Fred
LeBrun: Time wears on big plan for resort
First published: Sunday, October 30, 2005 Albany Times Union
The Catskills took millions of years to form as mountains. That
should be an
important clue to Dean Gitter, who is proposing to reshape them
dramatically
with his colossal Belleayre Resort project.
Congressman Maurice Hinchey's district includes the site of
Gitter's
proposed resort complex -- 2,000 acres on either side of the
state-owned
Belleayre Ski Center in Ulster County. After years of staying
in the
background, Hinchey has weighed in on Gitter's dream, which
is moving
glacially through a state Department of Environmental Conservation
permitting process.
Hinchey has given it a thumbs down. Not all the way down, but
about
two-thirds of the way. He did offer a drastically cut-down version
as a sort
of compromise.
The congressman's primary concern is that Gitter's full resort
plan would
jeopardize New York City's nearby water supply trunk line.
"Without that water supply, the city of New York can't
exist. And in the
future, there are apt to be millions more relying on that same
Catskill
water," he said, noting the growing contamination of the
Long Island
aquifer.
Hinchey suggested that Gitter should abandon development plans
for the
steep-sloped east side of his property in the mountainous Big
Indian area.
Rather, he says, Gitter should concentrate on developing only
the 900 acres
on the west side of the existing ski resort -- if it meets various
environmental standards, of course. Further, Hinchey says the
east side
should be bought by the state or New York City and added to
the forest
preserve, or at least removed from possible development for
all time.
Not surprisingly, attorney Marc Gerstman, representing a coalition
of forces
opposing Gitterland, as it is derisively known, said his group
supports the
Hinchey alternative.
Also not surprising was Dean Gitter's heated rejection. His
Albany lawyer,
Dan Ruzow, added, "the notion you can't build on Big Indian
is not
acceptable to us." He went on to say that a key element
of the hotels, golf
courses and luxury homes combo Gitter is envisioning is a five-star
luxury
hotel for the Big Indian side. Without it, Gitter makes no money
on this was
the clear implication.
So, six years into this multimillion-dollar application process,
all that
can be said for sure with this latest round is that Congressman
Maurice
Hinchey, a powerful force in his district, is against Dean Gitter's
resort
plans unless they are severely cut back.
Meanwhile, the lawyers for Gitter and his allies among officials
in the
towns and counties involved, are drafting appeals to a far-reaching
September decision by DEC administrative law judge Richard Wissle
that would
require separate drawn-out trials on 12 environmental quality
of life issues
the judge says Gitter failed to properly address in his permit
application.
Potentially, a staggering delay that could take years to get
through, and a
big setback for Gitter.
And after that is resolved, Gitter faces more permit applications
with the
city of New York that could and most likely will kill Gitter's
proposal
anyway.
What a muddy, tortured process.
Three things are coming into focus at this point: One, somebody
in the
Gitter camp has deep pockets, and that person has more money
than he or she
needs. Two, Gitter's vision or nightmare, take your pick, has
become a
full-employment act for lawyers. And three, by the time he actually
gets a
simply yes or no to his plan, through the natural erosion of
the ages Big
Indian will be as flat as Cape Cod and useless for skiing anyway.
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
In the Matter of the Application of PETITION FOR PARTY STATUS
Application Number 0-9999-00096/00005
CROSSROADS VENTURES, LLC
For The Belleayre Project at Catskill Park
for permits to construct pursuant to the Environmental Conservation
Law
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I Introduction
This Petition for Party Status is submitted by the Catskill
Preservation Coalition (hereinafter referred to as
the "CPC") which is comprised of the following groups:
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Catskill Heritage
Alliance, Pine Hill Water District Coalition, Theodore Gordon
Flyfishers, Inc., Zen Environmental Studies Institute, Friends
of Catskill Park, Catskill Center for Conservation and Development,
Trout Unlimited, New York Public Research Interest Group and
Riverkeeper, Inc., by their attorneys, the Law Office of Marc
S. Gerstman, Esq. The Sierra Club joins in this Petition for
Party Status.
The CPC hereby petitions for Full Party Status pursuant to 6
N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.5 (b) in the above referenced adjudicatory
hearing. The CPC represents a wide range of local, regional,
statewide and national environmental, conservation, community,
landscape preservation and economic development interests which
will be adversely impacted by the proposed Crossroads Ventures,
LLC project ((hereinafter referred to as the (Belleayre Project().
The Belleayre Project will result in significant and unmitigated
adverse environmental impacts which will have a critical bearing
on the future of the Catskill Park, the Towns of Shandaken and
Middletown, the Route 28 Corridor, the central Catskill communities
and the New York City Watershed and Drinking Water Supply. In
the hearing, the CPC will present expert testimony and evidence
on the substantial and fatal deficiencies in the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement ("DEIS"), supporting documentation
and applications and on the significant and pervasive adverse
environmental impacts which will result from the Belleayre Project.
The State Environmental Quality Review Act, ECL, Article 8 ("SEQRA")
requires that the Belleayre Project's significant adverse environmental
impacts, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures be
identified and objectively evaluated. As outlined below, the
CPC will present evidence that the DEIS does not provide a reasonable
and candid evaluation of the adverse visual, traffic, noise,
economic, water quality, ecological, wildlife and habitat, community
character and cultural resource impacts. These fatal defects
in the DEIS regarding the substantial adverse impacts which
will result from construction and operation of the Belleayre
Project deprive the Commissioner of the legally necessary environmental
analysis and record upon which she must make SEQRA findings
pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11. Moreover, multiple
aspects of the Belleayre Project do not meet permit standards
pursuant to the Environmental Conservation Law.
II Summary of Substantive and Significant Issues
CPC, by this Petition, presents substantive and significant
issues for adjudication. CPC's experts will demonstrate that
the Belleayre Project will dominate and irretrievably alter
the landscape throughout the Towns of Shandaken and Middletown,
the Route 28 Corridor, and the Catskill Forest Preserve. Its
intrusion will be substantial and unavoidable. The Belleayre
Project will degrade the landscape and substantially interfere
with the region's economic vitality and renaissance.
CPC will demonstrate that Crossroads Ventures used inappropriate
methodologies and standards to assess sediment and erosion control,
project alternatives, impacts from project noise, blasting,
and traffic, as well as project impacts to aquatic and wildlife
habitat, wildlife resources, community character, the Forest
Preserve New York City's watershed, and local potable water
quality and quantity. The DEIS also fails to take account of
cumulative impacts and adverse secondary growth impacts that
will result from this Project. As a result, the DEIS artificially
minimizes or ignores the substantial impacts from construction
and operation of the Belleayre Project.
III Environmental and Statutory Interests of the CPC Members
The members of the CPC view the Belleayre Project and its significant
adverse environmental impacts from diverse local, regional,
statewide and national perspectives. However, all of members
of the CPC possess a common and profound interest in the economic
and environmental health of their communities and in the Catskill
Mountains.
Members of the CPC submit that the Belleayre Resort project
will result in significant adverse environmental impacts on
the character of the Catskill Park and the local communities;
the forest preserve and New York City Watershed; the area's
streams, flora and fauna; community character and quality of
life, water supply; roadways and traffic; rural character and
viewshed; and the social and economic vitality and base of the
area. CPC is further concerned about the multiple impacts of
8 years of construction. CPC ës member organizations submit
that a development project of this magnitude will dominate the
Central Catskill Region, lead to other large scale commercial
development projects, and ultimately transform the area from
the unique configuration of mountain park, forever wild forest
preserve, historic villages and watershed, to an overcrowded,
commercialized tourist area. The loss to New York State would
be irretrievable and felt throughout the State
The CPC's interests relate to: DEC's implementation of SEQRA
(including the project's impacts to visual, noise, traffic,
community character, water quality, secondary, neighborhood,
wildlife and habitat); water quality protection, Article 17,
Environmental Conservation Law; mining and land reclamation
laws and regulations, Article 23, Title 27, Environmental Conservation
Law; protection of waters, Article 15, Title 5, Environmental
Conservation Law; water supply, Article 15, Title 15, Environmental
Conservation Law, Article IX of the New York State Constitution;
and fishery and habitat protection, Article 11, Environmental
Conservation Law.
A. Trout Unlimited
Trout Unlimited's ("TU") mission is to conserve, protect
and restore North America's trout and salmon fisheries and their
watersheds. TU accomplishes this mission on local, state and
national levels with an extensive and dedicated volunteer network.
Locally, the two chapters, Ashokan/Pepacton and Catskill Mountains,
have joint responsibility for the Esopus-Ashokan system. They
are organized as all volunteer not-for-profit organizations.
Two years ago, they participated in The Birch Creek Project,
an on-going effort to reconnect and improve habitat on Birch
Creek. Working in collaboration with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, crews of volunteers installed fish-friendly baffles
on a double-concrete box culvert in Pine Hill. Crews have also
planted trees and willows in the Day Use Area. The two chapters
are presently collaborating with DEC's Division of Operations
to install a Denil steep-pass fishway for the Belleayre Mountain
Ski Center diversion structure, and will buy the fishway with
an Embrace-a-Stream grant from TU National. In respect to Birch
Creek and other area streams, the chapters are long-term, committed
stake-holders.
Esopus Creek Rainbow Trout are part of Catskill's history. Originally,
these fish were brought east from California and introduced
in the waters of the Catskills during the 1880s. They have thrived
in the Esopus-Ashokan watershed system. As one or two year old
fish, they swim down to the Ashokan Reservoir to feed on alewives,
then swim up the main stem and tributaries to spawn, entering
the Esopus as early as November and lingering as late as June.
Theodore Gordon, A. E. Hendrickson, Jim Payne, Roy Steenrod,
Everett Garrison, Preston Jennings and other expert sportsmen
fished the Esopus and praised its rainbow trout.
†
The Esopus Rainbows are a self-sustaining, feral population.
In addition, the Esopus system contains feral Brown and Brook
Trout. Rainbow, Brown and Brook Trout fingerlings are found
in Birch Creek and Lost Clove Brook, qualifying both streams
for Trout Spawning classification (the records are in Appendix
20 of the DEIS, though not all that were submitted were included)
Redds can at times be spotted by walking the banks. These streams
are essential to recruitment of all three Esopus drainage species,
and the Rainbow and other feral Trout they harbor can legitimately
be called a cultural heritage.
B. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. ("NRDC")
is a New York not-for-profit organization that includes among
its principal purposes the protection of the environment in
all its aspects, including land, water and air. NRDC is headquartered
in New York City and has taken a special interest both air quality
and the Hudson River. NRDC has a national membership of more
than 500,000, including many members who live or work in the
area of the proposed project or who use the Hudson River in
the area and its adjoining shores for recreation.
The environmental interests of NRDC in this proceeding are clear.
NRDC has and continues to focus on protecting the watershed
of New York City. Working on its own and with others, it has
advocated for the protection of sensitive lands within the New
York City Watershed and has opposed inappropriate incursions
into the landscape. Its members include many people who live
in the Catskills, New York City and Ulster and Delaware Counties
and countless others who hike the hills and other lands. These
members, and the organization itself, will be adversely affected
by the proposal of Crossroads Ventures to construct the Belleayre
Project.
C. Riverkeeper, Inc.
Riverkeeper is a not-for-profit public interest environmental
organization organized under the laws of the State of New York.
It is dedicated to protecting the Hudson River, its tributaries,
and the New York City drinking water supply watershed. Riverkeeper
is a surviving corporation that resulted from the 1992 merger
with the Hudson River Fishermen(s Association, Inc., a private
conservation organization founded by fishermen in 1966 to gather,
study, and disseminate information about the ecology of the
Hudson River as well as other important water bodies in New
York.
The proposed project is located in the Catskill and Delaware
watersheds. Together, these watersheds provide up to 90% of
the unfiltered drinking water supply for nearly 9 million New
Yorkers. Riverkeeper was a negotiator of, is a signatory to
the 1997 New York City Watershed Memorandum of Agreement, and
has worked to protect the New York City Watershed for more than
15 years. Riverkeeper has approximately 5000 members many of
whom live in the Catskill Mountains and in New York City and
drink water supplied from the Catskill and Delaware watersheds.
Adverse impacts from the proposed project could jeopardize the
quality of the drinking water produced in the Catskill and Delaware
watersheds. The proposed project also could affect Riverkeeper
members that live in or near, fish in, or otherwise use and
enjoy the Catskill and Delaware watersheds.
D. The Catskill Center for Conservation and Development
The Catskill Center for Conservation and Development ("Catskill
Center") is a not-for-profit membership organization committed
to balancing the protection of natural resources with sustainable
economic development in the Catskill region. Founded in 1969,
the Catskill Center is a regional advocate emphasizing the development
and implementation of innovative programs in natural resource
conservation, community planning & development, education,
and regional arts and culture. The Center's advocacy work has
focused on protecting the Catskill Mountain region, with its
rich cultural legacy, which encompasses some 6,000 square miles
of mountains, small towns, rivers, and farmlands. The area also
serves as the primary source of water for the City of New York.
The Catskill Center is an advocate for the region's vibrant
main streets, beautiful natural resources, cultural assets,
working landscapes, and drinking water resources.
Specifically, the Catskill Center has engaged in diverse activities
within various Catskill communities in order to achieve its
objectives including:
Protect and conserve natural resources in partnership with other
agencies and organizations;
Monitor, and when appropriate, take action on regional environmental,
land use and natural resource issues impacting the region;
Provide technical assistance, information and leadership to
small businesses throughout the region in order to build sustainable
communities;
Developed an interdisciplinary Catskill curriculum for teachers;
Coordinate a regional stream-monitoring network of school and
public volunteer groups;
Strengthen public awareness of the rich cultural and artistic
heritage of the Catskills.
Sponsor conferences, round-tables, forums and workshops to
bring together stakeholders and policy makers.
The Catskill Center believes that the Belleayre Project represents
irresponsible land use planning and development and is ill suited
to Catskill Park, due, in part, to its scale. The project is
unprecedented in size, within not only the Catskill Region but
indeed, the entire northeastern United States. A project of
this type is not compatible with the character or values of
the region's local communities. The Belleayre Project will also
require dramatic disruption in a particularly environmentally
sensitive and valuable area. Moreover, the Belleayre Project
could be the first step towards the requirement for New York
City to provide filtration for its water supply which would
significantly impact the Catskill communities and undermine
the New York City Watershed Agreement.
Development of this Project is in direct contravention to the
planning, educational, monitoring initiatives, the advocacy
work, and technical assistance the Center has long provided
to users of the area's resources and undertaken on behalf of
the area. Its members live and work in the affected area and
enjoy the resources that will be irretrievably damaged by this
Project.
E. Friends of Catskill Park
SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Friends of Catskill Park ("FCP"),
which was organized in April 2001, is an all-volunteer grassroots
organization based in Shandaken, New York, which lies within
New York's Catskill Park and the New York City Watershed. FCP's
mission is to assist in the preservation and enhancement of
Catskill Park, the communities within the Park, and to help
safeguard the Park as a wild and natural heritage for all New
Yorkers to experience and enjoy for generations to come. Friends
of Catskill Park was established in response to the proposed
Belleayre Resort at Catskill Park which is the largest single
development ever proposed for the Central Catskills. FCP is
a project of the Open Space Institute, Inc., which serves as
an incubator for such projects, conferring 501(c)(3) status
and supplying administrative support.
FCP currently has approximately 700 supporters. They include
residents of the Central Catskills, the area that would be the
most directly impacted by the Belleayre Resort; residents from
throughout New York State who frequent the Park and State Forest
Preserve and use and enjoy the resources; and residents from
New York City who want the New York City Watershed protected
from degradation.
The Catskill Park is the second largest accumulation of ''forever
wild'' land in New York State, second only to the magnificent
Adirondack Park. It is especially unique because it is a prized
wilderness within just 2 hours of one of the largest cities
in the world and it contains a substantial part of the New York
City Watershed. FCP's mission is to protect the fragile balance
that currently exists among the Catskill Park, the New York
State Forest Preserve within the Park, the New York City Watershed
and the communities within the Park, all which co-exist harmoniously
and serve a wide range of needs throughout the state.
F. Zen Environmental Studies Institute
Zen Environmental Studies Institute ("ZESI") is a
501 (c) (3) not-for-profit environmental organization with training
facilities on Raquette Lake in the Adirondacks and on the Esopus
River in Mount Tremper. ZESI's Mount Tremper facility, which
is located within miles of the proposed Belleayre Project is
a 35-acre site that contains approximately 15 acres of ecologically
fragile wetlands. Much of ZESI's ecological training and studies
take place in these wetlands which are in danger due to the
proposed creation of the Belleayre Resort by Crossroads Ventures.
ZESI is concerned that the creation of large areas of non-porous
surfaces will result in substantially more runoff than the property
currently experiences when the Esopus river is in flood stage.
As a result, ZESI is concerned that its wetland property will
be damaged. ZESI is also concerned that golf course pesticides
and fertilizers, chlorinated hydrocarbons and phosphorous-containing
chemicals may find their way into the Esopus in spite of the
detention ponds and filtration catch-basins proposed by the
developer. ZESI's analysis of the DEIS and the Belleayre Project
indicates that much of what is being proposed is based on speculation,
rather than experimentally verifiable data. If the Belleayre
Project were built, both ZESI and its members who use and enjoy
the wetlands located on ZESI's property will be adversely affected.
G. Pine Hill Water District Coalition
The Pine Hill Water District Coalition ("Water Coalition")
is a 501(c) 4 not-for profit organization formed to protect
the water supply and quality of the Pine Hill Water District
and to advocate on behalf of people who use and enjoy the water
resources of Pine Hill, New York in the Town of Shandaken. The
Water Coalition's 70-100 members live in and around Pine Hill;
most of them currently have water supplied by the municipally
owned Pine Hill Water District which was formed in 2003. Several
members of the Water Coalition own or have owned and/or managed
water resources in the District which either currently or historically
supply water to the hamlet of Pine Hill.
The potable and non-potable water resources proposed for the
Belleayre Resort at Catskill Park are inaccurately described.
Generally, the DEIS overestimates the supply, especially during
drought conditions, and under-estimates current and future use,
both of the proposed resort and of the hamlet of Pine Hill.††In
addition, the water resources considered and proposed for use
at the resort include water resources located within the hamlet
of Pine Hill have been historically utilized to supply water
to the hamlet and are needed to meet Pine Hill's current and
future water needs.
H. Catskill Heritage Alliance
Catskill Heritage Alliance ("the Alliance") is an
unincorporated membership organization formed for the purpose
of preserving the harmony between the villages of the central
Catskills and the surrounding wilderness through community revitalization,
open space conservation, and environmental protection. The Alliance
has approximately 300 members and supporters, most owning property
or residing in Shandaken, New York, and others frequenting the
Catskill Mountain region for recreational or business purposes.
The Alliance has analyzed and critiqued multiple aspects of
the proposal of Crossroads Ventures to build a golf-oriented
resort facility on the ridges east and west of the Belleayre
ski resort. In opposition to material presented in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), the Alliance claims the
following: 1) the economic interests of the communities involved,
particularly Shandaken, are not served by the proposed resort;
(2) the fiscal impacts and changes in community character engendered
by the resort would harm the communities involved by draining
resources needed for more sustainable forms of tourism and hamlet
revitalization; (3) the DEIS does not adequately describe and
quantify potential environmental adverse impacts, including
adverse impacts to protected open space, of the proposed resort;
4) the DEIS presents no evidence of broad-based community support
for the proposed resort; and 5) the DEIS does not adequately
identify and describe potential alternatives to the proposed
resort.
The Alliance also claims that the review process of the proposed
project has been flawed in major respects, including omission
of relevant consideration of other private and governmental
developments within the same region (e.g., the Catskill Mountain
Railroad and proposed expansions of the Belleayre Ski Center)
and other procedural errors (e.g., inadequate time provided
for review of the DEIS, which was itself presented in unwieldy
and poorly accessible formats). Finally, the Alliance joins
with the Pine Hill Water District Coalition in objecting to
use by the project of water assets located within Pine Hill
and historically utilized by the hamlet and to any water uses
that harm current water users or limit the natural and anticipated
growth of the hamlet.
I. Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, Inc.
The Theodore Gordon Flyfishers ("TGF"), a dedicated
group of five hundred members, including conservationists and
anglers, who are deeply concerned with the future of the Esopus
Creek and its ecosystem on Belleayre Mountain, including Birch
Creek and Lost Clove Brook.
TGF was founded during the 1960's to protect the rivers of the
Catskills from potential damage associated with construction
and development along their banks. TGF sponsors programs such
as "Trout in the Classroom," an environmental education
program that has been integrated into the curriculum of over
80 classrooms throughout New York City and State to help develop
in children an understanding of the State's shared aquatic resources.
TGF's members have served as educators on various subjects and
as advocates for many different rivers during the past 40 years.
However, TGF considers the rivers of the Catskill region to
be its "home waters". Most of TGF's members reside
in the tri-state area of New York, Connecticut and New Jersey,
some of whom reside within the borders of the Catskill Preserve.
TGF considers protection and conservation of the Catskill waters
to be its primary goal and purpose.
Nestled in the Catskill Mountains, the Esopus Creek is one of
several world class trout streams in this region that support
sizable wild trout populations. The trout streams of the Catskills
are revered among fishermen across the nation as the birthplace
of American flyfishing. As a vital trout producing stream, the
Esopus Creek was praised by Theodore Gordon for its significant
population of rainbow trout. The Esopus is a historical and
recreational treasure of the Catskills that continues to attract
thousands of anglers every year and thus, it deserves to be
protected.
J. New York Public Interest Research Group
The New York Public Interest Research Group ("NYPIRG")
is New York State's largest non-profit, non-partisan student
directed research and advocacy organization. NYPIRG's primary
areas of focus are on environmental protection, public health
and government accountability.
NYPIRG's headquarters are located in New York City, with regional
offices in Albany, Buffalo and Long Island, and 20 college campus
chapter offices throughout the state, including New Paltz in
the mid-Hudson Valley. NYPIRG's environmental project currently
focuses on environmental and public health, including drinking
water protection, notification and reduction of pesticide use,
clean air and energy, and toxic site clean-ups.
NYPIRG has approximately 60,000 citizen supporters and seeks
to empower, train and educate students and other community members
and encourage their participation in the public decision-making
process through organizing and advocacy efforts to address significant
problems affecting the health, environment, democratic institutions
and quality of life for New York State's residents.
As negotiators of, and signatories to, the 1997 New York City
Watershed Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA"), NYPIRG
is committed to overseeing the implementation and enforcement
of the MOA and working with watershed stakeholders to ensure
that the drinking water supply for more than nine million New
Yorkers remains high quality.
In addition to the Watershed Agreement, among our other major
environmental achievements, NYPIRG was instrumental in passing
the Pesticide Neighbor Notification bill, which allows counties
to pass local laws requiring commercial lawn applicators to
provide written notice to abutting properties at least 48 hours
prior to most lawn pesticide applications and led efforts to
strengthen and reauthorize the state's toxic waste site clean
up law, commonly known as Superfund.
K. Sierra Club
Sierra Club is a national, non-profit environmental and conservation
organization incorporated under the laws of the State of California.
The Sierra Club is dedicated to the protection of public health
and the environment. The Sierra Club joins in the Petition for
Party Status on behalf of itself and its adversely affected
members. The Sierra Club has more than 700,000 members nationwide,
43,000 of whom live in New York. The Sierra Club is dedicated
to enjoying and protecting the wild places of the Earth; to
practicing and promoting the responsible use of the Earth's
resources and ecosystems; to educating and enlisting humanity
to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human
environment; and to using all lawful means to carry out these
objectives. Many members of the Sierra Club use and enjoy the
Catskills and other resources that would be adversely affected
by the Belleayre Project.
The Sierra Club's concerns encompass the enjoyment and protection
of the natural and human environment around the area of Catskill
Park. The Sierra Club's particular interest in this case stems
from the past, present, and future harm to the environment that
would be caused by the Belleayre Project. Sierra Club members
reside, work, and recreate in the areas impacted by these facilities.
Sierra Club members have an interests in protecting New York
City drinking water supply. Sierra Club members have participated
in agency proceedings related to the permit.
IV. Issues for Adjudication and Offers of Proof
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.5(b)(2)(i) and (ii))
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project will not meet the regulatory
or statutory standards set forth in the Environmental Conservation
Law and the State Historic Preservation Act and, therefore,
its permit applications must be denied.
An issue is adjudicable if it is proposed by a potential party
and it is both substantive and significant. In accordance with
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4 (c)(2), an issue is substantive if
there is sufficient doubt about the applicant's ability to meet
statutory or regulatory criteria applicable to the project,
such that a reasonable person would require further inquiry.
An issue is significant if, ". . . it has the potential
to result in the denial of a permit, a major modification to
the proposed project or the imposition of significant permit
conditions in addition to those proposed in the draft permit."
The issues presented by the CPC, through its experts, are substantive
and significant as defined in 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
Based on the expert testimony offered in the Petition, CPC contends
that DEC will be unable to issue findings pursuant to SEQRA
for the Belleayre Project. Pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11
(d) (5), DEC must, "certify that consistent with social,
economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable
alternatives available, the action is one that avoids or minimizes
adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable,
and that adverse environmental impacts will be avoided or minimized
to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as conditions
to the decision those mitigative measures that were identified
as practicable." The DEIS fails to meet the requirements
of SEQRA; therefore, the Commissioner will be unable to issue
positive findings pursuant to SEQRA.
A. Visual and Aesthetic Impacts
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project presents substantive
and significant issues for adjudication since it will result
in significant adverse visual impacts which have not been and
cannot be mitigated by Crossroads Ventures. Therefore, Crossroads
Ventures' permit applications must be denied.
CPC will present the testimony of Mr. Peter J. Smith, AICP,
MCIP, RLA; Ms. Mary Kopaskie, AICP, MCIP, RPP and Mr. Danny
Sundell, RLA, ASLA, that the Belleayre Project will result in
significant adverse visual and aesthetic impacts. The curricula
vitae of Mr. Smith, Ms. Kopaski and Mr. Sundell are attached
hereto as Exhibits "CV-A", "CV-B " and "CV-C
". Specifically, Mr. Sundell and Mr. Smith will testify
to the facts and conclusions set forth in their report, which
is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", including but not
limited to the following:
1.) The methodology used by the DEIS does not fully comply with
the DEC Visual Impact Assessment Policy in that "line-of-sight"
profiles are not included; at a minimum, these should have been
completed for several of the points along Route 28 that were
identified in the DEIS as "potentially visible areas along
roadways and from the Village of Pine Hill. As such, the method
used in the DEIS Visual Impact Study (Appendix 21) does not
include the minimum required by the DEC Policy on Assessing
and Mitigating Visual Impacts.
2) Based on a review of the surrounding topography, a worst-case
scenario for visual impacts should be completed from across
the valley; namely Rose Mountain, Monka Hill and Hog Mountain.
The visual impacts from the Village of Pine Hill and Route 28
would also be the most frequently observed due to the development
there and would likely have the greatest impact on community
character, however these views have not been included in the
DEIS. No visual assessment or simulations were completed from
the Pine Hill hamlet, the Belleayre summit and slopes or Route
28, the areas most likely to be impacted within the five-mile
radius.
3.) Based on a review of the surrounding topography, the worst-case
scenario for visual impacts will be from across the valley;
namely Rose Mountain, Monka Hill and Hog Mountain. The visual
impacts from the Village of Pine Hill and Route 28 would also
be the most frequently observed due to the development there
and would likely have the greatest impact on community character,
yet none of these views were included in the DEIS.
4.) The following significant adverse visual impacts should
have been evaluated in the DEIS but were omitted:
Visual impacts of blasting the top of a currently forested and
undisturbed mountain with no consideration to the changes in
topography ;
Visual impacts and potential erosion of stockpile areas and
the lack of a stockpile management plan;
Visual impacts of clear-cutting over 500 acres and turning much
of the area into lawned golf courses and buildings;
Loss of forest land that includes the destruction of over 278,000
trees;
Light pollution, including night glow, lighting visible from
an elevation perspective and glare from lighting during the
winter (snow glare), on an historically "dark" region;
Impacts on panoramic views and vistas along Route 28 and from
other places within a five mile radius of the project site.
Conclusion
The Belleayre Project will result in significant adverse impacts
to community character, the economy of the region and to the
region's cultural and historic resources which cannot be mitigated
and which are not outweighed by the social, economic and other
essential considerations. As a result, the Commissioner will
be unable to issue the required legal findings pursuant to 6
N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11(d)(5). CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's significant adverse impacts on community
character should be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß
624.4.
B. Groundwater and Surface Water Impacts
CPC will present evidence that the Belleayre Project raises
substantive and significant issues for adjudication since it
will result in significant adverse impacts to the area's surface
and ground water resources which have not been and cannot be
mitigated by Crossroads Ventures. The Belleayre Project will
result in violation of New York State Water Quality Standards
and unduly stress the region's water resources. As a result,
the valuable and unique fisheries will be irrevocably degraded
and potentially destroyed. Accordingly, Crossroads Ventures'
permit applications must be denied.
The offer of proof submitted herewith prepared by Andrew Michalski,
Ph.D., CGWP, Michalski & Associates, attests to the significant
adverse surface and ground water impacts that will result from
the construction and operation of the Belleayre Project. Dr.
Michalski's curriculum vitae is attached hereto as Exhibit "CV-D".
His report on Groundwater Issues of the DEIS For the Belleayre
Resort is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
Dr. Michalski will testify to the findings and conclusions in
his report including but not limited to the following:
1) The proposed groundwater withdrawal rates from Rosenthal
wells R2 and R1, required to meet potable and irrigation water
demands for the eastern portion of the project (Big Indian Plateau),
cannot be sustained over dry weather periods. The Silo A Spring
cannot be used as a backup supply source during such periods
because the flow in Crystal Spring Brook would fall below the
criterion of 30% of average flow ("the Tennant threshold").
2.) Even at sustainable reduced rates, groundwater pumping at
the two portions of the project (the eastern Big Indian Plateau
and western Wildacres Resort) would significantly reduce the
baseflows in Crystal Spring Brook, Birch Creek, and Emory Brook.
Existing streamflow measurements for dry weather months show
that Crystal Spring Brook is already losing much of its baseflow
along the segment above the confluence with Birch Creek, and
Birch Creek is barely gaining any water within its two-mile
segment below the confluence with Crystal Spring Brook. The
amount of further reduction in the Birch Creek baseflow attributable
to the proposed pumping would approach withdrawal rates from
the Rosenthal wells, as the wells would subtract water from
the creek. The lower segment of Crystal Spring Brook might completely
lose its baseflow due to the combined effects of increased pumping
rates at the two portions of the proposed resort and at the
existing Belleayre Ski Area, and through flow short-circuiting
along open holes of numerous deep bedrock wells installed within
and adjacent to the project area. This effect will further be
exacerbated by the proposed expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center.
3) Extensive lowering of bedrock water levels due to pumping
at the Rosenthal supply wells, estimated to exceed 45 to 50
feet within a half-mile radius of the wells, could adversely
impact a number of residential wells located outside the Pine
Hill Water Company service area. Cumulative impacts of concentrated
bedrock pumping at the two portions of the project and at the
Belleayre Ski Center include well interference effects and the
potential for inducing an upward migration of saline water.
Expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center will increase the potential
for these impacts to occur.
4) Re-evaluation of bedrock hydrogeology and spring capture
areas, with due accounting for structural effects of a stacked
multi-aquifer bedrock and the role of open holes, should be
conducted by the Applicant in order to assess and quantify groundwater-related
impacts and to develop reliable monitoring of such impacts.
In addition, Dr. James Thaler, author of Catskill Weather, will
testify that the use of the Slide Mountain precipitation data
overestimates the precipitation which will fall in the area
of the Project. Dr. Thaler's curriculum vitae is attached as
Exhibit "CV - E". Dr. Thaler's letter supporting the
analysis prepared by Trout Unlimited is attached as Exhibit
"C ". The report prepared by Trout Unlimited is attached
as Exhibit "D ". T
The 60.24 inch Slide Mountain precipitation number is relied
on in the DEIS, in terms identical to that of the water budgets,
that, "direct precipitation input to the 3.5 acre irrigation
ponds, less the expected evaporation losses, will be approximately
3.8 million gallons per year, on average." The further
ñ and critical ñ claim is that this contribution
from runoff will reduce demands on proposed irrigation well
Rosenthal no.1, adjacent to Birch Creek. As annual average precipitation
for Belleayre Mountain is roughly 28% less than for Slide Mountain,
3.8 million gallons is overly optimistic. As a result, more
water over longer periods of time will be pumped from the Rosenthal
well in order to make up the shortfall and to keep the Big Indian
golf course green in dry weather. However, as indicated in the
expert reports, there isn't enough water in the aquifer and
(2) pumping the Rosenthal wells will take water from Birch Creek.††
†
C. Water Supply
The CPC contends that the use of the water resources and systems
identified in the DEIS (including Water Supply Applications
and Water Conservation Programs) for the Belleayre Resort project
raise substantive and significant issues for adjudication since
the DEIS and water supply applications fail to demonstrate that
it can meet the criteria set forth in ECL ß 15-1503(2).
Neither the DEIS nor the application demonstrate that: the potable
water resources proposed for the Big Indian Plateau are adequate
as required by, 6 NYCRR 601.5(k)(5) and 601.6 (b) (4); the use
of the potable water resources proposed for the Big Indian Plateau
are just and equitable (as required by 6 NYCRR 601.5(k)(6) and
601.6 (b)(6)); the use of the potable water resources proposed
for the Big Indian Plateau is necessary as required by 6 NYCRR
601.5(k)(1), 601.6 (b) (1), and 601.6 (B)(2). In addition, the
DEIS fails to provide essential documentation regarding the
applicant's ability to satisfy all of the legal and regulatory
prerequisites to use of the identified water supply resources
for both the Big Indian Plateau and the Wild Acres portions
of the proposed resort.
The CPC will rely on the testimony of Mr. Paul Rubin, principal
hydro geologist with HydroQuest, a hydrological consulting firm
based in Stone Ridge, New York, and Andrew Michalski, Ph.D.,
CGWP, Michalski & Associates. Mr. Rubin's curriculum vitae
is attached to this Petition as Exhibit "CV-F ". Mr.
Rubin's letter to DEC which summarizes the substantive and significant
issues concerning the impacts to the potable water supply is
attached as Exhibit "E". The CPC will also submit
testimony by Richard Schaedle, Chairman of the Pine Hill Water
District Coalition and Matthew Persons, a member of the Water
Coalition; both Mr. Schaedle and Mr. Persons have extensive
experience in the management of the water system and water resources
serving Pine Hill.
Since May of 2001, the Alliance and the Water Coalition have
contested the data and conclusions of the water supply sections
of the DEIS in the context of the SEQRA review of the proposed
Belleayre Project and in the context of the SEQRA review of
a modification to the water supply permit now held by the Town
of Shandaken for the Pine Hill Water District (Permit # 3-5150-00365/00001).
The Alliance and the Water Coalition contend that the engineering
and hydrological studies supplied in support of the Pine Hill
water supply permit contain tables, charts, data, and analyses
drawn from, and in many cases, identical to the materials offered
in support of the water supply application for the Big Indian
Plateau. These groups have argued throughout the DEC's review
of this project that there simply is not enough water on the
eastern portion of the Belleayre ridge to supply the water needs
of the hamlet of Pine Hill, the Belleayre Ski Center, and a
new 2,000-acre golf course resort. With the proposed expansion
of the Belleayre Ski Center, the available potable water supply
will further decrease. Mr. Rubin's affidavit in the prior litigation
and his letter to DEC are attached hereto as Exhibit "F
".
Because the water resources in the two permits applications
overlap, the Alliance and the Water Coalition, joined by the
Natural Resources Defense Council, brought suit against the
DEC in November of 2002, seeking an adjudicatory public hearing
in regard to the DEC's decision at that time to allow Crystal
Spring-Silo A, a water resource now proposed for use by the
resort, to be removed from the Pine Hill Water Supply Permit
by Mr. Dean Gitter during his ownership of the Pine Hill Water
Company. The suit also raised issues of segmentation of review
under SEQRA, given Mr. Gitter's role in the three companies
(Crossroads Ventures, LLC; Silk Road Organization of NY, and
the Pine Hill Water Company) that came to own all of Pine Hill's
public water resources during the period between 2000 and 2003.
Although the court declined to require a hearing on the modifications
to the Pine Hill Water Supply Permit, the ruling was based in
part on the opportunity for review of the use of Crystal Spring-Silo
A by the resort at a later point: "Most importantly, any
potential environmental impacts of the proposed Resort on the
Pine Hill's water supply will have to be fully addressed during
the resort SEQRA review." (Supreme Court of the State of
New York, Albany County, Memorandum and Judgment, Index No.
7343-02, February 14, 2003, p. 18; emphasis in original)
The Water Coalition will be submitting, concurrent with the
review of the Belleayre Project, a Water Supply Application
under 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 621.14. The application will demonstrate
that the current Pine Hills Water Supply Permit (permit number
3-5150-00365/00001) must be modified based on materially false
and inaccurate statements in the Pine Hills permit application;
newly discovered material information and a material change
in environmental conditions; and noncompliance with the Environmental
Conservation Law and implementing regulations related to the
water supply permit.
Mr. Rubin and Dr. Michalski have evaluated the DEIS and found
it to be substantively deficient. They will testify that their
analyses have identified substantive and significant flaws,
as outlined below:
1) the applicant has not shown that the water resources proposed
for the Big Indian plateau are adequate (as required by 6 NYCRR
601.5(k)(5) and 601.6(4)). Specifically, the applicant has failed
to document sustained yields of all the wells (and particularly
Rosenthal Well # 1 and Rosenthal Well # 2) and of the Crystal
Spring-Silo A, proposed as a backup source of potable water
supply in the DEIS, during severe drought conditions. Instead,
the periods of measurement provided are insufficiently dry,
the estimates of flows are overly generous, and the methods
of assessing low flow conditions are inappropriate. In addition,
the possibility of interconnection of the wells (and possibly
with springs in the same aquifer) requires evaluation before
the sustained yields of the wells can be considered verified.
Finally, even if taken as valid, the flows reported for Crystal
Spring-Silo A, especially given the requirement to limit its
use during low flow conditions (see DEIS Section 3.2.2.K, page
3-42), show it to fall below the flows required for an auxiliary
source as determined by the New York State Department of Health
and the applicable Ten States Standards;
2) the applicant has not shown that the use of the water resources
proposed for the Big Indian plateau are just and equitable (as
required by 6 NYCRR 601.5(k)(6) and 601.6(6)). Specifically,
the adverse hydrological impacts of the water uses proposed
in the DEIS, both for potable water and for irrigation, have
been underestimated; the possibility of interconnected wells
has not been fully evaluated; the effects of additional large
withdrawals on the aquifer have not been sufficiently gauged;
the impacts of depleting stream flows, especially on fish and
fish breeding, have not been fully assessed and mitigated; and
the present and future competing water needs of both the hamlet
of Pine Hill and the Belleayre Ski Center have not been fully
explored. The proposed expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center
further emphasizes the need for a thorough evaluation of the
water needs of the Belleayre Project and the hamlet of Pine
Hills.
3) the applicant has not shown that the use of the water resources
proposed for the Big Indian plateau is necessary (as required
by 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß ß 601.5(k)(1), 601.6(1), and 601.6(2)).
Specifically, alternative water sources (i.e., additional wells)
have not been fully evaluated, and alternative uses (e.g., smaller
resort, redesign as hiking and biking or wilderness retreat
center, and others) that are less water-use-intensive have not
been seriously considered. A reduced scale alternative will
also ease the pressure on the available water supply which will
result from the expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center.
None of these points relies on challenges to the applicant's
ownership of the Crystal Spring -Silo A. Instead, this analysis
rests on the permitting requirements for installing a new water
supply system, developing sources of water supply in connection
with such water supply system, and entering into contracts or
other agreements for the supply of water (6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß
601.1-8). The CPC will raise legal questions regarding a covenant
on the deed for Crystal Spring-Silo A -- restricting use of
its water to Ulster County -- which is invoked by the proposed
use of its water for a resort spanning Ulster and Delaware Counties.
Finally, the CPC will argue that the DEIS does not supply sufficient
legal and engineering detail regarding the Water Supply Application
for the Village of Fleischmanns to complete an adequate analysis.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide accurate and sufficient information
needed to justify the use of the Rosenthal Wells and Crystal
Spring-Silo A for the Big Indian Plateau. It also fails to provide
sufficient information to justify use of the water supply system
of the Village of Fleishmanns for the Wild Acres and Highmount
Estates portions of the resort. As a result, the Commissioner
cannot issue the findings required pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.
617.11 (d)(5). Therefore, Crossroad's Ventures permit applications
should be denied.
D. Noise Impacts
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project presents substantive
and significant issues for adjudication since it will result
in significant adverse noise impacts which have not been and
cannot be mitigated by Crossroads Ventures. Therefore, Crossroads
Ventures' permit applications must be denied.
The CPC will present the testimony of Peter J. Smith and Mary
Kopaskie who will testify that the DEIS failed to mitigate the
noise generated from the Belleayre Project notwithstanding that
the noise impacts will be intrusive. Mr. Smith and Ms. Kopaskie
will testify to the following:
1.) The Sound Impact Study (SIS) for the DEIS assumes that increases
in
existing sound levels of 9 dBA or less are: "insignificant,
temporary construction noise" . The DEIS improperly refers
to the noise generated at these levels as "insignificant".
Pursuant to DEC' Policy Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts
("Policy"), DEC refers to these levels as intrusive
and may cause complaints. Yet, these impacts are dismissed in
the DEIS without any discussion of mitigation. Clearly, according
to the DEC Policy, further consideration is needed.
2.) The DEIS states that typical blasting noise levels range
between 93 to 94 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. The DEIS also
states that blasting noise levels will be only 46 dBA for the
proposed project which is 4 dBA below the existing ambient daytime
average sound level. The existing daytime sounds, as documented
in the DEIS, range from 41 to 50 dBA and are characterized by
"wind rustling through the trees" and the sound of
a "nearby creek." The DEIS wrongfully implies that,
through noise attenuation, these activities will not increase
the current noise levels in the area. The DEIS erroneously concludes
that: "blasting for this project is not to significantly
contribute to overall Project construction noise." Blasting
the mountaintop will create an amphitheater effect and the noise
levels will be in excess of existing, ambient wind and creek
levels. This is one of the factors which the DEC Policy requires
that the DEIS consider. See DEC Policy page 10.
3.) Increased noise levels will impact local neighborhoods during
construction of the proposed Belleayre Project. The cumulative
effects of blasting and construction will increase the noise
levels from levels associated with a rural community to those
at equal to an urban industrial area. See DEC Policy page 20.
Additionally, the noise levels will exceed ambient levels of
a rural setting and will have significant impacts on residents.
Finally, the noise mitigation plans are not clearly defined
and do not state how noise will be regulated to control the
impacts. This is required by the DEC Policy. See DEC Policy
pages 23-26.
4.) The community character noise impacts that have not been
adequately evaluated in the DEIS include:
Duration of noise, especially in the summer months when most
residents are outside and windows are open
Noise impacts from trucks hauling fill (over 230,000 cubic yards)
and construction materials throughout construction
Noise impacts from trucks and vehicles to service the Resort
once it opens
Increased traffic noise from Resort users
Increased traffic noise from Belleayre Ski Center users
Conclusion
The Belleayre Project will result in significant adverse noise
impacts which will have long term detrimental effects to the
surrounding communities which cannot be mitigated and which
are not outweighed by the social, economic and other essential
considerations. The DEIS did not take a hard look at these adverse
impacts and does not provide the Commissioner with an adequate
legal or technical record on which to predicate findings pursuant
to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11(d) (5). Consequently, the Belleayre
Project's permit applications must be denied. CPC requests that
the issue of the Belleayre Project's adverse noise impacts should
be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
E. Traffic Impacts
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project will result in substantive
and significant traffic impacts which require adjudication since
the DEIS' traffic impact analysis undervalued the impacts and
underestimated the current traffic. CPC's experts will demonstrate
that the Belleayre Project's traffic impacts have not been properly
evaluated in the DEIS and that significant elements have been
omitted from the analysis.
CPC will offer the expert testimony of Brian T. Ketcham, P.E.,
whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-G".
The report prepared by Community Consulting Services is attached
as Exhibit "G ". In addition, Ferrradino & Associates,
Inc. evaluated the traffic impact analysis in the DEIS and found
that it to be inaccurate and incomplete. The "Ferradino
Report" is attached as Exhibit "H". Mr. Ketcham
has reviewed the Ferradino report and endorses its analysis
and conclusions and is prepared to testify to the issues presented
in the Ferradino report, many of which are consistent with and
support the findings set forth in Mr. Ketcham's report.
Mr. Ketcham will testify that, in his expert opinion, the DEIS
fails to address the actual traffic impacts from the Belleayre
Project. He will testify to the findings and conclusions in
his report including but not limited to the following.
1.) The DEIS understates the magnitude of traffic associated
with the Belleayre Project and the magnitude of background growth
which is likely to occur. The underreporting of future conditions
is based, in part, on the selection of 2008 as the year of the
traffic analysis despite it being only two years into the construction
schedule. If the year 2014 were used, which is the completion
date, the growth in background traffic on Route 28 would be
double the traffic volume considered in the DEIS. Mr. Ketcham's
report is attached hereto as Exhibit "I". The DEIS
also fails to consider the growth rate projected for the Ski
Center from 5,000 skiers in 2003 to approximately 8,000 skiers
by 2008. In addition the traffic projections for the Belleayre
Project are based on the median to low traffic rates set forth
in the Institute of Transportation Engineers ("ITE")
Trip Generation Manual. The ITE presents not only average conditions
in the field it also includes minimum and maximum rates observed
in the field. Notwithstanding that the Belleayre Project will
depend on its success in attracting visitors and guests, the
DEIS does not consider the traffic generated based on higher
occupancy associated with a highly successful resort.
2.) The DEIS also fails to consider the effects of the Belleayre
Mountain Ski Center expansion. Use of the Ski Center has increased
dramatically since the 1999-2000 baseline season for the DEIS.
The increased use of the Ski Center is neither reported in the
DEIS nor is the increased use of the Ski Center associated with
the proposed expansion.
3.) The DEIS utilizes inappropriate traffic count figures for
analyzing the worst case traffic impacts. The use of Martin
Luther King, Jr. holiday weekend traffic counts as the worst
case scenario does not reflect the significant number of days
with a higher volume of ski attendees during the 2002-2003 period.
Counts taken by Mr. Ketcham in the February of 2003 and included
in Exhibit "I " reinforce this observation. Mr. Ketcham
has modeled the intersection of Route 28 and County Road 49A,
the entrance to the Belleayre Ski Resort, using both Saturday
P.M. peak hour volumes in the DEIS and volumes more likely to
occur in 2014 with the full Ski Resort build out and full Resort
occupancy. Exhibit "I" presents the results for a
signalized intersection: according to the DEIS, traffic at the
intersection will operate at a Level of Service (LOS) C; with
more realistic 2014 worst case traffic, it will operate at a
failed condition, LOS F.
4.) The DEIS fails to account for shuttle bus operation between
Big Indian and the Ski Center. Despite the assertion that 80%
of trips to and from the Ski Center will be by shuttle bus,
the DEIS does not include shuttle bus trips. The DEIS fails
to account for a reasonable number of non-shuttle bus trips
(i.e., auto trips) based on the desires of skiers to arrive
promptly at the Ski Center and avoid undue delays associated
with shuttle bus transportation. The Belleayre Project generated
trips will likely increase to 1000 trips in the Saturday P.M.
peak hour, more than doubling the traffic volumes measured in
2003.
The DEIS fails to assess the potential doubling of parking spaces
and
potential alternative parking locations proposed by expansion
of the Ski Center and the necessary increase in Ski Resort shuttle
bus traffic; temporal distribution of trips and the associated
impacts during the various times of day and between competing
uses; vehicle occupancy factors; current bus service to the
Ski Center and existing shuttle bus service; accident and safety
impacts or conditions in the Route 28 corridor.
The DEIS does not account for any non-ski trips, such as those
that are
made to off-site locations to expend the estimated $19.2 million
in annual sales, which are forecast to be made each year.
Conclusion
The Belleayre Project will result in significant adverse traffic
impacts which will have long term detrimental effects to the
surrounding communities which cannot be mitigated and which
are not outweighed by the social, economic and other essential
considerations. The DEIS did not take a hard look at these adverse
traffic impacts and does not provide the Commissioner with an
adequate legal or technical record on which to predicate findings
pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11(d) (5). Consequently,
the Belleayre Project's permit applications must be denied.
CPC requests that the issue of the Belleayre Project's adverse
noise impacts should be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.
ß 624.4.
F. Aquatic Habitat
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project raises substantive and
significant issues for adjudication since the DEIS failed to
adequately address the environmental impacts of the water withdrawal
on the area's surface waters and aquatic habitat in the vicinity
of the project. The CPC will rely on the testimony of Dr. Piotr
Parasiewicz to demonstrate that the DEIS fails to adequately
address the catastrophic impacts which the water regime for
the Belleayre Project will have on the area's aquatic resources.
Dr. Parasiewicz' curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-H
". Dr. Parasiewicz' expert report is attached as Exhibit
"J ".
Dr. Parasiewicz will testify to the findings in his report including
but not limited to the following:
1.) The proposed Belleayre Resort at Catskill Park is located
in the headwaters of Lost Clove Brook and tributaries to Birch
Creek, (third and second order tributaries of Esopus Creek),
as well as in headwaters of tributaries to Emory Brook (a second
order tributary of the Bush Kill). These high gradient, coldwater
streams are classified as Trout Spawning streams, or are recommended
for upgrade to trout spawning classification, and support a
relatively vibrant fish fauna. Electrofishing data collected
in 2000 by the NYS DEC (Mike Flaherty, Region 3) show a fish
community dominated by trout species. However, differences were
noted in the faunal composition between upstream areas dominated
by native brook trout and the lower portion of Birch Creek (below
the confluence with Crystal Spring Brook), dominated by brown
and rainbow trout. The number of juvenile trout recorded indicates
healthy reproduction in these streams. The accompanying species
include low numbers of slimy sculpin, longnose dace, blacknose
dace and white sucker, as is characteristic of New York coldwater
streams. The existing electrofishing data provides only a rough
assessment of the relative density of species within the fish
community, but the overall community appears appropriate for
this type of stream.
Upstream of Pine Hill, the habitat quality of Birch Creek appears
relatively unimpaired. It has diverse habitat features and is
well shaded, meaning low water temperatures can be anticipated.
However, the woody debris dams that provide important habitat
for brook trout are infrequent. Further downstream, between
Pine Hill and the confluence, substantial channel modifications
can be observed. Lack of vegetation along some reaches of this
section of the stream corridor may result in elevated water
temperatures. This would help explain the lower number of brook
trout recorded.
2.) The Belleayre Project will result in the following impacts:
reduction of ground water levels and loss of base flow in adjacent
streams;
increased duration of low flows;
increased water temperature;
increased pollution levels;
modification of stream morphology;
reduction of fish densities and a shift of community structure
from one dominated by trout towards generalist, warm water species
(e.g. bluegill). Convincing proof that this will be avoided
has not been provided in DEIS documentation.
This habitat will be further stressed by the proposed expansion
of the Belleayre Ski Center.
3.) Dr. Michalski's expert analysis indicates that flows in
the evaluated streams are flashy, with a relatively low amount
of ground water contributing to summer flows. These flashy conditions
may be caused by shallow soils due to historic deforestation
of the region (Parasiewicz 2000). This pattern is dramatic in
the Catskill Mountains because of the high instability of post-glacial
till that accelerates topsoil removal. The flashiness of flows
is clearly visible on the Big Indian hydrograph. Flows in Catskill
mountain streams can increase by a magnitude of 45 (see Exhibit
"J ", Figure 1). Because of the low storage capacity
of surface soils, another characteristic of the flow regime
is an extended duration of low flows.
4.) During four summer and fall seasons recorded at the Big
Indian gauge, stream flows remained under the 30% Tennant threshold
for 63% of the time. During the drought years of 2001 and 2002,
flows fell below the 30% threshold for 90% of the time and for
over 70 days without interruption. In addition, flows can stay
below the
10 % threshold (delineating poor fisheries) for a period of
two weeks continuously. In Birch Creek, low flow durations are
likely extended by early withdrawals of water for snow making
starting in September. The usual consequences of extended duration
and frequency of low flow conditions are elevated temperatures
and pollution levels (see Exhibit "J", Figure 2).
Canopy cover shading, variability in habitat structure, and
a substantial base flow are essential factors in mitigating
this impact.
5.) In Birch Creek, the primary impact of the proposed project
on aquatic fauna will be through modification of its flow regime.
This low flow regime will result from a reduction of flow in
the river due to increased ground water pumping and surface
withdrawals for snow-making and faster surface runoff due to
increased impervious area, removal of forest cover, filling
and fragmentation of wetlands and compaction of soils on the
ski slopes. Increased runoff can result in higher peak flows,
sediment transport and subsequent channel alteration. Despite
the proposed detention ponds, increased stream flows could result
in additional fine sediments being transported downstream also
due to erosion processes below the ponds. Fine sediments reduce
the interstitial space in the gravel substrate, reducing macro-invertebrate
production as well as the survival of trout larvae (trout larvae
actively utilize interstitial spaces immediately after hatching).
A secondary effect of detention areas can be elevated temperature
of pond water entering streams after a storm event. The removal
of forest vegetation and reduction of wetlands will inevitably
lead to reduced subsurface water storage capacity within the
watershed, also contributing to lower stream flows during the
summer months. Reduced storage could also potentially reduce
recharge of ground water and lead to lower ground water intrusion
into the streams.
6.) Using the data compiled by Dr. Michalski, in comparison
with the present situation, the proposed project would conservatively
increase withdrawals by 0.3 cfs which will result in a concomitant
reduction in flow. Reduced flow means less wetted area (i.e.
smaller river) which limits fish mobility and increases the
vulnerability of small fish to predation as shallow margins
are removed first. Reduced flows increase the separation between
juvenile and adult trout habitats, forcing young fish to use
high-risk locations. Lower water depth and flow velocities also
create habitat that is much less suitable for fluvial specialists
that require flowing waters. The expected result is a shift
of the fish community structure from specialized species towards
habitat generalists. More shallow, slower moving waters also
warm faster, especially if ground water contributions are diminished.
Reduced intrusions from underwater springs may reduce spawning
success of trout and negatively affect their populations not
only in Birch Creek but in entire Esopus system. In the winter,
ground water intrusions increase water temperature in streams
limiting creation of frazil ice. Lack of spring water can lead
to creation of anchor ice that can impact fish larvae as well
as channel morphology.
Additional impacts to fish habitat are associated with destabilization
of the flow regime. Higher peak flows can modify channel geometry
creating an over-widen channels as is the case on other rivers
in the Catskills including the Beaver Kill. Reduced number of
pools leads to less diverse habitat structure and reduction
of canopy cover shading elevate summer temperatures even more.
Increased sediment transport during higher flows could cause
large deposition areas and even impact bridges and culverts
in the watershed. These impacts will be exacerbated by the proposed
expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess,
or take a hard look at, whether the Belleayre Project will cause
significant adverse impacts to the aquatic habitat in the area
of the Project. Due to the complicated geological nature of
the area and the project size, in order to adequately identify
the impacts on stream flows and aquatic habitat, a precise watershed-wide
hydrological model is required. In addition, in order to estimate
the consequences of flow and morphological changes on resident
fish fauna, a quantitative habitat model must be prepared in
conjunction with the hydrological simulation. As a result, the
Commissioner cannot issue the findings required pursuant to
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11 (d)(5). CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's adverse impacts on fish habitat should
be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
G. Impacts on the Forest Preserve
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project raises substantive and
significant issues for adjudication since the DEIS failed to
adequately address the significant adverse impacts to the Forest
Preserve and recreational opportunities for visitors to the
area. The CPC will rely on the testimony of Professor Chad Dawson
to demonstrate that the Belleayre Project will result in substantial
adverse impacts to the Forest Preserve land and resources due
to the large increase in visitors to the area which the DEIS
predicts the Belleayre Project will generate. Professor Dawson's
curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV ñI".
Professor Dawson's letter opinion is attached as Exhibit "K
".
Professor Dawson will testify that the DEIS predictions set
forth in Appendix 26 indicate that the projected visitation
will be approximately 637,800 visits to the Belleayre Project.
The Belleayre Project will generate more than ten times the
current annual reported use of the trail visits on all trails
in all areas of the Catskill Park. Even assuming that each visitor
will spend only one trip per year on Forest Preserve lands,
the Belleayre Project will result in a seven hundred (700%)
percent increase in use of the Forest Preserve trails. In anticipation
that the visitors will be more likely to visit the Forest Preserve
lands in proximity to the Belleayre Project, the intensity of
the use will result in even greater adverse impacts. The DEIS
fails to address these impacts. DEC has already acknowledged
that the potential for overuse of the Forest Preserve lands
presents its greatest danger even before the Belleayre Project
was proposed. The Belleayre Project also undermines many of
the values and goals set forth in the Catskill Park Master Plan.
Professor Dawson will testify that the potential biological
and ecological impacts include trampled and disturbed vegetation,
disturbance of breeding and nesting birds and animal behavior,
changes in the ecosystem due to physical changes in the environment;
physical changes to the trail system and visitor distribution
and the resultant social conditions which will result from increased
visitation and use of the Forest Preserve.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess,
or take a hard look at, whether the Belleayre Project will cause
significant adverse impacts to the Catskill Forest Preserve.
Due to the significant increase in visitors expected to at the
Belleayre Project, the likely impacts to the Forest Preserve
will be significant. Yet, the DEIS fails to evaluate the impacts
to the Forest Preserve and the increased use of trails and resources
which will result from the Belleayre Project. As a result, the
Commissioner cannot issue the findings required pursuant to
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11 (d)(5). CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's adverse impacts on the Forest Preserve
should be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
H Wildlife and Habitat Impacts
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project raises substantive and
significant issues for adjudication since the DEIS failed to
adequately address the significant adverse impacts on wildlife,
habitat and fauna. The CPC will rely on the testimony of Dr.
Erik Kiviat to demonstrate that the DEIS fails to adequately
attribute ecological significance to the biodiversity of the
project site and the Belleayre Project's off-site impacts. Dr.
Kiviat's curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-J".
Dr. Kiviat's report is attached as Exhibit "L". In
addition, Dr. Michael Burger will testify concerning the Catskill
Important Bird Area. The Audubon New York letter supporting
the listing is attached as Exhibit "M" " and
the resume of Dr. Burger is attached as Exhibit "CV-K ".
Graham Cox will support the testimony of Dr. Burger. His curriculum
vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-L".
Dr. Kiviat will testify to the findings and conclusions in his
report including but limited to the following:
1.) The area provides diversity and rich biological resources.
For example, large areas of forest near the Long Clove Trail
are dominated or co-dominated by beech which is likely unusual
for the Catskill Mountains and may provide special biodiversity
values associated with rare specialist insects, fungi or animals
that use beech mast as a critical resource. In addition, Dr.
Kiviat identified diverse communities of forest floor wildflowers,
extensive hardwood forests, spring and seep habitats and streamside
habitats. The site is also potential habitat for Northernmonkshood
which is designated as a threatened plant species by the federal
government.
2.) The zoological surveys in the DEIS were not adequate given
the size of the site and its seeming diversity. For example
ornithologists typically consider 3-5 visits per habitat to
be sufficient to evaluate a site. Given the size of the site,
its topography and variety, the 8 day survey undertaken for
the DEIS was not sufficient to characterize the site. For example,
the DEIS dismissed the possibility of the presence of significant
bird species on the site. However, the site is included as part
of the Catskill Important Bird Area as identified by scientists
associated with Audubon New York.
In 1988, Audubon New York, in its initial round of identifying
Important Bird Areas ("IBA") in New York State, which
was published in 1998, identified significant parts of the†Catskill
Park and New York City watershed†as Important Bird Areas
using internationally recognized selection criteria. The list
of criteria can be found in National Audubon's web site attached
hereto as Exhibit "N". In its second round of research
and analysis, which is on-going, Audubon New York will be modifying
the IBA boundaries based on more thorough analyses using, among
other tools, GIS data and integrating this information with
the "GAP analysis" study prepared by the DEC and Cornell
University on behalf of the United States Department of the
Interior which indicated "gaps" in the protection
of the State's biological resources. This further analysis being
undertaken by Audubon New York supports including as part of
the IBA tracts of Forest Preserve and adjacent properties to
the south of the Route 28 corridor which are centered on the
Belleayre Ski Center. However, the site is currently included
for consideration and evaluation as part of an expanded Catskill
Important Bird Area as identified by scientists associated with
Audubon New York. Audubon New York's IBA technical advisory
committee is currently evaluating the data prior to issuance
of the revised Catskill IBA listing.
Forest fragmentation and parcelization will degrade the intact
hardwood forest cover and likely will result in†an adverse
impact on the assemblage of forest responsibility species; species
that rely on the particular habitat of a region for their long-term
conservation. This assemblage of forest responsibility species
forms the core of the IBA identification for this particular
Catskill site. The portion of the IBA on the Forest Preserve
lands could be considered in the future for designation by DEC
as a Bird Conservation Area (BCA), for which a management plan
specific to protection of forest bird species would be prepared.
The Catskill Important Bird Area is one of the largest, most
intact contiguous habitats for the assemblage of forest responsibility
species in the Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Region
of New York State. As mentioned, responsibility species are
those that rely on the particular habitat of a region for their
long-term conservation because they are found at high relative
abundances and/or have a disproportionately high percentage
of their populations in the particular Bird Conservation Region.
The forest assemblage of the Appalachian Mountain Bird Conservation
Region is composed of the following species: Black-and-white
Warbler, Black-billed Cuckoo, Black-throated Blue Warbler, Blue-gray
Gnatcatcher, Canada Warbler, Cerulean Warbler, Eastern Wood-Pewee,
Hooded Warbler, Least Flycatcher, Louisiana Waterthrush, Northern
Flicker, Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Scarlet Tanager, Sharp-shinned
Hawk, Wood Thrush, Worm-eating Warbler, Yellow-throated Vireo.
Many other more common species also nest within the region.
While not all of the above-listed species breed within the Catskill
Important Bird Area or on Belleayre Mountain, many do and all
of the species are likely to utilize the region during migrations
before and after the breeding season. The massive proposed Belleayre
Resort would cause fragmentation of this habitat and would destroy
the functionality of a significant segment of this important
Bird Conservation Region.
3.) The zoological survey ignored rare or uncommon mammals which
would be expected to be present in the well-developed forests
and rocky habitats present at the site. The presence of the
endangered Indiana Bat is dismissed notwithstanding that the
habitat appeared suitable for maternity roosting. In addition,
the site appears suitable for timber rattlesnake habitat which
was all but ignored by the DEIS.
4.) The DEIS fails to identify or discuss the potential significance
of the Belleayre Project on the extensive forests adjacent to
the site. The site forms part of an extensive forest, including
the two largest designated wilderness areas of the Catskill
Park. The extensive forest, including the site and the adjacent
wilderness areas are essential features of the Park and support
wide-ranging, area-sensitive or forest interior species.
5.) A rare plant survey should have been conducted as part of
the DEIS process in order to identify rare species in the Catskills
in flowering and non-flowering form and sedges of statewide
or regional significance.
6.) The site survey did not adequately evaluate the site for
the presence of Wood and Spotted Turtles, species of special
concern and Spring Salamander and Red Salamander which are both
regionally rare but which may have been discovered with a thorough
analysis.
7.) The streams on and adjacent to the site support trout Brook
Trout and slimy sculpin which depend on cool flowing water with
high dissolved oxygen content and good water quality. As indicated
in the expert reports in the Petition for Party Status, the
Belleayre Project will cause significant erosion on steep slopes
and elsewhere on the site which will result in increased turbidity
nutrient levels and temperature which would decrease the dissolved
oxygen in the local streams. In addition, as indicated in reports
provided by experts in the Petition for Party Status, pesticides
and nutrients from operation of the golf courses will threaten
the fish population of the local streams.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at, whether the Belleayre Project will cause
significant adverse impacts to the wildlife and wildlife habitat.
Due to the significant alteration in the topography of the site
and its associated dramatic deforestation, the Belleayre Project
will result in significant loss of wildlife resources and habitat.
The loss will not be limited to the Project site. Rather, the
impacts will be felt on adjacent state lands including lands dedicated
to natural resource preservation and wilderness experience. The
DEIS fails to evaluate the wildlife resource and habitat impacts
which will result from the Belleayre Project. As a result, the
Commissioner cannot issue the findings required pursuant to 6
N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11 (d)(5). CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's adverse impacts on wildlife
resources and habitat should be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.
ß 624.4.
I. Forestry Impacts
CPC contends that the Belleayre Project raises substantive and
significant issues for adjudication since the DEIS failed to adequately
address the significant adverse impacts on the extensive forestlands
of which the site forms one component. On either side of the Big
Indian site are extensive tracts of wilderness areas of the New
York State Forest Preserve. Yet, the DEIS does not account for
private forest fragmentation which will result from development
of the site including habitat and biological impacts. In addition,
notwithstanding that private forest land continues to be lost
at an alarming rate in the Catskill region, the DEIS does not
account for the cumulative loss of this significant resource.
The CPC will rely on the testimony of Dr. Myrna Hall and Ms. Mary
L. Tyrrell to demonstrate that the DEIS fails to adequately address
the loss and fragmentation of private forestland and the forest
impacts which will result from the Belleayre Project. Dr. Hall's
curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-M" ,
Ms. Tyrrell's curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-N
" and their report is attached as Exhibit "O".
Dr. Kiviat and will also testify concerning the impact of fragmented
forest on the biodiversity of the region.
Dr. Myrna Hall and Dr. Kiviat will testify to the findings and
conclusions in their reports including but not limited to the
following:
1.) Private forest land, now estimated to account for 1.4 million
acres of land within the study area defined as a portion of the
New York City Catskill and Delaware Watersheds is disappearing
at a rate of 16,187 acres per year for a total of 145,685 acres
between 1992 and 2001. The rate is likely to proceed over the
next decade which would result in the loss of another 162,000
acres of private forestland and a significantly fragmented forest
resource. Fragmentation, parcelization and loss of private forest
lands in the areas near the site will be accelerated with the
construction and operation of the Belleayre Project.
2.) The largely forested Catskill/Delaware Watersheds are under
tremendous pressure from development. Two prominent features of
the Catskill region are the nearly 300,000 acres of public forest
land and the 1,854 square miles of catchment known as the Catskill/Delaware
watersheds. Forest fragmentation and parcelization will degrade
the biodiversity of this important area of second growth forest
and will diminish the biodiversity of the regional forest. The
Belleayre Project will result in the loss of intact forestlands
which now extend on either side of the Big Indian parcel. This
loss will result in an increased edge effect, with the associated
introduction of weeds, nuisance species, loss of breeding habitat
and the loss of woodland bird species.
3.) Given the extensive tract of forest land on the site and adjacent
thereto, it is reasonable, and consistent with the known literature
concerning forestlands of this expanse and type, that it supports
wide-ranging, area sensitive and forest interior species such
as black bear, fisher, bobcat, barred owl, diverse bird species
and the timber rattlesnake. The DEIS fails to assess the impact
that fragmenting the forest will have on these and other species.
4.) As indicated in section I of the Petition for Party Status,
and in the correspondence from Audubon New York, the site will
likely be included as part of the Catskill Important Bird Area
as identified by scientists associated with Audubon New York.
The Catskill Important Bird Area is one of the largest, most intact
contiguous habitats for the assemblage of forest responsibility
species in the Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Region
of New York State. The massive proposed Belleayre Resort would
cause fragmentation of this habitat and would destroy the functionality
of a significant segment of this important Bird Conservation Region.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at, the Belleayre Project's significant
adverse impacts on the extensive forestlands of the region of
which the site forms one component. Due to the dramatic deforestation
of the site, the Belleayre Project will result in forest fragmentation
and a significant loss of wildlife resources and habitat. The
loss will not be limited to the Project site. Rather, the impacts
will be felt on adjacent state lands including lands dedicated
to natural resource preservation and wilderness experience. The
DEIS fails to evaluate these wildlife resource and habitat impacts
which will result from the Belleayre Project. As a result, the
Commissioner cannot issue the findings required pursuant to 6
N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11 (d)(5). CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's adverse impacts on the forestlands
should be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
J. Alternatives
CPC will present evidence that none of the alternatives considered
by the applicant are discussed in a way that provides a meaningful
basis to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed action,
because of the utter lack of detail in the evaluation of alternatives
considered, the absence of smaller scale alternatives, and critical
deficiencies in the analysis of impacts for the applicant's
preferred plan (Sections†3 and 4). According to 6†NYCRR
߆617.9(b)(5)(v): "The description and evaluation
of each alternative should be at a level of detail sufficient
to permit a comparative assessment of the alternatives discussed."
The DEIS falls far short of this standard, since the necessary
detail either is absent or very limited, thereby utterly thwarting
the requisite comparative assessment of alternatives. CPC will
identify a number of substantive deficiencies in the DEIS's
analysis of the impacts of the proposed action, particularly as
this information relates to the comparative evaluation of alternatives.
CPC will offer the testimony of John Ellsworth, Manager of Environmental
Programs for Cashin Associates, P.C., and John Altschuler, Hamilton,
Rabinovitz and Altschuler, whose curriculum vitae are attached
as Exhibit "CV-O" and Exhibit "CV-P"
respectively. Mr. Ellsworth and Mr. Altschuler will testify to
facts and conditions set forth in their reports attached as Exhibit
"P" and "Q" , including:
1. The applicant's analysis and conclusions regarding a
one golf course/one hotel option as required by the scoping document
is flawed. The applicant's conclusion that a one golf course/one
hotel option is not financially feasible is erroneous, and further
ignores the natural resource benefits and other benefits of such
an option.
2. The applicant has completely failed to analyze any other reasonable
alternatives of smaller scale or magnitude. Among the alternative
uses for the subject property that should be examined in the DEIS
is a facility, scaled down significantly from the proposed plan,
which focuses primarily on addressing the local shortfall of lodging
identified in the DEIS. Such an alternative could be designed
to provide a range of lodging options, similar to the proposed
project, and also could include suitable amenities (e.g., one
or more restaurants, lodging-related shops and recreational facilities,
to name a few). It would be appropriate for this alternative to
include a number of variants, which examine a range of options
for lodging facilities and amenities.
3) The analysis of reasonable alternatives must be evaluated as
a means to eliminate, avoid or mitigate the significant adverse
impacts which will result from the proposed Belleayre Project.
In light of the significant adverse environmental impacts associated
with development on the east side of Belleayre Mountain, a western
alternative must be evaluated.
According to the Applicant's consultant (HVS), while the
calculated expected return for Scenario 1 (development of the
entire program on east and west parcels) was the highest at 14.7%
and Scenario 5 (development of only the Wildacres golf club and
resort) produced an expected IRR of 10.7%, both are marginal returns.
The consultant's report further stated that Scenario 1
would require the stronger yields associated with the detached
lodging units to counterbalance the risk of investment in the
hotel and country club components. Given the applicant's
stated strong expected returns produced by the detached lodging
unit component, it is reasonable to expect that a program that
includes the development of Wildacres in its entirety, including
the detached lodging units could produce an acceptable risk-adjusted
return, and is worth careful consideration.
The two components of the Applicant's program involve two
very different parcels of land, the development of which have
varied implications for the environment. The western parcel is
already partially developed with existing infrastructure and its
runoff flows to the less-threatened Pepacton reservoir. The eastern
parcel is undeveloped forestland and runoff from development there
would flow to the more sensitive water body, Esopus Creek. Limiting
the development to the western parcel would decrease infrastructure
investment costs, risks, and the overall environmental impact.
The following examples should be evaluated through SEQRA and adjudication
of the alternatives.
The Wildacres Alternative - Development of only the western parcel
of the site, comprised of the ëWildacres' component,
with the detached units. The inclusion of the detached units in
the analysis may counterbalance the risk associated with the hotel/spa
and golf amenities. Under this alternative, the eastern portion
of the property could be sold to New York City or State or fully
protected as forest lands, with conservation easements.
The Reduced Scale Residential Alternative - An all-residential
development of a reduced scale that capitalizes on the remaining
land by selling either to a public entity or to individual owners
or by setting it aside as a preserve as an amenity to the development.
A residential community could be centered on a single golf club
and the remaining portion of the site could be sold to a public
entity that would create a nature preserve.
The Natural Amenity Alternative - A destination development focused
on alternative outdoor activities or recreational attractions
that take advantage of the natural amenity of the unique pristine
wilderness of upstate New York. This alternative might include
a hotel/spa resort that offers an equestrian center, mountain
biking and hiking trails or yoga retreat, offering a combination
of amenities that would contribute a higher profit margin than
a golf course and result in less environmental impact than a golf
course.
The Single Golf Course (on western parcel) Alternative - A mixed
vacation and residential development. This alternative would capitalize
on shared amenities such as a single golf course on the western
parcel of the site, club and possibly a golf school, with a nature
preserve, developed over possibly a smaller site assemblage.
4.) The applicant's analysis and conclusions regarding
a "no-action" alternative are flawed because they
assess only as-of-right development possibilities in absence of
the proposed project. The "no-action" alternative
is also inadequate because it speciously concludes that the proposed
project will provide conservation benefits beyond maintaining
the status quo. The absence of analysis on a no-build alternative
is further evidence that the full range of reasonable alternatives
has not been addressed.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at a full the range of reasonable alternatives.
In addition, as a result of the cumulative impacts associated
with the proposed expansion of the Belleayre Ski Center, a reduced
scale alternative must be evaluated in a manner which allows a
comparison of environmental impacts and mitigation measures. Due
to the lack of reasonable alternative analysis, DEC will not be
able to make the requisite findings under SEQRA that the selected
alternative minimizes or avoids adverse environmental impacts
to the maximum extent practicable. The inadequate alternatives
section does not provide the Commissioner with an adequate legal
or technical record on which to predicate findings pursuant to
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 617.11(d) (5). Consequently, the Belleayre
Project's permit applications must be denied. CPC requests
that the issue of the Belleayre Project's alternatives
be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
K. Cumulative Impacts
The CPC will present evidence that the DEIS does not address the
cumulative impacts which will result from construction and operation
of the proposed Belleayre Project and the proposed expansion of
the Belleayre Mountain Ski Center. Although the Belleayre Project
is wed to the proposed expansion of the Belleayre Mountain Ski
Center, the DEIS fails to acknowledge the synergistic and cumulative
impacts which will occur. The two projects will result in cumulative
impacts on the availability and adequacy of potable water supplies,
surface water flow and aquatic habitat, traffic, use of Forest
Preserve lands, and secondary growth. A discussion of these cumulative
impacts by CPC's experts is set forth in this and the other
sections of the Petition for Party Status
According to the DEIS, the most recent version of the Ski Center's
unit management plan calls for increasing snowmaking capacity,
adding parking spaces, expanding the lodge, and constructing new
ski trails. See DEIS at 1-7. These ambitious improvements are
aimed at substantially increasing annual skier visits to the Ski
Center. Annual visits at the Ski Center between 1998 and 2002
ranged from 75,000 to 142,000 visits; according to the DEIS with
future plans calling for an increase in the usage to 225,000 skier
visits. See HVS Economic Evaluation at 2-5. A higher goal of 250,000
annual skier visits has been attributed to Ski Center Superintendent
Tony Lanza in the local media. See Jay Braman Jr., "Belleayre
seeks trails into Pine Hill Community," Catskill Mountain
News, Mar. 5, 2003. According to the DEIS, "The Belleayre
Resort at Catskill Park will bring to fruition the creation of
a four season world-class Resort associated with the Belleayre
Mountain Ski Center as contemplated in State and regional planning
studies prepared over the last 40 years. The project is designed
to complement both the active and passive recreational opportunities
provided by the Belleayre Mountain Ski Center surrounding New
York State Forest Preserve lands." DEIS page ii.
Moreover, the planned improvements are cited as a factor critical
to the success of the Project. The HVS Economic Evaluation states:
An important consideration here is the potential for future improvements
to the [Belleayre Mountain] Ski Center. In order for the Ski Center
to truly function on the level of the proposed Resort (and not,
in fact, detract from the Resort's market orientation),
a major redevelopment of the lodges and other supporting facilities
should be completed. Although the facility is currently state-owned,
the current management team appears to be aware that a major upgrade
will be necessary for the Ski Center to function in this regard.
See DEIS at 1-5 to 1-7.
Although future improvements at the Ski Center are cited in the
DEIS as support for the Project's "purpose, need
and benefits," the DEIS makes no effort to otherwise identify
and assess how the simultaneous development of the Project and
expansion of the Ski Center will cumulatively impact the environment.
Pursuant to SEQRA regulation, an EIS is required to assess significant
cumulative impacts. 6 N.Y.C.R.R. 617.9(b)(5)(iii)(a). "Cumulative
impacts" are defined as "impacts on the environment
that result from the incremental or increased impact of an action(s)
when the impacts of that action are added to other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future actions."
The failure of the DEIS to incorporate an assessment of the expansion
planned for the Ski Center is confounding, given that the Ski
Center is State-owned and operated by the DEC. The DEC is itself
responsible for the planned upgrade, which is not speculative
but certain. The DEC's Ski Center expansion plans, which
call for "ambitious expansion of the size of the facility,"
have existed as at least a "rough draft" since at
least May 2002. See Jay Braman Jr., "Belleayre Planning
Underway," Catskill Mountain News, May 22, 2002 (attributing
information to Ski Center Superintendent Tony Lanza.
On information and belief, DEC has, in its possession, a draft
unit management plan ("UMP") for the Belleayre Mountain
Ski Center expansion. The Director of the Ski Center, Mr. Tony
Lanza, has on numerous occasions lead discussions on the nature
of the proposed expansion as reported in several newspaper articles
which are attached as Exhibit "R". As early as March
2003, Mr. Lanza stated that the draft UMP would be released for
public comment in short order. In fact, these expansion plans
were discussed at a public meeting at the Ski Center in March
of last year. On March 28, 2004, a Freedom of Information Law
request was submitted to DEC for the draft UMP which considers
the proposed Belleayre Ski Center expansion. DEC has not yet made
this record available. DEC, as lead agency for the Belleayre Project,
must require consideration of the cumulative impacts of these
two projects.
The proposed expansion is consistent with, and goes beyond, the
1998 final UMP for the Ski Center which lists 24 management objectives
for modernization and expansion. In 1998, the UMP indicated that
the skier carrying capacity increased to 4,500 skiers daily. Currently,
according to Mr. Lanza, "We at (sic) 6,000 per day and
we are planning for 7,000 to 9,000 per day. That would mean over
250,000 skier visits per year with an estimated secondary economic
impact on the surrounding communities of $88 million." The
1998 UMP lists the 24 management objectives including: replacing
lift # 8, increasing snowmaking; expanding Overlook Lodge; adding
several new ski trails; and, adding a reception lodge and tubing
park.
As guardian of the Forest Preserve, DEC has a higher responsibility
to ensure that the Ski Center expansion and its associated impacts
are fully disclosed and considered in connection with the Belleayre
Project. The Commissioner must be fully informed concerning the
proposed expansion before any decision can be made on whether
the SEQRA findings can be issued in accordance with 6 NYCRR ß
617.11.
The Traffic Impact Study noted, however, that traffic in the area
varies significantly by season, time of day, and day of the week
(Traffic Impact Study at 44; DEIS at xiv) and concluded that the
greatest increases in traffic will occur during the morning and
evening hours of the peak ski season. SeeTraffic Impact Study
at 3. To accommodate these increases, the consultants recommended
numerous improvements and mitigation measures, including additional
turn lanes at two intersections on NY Route 28 and a new traffic
signal. See Traffic Impact Study at 44-45; DEIS at xiv-xv.
In its present form, the traffic study addresses the traffic generated
by the Ski Center in only two respects. First, a weekend of record
attendance at the Ski Center in year 2000 was used to develop
the background traffic level during the peak seasons. See Traffic
Impact Study at 3. Second, the study noted that annual traffic
volumes on Route 28 have been increasing two percent annually;
to account for "some additional growth that is expected
at the Belleayre Ski Resort," the consultant used a three
percent annual growth rate to project the background traffic volume
for 2008, the year the proposed Project is expected to be fully
open. With respect to this latter modeling assumption, the consultant
noted that the extra one percent added to the annual growth rate
in background traffic accounted for only "some" additional
growth at the Ski Center. According to the consultant, "[a]ny
specific developments proposed for the [Ski Center] would typically
require the completion of a traffic impact analysis specific to
the Project Ö the additional one percent added to the background
growth rate is not meant to replace the SEQR requirements of an
additional development."
As the traffic consultant itself acknowledged, to the extent that
additional development is planned at the Ski Center, such development
undermines the sufficiency of the DEIS' present projections
and requires additional SEQRA analysis. As noted above, additional
development is most certainly planned for the Ski Center, including
increased snowmaking capacity, additional parking spaces, expansion
of the lodge, and construction of new ski trails. According to
the DEIS, the aim of these improvements is to attract 200,000
to 225,000 skier visits annually. Because annual skier visits
between 1998 and 2002 ranged from 75,000 to 142,000 visits, and
year 2000 data was used to develop peak traffic estimates, (Traffic
Impact Study at 4) the reported development plans of the Ski Center
represent a substantial increase in visits and related traffic
that have not been accounted for in the DEIS' impact analysis.
The DEIS is thus incomplete until appropriate cumulative impact
analysis is completed. Such analysis must account for the traffic
increases associated with the expansion of the Belleayre Mountain
Ski Center, as well as any other environmental impacts expected
to result from the development and increased attendance.
L Community Character
The CPC will present evidence that the DEIS does not address the
adverse impacts to community character which will result from
construction and operation of the proposed Belleayre Project.
The DEIS omits consideration that the Project will result in any
community character impacts by narrowly defining the concept.
However, SEQRA defines the term "environment" broadly
to include, "the physical conditions which will be affected
by a proposed action, including Ö existing patterns of population
concentration, distribution, or growth, and existing community
or character." ECL ß 8-0105(6). Accordingly, "the
impact that a Project may have on population patterns or existing
community character Ö is a relevant concern in an environmental
analysis." Staff and Workers Ass'n v. City of New
York, 68 N.Y.2d 359, 366 (1986).
The DEIS concludes that, with respect to the existing use of the
Project site and the land use and community character of adjacent
land, no mitigation measures are required because no adverse or
significant impacts have been identified. See DEIS at 3-135, 3-140.
The DEIS' conclusion that there will be no impact upon
community character is based upon its assertions that: (1) "the
Resort will be fairly self-contained [and thus] there will not
be an affect on community character;" and (2) the Project
will merely "re-introduce resort development uses into
an area that historically supported such development locally and
on a large scale."
CPC will present evidence that DEIS treatment of community character
is critically flawed. Mr. Peter Swift will testify concerning
smart growth and the Belleayre Project's impacts on policies
designed to achieve sustainable development. Mr. Swift's
curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "Q ". Mr.
Peter Smith and Ms. Mary Kopaski will testify in accordance with
their report (which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"),
including but not limited to the following:
1.) One of the most important characteristics of the Catskills
is its vast amount of open space. Approximately 500 acres of forested,
open space will be directly altered if the Belleayre Project is
approved. The Catskill Mountains have been recognized as a significant
natural resource in New York State. The Catskill Forest Preserve
Public Access Plan recognizes that the Catskill Forest Preserve
is an invaluable asset to the quality of life and economic vitality
of the Catskill region and management of the Preserve is imperative.
The open space impacts that have not been evaluated in the DEIS
would include:
Source of topsoil has not been identified which will impact the
loss of agricultural land;
Cumulative impacts and secondary growth impacts from construction
of the Belleayre Project and the expansion of the Belleayre Ski
Center;
The potential over use of the Forest Preserve lands, trails and
resources;
Loss of the wilderness and forest character of the area;
Land use changes from forested land to more intensive development
that will result in more impervious materials and a loss of the
open space on the mountain top;
Potential loss of an additional 1,387 acres with no guarantees
from the applicant on specific ways the remainder of the property
is to be protected;
Impact on Route 28 as a scenic drive ñ and potentially
as a State designated Scenic byway;
The scale and design of the hotels is out of context with the
immediate area and the evolution and development of the Catskills.
2.) The DEIS inaccurately portrays the benefits and impacts of
the Belleayre Project on community character. For example, the
economic impacts of the proposed project will have a significant
adverse impact on the existing community character as they will
impact the number and type of jobs available, future surrounding
land uses and the need for additional housing. These economic
impacts are improperly assessed in the DEIS including:
The source of topsoil has not been identified and the impacts
of loss of agricultural land;
Land use changes from forested land to more intensive development;
Problematical methodologies used in the economic analysis of the
DEIS (boundaries, assessment of economic benefits, use of "average
household income");
The use of all of New York State (including the New York City
Metropolitan Area) rather than eliminating this area that skews
the economic analysis;
Characterization of the local economy and labor force is inaccurate
and the area is, in fact, a growing and vibrant portion of the
State;
Overstatement of the number of quality or living wage jobs and
potential salary impacts that the proposed project will have on
the region;
Overstatement of existing unemployment rates and the need for
this project as a "catalyst" for new development;
Understatement of average household incomes to make the area appear
to be in a depressed state when, in fact, the area has experienced
economic improvement over the past ten years and especially since
9/11;
Lack of Per Capita Income analysis to illustrate the economic
condition of the region when compared to the rest of the State;
No recognition of the changing tourism industry and, in particular,
the local movement away from large scale, all inclusive resorts
to niche market providers;
The potential impacts on hamlets by creating one "large-scale"
development that would be allegedly self-contained and compete
"head-on" with existing businesses;
Secondary growth impacts (second/vacation homes, new housing construction,
impacts on Route 28, economic impacts on the hamlets, cumulative
impacts with the expansion of Belleayre Ski Center and overall
fiscal impacts) are not considered.
3.) Community character impacts of the proposed Belleayre Project
are tied to the probable population growth that can be expected
from the project, yet this population growth is ignored in the
DEIS. This population growth will impact community character of
the region and, in particular, the Towns of Shandaken and Middletown
The community, neighborhood and social impacts that have not been
evaluated in the DEIS include:
Increased truck traffic and traffic generated by the project;
Increased cost for road maintenance (Route 28) because of increased
truck use in hauling fill, construction materials, landscape materials
and the other traffic generated by the project;
Inclusion of "gated communities" to create exclusive
enclaves in an area historically known as open and inclusive;
No consideration given for population growth and the need for
additional housing for lower paid employees;
Meeting the broad definition of "in harmony" from
either zoning code as the standard for special use permit requirement;
The community vision as outlined in the community survey and workshops;
Population growth potentials are not considered and are likely
to have impacts on schools, fire, police and other services.
The cultural and historical impacts which will result from the
Belleayre Project have not been adequately identified or evaluated
by the DEIS. The area of the Catskills which will be impacted
by this Project has a long and rich cultural history. Often referred
to as "America's First Wilderness" because
scholars trace the beginnings of conservation to this area, the
region has long be renowned as a vacation and recreation area
for recreational pursuits directly related to the beauty and aesthetics
of the area. ( HYPERLINK "http://www.catskillcenter.org/region.html"
http://www.catskillcenter.org/region.html ). Ironically, because
of the sheer size of the Belleayre Project and the highly water
intensive nature of its recreational use, i.e. golfing, this project
will undermine the very natural and cultural attributes that have
made this area unique resource that it is today.
In celebration of the one hundredth anniversary of the Catskill
Park, Christopher Olney of the Catskill Park Centennial Committee
made the following observation regarding the Park:
The Park's great value, appeal and uniqueness lies in this
mix of public and private land across the landscape, manifesting
itself as untouched wilderness areas and public recreation facilities
intermingled with working farms and forests, scattered residences,
and small-town communities. This mix forms both a diversity of
land cover types across the region, benefiting many types of wildlife,
and a diversity of scenery and beauty in the region, benefit residents
and visitors alike.
Indeed, the beauty of the Catskills lies not only in the pristine
spruce-fir summits, rugged road outcrops, vast forest tracts,
hidden lakes, boulder studded trout streams, and graceful waterfalls,
but also in the open hay meadows and dairy pastures, magnificent
reservoirs, secluded homes in quiet hollows, undulating railroads,
old barns and stone walls alluding to our agrarian past, and bustling,
colorful main streets. All these things together and in close
proximity to each other give the Catskill region its charm and
identity. The Catskill Park is certainly a grand experiment in
how human communities can coexist with wilderness; geographically
intermingled and historically entwined. The Catskill Park Centennial
Celebrating 100 years in 2004, Christopher Olney.
This area truly represents a unique intermingling of land uses.
The Catskill Park is truly one of the Nation's unique "parks"
because it encompasses both public and private lands, unlike most
other public parks. According to Alf Evers, renowned Catskill
historian, with the creation of the Catskill Park, "the
word ëpark' took on an extended meaning to the people
of the regionÖthe new kind of parkÖwas owned by the
people and might be used by them except in ways that might damage
the conservation goals of the park." (www.catskillpark100.org/history/cp.htm).
Indeed, of the Catskill Park's 705,500 acre area, approximately
41 percent of the Park's land area is public and 59 percent
is private. Id.
Contrary to the DEIS, the Belleayre Project does not represent
a continuation of the area's resort history and culture.
Rather, this proposal will overwhelm and destroy the diverse and
intermingled land uses that currently characterize the area.
CPC will present evidence that DEIS' treatment of cultural
resources is critically flawed.†† Mr. Peter Smith
and Ms. Mary Kopaski will testify in accordance with their report,
that among other issues, "The scale and design of the hotels
is out of context with the immediate area and the evolution and
development of the Catskills".
Furthermore, the DEIS fails to adequately consider impacts to
historic resources despite the fact that the following sites listed
on the National Register of Historic Places are located within
the affected project area: the Zen Mountain Monastery (Camp Wapanachki),
Old St. Rt. 28 at junction with Miller Road, Temper, New York;
District School No. 14, Academy Street, South of junction with
Birch Creek Road, Pine Hill, New York; Elm Street Stone Arch Bridge,
Elm Street, over Alton Creek, Pine Hill, New YorkÖ..
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at the significant adverse impacts to community
character. Due to the lack of consideration of community character
and neighborhood impacts, the Commissioner will not be able to
make the requisite findings under SEQRA that the selected alternative
minimizes or avoids adverse environmental impacts to the maximum
extent practicable. The inadequate community character evaluation
does not provide the Commissioner with an adequate legal or technical
record on which to predicate findings pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.
ß 617.11(d) (5). Consequently, the Belleayre Project's
permit applications must be denied. CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's impacts on community character
be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
M. Sediment and Erosion Control
The CPC contends that the failure of the DEIS and application
to adequately address stormwater controls, erosion and sedimentation
of the areas surface waters raises substantive and significant
issues for adjudication. The DEIS fails to describe, anticipate,
and mitigate the effects of large areas of land disturbance (up
to 25 acres at a time) in connection with the particular soils
and geology of the project sites.
The CPC will rely, in part, on the testimony of Mr. Paul Rubin,
Principal hydrogeologist with HydroQuest, a hydrological consulting
firm based in Stone Ridge, New York. Mr. Rubin's resume
is attached to this Petition. Steven R. Garabed, a senior engineer
from Carpenter Environmental Associates, Inc., whose curriculum
vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-R", will testify
that the Applicant has not provided sufficient information to
justify a waiver of the 5-acre disturbance limit. The Carpenter
Environmental Associates Report is attached hereto as Exhibit
"S". CPC will also rely on the testimony of Dr. Paul
S. Mankiewicz, Ph.D. whose curriculum vitae is attached as "CV
ñU". Dr. Mankiewicz' report is attached hereto
as Exhibit "V". Mr. Garabed. Dr. Mankiewicz and Mr.
Rubin will testify to the following:
1.) As indicated, the applicant's phased construction plan
proposes to disturb up to 25 acres of soil at one time during
Phase I and up to 16.4 acres during Phase II. Disturbances of
this magnitude would likely cause severe water quality impacts
and are not in compliance with permit limits. The New York State
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial
Activities from Construction Activities, Permit No. GP-02-01,
limits areas of unprotected, exposed soil to no more than 5 acres
at any given time without prior written approval from DEC. Limiting
the phasing of construction activities to disturb less than 5
acres or less at a time reduces sediment loadings to wetlands
and watercourses; however, exposure of 16-25 acres of bare soil
on a mountainside will compromise the effective management of
stormwater runoff and may result in catastrophic sediment loading
of receiving waters during rain events. The sensitivity of the
site including the nature of the soils on the site, the steep
slopes and its location amidst important trout streams and the
Catskill/Delaware watershed justify a condition that not more
than one acre be disturbed at any one time.
2.) According to EPA, sediment from one acre of a construction
site can be equivalent to 1000-2000 times the sediment loading
from one forested acre. In addition, clay particles often remain
suspended for 6-9 months and even longer which could allow these
particles to enter the New York City water supply distribution
system. Elevated turbidity and suspended sediment present public
health concerns for unfiltered water supplies. This will also
be of concern due to the discharge to the Esopus Creek which is
an impaired water body listed on the New York State list pursuant
to section 303 (d) of the Clean Water Act. The DEIS fails to provide
the public and interested parties with the level of information
required for review under SEQRA.
3.) The DEIS does not consider and evaluate the impacts of the
region's lacustrine clay (lake clay) deposits. In the vicinity
of the project area there are two distinct clay-rich glacial units
that may readily be entrained into turbulent stream flow and into
runoff over exposed sediments which will occur during project
construction. Lacustrine clays are concentrated in the valley
bottoms of relict glacial lakes such as Shandaken and Peekamoose,
and clay-rich sediments pose the greatest water quality threat
in the Esopus Creek basin. The DEIS does not give adequate attention
to the nature and specific hydrogeology of these clay deposits,
resulting in underestimates of sediment increases following storm
and other high water events. The DEIS fails to incorporate inadequate
mitigation for this significant impact.
4.) The Applicant has stated that the CP series of plans exemplify
the level of planning and phasing that will be completed for all
phases of the project. However, the CP series of plans do not
possess sufficient detail to warrant granting of a waiver. For
example, CP-15 contains a table that lists the various erosion
control technologies, which can be used at the site based on the
slope of the specific area requiring mitigation. Based on this
plan twenty different technologies could be used in an area with
slopes greater than 100%.
5.) The Applicant does not show which technology has been selected
for use. Prior to starting work in an area, the Applicant, the
DEC and the public must know exactly what erosion controls will
be used. Without knowing which technology is being used, it is
impossible to assess the potential environmental impacts of the
waiver.
6.) The Applicant should be required to show exactly how erosion
and sediment control would be addressed in an area. The Applicant
is requesting that NYSDEC waive its disturbance requirement, but
the Applicant has not properly demonstrated that proper erosion
and sediment controls will be used to protect these large areas
of soil disturbance. Without specific erosion control plans and
details the Applicant's waiver request should be denied.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at, whether the Belleayre Project will cause
significant adverse impacts to the sediment and surrounding water
bodies that will be affected by erosion off the site. The DEIS
did not take a hard look at the adverse impacts and does not provide
the Commissioner with an adequate legal or technical record on
which to predicate findings pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11(d)
(5). Consequently, the Belleayre Project's permit applications
must be denied. CPC requests that the issue of the Belleayre Project's
adverse impacts on sediment and erosion control be adjudicated
pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
N. Stormwater Management Plan
The CPC will present evidence that the DEIS and the applications
do not contain sufficient information to analyze stormwater impacts
from the proposed Belleayre Project. CPC will demonstrate that
the use of the WinSLAMM model to characterize pre-development
conditions related to stormwater runoff at the project site was
improper and that operation of the effectiveness of the stormwater
management infrastructure will not achieve the results predicted
by the applicant.
The CPC will also demonstrate that the neither the DEIS nor the
applications and supporting documentation show whether the project
will meet the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for phosphorous.
CPC will rely on Steven R. Garabed, a senior engineer for Carpenter
Environmental Associates, whose curriculum vitae is attached as
Exhibit "R" and Professor Robert Pitt, Ph.D., M.S.C.E.
whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit "CV-S"
Mr. Garabed's report is attached as Exhibit "S".
Professor Pitt's report is attached as Exhibit "T".
Professor Pitt will testify that the WinSLAMM model employed erroneous
assumptions as inputs into the model; that the model was not properly
calibrated and the data was not properly verified. Without use
of the appropriate local calibration and verification data, errors
in pollutant discharge estimates cannot accurately be made. In
support of CPC's position, Professor Pitt will testify
that:
1.) The WinSLAMM model should not have been used to predict pre-development
conditions relating to stormwater runoff. The model was developed
to predict stormwater runoff from post-development conditions.
2.) Neither the DEIS nor the supporting documents describe the
data and assumptions used as input to the model. Good modeling
practices were not employed by the applicant; therefore, the model
cannot be relied on to predict the Belleayre Project's
impacts.
3.) Due to their poor design, the stormwater detention ponds will
not achieve the volume of stormwater reduction or pollutant mitigation
claimed by the applicant.
4.) The DEIS did not accurately predict the pollution loading
from snowmelt. Studies have demonstrated that pollution loads
from snowmelt can exceed pollution loads from mild weather storm
events. Adequate mitigation, therefore, has not been included
in the design of the stormwater detention ponds.
5.) The impacts from stormwater runoff on nearby trout and trout
spawning streams have not been addressed.
Mr. Garabed will testify that the DEIS must reflect the phosphorus
loading from the site using current data; discharge permits, and
planned or completed projects, so that an accurate and up to date
assessment of compliance with the TMDL can be completed. In support
of CPC's position, Mr. Garabed will testify to the following:
1) The NYSDEC has developed a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
for phosphorus within the Ashokan Watershed. According to Appendix
10 of the DEIS, there is flexibility in the loading assigned to
non-point sources since as of 1996, the actual phosphorus loading
from non-point sources was less than the allocated loading. Data
from 1996 is not sufficient to make a determination as to whether
there is available loading within the Ashokan Watershed today.
2) After over eight years, there has likely been additional development,
which has increased the phosphorus loading within the watershed.
The cumulative impact of all projects since 1996 and any proposed
projects, which would be concurrent with the construction phase
of the Belleayre project, must be considered in determining whether
the TMDL will be complied with. For example, the NYSDEC recently
released the Draft SPDES permit for the Shandaken Tunnel. This
permit includes the Shandaken Tunnel as an additional point source
within the watershed and allocates 10,457 kg/yr to the Shandaken
Tunnel.
3) Since the discharge from the Tunnel was unaccounted for in
the original TMDL allocations, the proposed allocation of 10,457
kg/yr exceeds the 8,026 kg/yr margin of flexibility for non-point
sources, meaning that no additional inputs of phosphorus would
be allowable.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at, whether the Belleayre Project will meet the
TMDL for phosphorous in the stormwater management plan. The DEIS
did not take a hard look at the adverse impacts and does not provide
the Commissioner with an adequate legal or technical record on
which to predicate findings pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11(d)
(5). Consequently, the Belleayre Project's permit applications
must be denied. CPC requests that the issue of the Belleayre Project's
adverse impacts on phosphorous loading be adjudicated pursuant
to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
P. Stormwater Treatment ñ Chitosan Acetate
CPC will present evidence that the applicant proposes to treat
captured stormwater in detention basins with an allegedly "environmentally-friendly"
flocculent called chitosan acetate before pumping the treated
stormwater into forested land. CPC will present expert testimony
to show how there is conflicting information on the toxicity of
this flocculent to rainbow trout. Since there is a genuine question
as the toxicity of this flocculent, the Applicant must be required
to evaluate the potential toxicity of Storm Klear under site specific
conditions. Steven R. Garabed, senior engineer at Carpenter Environmental
Associates, whose will testify that in his expert opinion:
1) The information found in Appendix 2 of the DEIS claims that
Chitosan used at the proposed dose of 1 to 2 mg/l is not toxic
to rainbow trout. In fact, toxicity to cultured rainbow trout
was observed at concentrations as low as 0.075 mg/l after 24 hours
of exposure.
2.) The applicant should evaluate the potential toxicity of this
flocculent by completing bioassay testing on a stormwater sample
collected from the first stormwater/sediment basin installed at
the project site. Without such testing, the use of Storm Klear
at the site may cause an adverse impact to the trout population
of the receiving waters.
Conclusion
The DEIS fails to provide sufficient information to assess, or
take a hard look at, whether the use of Chitosan for the Belleayre
Project will be toxic to fish. The DEIS did not take a hard look
at the adverse impacts and does not provide the Commissioner with
an adequate legal or technical record on which to predicate findings
pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.ß 617.11(d) (5). Consequently, the
Belleayre Project's permit applications must be denied.
CPC requests that the issue of the Belleayre Project's
use of chitosan be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß
624.4.
Q. Mining Permit
Crossroads Ventures has not applied for a Mined Land Reclamation
Permit. Pursuant to the New York State Mined Land Reclamation
Law and its implementing regulations, a mining permit is required
for the proposed Belleayre Project. See ECL ßß 23-2701
et seq. The Mined Land Reclamation Law requires that: "any
person who mines or proposes to mine from each mine site more
than one thousand [1,000] tons or seven hundred fifty [750] cubic
yards, whichever is less, of minerals from the earth within twelve
successive calendar months Ö shall not engage in such mining
unless a permit for such mining operation has been obtained from
the [DEC]." ECL ß 23-2711(); 6 NYCRR 421.1(a). The
statute defines "mining" as "the extraction of
overburden and minerals from the earth" and "mineral"
means "any naturally formed Ö solid material located
on or below the surface of the earth," including peat and
topsoil. See ECL ß 23-2705(7), (8); 6 NYCRR 420.1(j), (k).
Although the Mined Land Reclamation Law does not require a permit
for the excavation, removal and disposition of minerals from construction
Projects or excavations in aid of agricultural activities, this
exception is "exclusive of the creation of water bodies."
See ß 23-2705(8); 6 NYCRR 420.1(k).
According to the DEIS, development of the proposed Belleayre Resort
will necessitate the cutting and filling of nearly 1 million cubic
yards of soil and bedrock. See DEIS at 3-6. The mining activity
for the Belleayre Project will necessitate the stripping of 6,800
cubic yards of soil and the blasting of 18,200 cubic yards of
rock to create the Project's detention ponds for treated
wastewater. See DEIS at 2-55. These plans, which involve the mining
of 25,000 cubic yards of minerals (more than 30 times statutory
threshold) within a 12-month period for the creation of a water
body requires a mining permit.
Given the immense quantities of rock to be blasted and soil to
be stripped, there may be additional mining activities planned
for the Project that require mining permits. This failure to apply
for the requisite permit and meet the requirements of the Mined
Land Reclamation Act precludes any finding that the DEIS is complete.
Significantly, all mining permit applicants must develop a land-use
plan and furnish a financial surety. See 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß
ß 422.1, 423.1. A mined land use plan sets forth in detail
the applicant's mining and reclamation methods; the financial
surety, established as a condition precedent to the issuance of
a permit, is conditioned upon conformance with the applicant's
mined land-use plan. 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 422.1 and 423. The suretyówhich
may be furnished in the form of a bond, irrevocable letter of
credit, or certificate of depositóis intended to insure
that a Project Sponsor does not begin extractive activities without
the financial wherewithal to complete the appropriate reclamation.
6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 423.1(c), (d).
Remarkably, despite this enormous amount of proposed blasting
and earthmoving, the DEIS concedes that the financing is not yet
in place for the Project's construction. The HVS Economic
Evaluation notes, for instance, that the developer intends to
affiliate both components of the proposed resortóeastern
and westernówith nationally recognized hotel chains. However,
brand affiliation (and the accompanying financing) has not yet
been established for the Project. See DEIS at 1-2.
Project approval in the absence of a financial surety raises the
possibility that construction of the Project might beginóentailing
the blasting of bedrock and the stripping of soil on a scale never
before seen in the regionówithout any guarantee that the
Project will ever be finished. The present terms of the DEC's
draft permits therefore leave open the possibility that substantial
damage may be done to the mountain without any degree of accountability
if the Project does not come to fruition. Accordingly, a mining
permit and the attendant financial surety is an absolute must
for this Project.
Conclusion
The application for permits to construct and operate the Belleayre
Project must be denied due to the failure of the DEIS to include
an evaluation of the requirements of the Mined Land Reclamation
Law and a permit application and mined land use plan pursuant
to ECL, Article 23, Title 27. Consequently, the Belleayre Project's
permit applications must be denied. CPC requests that the issue
of the Belleayre Project's failure to apply for a mining
permit and provide financial security for mining and reclamation
be adjudicated pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
R. Pesiticides
The CPC contends that the DEIS did not adequately address the
potential impacts from pesticide use on the proposed Belleayre
Project Golf Courses. CPC offers the testimony of Dr. Walter Knisel,
Ph.D and Dr. Paul Mankiewicz in support of the Petition for Party
Status. Dr. Knisel's curriculum vitae is attached as "CV-T".
Dr. Knisel's report is attached as Exhibit "U".
1.) The LEACHM model the Applicant used to evaluate post-development
pesticide transport was run using an inaccurate assumption about
the depths of soils at the site after development. The modeling
was based on erroneous assumptions and data concerning soil depths
at the site. The model also greatly overestimates the attenuation
of pesticide loading to transport to surface and groundwater.
2.) The pesticide discharges will exceed the limits set forth
in the Wildacres Draft SPDES permit due to the defective stormwater
plan as designed. The Big Indian Draft SPDES Permit does not include
any effluent limits for the pesticides and therefore the permit
provides no protection against violation of the water quality
standards as established in 6 NYCRR ß 703.5 or water quality
criteria as described in DEC T.O.G.S. 1.1.1 are exceeded in surface
or groundwaters.
3.) The modeling of pesticide leaching to groundwater erroneously
uses a default assumption of 2.5 meters of soil above the water
table or bedrock. The Belleayre Project plans require only 6 inches
of topsoil on the golf course over gravel and sand underdrains,
or, in some areas, other boundary conditions such as bedrock.
These conditions will likely channel pesticide-laden runoff into
the micro-detention ponds and to surface water resources, or into
bedrock fractures and then into groundwater.
4.) The pesticide monitoring wells set forth in the Draft SPDES
Permits will not ensure the protection of water quality. Water
quality monitoring must not only occur on a regularly scheduled
basis, but samples must be taken from sources that actually reflect
any water quality impacts that are occurring since the monitoring
requirement is designed to protect drinking water and sensitive
trout-spawning habitat from pesticides which can harm human and
aquatic life if not detected. The Draft SPDES Permits at issue
here, however, designate groundwater monitoring wells that are
entirely insufficient to detect such impacts. The monitoring wells
will be installed into bedrock 400-700 feet below the golf course,
therefore, they will not serve as adequate monitoring wells because
pesticides are unlikely to reach that deep into the aquifer. To
monitor infiltration and pesticide contamination of groundwater,
the Applicant should use shallow overburden wells. Moreover, only
15 of the 31 pesticides listed on the SPDES permits can be analyzed
by currently Certified Laboratory methods.
Conclusion
The application for permits to construct and operate the Belleayre
Project must be denied due to the failure of the DEIS to include
an adequate evaluation of the pesticide impacts to ground and
surface waters in violation of ECL, Article 17 and SEQRA. Consequently,
the Belleayre Project's permit applications must be denied.
CPC requests that the issue of the Belleayre Project's
adverse impacts to water quality be adjudicated pursuant to 6
N.Y.C.R.R. ß 624.4.
V. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Catskill Preservation Coalition
requests that it be granted party status in the adjudication of
the significant adverse impacts which will result from the Belleayre
Project. Alternatively, in the event that the Catskill Preservation
Coalition is denied party status, the CPC requests that each individual
member organization listed above be granted individual party status
based on the substantive and significant issues which have been
set forth in this Petition of Party Status. To: Honorable Richard
Wissler, Administrative Law Judge
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Hearings and Mediation Services
625 Broadway
Albany, New York 12233
Dated: April 23, 2004
Albany, New York Respectfully Submitted,
Law Office of Marc S. Gerstman
____________________________
Marc S. Gerstman, Esq.
Attorneys for the Catskill
Preservation Coalition 313 Hamilton Street
313 Hamilton Street
Albany, New York
518-432-4100
Mr. Daniel Ruzow, Esq.
Whiteman, Osterman and Hanna
Attorneys for Crossroads Ventures, LLC
One Commerce Plaza
Albany, New York
Ms. Carol Krebs, Esq.
Assistant Regional Attorney
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, New York 12561-1620
FILENAME 040330petition for party status.doc
Draft Environmental Impact Statement For Belleayre Resort at Catskill
Park. September 2003. Appendix 22 - Sound Impact Study. p. 4-2.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement For Belleayre Resort at Catskill
Park. September 2003. Appendix 22 Sound Impact Study. p. 3-10.
|