Today, the Port of Oswego Authority (POA), filed its response in New York State Supreme Court to the lawsuit brought by the City of Oswego.
The City’s Application With Respect To The Project Is Time-Barred
The City, though not an “involved agency” was duly notified of plans for development well in advance of the start of any construction. The $15 million project, the Central New York Regional Agriculture Export Center, involving construction of a new warehouse and other upgrades, underwent a required State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) review beginning in April 2020 and concluding on Sept. 23, 2020. The Port, a New York State governmental agency, acted as lead agency and undertook a coordinated review with the only other involved agency, the NY State Dept. of Transportation (DOT). The New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) participated in the review as “interested” parties.
On or about April 27, the Port provided notice of its intention to act as lead agency. That notice, along with a copy of Part 1 of the Port’s Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) went to DOT, and to “interested” agencies which included OPRHP. The City was also provided with its own notice and Part 1 of the Port’s EAF. The Port’s Executive Director also met with the Mayor’s office to discuss this project. In addition, following a July 6, 2020 Port board meeting that revised the scope of the project to concentrate on its first phase, a notice was sent to the City by letter on July 9, 2020 with an amended EAF. To be clear, the City, as an “interested agency” received both the April 27 and July 9 lead agency notices and enclosed EAF Parts 1. The Port received no complaints about the proposed warehouse construction from the City at this time, nor anything else regarding the project.
The Port received no objections from DOT, SHPO, or OPRHP and issued a negative impact declaration on Sept. 23, 2020. No objection was received to that declaration and the DOT concurred with that declaration. That declaration was then published in the Environmental News Bulletin.
The City had 4 months after the negative impact declaration to challenge the project. The time to challenge has long since expired.
The Port took the requisite “hard look.”
The project proceeded in every respect in full compliance with SEQRA. As part of the review process, the Port submitted background materials to SHPO and OPRHP in early May 2020. Among other things, those materials clearly identified the warehouse construction and that it would block certain views of the lighthouse. In no subsequent communications—which included aerial drone photos and a Visual Resource Assessment showing impacts to sensitive sites within the project’s viewshed—did SHPO reference the lighthouse. Even though the materials shared revealed that the warehouse construction would block certain views of the lighthouse. To be clear…its’ analysis was limited to Fort Ontario, which is also the only viewshed of a registered historical resource that the project impacts, and their responses mentioned no potential environmental impact regarding the warehouse construction.
Revisions to the warehouse design did not warrant further SEQRA action
The City, relying upon inaccurate and misleading information, takes issue that the warehouse dimensions have changed since the negative declaration and that these changes had an impact on the ability to view the lighthouse.
In materials submitted to SHPO in May 2020, the warehouse project, then a dome design, had an expected height of 55 feet. Again, materials shared with SHPO revealed that the dome warehouse construction would block certain views of the lighthouse. The revised design is now slightly over 70 feet tall. An extremely significant fact worth mentioning is that the views that the City references are not impacted any more severely by this increased height. The lighthouse would not have been visible from these angles even if the warehouse was the dome design and 55 feet tall, which is the design that the city made no move to object to at the time. Therefore, the basis for the City’s lawsuit is unfounded and is a frivolous waste of tax-payer funds.
The City also alleges that the Port’s Board of Directors never approved the change in height. This is also inaccurate. The Port elected to publicly rebid the warehouse construction after its bid for a 55-foot domed structure returned only one bid that was 71 percent over the estimated cost. The rebid on the project was within budget and the design changed from a round dome to a square warehouse in the same footprint as the original plan. The bid was submitted to the Board for approval. The full Board had the information on the rebid well in advance of the meeting on Dec. 7, 2020, and they voted to accept the bid at that meeting.
The Port took the required “hard look” before concluding that the negative declaration was not impacted by the warehouse construction change, and the Port’s consultants advised the Port that no such change was necessary. The Port also took into consideration that—at that time—there had been no objections from any interested or involved agencies or the public regarding the fact that the warehouse construction would block certain views of the lighthouse and that the changes in size would have no measurable change on those views (they would still be blocked).
The Agricultural Expansion Project Is Vital To The Port’s Survival
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has jurisdiction over the handling of grain for export. The USDA had already notified the Port before November 2019, that the Port’s license to handle grain exports would be revoked unless certain capital improvements were made to Port facilities. Grain handling and related agricultural products accounts for a substantial part of the Port’s annual operating revenues and employs a number of additional longshoremen. In addition, the Port’s grain handling operations are the most cost-effective method for Central New York farmers to access the market, including the international market, for their grain. Other ports with grain export capacity are more distant, and therefore subject farmers to higher freight costs, which, in-turn, subject the environment to more emissions and adverse impacts from longer truck routes.
The Central New York Regional Agriculture Export Center Expansion Project is critical to the Port’s vitality because it will enable to the Port to keep its’ grain handling license and give it a competitive edge in attracting more business and jobs in the future.
A 2018 economic impact study commissioned by the Great Lakes Seaway Partnership documented that in 2017, the Port of Oswego supported 209 jobs, $26.7 million in economic activity, $13.8 million in personal income and local consumption expenditures, and $5.8 million in federal and state tax revenue.
“The study reflects the important contributions the Port of Oswego provides to the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Region, “ said Steven A. Fisher, executive director, American Great Lakes Ports Association. “The jobs supported by the maritime industry include not only those located directly on the waterfront—shipyard workers, stevedores, vessel operators, terminal employees, truck drivers and marine pilots—but also grain farmers, construction workers, miners and steelworkers. Many of these jobs would vanish if not for a dynamic maritime industry.”
Discover more from Oswego County Today
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
