Today’s story in Newsday regarding the proposed Glen Cove Garvies Point development once again disregards the fact that this project has not received the required permits from government agencies. Like the City and Developer’s advertising campaign of “shovels in the ground”, this article ignores the hard facts as documented by the DEC merely 3 weeks ago in its December 16, 2016 letter:
- the DEC has not issued Natural Resources permits’ (Tidal Wetlands, Protection of Waters and Water Quality Certification),
- parts of this land are only now being considered for NYDEC BCP (Brownfield Cleanup Program) due to petroleum contamination which may exist on the property,
- a “Radiological Monitoring Plan must be included for all work in the Creek”.
Newsday dispels residents’ health concerns about contamination while highlighting that “agencies have assured residents that, once remediation is deemed complete, people who would live in or use Garvies Point would not be at higher risk for cancer or other diseases.” Well, in 2011 the City of Glen Cove did deem the remediation complete, splashing such statement across the cover page of its SEQRA Findings Statement, the “Waterfront consists primarily of vacant formerly contaminated land. . . .”
It was only after these “opponents”, as Newsday refers to them, finally resorted to legal action after years of having their voices ignored that the agencies suddenly decided further remediation was required.
The article does not mention that Nassau County waived the required stormwater retention of eight (8) inches, allowing a mere two (2)inches for this 56 acre coastal property while, adamantly requiring the Diocese of Rockville Center to retain eight (8) inches on its land-locked mid-island property nor does it mention that the Town of Oyster Bay told Glen Cove in 2016 that this project should not “be held to the lowest possible standard for stormwater management given the size of the development and associated magnitude of stormwater runoff volume, and the sites’ location adjoining critical coastal resources.”
SEQRA is not just a procedural inconvenience, its purpose is to protect and ensure the health of our precious resources. At a time when Long Island’s water is threatened and becoming scarce, when millions of state and local funding is spent researching, grant writing, and programming to protect our water, ignoring the threat which this project poses to this valuable resource is inexcusable.
– Amy Marion, counsel for “the opponents”