james reinhard lynch, ariel d (apa) apa project # 2018
TRANSCRIPT
From: JAMES REINHARD To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: APA Project
# 2018-0123 Date: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 7:48:21 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
I wish to add my voice to those objecting to the current plan for APA Project # 2018-0123. This current alternative represents a form of sprawl that is not in keeping with best practice conservation design and sets president for other inappropriate development. There should be a public hearing that hopefully leads to the more appropriate Alternative plan 2.
_______________________________ Jim Reinhard 237 Montgomery Ave 2E, Haverford Pa 19041 12 Glengary Way, Elizabethtown NY 12932 412-352-5244
Ms. Lynch,
This is such an upsetting project - slow destruction of the Adirondacks.
The developers should be required to eliminate new road construction east of the lake, place home lots west of the lake on smaller footprints and maintain the Resource Management in unsubdivided blocks of forest.
Given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest blocks constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major design modifications, by its own regulatory definition the APA MUST send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing.
Ellen Utley Tupper Lake
From: Richard Daly To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: APA proj 2018-0123 Date: Thursday, December 24, 2020 7:47:16 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
My dear Ariel Lynch: I support the Englebright-Kaminsky legislative bill re: APA project #2018-0123, to prevent severe damage to environs of Woodward Lake, Fulton County. I realize that this is a foot-in-the-door to future misguided decisions in matters inside TheBlueLine. Let's hope that a New Year and a new Legislature will bring us hope for the future! Sincerely, Richard L. Daly - concerned citizen-voter in Plattsburgh, Clinton County.
From: Daniel Pearlstein To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 Date: Thursday, December 24, 2020 3:26:26 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I am a lifelong New Yorker, having lived in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Ithaca. My wife and I just bought a home in the Adirondack Park, right next to the property where she grew up. We believe strongly in the APA's long-range land use planning mission and stewardship obligations to the Park, the people who live there, and all New Yorkers.
Accordingly, I write to second Dave Gibson of Adirondack Wild's concerns about the above- captioned application. I believe that people's interest in living within the park will grow rapidly in coming years with climate change, future pandemics, and other reasons to seek refuge on high ground.
I, for one, welcome the prospect of new neighbors just as I wish to be welcomed, myself and my family. But I also know as a regional planner and attorney that good planning makes good neighbors. Conversely, bad planning or the absence of planning can wreck a neighborhood, however remote, seemingly pristine, or picturesque.
What the agency does with this one application will set a precedent for what are likely to be many more development applications soon to come. Just as I would not like to see new sprawl development come to the areas of the park within Clinton County, near my home, I do not wish to see it in Fulton County.
As Dave Gibson has written:
"Given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest blocks constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major design modifications, by its own regulatory definition APA ought to send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing.
"Absent a public hearing, permit applications cannot be denied by APA. At this point in the process, the one true conservation design alternative (Alternative 2) which eliminates the new road, concentrates homes on good soils west of Woodward lake, and maintains unsubdivided blocks of forest above the lake on all sides can only be pursued through a hearing. The result of any hearing ought to deny the applicant’s preferred design without prejudice and direct him towards project Alternative 2 – or something similar."
Sincerely,
From: [email protected] To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 - completed application for Woodward Lake Subdivision Date: Saturday, December 26, 2020 9:46:10 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch, “The Adirondack Protection Agency (APA) is responsible for maintaining the protection of the forest preserve…..” yet, in regard to APA Project# 2018-0123 (Woodward Lake subdivision), although the APA has the authority to require the developer, New York Land and Lakes Development LLC, to submit a conservation- minded subdivision plan, to date, the APA has not exercised this authority. The Woodward Lake project does not attempt a Conservation Subdivision which is NY state’s preference of the 2018 APA Large-scale Subdivision application procedure. These application guidelines are not currently being upheld and the APA should require the developer’s application to be submitted as a Conservation Subdivision, therefore…….given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major conservation design modifications, by its own regulatory definition the APA should send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Meghan Hanney 49 Colvin Rd Bakers Mills, NY, 12811 [email protected] m: (610) 314-1932
From: James E Close To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: to APA Project # 2018-0123 (Woodward Lake) Date: Sunday, January 03, 2021 9:30:03 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Adirondack Wild has just notified me, as well as its other members and supporters, of the pending review and approval of this subdivision, whose scale and breadth is antithetical to your mission of protecting the ecological integrity and character of the Adirondacks. I am appalled that such a project even merits consideration by the APA, but the reality is that it is before you, and cannot be ignored even if it is patently obvious that the end result is further denigration and fragmentation of this already-threatened and fragile region. Adirondack Wild notes the following deficiencies and concerns with the application, and I concur completely: o A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake; o APA denial of the permit as requested; o As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that: eliminates new road construction east of the lake; clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints, and; maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation. Ideally, the permit should be denied and the project halted as the “best alternative” and the one most consistent with your agency’s mission. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my comments. ******************************************************************************** “Only intuition can protect you from the most dangerous individual of all, the articulate incompetent.” -Publisher Robert L. Bernstein, quoted in Forbes ******************************************************************************** Sent to you by: James E. Close 3 Brightman Rd Mechanicville, NY 12118-2807 518-664-2980
From: Bill To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Monday, January 04, 2021 1:32:27 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
I oppose the Woodward Lake subdivision as proposed. I would like to see:
A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake.
APA denial of the permit as requested.
As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that:
eliminates new road construction east of the lake; clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints, and; maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation.
William Roberson 410 E. 17th St. Brooklyn, NY 11226
From: Lawrence To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA); [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 1:44:20 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Ms. Lynch: I am very concerned about the destructive proposed development at Woodward lake. This type of development should not be allowed in the Adirondack Park. I am in full agreement with Adirondack Wild’s position on this proposed violation of the environmental integrity of the Adirondack Park, as follows: o A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake should take place; o APA denial of the permit as requested; o As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that:
· eliminates new road construction east of the lake; · clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints,
and; · maintains large blocks of un-subdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open
space recreation. Very Concerned, Lawrence D’Arco 1202 Greenwich Dr Albany, NY 12203 Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Ariel Lynch NYS APA Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 [email protected]
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing to you to oppose the proposed Woodward Lake subdivision layout. Project 2018-0123.
The developer proposal would have a destructive environmental impact on the lake, the wildlife, and it’s habitats. It would also make the land/forest above the lake less useful to wildlife and recreation by subdividing the lots. Also, new roads would be needed and would cut through 1200 acres of woods zoned as the most protected land classification in the Adirondack Park.
Many years ago I remember going to Woodward Lake with my son and his Boy Scout troop on a winter outing and hike. It would be terrible to have this beautiful area subdivided and environmentally impacted in such a negative way.
Please do not give up on true conservation design for Woodward Lake. Please allow a full adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123 Woodward Lake. Deny the permit as requested.
I agree with the alternative true Conservation Design that eliminates new road construction east of the lake. It would cluster homes on good soil, on smaller lots on the west side of the lake and would have overlapping footprints. It would maintain large sections of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry and open spaces for all.
Wildlife and wilderness cannot survive the continuing destruction of it's land, habitat and water and the added pollution from septic systems, chemicals, etc. This would be a damaging Adirondack subdivision. We must slow the development of forest fragmentation and sprawl in the park.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
From: Greg Wait To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA); [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 Date: Wednesday, January 06, 2021 11:30:53 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
There is a reason we love the Adirondack Park. The reason is exactly the opposite of having houses surrounding lakes. To develop as is proposed is an archaic paradigm in development. It is no longer appropriate for the people or for the integrity of the landscape. If you continue to allow damaging development, especially when a viable alternative exists that will keep the beauty of the Park intact, you will be responsible for its degradation. The pristine waters are not as safe as some think. There is not as much wild land as some think. So many people fought so hard to secure what we have right now. Please deny this permit. Please consider a public hearing on this proposal. Please adapt a conservation design model. I have traveled all over this country and to mountains in Europe. The Adirondack Park is a special place. It is a jewel in the state and country. It is impossible to keep it a jewel, a place in which people come for the peace and wildness of the mountains and lakes, if you do not change the way the land is developed. Thank you for reading this letter. Gregory Wait 475 county route 10 Corinth Gateway to the Adirondacks!!!!!!! ps I am not opposed to development at all. I am opposed to thoughtless damaging development. Thank you again.
From: fcoppa To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: Subdivision Proposal for Woodward Lake/Northville; Project 2018-0123 Date: Friday, January 08, 2021 11:33:31 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Ariel Lynch Project Review Officer NYS Adirondack Park Agency
Dear Ms. Lynch,
There appear to be very serious issues regarding the proposed development, and its potentially-harmful effect on the surrounding lake and forest area. Please initiate a public hearing to review this project and very- seriously consider re-design to avoid damaging such a fragile area.
Sincerely,
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing to oppose the proposed Woodward Lake subdivision layout. Project 2018- 0123
I’m very concerned there would be destructive environmental impact around the lake with the developer proposal. It would affect the forest and lands above the lake and wildlife living and passing through there. The subdivision would make the land less useful for recreation as well. The 1200 acres of woods zoned in the Adirondack Park will have new roads cut through them.
As a mother of a Boy Scout that loved winter camping outings there, please don’t ruin this beautiful piece of heaven our family has such good memories of. It would be an environmental slap in the face for so many to have this subdivision proceed as originally planned.
I agree with the alternative true Conservation Design that eliminates new road construction east of the lake. It would cluster homes on good soil, on smaller lots on the west side of the lake and would have overlapping footprints. It would maintain large sections of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry and open spaces for all.
Please give the public a chance to voice their views by allowing a full adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123 Woodward Lake. Give the true conservation design for Woodward Lake a chance. Deny the permit as requested.
Our wilderness and wildlife cannot survive the continuing destruction of its land, habitat and water. The added pollution from septic systems and other chemicals it would introduce would be terrible. This would be a damaging Adirondack subdivision. We must slow the development of forest fragmentation and sprawl in the park.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
January 6, 2021
Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency P.O. Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 (Via Electronic Submission)
RE: New York Land & Lakes Development LLC, Project # 2018-0123
Dear Ms. Lynch,
On behalf of the Adirondack Council, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to offer the following comments on the subdivision project proposal for the New York Land & Lakes Development LLC, Project # 2018- 0123. The Council believes that the Adirondack Park Agency’s (APA) Large- scale Subdivision Application process was designed to result in a more transparent process, garner meaningful public input, and encourage subdivisions that reflect the conservation design elements necessary to protect the environment while being fair for the applicant. In reviewing the proposed site development plans, the Council does not believe that the overall project design has been sufficiently altered from its 2018 version to meet the intent of the large-scale subdivision application. Without substantial changes made to the proposed development plans to meet the goals of conservation design, the Adirondack Council does not support the proposed project.
Following public comments and input from the Agency, the applicant should have made substantial changes and supported a conservation design plan, but they have not. Woodward Lake will still be surrounded by building lots around the lake with a second row of houses behind them and a new 2,000- foot road. The proposed subdivision plans are not in accordance with the objectives of “conservation design” for large-scale subdivisions. Clustering building lots around the most sensitive natural resource on the property and calling it “Modified ‘Conservation’ Subdivision” is not conservation design. Approval of the applicant’s project as currently proposed would subject the shoreline and surrounding landscape to significant habitat fragmentation, resource disturbance, susceptibility to invasives, and more. The Council offers the following critiques:
RECEIVED
Date: January 11, 2021
The proposal as drafted will still fragment and impact rural open space: In September 2018 and February 2020, the Council submitted comments on the Woodward Lake subdivision plans. Many of our concerns echoed in those letters remain the same, including calling for a stronger demonstration of open space protection. The applicant proposes only 14% of the total property be protected as open space and those 170 acres will be protected only through a homeowners’ association agreement, which lasts only as long as the association does. The areas of lots 2, 3, 7, 8, & 11, which total 630 acres +/-, will be left to individual management with no guarantee of lasting open space protection.
In addition, NY Land & Lakes ruled out the use of a conservation easement to protect open space on the property, citing that it would take too long to obtain an easement and that smaller lot sizes would decrease the value of the lots. Neither of these hold muster for failing to protect open space, the forest matrix and wildlife corridors.
The revised plan may also impact and fragment wildlife corridors. According to Figure 3 of the APA Qualitative Biological Survey, the travel routes large mammals utilize on the property appear to overlap portions of the proposed subdivision on the southern and eastern sides of the lake.
Clustering: A distinctive feature of conservation design is the clustering of building envelopes and structures to minimize the ecological footprint of development. Clustering promotes aesthetic values, habitat connectivity and open space. The applicant’s decision to concentrate development on shoreline wildlife habitat, some of the rarest and most sensitive on the parcel, is the opposite of conservation clustering and conservation design. Shoreline development will destroy important wildlife habitat while exponentially adding to the potential for polluted runoff reaching the lake. Furthermore, the construction of a 2,000-foot road to access the lots on the east side of the lake will increase exposure to road salt and invasive species infestations. The applicant should propose and bring to the APA an alternative plan that limits shoreline developments, utilizes existing building envelopes and disturbances, and overall minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects.
Clustering is intended to minimize impacts to open space, wildlife and other natural resources by decreasing a development’s ecological footprint. Clustering is not, as the applicant indicates, only applicable to “urban and suburban areas as a way of reducing development costs and preserve open space.” (Application, page 14) The current proposal fails to recognize that development and existence of homes and roadways will have ecological impacts several hundred meters surrounding the actual footprint of new infrastructure.
Clear need for legislative intervention: The proposed subdivision plan only reinforces the need for some form of state legislation mandating clustering of homes away from sensitive landscape features such as water, wetlands and steep slopes while retaining large open spaces for wildlife. Conservation design legislation will ensure developers prudently adopt conservation-minded development plans, regardless of developers’ financial vision for a property. The agency has the right and obligation to require
2 of
such changes. If it doesn’t feel it has the authority then agency leadership should reverse position and indicate support for and engage constructively in conservation design legislation.
Without clear commitment by the Agency to adhere to conservation design standards, and protection of the ecological integrity and wild character of the unique and endangered Adirondack Park, the opportunity to preserve the Adirondacks and foster sustainable hamlet centric development is lost. We will continue to see these types of projects approved to the detriment of the Adirondack Park and its most sensitive lands. Projects of this scale should not be permitted on Resource Management lands when they will have direct, measurable impacts on lands identified by the APA as having “overriding natural resource and public considerations” and are characterized by “substantial acreage of one or more of the following: shallow soils, severe slopes, elevations of over twenty-five hundred feet, flood plains, proximity to designated or proposed wild or scenic rivers, wetlands, critical wildlife habitats or habitats of rare and endangered plant and animal species.” (APA Act § 805 3g)
In closing, the Adirondack Council believes that the Woodward Lake project is the test case for how well this new application process will function in creating developments that are light on the land, appropriate to the surrounding community, and economically sustainable. We encourage the Agency to continue to work with the applicant to develop another revised plan that strongly incorporates clustering, protects water quality, critical wildlife habitat and connectivity, and aligns with other conservation design principles. It appears that now more than ever conservation design legislation is needed to prevent irresponsible development in the Adirondack Park to protect open space, wildlands and wildlife. The Adirondack Council values vibrant communities and we see additional housing opportunities in the Park as a valuable component to these communities. The land use and development decisions we make today will have lasting impacts on the landscape, ecology and people of the Park for generations to come; wise decisions are needed now.
Thank you for taking the time to review our comments.
Sincerely,
3 of
From: Sid Harring To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 11:17:44 AM Attachments: APA letter, 2021
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
January 11, 2021 Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977
Re: Project No. 2018-1=0123, Woodward Lake
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I write to oppose the granting of an APA permit for the above project and request that a full adjudicatory hearing be held. My objection centers on the scale of this project, the carving up of this small lake front into 34 lots without regard either to the sensitive nature of the Adirondack landscapoe, or to modern principles of conservation design. Indeed, this project looks just like the sliced up lake frontages that characterized development in the Park before the APA Act, which was designed to protect the "forever wild" character of this land. Any person driving through the Park can see dozens and dozens of lakes, now hemmed in by suburb-like developments that completely change the character of the land. This is urban sprawl moving into an Adirondack wildnerness.
While I have no interest in the project, I own a timber tract about two miles south of this development, fortunately on another road, so this eye-sore of a suburb will not interfere with my undeveloped forest. It is mind boggling to think that I could divide my own land - with a perfect Adirondack pond -- into about 14 lots, replicating this development. And evidently so could anybody else. Obviously, if three or four local landowers followed, this would completely change the character of this area from a wilderness to suburban sprawl.
Given the development of the past fifty years, it is easy to see what this level of continued development would do to the ecology and landscape of the Park. Every single lake that becomes a suburb changes the character of the Park, and forever changes the wild ecology of that area. This development is on a gravel road, across from the Shaker Mountain Wild Forest. Indeed, the forest across
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I write to oppose the granting of an APA permit for the above project and request that a full adjudicatory hearing be held. My objection centers on the scale of this project, the carving up of this small lake front into 34 lots without regard either to the sensitive nature of the Adirondack landscapoe, or to modern principles of conservation design. Indeed, this project looks just like the sliced up lake frontages that characterized development in the Park before the APA Act, which was designed to protect the “forever wild” character of this land. Any person driving through the Park can see dozens and dozens of lakes, now hemmed in by suburb-like developments that completely change the character of the land. This is urban sprawl moving into an Adirondack wildnerness.
While I have no interest in the project, I own a timber tract about two miles south of this development, fortunately on another road, so this eye-sore of a suburb will not interfere with my undeveloped forest. It is mind boggling to think that I could divide my own land – with a perfect Adirondack pond -- into about 14 lots, replicating this development. And evidently so could anybody else. Obviously, if three or four local landowers followed, this would completely change the character of this area from a wilderness to suburban sprawl.
Given the development of the past fifty years, it is easy to see what this level of continued development would do to the ecology and landscape of the Park. Every single lake that becomes a suburb changes the character of the Park, and forever changes the wild ecology of that area. This development is on a gravel road, across from the Shaker Mountain Wild Forest. Indeed, the forest across the street could be classified as wilderness and protected forever, if the DEC was not “finished” with adding new wilderness areas to the Park. It is also near the newly re-routed beginning of the world class Northville-Placid Trail, which will now have hikers starting from a suburb, instead of starting in pristine forest.
No one would deny that this landowner should be able to put some appropriate number of bulldings on this land. But there now are principles of conservation design that would cluster these buildings, build fewer roads, especially on the wild, eastern side of the lake, and keep most of the land wild, consistent with the Park and with the immediate area.
I’m also concerned that, since the debacle of the Adirondack Club and Resort scheme, a completely unbuildable and uneconomic devastation of the Park that has gone nowhere at great cost, it appears that the APA will now approve just about any development scheme at all. This is shortsighted given that these projects will remain forever and alter the forever wild character of the Park. I am concerned that the APA lacks any vision of the future of the Park as a wilderness resource, in the context of global development and climate change. This wilderness serves a heavily urbanized region of fifty million people, and needs to be protected.
Sincerely,
Mayfield, NY 12117
the street could be classified as wilderness and protected forever, if the DEC was not "finished" with adding new wilderness areas to the Park. It is also near the newly re-routed beginning of the world class Northville-Placid Trail, which will now have hikers starting from a suburb, instead of starting in pristine forest.
No one would deny that this landowner should be able to put some appropriate number of bulldings on this land. But there now are principles of conservation design that would cluster these buildings, build fewer roads, especially on the wild, eastern side of the lake, and keep most of the land wild, consistent with the Park and with the immediate area.
I'm also concerned that, since the debacle of the Adirondack Club and Resort scheme, a completely unbuildable and uneconomic devastation of the Park that has gone nowhere at great cost, it appears that the APA will now approve just about any development scheme at all. This is shortsighted given that these projects will remain forever and alter the forever wild character of the Park. I am concerned that the APA lacks any vision of the future of the Park as a wilderness resource, in the context of global development and climate change. This wilderness serves a heavily urbanized region of fifty million people, and needs to be protected.
Sincerely,
Sid Harring 210 Warner Hill Road Mayfield, NY 12117
January 13, 2021 Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency P.O. Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 RE: APA Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake
Dear Ms. Lynch: Adirondack Wild strongly believes that this subdivision of 1,169 acres of land classified as Resource Management and Rural Use into 34 lots surrounding Woodward Lake, for the reasons set forth herein and in our previous comments should not be approved, and therefore should be subject to an adjudicatory hearing pursuant to Adirondack Park Agency Act, Sec. 809. Our reasons why the application should be subject to an adjudicatory hearing are two-fold:
1. Application Fails to Conform with APA’s Large-Scale Subdivision Application: The application for preferred alternative 6 substantively fails to conform with the required APA’s Large-scale Subdivision Application approved by the agency in 2018. The applicant chose to apply under this application and is bound by its objectives. One of those objectives (page 1 of the application) is to develop projects “in accordance with the principles of conservation design.” The completed application violates these principles in substantive ways. First, it spreads development impacts rather than concentrates them. The ecological impact zones of the development clusters fail to overlap with each other, as we have described in our past letters. Second, rather than avoid vulnerable habitats and ecosystems, multiple residences and driveways fall within impact zones. Third, rather than conserve large blocks of forest unsubdivided for their utility as habitat, forest management or open space recreation, the Resource Management and Rural use forests, both deemed by the Nature Conservancy as important local matrix forests, are subdivided into many separate ownerships. The application also fails to conform with the APA’s Large-scale Subdivision Application’s requirement (page 9) that “project design should minimize the creation of new areas of disturbance on the project site to the greatest extent practicable and should concentrate development to the greatest extent practicable.” The completed, preferred application (alternative 6) does not minimize new areas of disturbance and does not concentrate development. Alternative 2 is the only alternative presented that is roughly in accordance with the principles of conservation design and that can satisfy other legal requirements under the Act. It eliminates new road construction east of the lake, clusters home lots west of the lake on smaller, overlapping footprints, and maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest in Resource Management and Rural
RECEIVED
Date: January 14, 2021
Use for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation. Alternative 2 ought to be pursued to a completed application. Inexplicably, it is the far more damaging Alternative 6 that has been deemed complete by APA. To change this unfortunate fact at this late stage and to advance an alternative such as Alternative 2 that meets APA’s application objectives can only be accomplished through adjudication.
2. Application is Inconsistent with and Violates the APA Act: The application, as submitted, is inconsistent with the “character description, purposes policies and objectives” of the Rural Use and Resource Management land use areas involved and would have an undue adverse impact upon the natural, wildlife and open space resources of the Adirondack Park, pursuant to Sec.809 (10) of the APA Act. These statutory failings are directly related to the fragmentation of this huge holding into 34 separate ownerships, instead of the clustered design required by the APA Act and by the Large-scale Subdivision Application.
The Adirondack Park Land Use and Development Plan set forth in Section 805 of the APA Act provides that the “purposes, policies and objectives” of Resource Management areas is to protect the “delicate physical and biological resources, encourage proper and economic management of forest... resources”. The project would subdivide 600 acres of steep forested land into seven lots, rather than retain this most sensitive land use classification in a single ownership to ensure proper management. Fragmentation of 600 acres of forested Resource Management into seven separate lots is antithetical to the very purposes for which the Adirondack Park Land Use and Development Plan was created, as reflected in the statutory command to encourage proper management of these resources.
In Rural Use areas, where thirty new single-family dwellings will be built on separate lots, Section 805 of the APA Act specifies that residential uses “should occur on large lots or in relatively small clusters”. Instead, lots, dwellings, accessory structures and wastewater treatment systems are jammed along the shoreline of tiny, 100-acre Woodward Lake, and a new 2,000-foot road is cut through a previously undeveloped forested area. The subdivision proposal is a completely conventional design that seeks to maximize the developer’s goals rather than minimize environmental impacts. A well-designed, cluster subdivision as required by the APA Act could have eliminated the need for a new road, avoided crowding development on the shoreline, and resulted in efficient management of wastewater and stormwater systems.
Claims are often made, thanks to the density restrictions in the wild areas of the Park, that a large percentage of a given project is left undeveloped. Of course, if the open space character of the Park were always sufficiently protected by the overall intensity guidelines alone there would be no need for the Agency to conduct detailed analyses of impacts on Park resources. Claims regarding the amount of undeveloped land in a project should be taken with a grain of salt. Density is only the starting point. Spatial design is the next step. Highly misleading are the applicant’s claims to the APA that this project will result in only “28 acres of disturbance, or less than 3% of the entire property, leaving more than 97% or 1,142+ acres undisturbed.” Thanks to groundbreaking research conducted in the Adirondack Park, we know that the ecological footprint of a dwelling in our forested landscape is far greater than its development footprint. Sworn testimony has been submitted to the APA during past adjudicatory hearings that an acre of developed land may have an ecological impact of up to seventeen acres surrounding the development footprint. Therefore, from a scientific standpoint it is absolutely not the case that 97% of this project site will be undisturbed. This is precisely why the APA Act commands that development in Rural Use and Resource Management areas be clustered.
Density restrictions are only one of the agency’s tools. That together with ecological site analysis and spatial design must be used together to minimize resource impacts of large subdivisions. Unfortunately, in this case, a conventional subdivision has been proposed, designed not to minimize impacts but to maximize shoreline development and the developer’s marketing objectives.
Except for small areas of the lake over two meters deep, the entirety of tiny, shallow, one- hundred-acre Woodward Lake is an aquatic bed wetland. This fragile area is laced with streams and wetlands and associated aquatic and terrestrial resources. Yet rather than require a unified plan for protecting these resources, over thirty individual lot owners will have the ability to make land use decisions and related actions that can impact these resources. Steep slopes drain to the lake, and a new roadway will add further contaminants not only through construction activities, but also through maintenance, road salting, and oil and gas. The simplest and yet most effective solution to avoid these impacts is to retain much of the nearly 1200 acres in a single management ownership and cluster residences on the most appropriate areas.
Conclusion: The APA has been presented with a 1,200-acre blank canvas on which to guide development at this location. During a public hearing there remains the potential to develop an imaginative use of land that would appeal to environmentally aware second-home owners and conform to the Act and to the Application. Thus far, the developer has chosen, and APA has deemed complete a disappointingly conventional subdivision application that will have undue adverse impacts upon the open space, wetland and aquatic resources the Adirondack Park was created to protect. This fact is all the more disappointing because this is the first application to be reviewed under a new, pre-application process which APA promised would steer large subdivisions in the direction of conservation design based upon solid ecological site analysis. This test case for the APA has, thus far, proven a failure in achieving APA’s conservation design objectives, in minimizing early conceptual design, pre-application costs and in avoiding conflicts following a completed application. At this stage, these failures can be addressed and mitigated only through an adjudicatory public hearing. Finally, this application abundantly meets the agency’s Part 580 criteria for determining whether to conduct a public hearing, including:
The size and complexity of the project and the uniqueness of the affected resources; The degree of public interest in the project, evidenced by dozens of public comments
over a two-year period; The presence of significant issues relating to approval criteria; The possibility that the project can only be approved through major modifications; The possibility that information would come forward to assist the APA in its review.
Thank you for considering our comments and recommendation. Sincerely,
David Gibson, Managing Partner, Adirondack Wild
Rick Hoffman, Member, Board of Directors, Adirondack Wild
Cc: Robert Lore, Regulatory Programs Director Terry Martino, Executive Director Agency Members and Designees Amanda Lefton, Executive Chamber Basil Seggos, DEC Commissioner Adirondack Wild: Friends of the Forest Preserve P.O. Box 9247 Niskayuna, NY 12309 www. Adirondackwild.org 518.469.4081 (cell)
From: Linda Shuster To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 15, 2021 2:46:48 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing in regard to APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake. In particular, I am writing to express my concern regarding the failure of the developer of this project to provide APA with a conservation subdivision design in their application. The call for a conservation design on the part of APA is not an unreasonable request. In the long term, it is not only the Park and its wildlife that will benefit from a true conservation design. The future residents of the development also will benefit by having access to a clean, pristine lake, as well as the opportunity to recreate in a contiguous open space close to home. If (as a result of the current design) septic systems leak into the lake and produce problems like algae blooms, it will likely be up to the residents to deal with the issue of trying to clean up the lake.
People move to or buy second homes in the Adirondack Park in order to experience the wildlife and forest, and if the wildlife is reduced due to the fragmented forest that will result from the current design, it will greatly alter this experience. Moreover, it would be an excellent selling point for the developer if they can advertise a subdivision that meets standards for a conservation design. Polls show that, regardless of political affiliation, the majority of Americans favor preserving forests and open space.
I am respectfully requesting that you: 1. Deny the permit as submitted; and 2. Conduct a full adjudicatory public hearing regarding this development. Thank you for your work and for considering my requests.
Sincerely,
1535 Breton Rd SE Grand Rapids, MI
From: William Wonderlin To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Comments for APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 15, 2021 12:19:38 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch, I am writing to express my concern regarding the application that was submitted for the Woodward Lake subdivision (Project 2018-0123). This application does not adequately protect the environment surrounding Woodward Lake. I realize that it can be difficult to strike a balance between the interests of property owners wanting to develop their land and the broader goals of protecting the Adirondacks from poorly planned development that irreversibly damages its ecosystem. One of the more promising approaches in recent years has been the acceptance by many stake holders of the benefits of a Conservation Design in helping achieve this balance, and the APA deserves credit and our support in adopting this approach. Unfortunately, the applicants for the Woodward Lake subdivision have not met their obligation to submit an adequately documented and justified proposal for this development. Therefore, I respectfully request that the APA deny the request by the applicants for a permit for this project. Given the inadequacy of the proposal, I also request that the APA hold a full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2019-0123 before moving forward in the approval process. A hearing would provide an essential opportunity for other stakeholders in the community to express their concerns, raise questions that need to be answered, and recommend improvements to the application.
It is very unfortunate that the applicants have not made a good faith effort to submit a legitimate Conservation Design to the APA. Their proposal could be significantly improved by incorporation of several fundamental principles of Conservation Design. The proposed subdivision could be made less intrusive by reducing the construction of new roads, especially east of Lake Woodward. Of even greater importance is the need for increased clustering of homes on smaller footprints, which goes hand-in-hand with a reduction in the need for the construction of new roads. A decrease in the construction of new roads and an increase in the clustering of homes west of the lake could significantly decrease the disruption and subdivision of the forest, with obvious benefits to the wildlife and to the health of the forest.
Finally, I am concerned that the refusal of the applicants to work with the APA to achieve a true Conservation Design that balances all of the stakeholders' interests could become a too-common strategy for applicants in the future, leading to additional, inappropriate new development within the Adirondack Park. Please hold the applicants to an appropriate standard that respects the interests of all stakeholders and the APA.
Thank you,
1535 Breton Rd. SE East Grand Rapids, MI, 49506
www.protectadks.org [email protected] Like Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter
Board of Directors
Charles Clusen Chair
Barbara Rottier Secretary
David Quinn Treasurer
Nancy Bernstein Richard Booth John Caffry Andy Coney Dean Cook James Dawson Lorraine Duvall Robert Glennon Roger Gray Evelyn Greene Sidney Harring Peter Hornbeck Dale Jeffers Mark Lawton Peter O’Shea Philip Terrie Chris Walsh
Peter Bauer Executive Director
Ariel Lynch NYSAPA PO Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977
RE: Public Comment on APA Project 2018-123 by New York Land and Lakes Develop- ment on Woodward Lake
Dear Ariel Lynch,
-
-
-
the applicable criteria in the APA Act and must be the subject of an adjudicatory hear- -
RECEIVED
Slopes: -
Wetlands:
Developer Used Same Approach to Adirondack Park Development as it Used for other New York State Subdivisions:
4
5
Resource Management
Rural Use
More than half of this tract will be negatively impacted by develpment.
Forest Preserve
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
From: Robert Glennon To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123 - Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 22, 2021 4:12:07 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I respectfully resubmit these comments, which I unsuccessfully tried to file using the portal on the Agency's website for same, on Friday, January 15. The Agency has agreed to their resubmission. Please see my email exchanges with Ms. Stephanie Petith.
I was employed by the Agency a quarter century ago, from the mid-70s to the mid-90s as, first, Associate Counsel, next, Counsel, and finally as both Executive Director and Counsel (Budget would not allow me to fill the Counsel position). At no time was any project involving Woodward Lake under my consideration, and I represent only myself here.
I came to the Agency when it was in the throes of the remnants of the Big Bang, the 1973 passage of the Private Land Use and Development Plan, and stayed on through the 1990 Berle Commission report. During those times we endured the dumping of a truckload of manure on the front stoop, constant vilification in the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, strange envelopes containing mysterious white powder in the mail, the burning of an Agency Member's barns, three young fathers in an Agency vehicle shot at, and much more.
I was with other staff on Vroman Ridge in the Town of Fine when we faced an angry group, many brandishing long guns. I caught a would-be arsonist with containers of gasoline in the Log Building (1950 Blowdown logs) at 2 am one morning.
What kept us going was our belief that the Agency's mission was well-worth it all, and that while to be sure there would be setbacks (the horrid Flacke years, the 90 m skijump), for the most part the Agency would faithfully discharge that mission.
In 2009 I retired after 12 years as the Assistant Attorney General in Charge of the Plattsburgh Regional Office and began to attend your monthly meetings, only to find you embroiled in review of the ACR megaproject, rural sprawl on steroids, in Tupper Lake. I was there when, those of you saying aye smiling broadly, voted 10-1 to approve it.
You might as well have put a sign on the front lawn announcing that the APA was no longer a factor in insuring "optimum overall conservation, protection, preservation, development and use of the unique scenic, aesthetic, wildlife, recreational, open space, historic, ecological and natural resources of the Adirondack park."
As a result, numerous Adirondack groups began a long series of meetings to fashion a legislative override of the Agency's failures with regard to large subdivisions. One of the critical participants was the Common Ground Alliance, whose major principals were former Agency Chair Ross Whaley and current Agency Member Zoe Smith.
The result was the Conservation Design Bill, just reintroduced earlier this month as S. 1145 by Senator Kaminski and soon to be reintroduced by Assemblyman Engelbright, the chairs of the
Environmental Conservation Committees in their respective houses.
I was at your cordial 2019 meeting at the Agency with Chairman Engelbright, Assemblyman Jones and others, including Ms. Smith, my hopes for passage high.
Yet I've been told you subsequently opposed the bill, even sent staff to Albany to say so. I can't for the life of me fathom why you would engage in such an anti-Adirondack Park effort.
I was at your November 2019 monthly meeting when Associate Counsel Sarah Reynolds made an hour-long presentation on your historic handling of large subdivisions, its purpose most unclear. But she used the exact same lot number thresholds in the bill to define them. The Conservation Design Bill was not mentioned until Mr. Ernst jokingly asked about what he referred to as the "elephant in the room," whereupon she pooh-poohed it as having arisen in the "suburban context."
But later to your credit, maybe as a ploy to stave off the bill, you came up with your Large- scale Subdivision Application, embodying conservation design principles. I'm told the Woodward Lake project is the first time you used it.
Now, "inexplicably," as David Gibson of Adirondack Wild said in his comments, you have determined complete not a conservation design alternative, but a jejune, pedestrian, typical Large-scale Whack-up of an intact forest ecosystem surrounding a pristine lake.
The comments of Mr. Gibson and those of Peter Bauer of Protect the Adirondacks!, the only ones I've had a chance to read, admirably set forth the statutory and regulatory provisions governing the decision you must make; I will not repeat them here.
In the name of the future of the private lands of this magnificent natural area, cherished by the People of the State since 1892, for the preservation of their multifold resources, and for those yet to come, please discharge your manifest legal duty and direct the Woodward Lake project to adjudicatory hearing.
Sincerely,
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
I wish to add my voice to those objecting to the current plan for APA Project # 2018-0123. This current alternative represents a form of sprawl that is not in keeping with best practice conservation design and sets president for other inappropriate development. There should be a public hearing that hopefully leads to the more appropriate Alternative plan 2.
_______________________________ Jim Reinhard 237 Montgomery Ave 2E, Haverford Pa 19041 12 Glengary Way, Elizabethtown NY 12932 412-352-5244
Ms. Lynch,
This is such an upsetting project - slow destruction of the Adirondacks.
The developers should be required to eliminate new road construction east of the lake, place home lots west of the lake on smaller footprints and maintain the Resource Management in unsubdivided blocks of forest.
Given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest blocks constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major design modifications, by its own regulatory definition the APA MUST send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing.
Ellen Utley Tupper Lake
From: Richard Daly To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: APA proj 2018-0123 Date: Thursday, December 24, 2020 7:47:16 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
My dear Ariel Lynch: I support the Englebright-Kaminsky legislative bill re: APA project #2018-0123, to prevent severe damage to environs of Woodward Lake, Fulton County. I realize that this is a foot-in-the-door to future misguided decisions in matters inside TheBlueLine. Let's hope that a New Year and a new Legislature will bring us hope for the future! Sincerely, Richard L. Daly - concerned citizen-voter in Plattsburgh, Clinton County.
From: Daniel Pearlstein To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 Date: Thursday, December 24, 2020 3:26:26 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I am a lifelong New Yorker, having lived in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Ithaca. My wife and I just bought a home in the Adirondack Park, right next to the property where she grew up. We believe strongly in the APA's long-range land use planning mission and stewardship obligations to the Park, the people who live there, and all New Yorkers.
Accordingly, I write to second Dave Gibson of Adirondack Wild's concerns about the above- captioned application. I believe that people's interest in living within the park will grow rapidly in coming years with climate change, future pandemics, and other reasons to seek refuge on high ground.
I, for one, welcome the prospect of new neighbors just as I wish to be welcomed, myself and my family. But I also know as a regional planner and attorney that good planning makes good neighbors. Conversely, bad planning or the absence of planning can wreck a neighborhood, however remote, seemingly pristine, or picturesque.
What the agency does with this one application will set a precedent for what are likely to be many more development applications soon to come. Just as I would not like to see new sprawl development come to the areas of the park within Clinton County, near my home, I do not wish to see it in Fulton County.
As Dave Gibson has written:
"Given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest blocks constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major design modifications, by its own regulatory definition APA ought to send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing.
"Absent a public hearing, permit applications cannot be denied by APA. At this point in the process, the one true conservation design alternative (Alternative 2) which eliminates the new road, concentrates homes on good soils west of Woodward lake, and maintains unsubdivided blocks of forest above the lake on all sides can only be pursued through a hearing. The result of any hearing ought to deny the applicant’s preferred design without prejudice and direct him towards project Alternative 2 – or something similar."
Sincerely,
From: [email protected] To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 - completed application for Woodward Lake Subdivision Date: Saturday, December 26, 2020 9:46:10 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch, “The Adirondack Protection Agency (APA) is responsible for maintaining the protection of the forest preserve…..” yet, in regard to APA Project# 2018-0123 (Woodward Lake subdivision), although the APA has the authority to require the developer, New York Land and Lakes Development LLC, to submit a conservation- minded subdivision plan, to date, the APA has not exercised this authority. The Woodward Lake project does not attempt a Conservation Subdivision which is NY state’s preference of the 2018 APA Large-scale Subdivision application procedure. These application guidelines are not currently being upheld and the APA should require the developer’s application to be submitted as a Conservation Subdivision, therefore…….given that Woodward Lake and its adjoining blocks of wetlands and forest constitute a unique resource likely to be negatively affected by the development as proposed, and given that there is strong public interest in the significant issues of approval pertaining to conservation subdivision design, and given the possibility the project should only be approved with major conservation design modifications, by its own regulatory definition the APA should send the project to an adjudicatory public hearing. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Meghan Hanney 49 Colvin Rd Bakers Mills, NY, 12811 [email protected] m: (610) 314-1932
From: James E Close To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: to APA Project # 2018-0123 (Woodward Lake) Date: Sunday, January 03, 2021 9:30:03 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Adirondack Wild has just notified me, as well as its other members and supporters, of the pending review and approval of this subdivision, whose scale and breadth is antithetical to your mission of protecting the ecological integrity and character of the Adirondacks. I am appalled that such a project even merits consideration by the APA, but the reality is that it is before you, and cannot be ignored even if it is patently obvious that the end result is further denigration and fragmentation of this already-threatened and fragile region. Adirondack Wild notes the following deficiencies and concerns with the application, and I concur completely: o A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake; o APA denial of the permit as requested; o As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that: eliminates new road construction east of the lake; clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints, and; maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation. Ideally, the permit should be denied and the project halted as the “best alternative” and the one most consistent with your agency’s mission. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my comments. ******************************************************************************** “Only intuition can protect you from the most dangerous individual of all, the articulate incompetent.” -Publisher Robert L. Bernstein, quoted in Forbes ******************************************************************************** Sent to you by: James E. Close 3 Brightman Rd Mechanicville, NY 12118-2807 518-664-2980
From: Bill To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Monday, January 04, 2021 1:32:27 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
I oppose the Woodward Lake subdivision as proposed. I would like to see:
A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake.
APA denial of the permit as requested.
As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that:
eliminates new road construction east of the lake; clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints, and; maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation.
William Roberson 410 E. 17th St. Brooklyn, NY 11226
From: Lawrence To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA); [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 1:44:20 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Ms. Lynch: I am very concerned about the destructive proposed development at Woodward lake. This type of development should not be allowed in the Adirondack Park. I am in full agreement with Adirondack Wild’s position on this proposed violation of the environmental integrity of the Adirondack Park, as follows: o A full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake should take place; o APA denial of the permit as requested; o As a feasible alternative, a true Conservation Design of this subdivision that:
· eliminates new road construction east of the lake; · clusters home lots west of the lake on good soils and on smaller, overlapping footprints,
and; · maintains large blocks of un-subdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry, and open
space recreation. Very Concerned, Lawrence D’Arco 1202 Greenwich Dr Albany, NY 12203 Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Ariel Lynch NYS APA Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 [email protected]
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing to you to oppose the proposed Woodward Lake subdivision layout. Project 2018-0123.
The developer proposal would have a destructive environmental impact on the lake, the wildlife, and it’s habitats. It would also make the land/forest above the lake less useful to wildlife and recreation by subdividing the lots. Also, new roads would be needed and would cut through 1200 acres of woods zoned as the most protected land classification in the Adirondack Park.
Many years ago I remember going to Woodward Lake with my son and his Boy Scout troop on a winter outing and hike. It would be terrible to have this beautiful area subdivided and environmentally impacted in such a negative way.
Please do not give up on true conservation design for Woodward Lake. Please allow a full adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123 Woodward Lake. Deny the permit as requested.
I agree with the alternative true Conservation Design that eliminates new road construction east of the lake. It would cluster homes on good soil, on smaller lots on the west side of the lake and would have overlapping footprints. It would maintain large sections of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry and open spaces for all.
Wildlife and wilderness cannot survive the continuing destruction of it's land, habitat and water and the added pollution from septic systems, chemicals, etc. This would be a damaging Adirondack subdivision. We must slow the development of forest fragmentation and sprawl in the park.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
From: Greg Wait To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA); [email protected] Subject: APA Project # 2018-0123 Date: Wednesday, January 06, 2021 11:30:53 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
There is a reason we love the Adirondack Park. The reason is exactly the opposite of having houses surrounding lakes. To develop as is proposed is an archaic paradigm in development. It is no longer appropriate for the people or for the integrity of the landscape. If you continue to allow damaging development, especially when a viable alternative exists that will keep the beauty of the Park intact, you will be responsible for its degradation. The pristine waters are not as safe as some think. There is not as much wild land as some think. So many people fought so hard to secure what we have right now. Please deny this permit. Please consider a public hearing on this proposal. Please adapt a conservation design model. I have traveled all over this country and to mountains in Europe. The Adirondack Park is a special place. It is a jewel in the state and country. It is impossible to keep it a jewel, a place in which people come for the peace and wildness of the mountains and lakes, if you do not change the way the land is developed. Thank you for reading this letter. Gregory Wait 475 county route 10 Corinth Gateway to the Adirondacks!!!!!!! ps I am not opposed to development at all. I am opposed to thoughtless damaging development. Thank you again.
From: fcoppa To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: Subdivision Proposal for Woodward Lake/Northville; Project 2018-0123 Date: Friday, January 08, 2021 11:33:31 AM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Ariel Lynch Project Review Officer NYS Adirondack Park Agency
Dear Ms. Lynch,
There appear to be very serious issues regarding the proposed development, and its potentially-harmful effect on the surrounding lake and forest area. Please initiate a public hearing to review this project and very- seriously consider re-design to avoid damaging such a fragile area.
Sincerely,
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing to oppose the proposed Woodward Lake subdivision layout. Project 2018- 0123
I’m very concerned there would be destructive environmental impact around the lake with the developer proposal. It would affect the forest and lands above the lake and wildlife living and passing through there. The subdivision would make the land less useful for recreation as well. The 1200 acres of woods zoned in the Adirondack Park will have new roads cut through them.
As a mother of a Boy Scout that loved winter camping outings there, please don’t ruin this beautiful piece of heaven our family has such good memories of. It would be an environmental slap in the face for so many to have this subdivision proceed as originally planned.
I agree with the alternative true Conservation Design that eliminates new road construction east of the lake. It would cluster homes on good soil, on smaller lots on the west side of the lake and would have overlapping footprints. It would maintain large sections of unsubdivided forest for wildlife movement, forestry and open spaces for all.
Please give the public a chance to voice their views by allowing a full adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2018-0123 Woodward Lake. Give the true conservation design for Woodward Lake a chance. Deny the permit as requested.
Our wilderness and wildlife cannot survive the continuing destruction of its land, habitat and water. The added pollution from septic systems and other chemicals it would introduce would be terrible. This would be a damaging Adirondack subdivision. We must slow the development of forest fragmentation and sprawl in the park.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
January 6, 2021
Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency P.O. Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 (Via Electronic Submission)
RE: New York Land & Lakes Development LLC, Project # 2018-0123
Dear Ms. Lynch,
On behalf of the Adirondack Council, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to offer the following comments on the subdivision project proposal for the New York Land & Lakes Development LLC, Project # 2018- 0123. The Council believes that the Adirondack Park Agency’s (APA) Large- scale Subdivision Application process was designed to result in a more transparent process, garner meaningful public input, and encourage subdivisions that reflect the conservation design elements necessary to protect the environment while being fair for the applicant. In reviewing the proposed site development plans, the Council does not believe that the overall project design has been sufficiently altered from its 2018 version to meet the intent of the large-scale subdivision application. Without substantial changes made to the proposed development plans to meet the goals of conservation design, the Adirondack Council does not support the proposed project.
Following public comments and input from the Agency, the applicant should have made substantial changes and supported a conservation design plan, but they have not. Woodward Lake will still be surrounded by building lots around the lake with a second row of houses behind them and a new 2,000- foot road. The proposed subdivision plans are not in accordance with the objectives of “conservation design” for large-scale subdivisions. Clustering building lots around the most sensitive natural resource on the property and calling it “Modified ‘Conservation’ Subdivision” is not conservation design. Approval of the applicant’s project as currently proposed would subject the shoreline and surrounding landscape to significant habitat fragmentation, resource disturbance, susceptibility to invasives, and more. The Council offers the following critiques:
RECEIVED
Date: January 11, 2021
The proposal as drafted will still fragment and impact rural open space: In September 2018 and February 2020, the Council submitted comments on the Woodward Lake subdivision plans. Many of our concerns echoed in those letters remain the same, including calling for a stronger demonstration of open space protection. The applicant proposes only 14% of the total property be protected as open space and those 170 acres will be protected only through a homeowners’ association agreement, which lasts only as long as the association does. The areas of lots 2, 3, 7, 8, & 11, which total 630 acres +/-, will be left to individual management with no guarantee of lasting open space protection.
In addition, NY Land & Lakes ruled out the use of a conservation easement to protect open space on the property, citing that it would take too long to obtain an easement and that smaller lot sizes would decrease the value of the lots. Neither of these hold muster for failing to protect open space, the forest matrix and wildlife corridors.
The revised plan may also impact and fragment wildlife corridors. According to Figure 3 of the APA Qualitative Biological Survey, the travel routes large mammals utilize on the property appear to overlap portions of the proposed subdivision on the southern and eastern sides of the lake.
Clustering: A distinctive feature of conservation design is the clustering of building envelopes and structures to minimize the ecological footprint of development. Clustering promotes aesthetic values, habitat connectivity and open space. The applicant’s decision to concentrate development on shoreline wildlife habitat, some of the rarest and most sensitive on the parcel, is the opposite of conservation clustering and conservation design. Shoreline development will destroy important wildlife habitat while exponentially adding to the potential for polluted runoff reaching the lake. Furthermore, the construction of a 2,000-foot road to access the lots on the east side of the lake will increase exposure to road salt and invasive species infestations. The applicant should propose and bring to the APA an alternative plan that limits shoreline developments, utilizes existing building envelopes and disturbances, and overall minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects.
Clustering is intended to minimize impacts to open space, wildlife and other natural resources by decreasing a development’s ecological footprint. Clustering is not, as the applicant indicates, only applicable to “urban and suburban areas as a way of reducing development costs and preserve open space.” (Application, page 14) The current proposal fails to recognize that development and existence of homes and roadways will have ecological impacts several hundred meters surrounding the actual footprint of new infrastructure.
Clear need for legislative intervention: The proposed subdivision plan only reinforces the need for some form of state legislation mandating clustering of homes away from sensitive landscape features such as water, wetlands and steep slopes while retaining large open spaces for wildlife. Conservation design legislation will ensure developers prudently adopt conservation-minded development plans, regardless of developers’ financial vision for a property. The agency has the right and obligation to require
2 of
such changes. If it doesn’t feel it has the authority then agency leadership should reverse position and indicate support for and engage constructively in conservation design legislation.
Without clear commitment by the Agency to adhere to conservation design standards, and protection of the ecological integrity and wild character of the unique and endangered Adirondack Park, the opportunity to preserve the Adirondacks and foster sustainable hamlet centric development is lost. We will continue to see these types of projects approved to the detriment of the Adirondack Park and its most sensitive lands. Projects of this scale should not be permitted on Resource Management lands when they will have direct, measurable impacts on lands identified by the APA as having “overriding natural resource and public considerations” and are characterized by “substantial acreage of one or more of the following: shallow soils, severe slopes, elevations of over twenty-five hundred feet, flood plains, proximity to designated or proposed wild or scenic rivers, wetlands, critical wildlife habitats or habitats of rare and endangered plant and animal species.” (APA Act § 805 3g)
In closing, the Adirondack Council believes that the Woodward Lake project is the test case for how well this new application process will function in creating developments that are light on the land, appropriate to the surrounding community, and economically sustainable. We encourage the Agency to continue to work with the applicant to develop another revised plan that strongly incorporates clustering, protects water quality, critical wildlife habitat and connectivity, and aligns with other conservation design principles. It appears that now more than ever conservation design legislation is needed to prevent irresponsible development in the Adirondack Park to protect open space, wildlands and wildlife. The Adirondack Council values vibrant communities and we see additional housing opportunities in the Park as a valuable component to these communities. The land use and development decisions we make today will have lasting impacts on the landscape, ecology and people of the Park for generations to come; wise decisions are needed now.
Thank you for taking the time to review our comments.
Sincerely,
3 of
From: Sid Harring To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 11:17:44 AM Attachments: APA letter, 2021
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
January 11, 2021 Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977
Re: Project No. 2018-1=0123, Woodward Lake
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I write to oppose the granting of an APA permit for the above project and request that a full adjudicatory hearing be held. My objection centers on the scale of this project, the carving up of this small lake front into 34 lots without regard either to the sensitive nature of the Adirondack landscapoe, or to modern principles of conservation design. Indeed, this project looks just like the sliced up lake frontages that characterized development in the Park before the APA Act, which was designed to protect the "forever wild" character of this land. Any person driving through the Park can see dozens and dozens of lakes, now hemmed in by suburb-like developments that completely change the character of the land. This is urban sprawl moving into an Adirondack wildnerness.
While I have no interest in the project, I own a timber tract about two miles south of this development, fortunately on another road, so this eye-sore of a suburb will not interfere with my undeveloped forest. It is mind boggling to think that I could divide my own land - with a perfect Adirondack pond -- into about 14 lots, replicating this development. And evidently so could anybody else. Obviously, if three or four local landowers followed, this would completely change the character of this area from a wilderness to suburban sprawl.
Given the development of the past fifty years, it is easy to see what this level of continued development would do to the ecology and landscape of the Park. Every single lake that becomes a suburb changes the character of the Park, and forever changes the wild ecology of that area. This development is on a gravel road, across from the Shaker Mountain Wild Forest. Indeed, the forest across
Dear Ms. Lynch:
I write to oppose the granting of an APA permit for the above project and request that a full adjudicatory hearing be held. My objection centers on the scale of this project, the carving up of this small lake front into 34 lots without regard either to the sensitive nature of the Adirondack landscapoe, or to modern principles of conservation design. Indeed, this project looks just like the sliced up lake frontages that characterized development in the Park before the APA Act, which was designed to protect the “forever wild” character of this land. Any person driving through the Park can see dozens and dozens of lakes, now hemmed in by suburb-like developments that completely change the character of the land. This is urban sprawl moving into an Adirondack wildnerness.
While I have no interest in the project, I own a timber tract about two miles south of this development, fortunately on another road, so this eye-sore of a suburb will not interfere with my undeveloped forest. It is mind boggling to think that I could divide my own land – with a perfect Adirondack pond -- into about 14 lots, replicating this development. And evidently so could anybody else. Obviously, if three or four local landowers followed, this would completely change the character of this area from a wilderness to suburban sprawl.
Given the development of the past fifty years, it is easy to see what this level of continued development would do to the ecology and landscape of the Park. Every single lake that becomes a suburb changes the character of the Park, and forever changes the wild ecology of that area. This development is on a gravel road, across from the Shaker Mountain Wild Forest. Indeed, the forest across the street could be classified as wilderness and protected forever, if the DEC was not “finished” with adding new wilderness areas to the Park. It is also near the newly re-routed beginning of the world class Northville-Placid Trail, which will now have hikers starting from a suburb, instead of starting in pristine forest.
No one would deny that this landowner should be able to put some appropriate number of bulldings on this land. But there now are principles of conservation design that would cluster these buildings, build fewer roads, especially on the wild, eastern side of the lake, and keep most of the land wild, consistent with the Park and with the immediate area.
I’m also concerned that, since the debacle of the Adirondack Club and Resort scheme, a completely unbuildable and uneconomic devastation of the Park that has gone nowhere at great cost, it appears that the APA will now approve just about any development scheme at all. This is shortsighted given that these projects will remain forever and alter the forever wild character of the Park. I am concerned that the APA lacks any vision of the future of the Park as a wilderness resource, in the context of global development and climate change. This wilderness serves a heavily urbanized region of fifty million people, and needs to be protected.
Sincerely,
Mayfield, NY 12117
the street could be classified as wilderness and protected forever, if the DEC was not "finished" with adding new wilderness areas to the Park. It is also near the newly re-routed beginning of the world class Northville-Placid Trail, which will now have hikers starting from a suburb, instead of starting in pristine forest.
No one would deny that this landowner should be able to put some appropriate number of bulldings on this land. But there now are principles of conservation design that would cluster these buildings, build fewer roads, especially on the wild, eastern side of the lake, and keep most of the land wild, consistent with the Park and with the immediate area.
I'm also concerned that, since the debacle of the Adirondack Club and Resort scheme, a completely unbuildable and uneconomic devastation of the Park that has gone nowhere at great cost, it appears that the APA will now approve just about any development scheme at all. This is shortsighted given that these projects will remain forever and alter the forever wild character of the Park. I am concerned that the APA lacks any vision of the future of the Park as a wilderness resource, in the context of global development and climate change. This wilderness serves a heavily urbanized region of fifty million people, and needs to be protected.
Sincerely,
Sid Harring 210 Warner Hill Road Mayfield, NY 12117
January 13, 2021 Ariel Lynch Adirondack Park Agency P.O. Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977 RE: APA Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake
Dear Ms. Lynch: Adirondack Wild strongly believes that this subdivision of 1,169 acres of land classified as Resource Management and Rural Use into 34 lots surrounding Woodward Lake, for the reasons set forth herein and in our previous comments should not be approved, and therefore should be subject to an adjudicatory hearing pursuant to Adirondack Park Agency Act, Sec. 809. Our reasons why the application should be subject to an adjudicatory hearing are two-fold:
1. Application Fails to Conform with APA’s Large-Scale Subdivision Application: The application for preferred alternative 6 substantively fails to conform with the required APA’s Large-scale Subdivision Application approved by the agency in 2018. The applicant chose to apply under this application and is bound by its objectives. One of those objectives (page 1 of the application) is to develop projects “in accordance with the principles of conservation design.” The completed application violates these principles in substantive ways. First, it spreads development impacts rather than concentrates them. The ecological impact zones of the development clusters fail to overlap with each other, as we have described in our past letters. Second, rather than avoid vulnerable habitats and ecosystems, multiple residences and driveways fall within impact zones. Third, rather than conserve large blocks of forest unsubdivided for their utility as habitat, forest management or open space recreation, the Resource Management and Rural use forests, both deemed by the Nature Conservancy as important local matrix forests, are subdivided into many separate ownerships. The application also fails to conform with the APA’s Large-scale Subdivision Application’s requirement (page 9) that “project design should minimize the creation of new areas of disturbance on the project site to the greatest extent practicable and should concentrate development to the greatest extent practicable.” The completed, preferred application (alternative 6) does not minimize new areas of disturbance and does not concentrate development. Alternative 2 is the only alternative presented that is roughly in accordance with the principles of conservation design and that can satisfy other legal requirements under the Act. It eliminates new road construction east of the lake, clusters home lots west of the lake on smaller, overlapping footprints, and maintains large blocks of unsubdivided forest in Resource Management and Rural
RECEIVED
Date: January 14, 2021
Use for wildlife movement, forestry, and open space recreation. Alternative 2 ought to be pursued to a completed application. Inexplicably, it is the far more damaging Alternative 6 that has been deemed complete by APA. To change this unfortunate fact at this late stage and to advance an alternative such as Alternative 2 that meets APA’s application objectives can only be accomplished through adjudication.
2. Application is Inconsistent with and Violates the APA Act: The application, as submitted, is inconsistent with the “character description, purposes policies and objectives” of the Rural Use and Resource Management land use areas involved and would have an undue adverse impact upon the natural, wildlife and open space resources of the Adirondack Park, pursuant to Sec.809 (10) of the APA Act. These statutory failings are directly related to the fragmentation of this huge holding into 34 separate ownerships, instead of the clustered design required by the APA Act and by the Large-scale Subdivision Application.
The Adirondack Park Land Use and Development Plan set forth in Section 805 of the APA Act provides that the “purposes, policies and objectives” of Resource Management areas is to protect the “delicate physical and biological resources, encourage proper and economic management of forest... resources”. The project would subdivide 600 acres of steep forested land into seven lots, rather than retain this most sensitive land use classification in a single ownership to ensure proper management. Fragmentation of 600 acres of forested Resource Management into seven separate lots is antithetical to the very purposes for which the Adirondack Park Land Use and Development Plan was created, as reflected in the statutory command to encourage proper management of these resources.
In Rural Use areas, where thirty new single-family dwellings will be built on separate lots, Section 805 of the APA Act specifies that residential uses “should occur on large lots or in relatively small clusters”. Instead, lots, dwellings, accessory structures and wastewater treatment systems are jammed along the shoreline of tiny, 100-acre Woodward Lake, and a new 2,000-foot road is cut through a previously undeveloped forested area. The subdivision proposal is a completely conventional design that seeks to maximize the developer’s goals rather than minimize environmental impacts. A well-designed, cluster subdivision as required by the APA Act could have eliminated the need for a new road, avoided crowding development on the shoreline, and resulted in efficient management of wastewater and stormwater systems.
Claims are often made, thanks to the density restrictions in the wild areas of the Park, that a large percentage of a given project is left undeveloped. Of course, if the open space character of the Park were always sufficiently protected by the overall intensity guidelines alone there would be no need for the Agency to conduct detailed analyses of impacts on Park resources. Claims regarding the amount of undeveloped land in a project should be taken with a grain of salt. Density is only the starting point. Spatial design is the next step. Highly misleading are the applicant’s claims to the APA that this project will result in only “28 acres of disturbance, or less than 3% of the entire property, leaving more than 97% or 1,142+ acres undisturbed.” Thanks to groundbreaking research conducted in the Adirondack Park, we know that the ecological footprint of a dwelling in our forested landscape is far greater than its development footprint. Sworn testimony has been submitted to the APA during past adjudicatory hearings that an acre of developed land may have an ecological impact of up to seventeen acres surrounding the development footprint. Therefore, from a scientific standpoint it is absolutely not the case that 97% of this project site will be undisturbed. This is precisely why the APA Act commands that development in Rural Use and Resource Management areas be clustered.
Density restrictions are only one of the agency’s tools. That together with ecological site analysis and spatial design must be used together to minimize resource impacts of large subdivisions. Unfortunately, in this case, a conventional subdivision has been proposed, designed not to minimize impacts but to maximize shoreline development and the developer’s marketing objectives.
Except for small areas of the lake over two meters deep, the entirety of tiny, shallow, one- hundred-acre Woodward Lake is an aquatic bed wetland. This fragile area is laced with streams and wetlands and associated aquatic and terrestrial resources. Yet rather than require a unified plan for protecting these resources, over thirty individual lot owners will have the ability to make land use decisions and related actions that can impact these resources. Steep slopes drain to the lake, and a new roadway will add further contaminants not only through construction activities, but also through maintenance, road salting, and oil and gas. The simplest and yet most effective solution to avoid these impacts is to retain much of the nearly 1200 acres in a single management ownership and cluster residences on the most appropriate areas.
Conclusion: The APA has been presented with a 1,200-acre blank canvas on which to guide development at this location. During a public hearing there remains the potential to develop an imaginative use of land that would appeal to environmentally aware second-home owners and conform to the Act and to the Application. Thus far, the developer has chosen, and APA has deemed complete a disappointingly conventional subdivision application that will have undue adverse impacts upon the open space, wetland and aquatic resources the Adirondack Park was created to protect. This fact is all the more disappointing because this is the first application to be reviewed under a new, pre-application process which APA promised would steer large subdivisions in the direction of conservation design based upon solid ecological site analysis. This test case for the APA has, thus far, proven a failure in achieving APA’s conservation design objectives, in minimizing early conceptual design, pre-application costs and in avoiding conflicts following a completed application. At this stage, these failures can be addressed and mitigated only through an adjudicatory public hearing. Finally, this application abundantly meets the agency’s Part 580 criteria for determining whether to conduct a public hearing, including:
The size and complexity of the project and the uniqueness of the affected resources; The degree of public interest in the project, evidenced by dozens of public comments
over a two-year period; The presence of significant issues relating to approval criteria; The possibility that the project can only be approved through major modifications; The possibility that information would come forward to assist the APA in its review.
Thank you for considering our comments and recommendation. Sincerely,
David Gibson, Managing Partner, Adirondack Wild
Rick Hoffman, Member, Board of Directors, Adirondack Wild
Cc: Robert Lore, Regulatory Programs Director Terry Martino, Executive Director Agency Members and Designees Amanda Lefton, Executive Chamber Basil Seggos, DEC Commissioner Adirondack Wild: Friends of the Forest Preserve P.O. Box 9247 Niskayuna, NY 12309 www. Adirondackwild.org 518.469.4081 (cell)
From: Linda Shuster To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 15, 2021 2:46:48 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I am writing in regard to APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake. In particular, I am writing to express my concern regarding the failure of the developer of this project to provide APA with a conservation subdivision design in their application. The call for a conservation design on the part of APA is not an unreasonable request. In the long term, it is not only the Park and its wildlife that will benefit from a true conservation design. The future residents of the development also will benefit by having access to a clean, pristine lake, as well as the opportunity to recreate in a contiguous open space close to home. If (as a result of the current design) septic systems leak into the lake and produce problems like algae blooms, it will likely be up to the residents to deal with the issue of trying to clean up the lake.
People move to or buy second homes in the Adirondack Park in order to experience the wildlife and forest, and if the wildlife is reduced due to the fragmented forest that will result from the current design, it will greatly alter this experience. Moreover, it would be an excellent selling point for the developer if they can advertise a subdivision that meets standards for a conservation design. Polls show that, regardless of political affiliation, the majority of Americans favor preserving forests and open space.
I am respectfully requesting that you: 1. Deny the permit as submitted; and 2. Conduct a full adjudicatory public hearing regarding this development. Thank you for your work and for considering my requests.
Sincerely,
1535 Breton Rd SE Grand Rapids, MI
From: William Wonderlin To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Cc: Lore, Robert (APA) Subject: Comments for APA Project # 2018-0123, Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 15, 2021 12:19:38 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch, I am writing to express my concern regarding the application that was submitted for the Woodward Lake subdivision (Project 2018-0123). This application does not adequately protect the environment surrounding Woodward Lake. I realize that it can be difficult to strike a balance between the interests of property owners wanting to develop their land and the broader goals of protecting the Adirondacks from poorly planned development that irreversibly damages its ecosystem. One of the more promising approaches in recent years has been the acceptance by many stake holders of the benefits of a Conservation Design in helping achieve this balance, and the APA deserves credit and our support in adopting this approach. Unfortunately, the applicants for the Woodward Lake subdivision have not met their obligation to submit an adequately documented and justified proposal for this development. Therefore, I respectfully request that the APA deny the request by the applicants for a permit for this project. Given the inadequacy of the proposal, I also request that the APA hold a full, adjudicatory public hearing on Project 2019-0123 before moving forward in the approval process. A hearing would provide an essential opportunity for other stakeholders in the community to express their concerns, raise questions that need to be answered, and recommend improvements to the application.
It is very unfortunate that the applicants have not made a good faith effort to submit a legitimate Conservation Design to the APA. Their proposal could be significantly improved by incorporation of several fundamental principles of Conservation Design. The proposed subdivision could be made less intrusive by reducing the construction of new roads, especially east of Lake Woodward. Of even greater importance is the need for increased clustering of homes on smaller footprints, which goes hand-in-hand with a reduction in the need for the construction of new roads. A decrease in the construction of new roads and an increase in the clustering of homes west of the lake could significantly decrease the disruption and subdivision of the forest, with obvious benefits to the wildlife and to the health of the forest.
Finally, I am concerned that the refusal of the applicants to work with the APA to achieve a true Conservation Design that balances all of the stakeholders' interests could become a too-common strategy for applicants in the future, leading to additional, inappropriate new development within the Adirondack Park. Please hold the applicants to an appropriate standard that respects the interests of all stakeholders and the APA.
Thank you,
1535 Breton Rd. SE East Grand Rapids, MI, 49506
www.protectadks.org [email protected] Like Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter
Board of Directors
Charles Clusen Chair
Barbara Rottier Secretary
David Quinn Treasurer
Nancy Bernstein Richard Booth John Caffry Andy Coney Dean Cook James Dawson Lorraine Duvall Robert Glennon Roger Gray Evelyn Greene Sidney Harring Peter Hornbeck Dale Jeffers Mark Lawton Peter O’Shea Philip Terrie Chris Walsh
Peter Bauer Executive Director
Ariel Lynch NYSAPA PO Box 99 Ray Brook, NY 12977
RE: Public Comment on APA Project 2018-123 by New York Land and Lakes Develop- ment on Woodward Lake
Dear Ariel Lynch,
-
-
-
the applicable criteria in the APA Act and must be the subject of an adjudicatory hear- -
RECEIVED
Slopes: -
Wetlands:
Developer Used Same Approach to Adirondack Park Development as it Used for other New York State Subdivisions:
4
5
Resource Management
Rural Use
More than half of this tract will be negatively impacted by develpment.
Forest Preserve
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
From: Robert Glennon To: Lynch, Ariel D (APA) Subject: Project 2018-0123 - Woodward Lake Date: Friday, January 22, 2021 4:12:07 PM
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.
Dear Ms. Lynch,
I respectfully resubmit these comments, which I unsuccessfully tried to file using the portal on the Agency's website for same, on Friday, January 15. The Agency has agreed to their resubmission. Please see my email exchanges with Ms. Stephanie Petith.
I was employed by the Agency a quarter century ago, from the mid-70s to the mid-90s as, first, Associate Counsel, next, Counsel, and finally as both Executive Director and Counsel (Budget would not allow me to fill the Counsel position). At no time was any project involving Woodward Lake under my consideration, and I represent only myself here.
I came to the Agency when it was in the throes of the remnants of the Big Bang, the 1973 passage of the Private Land Use and Development Plan, and stayed on through the 1990 Berle Commission report. During those times we endured the dumping of a truckload of manure on the front stoop, constant vilification in the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, strange envelopes containing mysterious white powder in the mail, the burning of an Agency Member's barns, three young fathers in an Agency vehicle shot at, and much more.
I was with other staff on Vroman Ridge in the Town of Fine when we faced an angry group, many brandishing long guns. I caught a would-be arsonist with containers of gasoline in the Log Building (1950 Blowdown logs) at 2 am one morning.
What kept us going was our belief that the Agency's mission was well-worth it all, and that while to be sure there would be setbacks (the horrid Flacke years, the 90 m skijump), for the most part the Agency would faithfully discharge that mission.
In 2009 I retired after 12 years as the Assistant Attorney General in Charge of the Plattsburgh Regional Office and began to attend your monthly meetings, only to find you embroiled in review of the ACR megaproject, rural sprawl on steroids, in Tupper Lake. I was there when, those of you saying aye smiling broadly, voted 10-1 to approve it.
You might as well have put a sign on the front lawn announcing that the APA was no longer a factor in insuring "optimum overall conservation, protection, preservation, development and use of the unique scenic, aesthetic, wildlife, recreational, open space, historic, ecological and natural resources of the Adirondack park."
As a result, numerous Adirondack groups began a long series of meetings to fashion a legislative override of the Agency's failures with regard to large subdivisions. One of the critical participants was the Common Ground Alliance, whose major principals were former Agency Chair Ross Whaley and current Agency Member Zoe Smith.
The result was the Conservation Design Bill, just reintroduced earlier this month as S. 1145 by Senator Kaminski and soon to be reintroduced by Assemblyman Engelbright, the chairs of the
Environmental Conservation Committees in their respective houses.
I was at your cordial 2019 meeting at the Agency with Chairman Engelbright, Assemblyman Jones and others, including Ms. Smith, my hopes for passage high.
Yet I've been told you subsequently opposed the bill, even sent staff to Albany to say so. I can't for the life of me fathom why you would engage in such an anti-Adirondack Park effort.
I was at your November 2019 monthly meeting when Associate Counsel Sarah Reynolds made an hour-long presentation on your historic handling of large subdivisions, its purpose most unclear. But she used the exact same lot number thresholds in the bill to define them. The Conservation Design Bill was not mentioned until Mr. Ernst jokingly asked about what he referred to as the "elephant in the room," whereupon she pooh-poohed it as having arisen in the "suburban context."
But later to your credit, maybe as a ploy to stave off the bill, you came up with your Large- scale Subdivision Application, embodying conservation design principles. I'm told the Woodward Lake project is the first time you used it.
Now, "inexplicably," as David Gibson of Adirondack Wild said in his comments, you have determined complete not a conservation design alternative, but a jejune, pedestrian, typical Large-scale Whack-up of an intact forest ecosystem surrounding a pristine lake.
The comments of Mr. Gibson and those of Peter Bauer of Protect the Adirondacks!, the only ones I've had a chance to read, admirably set forth the statutory and regulatory provisions governing the decision you must make; I will not repeat them here.
In the name of the future of the private lands of this magnificent natural area, cherished by the People of the State since 1892, for the preservation of their multifold resources, and for those yet to come, please discharge your manifest legal duty and direct the Woodward Lake project to adjudicatory hearing.
Sincerely,