Sunday
The Environmental Assessment: A Summary
The Town of Ithaca Planning Department recommended a "negative declaration" of environmental impact for the Briarwood II 50-lot subdivision. The Planning Board, during its June 20, 2006 meeting, agreed, claiming “the project will not result in any large and important impact(s), and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment.” This assessment is inappropriate given the details of the project:
* Site includes upland tributary of Cayuga Lake
* Disturbed areas will be “reclaimed” by “lawn and landscaping, gardens, patios, etc.”
* Anticipated period of demolition and construction: ten years.
* Project will generate 1.92 tons/month of solid waste.
* Project will “discharge stormwater runoff into wetland areas.”
The Environmental Assessment incorrectly evaluated several aspects of the project’s impact.
* The assessment concluded that the proposed action would not “substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species,” even though the project calls for the destruction of 18 acres of woodland habitat.
* Neither the developer nor the Planning Board conducted adequate wildlife and vegetation surveys to ensure that no “threatened or endangered species” would be affected.
* The project proposal denies that this development will “affect aesthetic resources,” even though it is indisputable that many of the area’s residents will lose the pleasure of having woodland adjacent to their homes.
* Contrary to the environmental assessment, the loss of 18 acres of woodland should be described as a “major reduction of an open space important to the community.”
* Finally, the environmental assessment states that there would be no “public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts.”
* Site includes upland tributary of Cayuga Lake
* Disturbed areas will be “reclaimed” by “lawn and landscaping, gardens, patios, etc.”
* Anticipated period of demolition and construction: ten years.
* Project will generate 1.92 tons/month of solid waste.
* Project will “discharge stormwater runoff into wetland areas.”
The Environmental Assessment incorrectly evaluated several aspects of the project’s impact.
* The assessment concluded that the proposed action would not “substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species,” even though the project calls for the destruction of 18 acres of woodland habitat.
* Neither the developer nor the Planning Board conducted adequate wildlife and vegetation surveys to ensure that no “threatened or endangered species” would be affected.
* The project proposal denies that this development will “affect aesthetic resources,” even though it is indisputable that many of the area’s residents will lose the pleasure of having woodland adjacent to their homes.
* Contrary to the environmental assessment, the loss of 18 acres of woodland should be described as a “major reduction of an open space important to the community.”
* Finally, the environmental assessment states that there would be no “public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts.”
