NY website:
— BLOCK-BUSTER designLAB Architect's
RESIGNATION LETTER TO PHIL CLARK
OF CPL MADE PUBLIC
— DEC IGNORES CLEAR PROOF OF ADDITIONAL SOIL DISTURBANCE AND ILLEGAL SEGMENTATION
— OCDPW AND OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION COLLUDE TO PREVENT PUBLIC ACCESS TO OFFICIAL SITE PLAN
Although the DEC decision to not require a SPDES Permit and a SWPPP took place in April 2015, the DEC never saw a site plan until a fraudulent plan was generated by Phil Clark on 17 July 2015.
The DEC received that plan subsequently, and reaffirmed their previous improper decision. They also ignored:
1. two independent SOIL STUDIES undertaken for the County and CPL, respectively which established the NEED for replacement of unstable soils at various locations on the project site;
2. the need for flood mitigation and the installation of significant flood mitigation infrastructure requiring substantial SOIL DISTURBANCE [the same soil studies];
3. they also ignored statements by engineers for the manufacturer of "TuffTrack Greenway Pavers" who declared that the material used to justify 0 SF of soil disturbance for a 64,000 SF parking facility is:
Unsuitable for Municipal Parking;
Unsuitable for Daily Vehicular Traffic;
Requires significant Flood Mitigation and Flood Control Infrastructure [Soil Disturbance] when installed over impervious soils;
Cannot be plowed in winter closer than 2 inches above the installation;
Requires the Heavy Duty version of the recommended installation needing 8 inches of excavation [more Soil Disturbance];
GRASS WILL NOT GROW IN THE CELLS WITH DAILY USE.
The latest slap in the face to Orange County Taxpayers is the failure of the County DPW to release for inspection the OFFICIAL SITE PLAN AS IT EXISTS AS PART OF THE PUBLISHED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND IN CONTEXT WITH THOSE DOCUMENTS.
EVEN WORSE, while we contend that the DEC has never see the real site plan, and maintain that the plan given to them after 17 July 2015 is fraudulent and deficient, THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION WHICH HAS A SIGNING AUTHORITY ON THE PROJECT AND A FUNDING COMPONENT [BOTH OF WHICH SHOULD TRIGGER FEDERAL OVERSIGHT UNDER SECTION 106 REVIEW] has gone out of its way to prevent public access to the real construction documents till 27 AUGUST.
— WHAT WILL BE LEFT TO PROTECT ON 27 AUGUST?
— IS THAT DATE THE DATE THAT JUDGE CAHILL IS WAITING FOR TO RENDER A DECISION ON OUR ARTICLE 78 PETITION?