News
Website Notice:
August 12, 2010
This website has recently been updated; all posts from September 2009 through August 26, 2010 were posted from August 12 – 26, 2010.
Cricket Valley Energy Scoping Comments
June 18, 2010
The NYS DEC ran Public Comment Sessions on the Draft Scoping Document on Saturday, June 5 and Wednesday, June 9th. In addition, Written Scoping Comments were accepted through June 18, 2010.
On the plus side of the ledger are job creation, a net positive contribution to the Dover and Dutchess County tax base; a brownfield clean-up and wetlands restoration. On the negative side the the public spoke primarily to the environmental impacts: smokestack emissions contributing to already poor air quality in a valley and close to a school; potential drawdown or contamination of our groundwater even though the Applicant proposes to drill below the Aquifer; noise (a “light rain,”
as the Applicant suggests, or the drone of constant traffic as suggested in the Scoping Comments?)
The environmental impacts that affect our residents and neighbors were raised during the Scoping Sessions. Many of the environmental impacts to the Great Swamp itself are addressed in the Scoping Comments from Friends of the Great Swamp. The Scoping Comments submitted by Robert Herzog, former Director of New York City’s Energy Office and Wingdale resident, argue persuasively for the No Action Alternative.
– Cricket Valley Energy Scoping Comments from Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover
– Cricket Valley Energy Scoping Comments from Robert Herzog
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: Public Comment to the Dover Planning Board, May 17, 2010: Friends of the Great Swamp
May 17, 2010
-Read May 17, 2010 letter to Dover Planning Board
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: Public Comment to the Dover Planning Board, May 17, 2010: CRGD
May 17, 2010
Dear Dover Planning Board Co-Chairs Wylock and LaRobardier,
We believe that the Rasco Application should be held to the same high standards as every project proposed in or adjacent to the Great Swamp Critical Environmental Area. This should be especially true for Rasco, a business that relies on bringing Petroleum Contaminated Soils to a site above our single source Aquifer. Why should Rasco be granted an exception that would have been unthinkable for its neighbor, Cricket Valley Energy, or the Dover Knolls and Wind Rose developments up river?
The fact that the application arrived at your desks is another matter all together.
Thank you for doing everything in your power to protect the water supply of the residents of Dover and Wingdale, and for giving the “hard look” to all site plan proposals within the Great Swamp CEA, as required under SEQR.
Respectfully,
Stancy DuHamel
Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
“Dover Residents Question Legality of Rasco Application”
April 24, 2010
The Millbrook Independent, one of the local newspapers covering Dover, reported on the Planning Board meeting on April 5, 2010, at which the public commented on the Rasco Application for Site Plan Approval before the Board.
“Many environmental and local watchdog groups made written and oral comments that expressed deep concern about the potential effects of the proposed cold asphalt operation which would store and transport PCS [Petroleum Contaminated Soil] to and from the former Wingdale industrial park. The Housatonic Valley Association stated: “The application, as submitted lacks sufficient information to assure the Town that no contamination of the site and adjacent land and water resources will occur. We strongly urge the Planning Board to require a full SEQRA (State Environmental) review of this application.”
- See article in The Millbrook Independent, April 15, 2010
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover prohibits solid waste management facilities; Harlem Valley Bottom Aquifer is “sole source aquifer for Eastern Dutchess County’s 20,000 residents”
March 29, 2010
In 1999, during an almost decade long battle with a solid waste facility proposed in the Town of Dover, and with the help of a local citizen’s group, “Stop the Dump,” the Dover Town Board passed a zoning amendment prohibiting solid waste facilities. After the considerable efforts and funds spent by prior town administrations fighting to successfully keep at bay the growing number of solid waste projects proposed for various sites around town, it was particularly disappointing that the current administration chose instead to sign a Stipulation Agreement to define the currently proposed solid waste project a “pre-existing” operation and therefore apparently not subject to our zoning laws. And is is proposed for a site above our single source aquifer, “the only significant source of water for Eastern Dutchess County.”
On March 29, 2010, Constance DuHamel sent a letter to Supervisor Courtien and Planning Board Co-Chair Wylock, and attaching an article, “What’s Really Needed to Effectuate Resource Protection in Communities,” by Jayne E. Daley, describing the nine year effort to defeat the solid waste facility, culminating in the passage of a zoning law prohibiting “all classes of ECL Part 360 solid waste management facilities not owned or operated by the Town, and the use of solid waste or material that has previously been part of the solid waste stream … as fill or reclamation material for surface or underground mining:”
Hi Ryan and Dave,
In case you have not read this report recently, it touches on some of Dover’s history with the solid waste business which led to the Town’s decision to deny further applications from this industry, and in so doing further protect its water supply. The study references the Harlem Valley Aquifer.
From the study:
“In response to public demand, the Town commissioned its own engineering study that identified the existence of “a distinct valley bottom aquifer system composed of glacial sediments and a geographically distinct carbonate bedrock formation”, which met all criteria for designation as a principal aquifer (fn45.)This issue was particularly important because the aquifer supplies water to over 20,000 people (46) and represents the only significant source of water for Eastern Dutchess County (47.) This report and other pertinent information that was gathered by the Town’s consultants were forwarded to DEC for consideration and review.
36 Id. at 2-1. 37 Id. 6 NYCRR part 360 governs permits for C&D landfills. 38 Id. 39 See generally, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law. 40 Letter from NYS DEC to Anthony Palumbo, Dated July 21, 1995, in DEIS supra note 16, Appendix Q. 41 Id. Letter from NYS DEC to Anthony Palumbo, Dated July 21, 1995. 42 A primary aquifer is defined as a highly productive aquifer system used heavily for public water supply. Principal aquifers are of similar value, but not yet as heavily used as primary aquifers. DEC, Final Upstate New York Groundwater Management Plan, May 1987 at IV-19. 43 6 NYCRR Part 360.74(a)(5)(i)(a)(1). 44 DEIS, supra note 16 at 3.7. 45 Letter to Alan Fuchs, Regional Solid Waste Engineer, Region III, NYSDEC, dated October 25, 1995. 46 Harlem Valley Watershed Investigation, supra note 14 at Table 1. 47 Town of Dover’s Memorandum in Support of Adjudicability of Principal Aquifer Issue, In the Matter of the Application of Danny Fortune and Company, Inc. for modification of a mined land reclamation permit, State of New York Department of Environmental Conservation, NYSDEC Project # 3-1326-00031/00003.”
Please view the entire article, “What’s Really Needed to Effectuate Resource Protection in Communities” by Jayne E. Daley
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: DuHamel Letter in Response to Stipulation Agreement
March 29, 2010
This letter was written in response to reading the Rasco Stipulation Agreement, produced in the FOIL process. The Dover Town Board determined Rasco was a pre-existing facility, effectively allowing a solid waste project, banned under current Town Code, to begin operation, pending Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board. Surprised the Town Board chose not to to fight this determination, Stancy DuHamel wrote,
“It would appear that the alternative method of determining whether the project is grandfathered is to take it thru the courts. That route would necessarily involve legal fees, and I am curious to know the amount of the legal fees our Town Attys estimated it would cost to argue that the project was not grandfathered, and moreover should not be located above our water supply.”
This letter was read into the record at the April 5th Planning Board meeting.
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
“Petroleum Contaminated Soil Re-use Application in Dover,” TMI, March 17, 2010
March 17, 2010
The Millbook Independent covered the Dover Planning Board Meeting of March 15, 2010 at which the Rasco Application was discussed:
“We have concerns about the contaminated soil leeching through the Swamp River and traveling up to our reserve,” [Sibyll Gilbert, Vice Chair of the Oblong Land Conservancy] said from the podium. “Why should the Harlem Valley be the site for contaminated soil dumping from other areas?”
Gilbert suggested RASCO go through the State Environmental Quality Review, or SEQR, and that the planning board extend the public hearing period. She also submitted at letter to the Planning Board that stated: “The Oblong’s preserve, located downstream on the Swamp River, could be damaged by spills of soluble contamination, and the conservation of amphibian and reptilian species, for which this preserve was created, could be irreparably harmed. These species are particularly vulnerable to low levels of contamination.” She also stated that the environmental impacts are very complicated and “require knowledgeable technical support to provide adequate advice to the Planning Board. The SEQR process must be used to advantage to provide adequate time and the necessary resources to review this application.”
The Housatonic Valley Association stated in their written comments that they are concerned that the proposed operation involving the storage and use of petroleum contaminated soils (PCS) is close to a New York State-designated Critical Environmental Area (CEA) and that they would like to see a full environmental review (SEQR) conducted for the project: “We believe that the DEC permit was issued prematurely and that a more thorough review should have been taken by the agency to account for any remnant contamination that may be present on the site.”
- See article in The Millbrook Independent, March 17, 2010.
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: Public Comments to Dover Planning Board, March 15, 2010: CRGD, OLC & HVA
March 15, 2010
The Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover, the Oblong Land Conservancy and the Housatonic Valley Association submitted written comments at the March 15th meeting of the Dover Planning Board.
Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover
Oblong Land Conservancy
Housatonic Valley Association
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: Stipulation Agreement between Dover Town Board and Planning Board and Rasco Materials LLC
December 1, 2009
- Read Stipulation Agreement Between Dover Town Board and Planning Board and Rasco Materials LLC
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover Knolls DEIS Public Comment Period Ends
September 13, 2009
On June 30th, the public comment period ended for the Dover Knolls DEIS. Many constructive comments were entered into the public record both in writing and during the public hearings, including fiscal and hydrogeological reports from CRGD’s experts. Significantly, the comments of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation credited the work of CRGD’s water expert, noting that our water report was both “well prepared and accurate.”
Included here are Comments from the Dover Planning Board and the Town Planner, Graham Trelstad, AKRF. Trelstad continues to work with the Town Board and the developer as both teams consider alternatives that incorporate the substantial public comments from State, County and Federal Agencies, CT DEP, regional and national environmental groups, residents and neighbors.
Please see comments listed below for more detail.
Flesh out Dover Plan but keep it moving/Proposal still has unresoved issues
June 29, 2009
The Poughkeepsie Journal invited the Coalition to author a guest column to share its concerns about the Dover Knolls DEIS for the redevelopment of the Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center.
– Please see the Editorial and Valley Views, June 28 2009
The accompanying Editorial offers what we consider to be a balanced view: it recognizes the importance of phasing and ensuring sufficient water capacity for both the project and the current residents, while at the same time encouraging the redevelopment of the site. The author asks that the Town Board allow adequate time to weigh the serious issues while keeping the process moving. Decisions the Town Board makes this year will have lasting effects long after this Town Board, the developer and the current residents are gone.
“The Town has every right, and obligation, to hold the developer to high standards, especially since this project is bound to have a major impact.”
The developer, Alvin Benjamin, was invited to write a guest column as well.
Across the New York Border, Creating an Entire Village
June 24, 2009
–Go to Article, Litchfield County Times, June 18, 2009
Dover Knolls Project Nears Deadline; Many Impacts, Little Time
June 16, 2009
– Go to Article, Millbrook Independent, June 10, 2009
The Darkling Plains of Dover; We Sound the Alarm
June 16, 2009
– Go to Editorial, Millbrook Independent, June 10, 2009
A point of clarification: The Town Board did hire its own consultant as Town Planner, Graham Trelstad with AKRF, to advise them throughout the SEQRA process.
Dover Knolls DEIS is Accepted; the Public Comment Period is open
May 18, 2009
On April 29, 2009, the Dover Town Board accepted as complete the Dover Knolls Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS.) Residents, local and regional government officials, board and committee members, Interested Parties, neighbors and organizations from surrounding towns in NY and CT, are strongly encouraged to attend and comment on the DEIS at one or both sessions to be held at the Dover Middle/High School: Saturday, May 30th at 9am and Wednesday, June 3rd at 6:30 pm. Written comments may be submitted through June 30th.
We in Dover, Dutchess County and New York State have only one chance to get this project right. Our concerns encompass but are not limited to ensuring that: 1) local taxes don’t increase because of costs associated with an imbalance of residential options, additional school construction or wastewater facility upgrades and maintenance; 2) the Aquifer is not compromised by an unsupportable number of new residences; 3) the Great Swamp, the second largest wetlands in New York State, is not irreversibly compromised by inadequate wetlands boundary protection or an inappropriate Water and Wastewater Treatment Facility; 4) residential and commercial/retail construction is concentrated around the train station and on the existing footprint of the former Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center, thus minimizing traffic and impervious surfaces; 5) steep slopes are left untouched, thereby preserving our natural resources and the Appalachian Trail viewshed, and minimizing the effects of increased stormwater runoff.
There is indeed much to review, and the Coalition will continue to offer input during this critically important process.
– Please see DEIS, Accepted as Complete by the Dover Town Board
Dover considers 1000 Megawatt Power Plant
May 17, 2009
Many town and county residents, and neighbors from CT, attended the Advanced Power (AP) presentation at the Dover High School Wednesday night, May 20th during a special meeting convened for that purpose by the Dover Town Board. The company proposes to construct and operate a 1000 megawatt power plant, Cricket Valley Energy (CVE,) in Dover, NY, west of Rt 22 and along the Great Swamp River.
We have only recently learned of the proposal but the application process is proceeding quickly; AP has an option on the property and intends to file its application and begin the scoping process in June. The benefits to the town and region are economic. The company estimates 500 local construction jobs and, once complete, revenues of $4mm a year, to be split with the County. The drawbacks thus far appear to be environmental, with negative impacts potentially reaching far and wide.
While most of the cooling of the plant would rely on air condensers, the company estimates that between 250-275,000 gallons of water could be used daily. Whether drawn from the Aquifer or from the bedrock below as AP proposes, this level of water consumption poses a great concern to residents who rely on the area’s water resources.
The chemical composition and direction of emissions from the three, 250-290 foot stacks will be of concern not only to residents of the Harlem Valley, but to those who live in the paths of the carrying winds. Comparing the resultant air pollution of the proposed natural gas power plant favorably to that of a coal-fired electric power plant as AP did during the meeting seems to us to set up the wrong argument; the better comparison would be to our air quality as it is now. A coal-fired plant would never have been proposed in the first place.
The 25-30 permanent jobs are estimated to last for about 30-40 years, as the estimated useful life of the plant is about 60 years. “It will be either re-used or torn down,” one of the members of the CVE team responded to a resident’s question.
“Any major project creates both economic benefits and environmental impacts,” Town Supervisor Ryan Courtien said during the meeting, as quoted in the Poughkeepsie Journal. ”The benefits include construction and post-construction jobs, increased tax revenues for the town, county and schools and increased local spending. The impacts include pollution, noise, change in landscape, traffic and more impervious surfaces.”
This impacts of this project should be considered in conjunction with the impacts of Dover Knolls and within the contexts of our Master Plan and the constraints of our water supply. One PoJo blogger suggested constructing windmills on our farmland: A low-impact power generation alternative that preserves open space and agriculture, our Greenway and wildlife corridor, without water or air pollution.
The links are down to the Poughkeepsie Journal articles apprearing on May 1 & 11, 2009, but you can search www.poughkeepsiejournal.com
Dover Town Board Unanimously Passes Hudsonia Biodiversity Mapping Study
May 8, 2009
On April 29th, Supervisor Ryan Courtien led the Dover Town Board in passing Resolution #1142009 in Support of Biodiversity Mapping in the Town of Dover.
Hudsonia has mapped several towns in Dutchess County, most recently the Town of Amenia to our north. With many towns left to map, we are honored and proud that Dover was selected by Hudsonia as the next to be inventoried. This study will inform land use decisions for generations to come; the results will help guide the Town and Planning Boards when faced with both strategic and pragmatic decisions, and should prove to be a valuable reference tool for developers and conservationists alike.
– Please see Resolution
– Please see Hudsonia Presentation to the Town of Dover
Restore NY Funding Application for Dover Knolls’ Demolition Proposal
May 4, 2009
Please see the attached Letter to the Dover Town Board, submitted last week in connection with a Board meeting dealing with the Town’s proposed Restore NY funding application. The application is for funding to demolish two buildings on the Dover Knolls property. It was read into the record by Town Board Member Richard Hawthorne.
CRGD reiterates an ongoing concern, stated previously during the Scoping Sessions and during Town Board discussions of the Stimulus Funds Application, over the possibility of on-site burial of C&D and therefore the possible contamination of our water supply. We believe that the Town should maintain control and supervision over the expenditure of all Restore NY funds obtained in connection with the demolition of buildings: ”the Town Board can and should insist that any Restore NY funds obtained be spent to ensure that all demolition project materials be taken off-site and that nothing be left on-site or back-filled in the tunnels.”
– CRGD Letter to the Dover Town Board April 29, 2009
CRGD weighs in on Dover Town Board’s Completeness Review on the Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement
February 22, 2009
CRGD President Carolyn Handler recently added to the Dover Town Board’s discussion and debate of the completeness of the Dover Knolls DEIS. The Coalition notes that the Town Board was under no legal obligation to make the document available to the public and appreciates the openness with which Supervisor Courtien has chosen to conduct the review.
In a letter dated February 11th, addressed to Supervisor Courtien and members of the Town Board, Handler begins with acknowledging this process:
“CRGD recognizes that the formal public comment period for the DEIS will not begin until the Town Board determines the DEIS to be substantively complete and thereafter schedules a public hearing to receive comments. We also note that the Town Board made the DEIS available to the public on the Town’s website not long after it was filed by the Applicant on Christmas Eve, having rightly concluded that given the complexity and size of the Proposed Project, the public should begin the process of familiarizing itself with the contents of the DEIS at the earliest juncture– even though, as we recognize, the DEIS is currently undergoing revision as a result of the Town Board’s own completeness review as lead agency.” Read more
