The second public hearing on the Durst Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was held in Pine Plains on February 29. Approximately 200 local residents came to the hearing, although because of the heavy snow many left before it was finished.

After the usual formalities at the start, Matt Rudikoff of Matthew D. Rudikoff Associates, Inc. the planner for the project, made a statement rebutting the critical letter sent by the Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development. This is the letter that called the project “greenwash.” (Click here to see it.)

For all the rebuttal, and for all that Roger Akely, head of the DCDPD, sent a letter apologizing for the tone of the first letter (a letter he has to have approved), the project is still indeed greenwash, as the speakers later that evening proved.

Next on the agenda was Dan Stone of The Chazen Companies, the project engineer, who gave a short description of the project, stressing the same claims made at the first, much longer presentation on February 6. As before, the project is said to be environmentally friendly, ecologically sound, unobtrusive, has almost no traffic impact, will bring business to town, and all the rest.

The public comment period was then opened—and that’s when things got very interesting indeed.

First to speak was George M. Janes, AICP, Executive Director of the Environmental Simulation Center, Ltd. ESC is a not-for-profit organization hired by Pine Plains United to provide an objective analysis of the visual simulations used in the DEIS. The presentation was devastating. Mr. Janes pointed out the fundamental errors in the viewshed analysis and demolished both the assumptions and the methodology used to create the visual simulations. He also showed very cool simulations of his own that gave a much more accurate idea of the scale of the project and the horrible impact it will have on the local viewshed.

Next up was Robert Chamberlain, PE, a traffic engineer with Resource Systems Group, Inc. Based in Vermont, RSG specializes in the planning, analysis, and management of business, infrastructure, and natural resources. Mr. Chamberlain is Director of RSG’s Transportation Planning, Consulting and Engineering practice and was hired by PPU to review the traffic study in the DEIS. He presented a very critical analysis. Among other important points, he said that the safety analysis is cursory and flawed. There are now three intersections with Route 199 in Pine Plains; the Durst project will add six more, with a corresponding increase in crash rates. (Anyone who drove home through the snow at the end of the meeting last week can particularly appreciate this concern.)

The next speaker was Michael Klemens, Ph.D. A renowned conservation biologist, Dr. Klemens presented the results of an ecologic assessment that he prepared in consultation with Scenic Hudson planner Mark Wildonger and Scenic Hudson General Counsel Warren Reiss. His presentation was excellent—and once again, devastating to Durst. Dr. Klemens’s main conclusion: “This entire project needs to be rethought with stewardship of the natural environment as the guiding principle of site planning and design." You can read more about his presentation on the Scenic Hudson website

Following Dr. Klemens was James Sheldon of Gallatin, who runs the website www.LittleTownViews. We’ve been referring you to this excellent site and Mr. Sheldon’s Durst Watch columns for a while—and it only gets better. Mr. Sheldon presented an outstanding discussion of the project’s potential financial impacts. In contrast to the vague but rosy promises in the recent Durst mailings, his analysis gave some solid facts and figures. The picture isn’t pretty. The analysis is posted on his website. We strongly urge you to read it for a realistic picture of what this project is likely to bring.

The rest of the long evening (the hearing wrapped up at around 10:15) was devoted to additional comment from the public. About 25 citizens spoke, virtually all of them in opposition to the project. One interesting moment came when Lou Galm of Mountain Creek Modulars, one of the very few to speak in favor of the project, repeated the false claim that Pine Plains United represents only a small portion of the residents and is made up of many “outsiders.” Scott Chase, a former Town Supervisor and a member of the PPU steering committee, stood up to set the record straight (again). He pointed out that PPU has 700 members, almost all of them residents of Pine Plains. (If you’d like to join PPU—and you should—just go to their website at www.pineplainsunited.org. While you’re there, you can read earlier analyses and critiques of the DEIS. When you sign up, remember that all that analysis costs money. Be generous.) We should point out that Mr. Galm was one of the 12 local business owners who signed a letter supporting the project. The letter appeared as an ad in the Register Herald—courtesy of Durst. Take a look here

Back to Milan Insider Home Page