For Immediate Release
August 6, 2008
Contact: David Gibson, 518-377-1452, ext. 1
Dan Plumley, 518-576-4430

"Green Book," DOT Guidelines for Adirondack Park Significant Step for Park Greenways

Keene, NY-- The Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks believes the adoption of the new state Department of Transportation (DOT) Guidelines for the Adirondack Park  -- also called the “Green Book” – is a significant step for the protection and sound environmental maintenance of the park’s highways and greenways.  The adoption of the Green Book is expected to be ratified by representatives of the NYS Adirondack Park Agency, Department of Environmental Conservation and the DOT on Friday, August 8^th at the monthly meeting of the Park Agency in Ray Brook.

Completion of the Green Book and its revisions was one of the primary stipulations of a legal “Consent Order” that followed the unconstitutional cutting of several thousands of trees on Forest Preserve lands along the Route 3 scenic highway corridor between Saranac Lake and Tupper Lake in 2005.  The Association for the Protection of  the Adirondacks filed a civil violation of the Forest Preserve complaint against the cutting with the NYS-DEC at the time and then worked extensively to see the provisions of a strong “Consent Order” against DOT be brought to fruition.

“This week’s formal adoption of the ‘Green Book’ represents a significant step forward in appreciating the Park as a unified region whereby highway and greenway corridor management and policies keep this a special, scenic and ecologically distinctive place,” stated Dan Plumley, the Association’s Director of Park Protection.

“We congratulate Ed Franze of the DOT for shepherding this through.  It [the Green Book] is a good start as a comprehensive compilation of highway and Park policies, and now, certainly, places a stronger emphasis on Forest Preserve protection, “ Plumley added. “However, we have further to go to realize a true Parkwide system of greenway promotion and protection.”

Association Comments on the Draft “Green Book” include:

• The Association commends the Department in the tremendous amount of work undertaken in compiling the Draft NYS-DOT Guidelines for the Adirondack Park.  The document in and of itself represents a comprehensive compendium of state policy, regulations, design criteria and case studies regarding roadway and highway engineering, design and environmental controls.
• The Department is making progress on the requirements of the 2006 “Order on Consent” between the DEC, DOT and APA which required inclusion of policies directing the DOT with regard to addressing hazard tree management within the Adirondack Park, verifying the specific requirements for the application of needed temporary revocable permits (TRPs) and designating accountable Department staff expertise needed to guide and monitor parkwide program implementation. The DOT parkwide engineer position held by Ed Franze was one of AFPA’s recommendations..
• The Association is also pleased that the Department has produced the Appendix Q outlining the “Environmental Commitments and Obligations for Maintenance (ECOM) that includes the environmental checklist for NYSDOT maintenance activities in the Adirondack Park and the outline for the needed Adirondack Park Baseline Maintenance Training program.

However, the Association felt these sections require further consensus between the State departments and agencies and public stakeholders in order to fully protect Park resources and to prevent reoccurrences of the 2005 Route 3 tree-cutting which led to the Order on Consent.

“We also call upon all 3 state agencies (DOT, DEC and APA) to unite around a joint mission and visioning process to define a far more ecologically sustainable Green Book planning process for all highway and greenway corridor systems in the Park,” stated Dan Plumley.

“Real vision must go beyond compiling environmental rules and guidelines, so that the State undertakes actionable strategies for enhancing the Park’s scenic, natural character; strengthens and supports working, “walkable” communities; facilitates much needed advancements in mass transit opportunities in the park, like low-emission commuter bus and van routes, and light rail; and takes steps needed to reduce and mitigate negative impacts of roadways and vehicular traffic,” Plumley noted.

The Association believes that these components are central to the issue of highway design and maintenance within the Adirondack Park that we believe they must be emphasized directly in the primary chapters of the NYS-DOT Guidelines for the Adirondack Park.  Additionally, it would be most beneficial that a comprehensive transportation corridor map of the Adirondack Park be included as a stand alone insert with the executive summary and policy document.  On this map, it would be important to delineate all DOT highways in the Adirondack Park, local town and county roadways, scenic vistas and major points of interest, Park hamlets, and other greenway corridors important to the communities of the Adirondack Park.

The Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks is a non-profit, membership organization founded in 1901 to employ public education, citizen action, public and private partnerships and strong advocacy to protect, enhance, and sustain the wild character, ecological integrity, and mutual well-being of the natural and human communities of the Adirondack region. 

-30-

A summary of the Associations’ major comments on the Green Book are attached.

Attachment:Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks Formal Comments on the Scope of the Draft GreenbookFist and foremost, the Association urges that the final revision of the Greenbook provide more of an over-arching vision for both policy and state agency collaboration with public and private stakeholders, the public and interest groups on the broad range of critically important issues that surround the highway transportation and transportation corridor components of the Adirondack Park.  Specifically, the document and the intent behind it would be far better served if all 3 primary state agencies involved, the DOT, APA and DEC, could unite around one common vision and mission statement for the protection and enhancement of the Adirondack Park’s highway systems design, maintenance, transportation effectiveness, safety, scenic and ecological character, economic value and environmental sustainability. Such a vision should at firsthand recognize the unique position statewide, nationally and indeed globally that the Adirondack Park holds as regards to its extent of wild landscapes, critical juxtaposition of human communities and protected wilderness, its tremendous natural resource values and scenic character as well as its recreation, tourism and resource-based economy.  The park’s history supports a bold vision in that it has been rich with respect to both water and land transportation matters from the earliest days of aboriginal claims to the pre-colonial and colonial battles for nationhood as well as the post-war influx of tourists and automobiles in the 1950’s.  Of course the park’s conservation history should be noted in that the park is truly where designated wilderness preservation discussions began beginning as far back in the 1860’s to the park’s recognition internationally as a UNESCO established Biosphere Reserve. Mission and Direction for Protected Park Corridors and Greenways The Association would prefer to see the Greenbook as a vehicle whereby the DOT, DEC and the APA unite under a joint mission that supports the protection and enhancement of the unique transportation corridors and viable greenways in the park.  There is considerable historical precedent and direction for such work, as you know. In 1971, the Temporary Study Commission on the Adirondacks in the 21^st Century studied extensively the transportation sector in the Adirondacks and called for a policy whereby all roads were considered scenic roads within the park. In 1972, the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan was approved with Guidelines for Management and Use of Travel Corridors in the Park (pages 46-50 of the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan). An inventory of Park scenic vistas was created. Later, scenic byways were created in the Park. We fail to see any reference to these and other milestones in the current draft.

Furthermore, the Adirondack Highway Council (1974-c.1985) worked for years to implement a common vision for Adirondack transportation systems that strengthened the Park’s natural character. AHC succeeded in creating a high level of interagency and citizen collaboration and a remarkable number of achievements during its lifespan. The AHC was created, in part, in response to the challenges posed by the Transportation Corridor guidelines of the Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan, and by the urgent need to gain federal funds and federal support for highway standards in keeping with the unique character of the Adirondack Park. As you know, the AHC identified highway design standards, winter Olympics, bikeways, highway signs, landscaping, trailhead parking, undergrounding of utility lines as top priorities. Quoting from AHC reports, “In fulfilling its mission and consistent with the State Land Master Plan, the (Highway) Council has been able to promote free interchange of ideas between citizens and public agencies and the resultant coordinated actions have insured the preservation and enhancement of the Park's special character...the Council helps to provide an efficient transportation system compatible with the unique, natural character of the Adirondack Park."

Clearly, the Greenbook must do a better job at recognizing this history and placing current objectives in the context of these historical precedents if it is to be a credible document for forward progress in the 21^st century. Second, it should help revitalize and set measurable objectives to achieve these laudable goals and inspire policy discussions that move beyond the recognition and protection of scenic character to that of energy and transportation efficiency and safety; ecological, wildlife and watershed protection;  sustainable tourism, interpretation and sound, smart community-based development.  All of these critical topical areas could and should gain guidance and policy direction from the NYSDOT’s “Guidelines for the Adirondack Park, or Greenbook documents. Specifically, we urge the Department to consider highlighting in the Greenbook’s executive summary and appendix documents needed policy and guideline discussions including, but not limited to the following:

• An Adirondack Greenways System.  The opportunity and need exists for a public discussion on the benefits and design of an Adirondack Park Greenway system that highlights system-wide opportunities for integrated and complementary regional highway, road and bicycle corridors, trail, rail and river and waterway systems. This system was recommended by the Commission on the Adirondacks in the 21^st century (1990).  Resource protection, sustainable economic development and enhanced recreational access and opportunities can foster regional gains that strengthen both local communities while making the park more of a model territory for regional planning world-wide.  All corridor planning and systems in the park should have a parkwide focus that supports wild land, water quality, scenic and ecological protection goals while complementing sustainable community development and recreational tourism opportunities.
• Advancing Standards for Rural County and Town Highways and Roads.  With nearly 5 times as many miles of town and county highways in the park than State Highway, town and county governing bodies could play a vital role in advancing the Greenbook’s guidelines and greenways, in particular, with benefits to both local communities and the Adirondack Park as a whole.  There is the need for a basic, critical assessment on the environmental and scenic character management along the 5,535 miles of locally-owned paved, gravel and unpaved earth roadways across towns and county lands within the Adirondack Park.  Opportunities for advancing public input regionally and in management, design, maintenance, construction and preservation practices in line and training opportunities between state and local highway departments are critical first steps that could help integrate state and local guidelines to make the most of all park road and potential greenway corridor resources.
• Parkwide Guidelines and Options for Reducing Highway Impacts and Obstacles to Wildlife and Wildlife Movement.  In that the preservation of the wild character of the Adirondack Park is a priority, effort should be made to research and implement programs and actions that would benefit wildlife.  Automobile impacts with large mammals, such as deer and moose pose significant human safety and health concerns as well as costs.  Daily and nightly road kills with driving speeds often at or above 60 miles per hour on regional highways impact wildlife and results in road kills of ungulates, canids, small mammals, birds, owls , amphibians, reptiles and occasionally raptors as well as other wildlife.  Some parks, in Canada and elsewhere have been exploring the implementation of terrestrial wild planted overpasses and other below road underpass wildlife crossing areas that can help bridge wild areas bisected by highways.  The Greenbook should explore the range of options including highway speed limitations in certain areas, public education and other means for reducing highway corridor vehicular impacts on wildlife and wildlife movement corridors.
• Parkwide Guidelines and Options for Reducing Highway Impacts to Riparian Zones, Rivers, Lakes and Wetlands.  Chapters III, IV and appendixes C, D, E, G, K and others all speak in part of in whole to issues relating to controlling impacts to riparian zones, rivers, lakes and wetlands which is most important and admirable.  Nevertheless, there remains an urgent need in our view to see one unified section that addresses this critical topical area comprehensively. This section should look to the future of the Adirondack Park in which road and highway corridor construction, maintenance, design and use guidelines complement rather than detract from general water quality and ecosystem health.  It should explore research needs that move beyond the Cascade Lakes studies for road salt impacts, for example, to consider how the State and the DOT should be assessing such impacts and control strategies park-wide and the major public policy implications.  What factors parkwide and in conjunction with State, county and local highway systems and authority can be assessed and influenced to address, reduce or prevent environmental and ecological impacts to surface and subsurface water systems, wetlands and riparian zones?  How can the current DOT – DEC Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and other agreements with the Adirondack Park Agency as well as with local governments be strengthened to enhance water and ecosystem quality along highways?  These are the essential questions that the Association would expect the final Guidelines for the Adirondack Park could offer more concrete direction on in one section – rather than being spread across multiple chapters and appendixes that only touch on all of them and much too briefly.
• Walkable, Bikable and More Sustainable Communities.  In addition to looking at greenway opportunities that could be used for walking and biking opportunities between Adirondack hamlets, it is important that the Adirondack Greenbook offer direction to park communities on how to promote more opportunities for walking and bicycling – complementing efforts to advance sustainability in Adirondack communities.  Links to corridor bicycle and hiking trails or greenways that extend beyond the communities is an important aspect of greenway development, but also must include the promotion and design of public infrastructure within hamlets that enhance non-motorized transportation, public health and the environment.  Lessons learned from greenway programs in the UK and Europe offer much in terms of practical designs and effective recreational access agreements and easements that can be applied to the Adirondack regional and local environments.
• Scenic Character Protection Parkwide and by Community.  The draft Greenbook incorporates existing law and regulations that speak to scenic character in highway design, construction, the Adirondack Park Sign law, etc. across the state agency summaries in Chapter Two, appendix I and related, the rustic guide rail guidance in appendix L.  All of this is valuable information and there is imbedded much valuable guidance for preserving scenic character associated with roadways.  Once again, however, the final document would benefit from one united section that covers scenic issues and design guidelines comprehensively looking to both roadway and transportation corridor issues and where appropriate community interests and needs as well.  One critical policy discussion that is now missing should address improved regional collaboration and integration for scenic character and sign standards between the State NYS-DOT, NYS-DEC, the Adirondack Park Agency and the Adirondack towns and villages.  The reduction of excessive and disparate signage and a transformation to consistent sign shapes and colors that promote the park experience beyond communities and within hamlets would be a significant step forward that should be addressed in the final DOT Greenbook.
• Another important issue that needs addressing in the Green Book is the undergrounding of overhead low voltage distribution lines, phone and cable lines in hamlets and along highways corridors, particularly where they parallel Forest Preserve.
• Transit Options and Future for Sustainability in the Park Setting. Exurban development is creating more impacts and requiring more driving miles and energy cost implications region-wide.  At the same, the higher costs of gasoline and oil products makes inter-regional transportation and trans-regional transit more expensive and limiting day by day, year by year.  The DOT Greenbook should address mass transit options and alternative regional transport systems or programs that can (a) make more hamlet to hamlet travel available to lower and middle income citizens and public transit efficiency alternatives, (b) set clear targets for reducing contributions regionally for global warming gases and enhancing the park’s carbon footprint, and (c) enhancing regional and trans-regional opportunities and efficiency for regional tourism and business transit.  In statewide planning, what changes can be envisioned or considered for future, more sustainable transportation systems in the Adirondack Park?  Can small bus systems pose opportunities today and in the future?  How can trans-regional train, business and tourism transport be enhanced between the Adirondack region, Montreal, Canada and New York City?  Identifying the policy discussion venue for future planning for transit options and mass transit opportunities in the future should be discussed with the final DOT Greenbook.

In addition to the major planning sectors discussed above, what follows are some specific comments and changes to the DOT Greenbook presented in part previously that we wish to emphasize in accord with the Consent Order:

1. Hazard Tree and Emergency Actions.  The Greenbook should offer for more clarity on the definition and determination of what constitutes: (a) “hazardous trees” and an “actual and ongoing emergency.” These determinations are critical to the decisions and events that led to the Rt. 3 tree cutting of 2005 and other violations elsewhere in the Park, which lead to the following comments:
2. Administrative Process Made Clear and Unequivocal.  In the flow chart of Appendix Q, there is no safeguard or check off on the proper determination of whether or not a true actual and ongoing emergency exists. As you know, an “emergency” situation was deemed to exist along Rt. 3 in 2005. However, that emergency was not determined by DOT, DEC or APA but by an area legislator who put pressure on DEC to start tree cutting following one lone tree that had blown across Rt. 3 and ostensibly blocked an ambulance. Therefore, a procedure for determination of an “actual, ongoing emergency” to human life must be included in the guidelines to ensure that a repeat episode does not occur - whereby in the absence of a true emergency inappropriate and illegal tree cutting occurs prior to notification of DOT hierarchy and of the DEC and APA.
3. Mandatory Consultation Urged.  On page 31, it states that a regional maintenance engineer “should consult with the regional environmental coordinator to ascertain if permits would be needed for maintenance work or for consistency with prior environmental permits.” This consultation must be mandatory. The words “must consult” seem most necessary given the circumstances behind this revision and the Order on Consent.
4. ROW Determinations are Critical. Appendices O and Q are critical in the determination of environmental check lists, yes/no decision making and whether or not to seek DEC/APA involvement. In addition to determination of what constitutes hazardous trees and an actual, ongoing emergency (both of which need more treatment in these guidelines) is the determination of whether trees are to be cut inside or outside the DOT ROW. These guidelines suggest that it is merely a “yes, no” determination of whether a ROW delineation is adequate and preexisting and whether all work will be done inside the ROW.

In truth, the Rt. 3 ROW was determined only with great difficulty after the fact by finding the relatively few monuments that existed. Trees or in this case tree stumps could not be easily placed and counted inside or outside the ROW. We believe that the Rt. 3 ROW might have varied along the length of the highway. Our point is that determination of the ROW and whether trees lie inside or outside must not be left to field staff to determine. The threshold question found in Appendix Q “Is all work in the ROW?” is not trivial. There must be a preliminary step whereby DOT maintenance and environmental staff meet with DEC staff to determine whether the ROW is adequately delineated and whether all work is proposed inside the ROW. On these determinations and the confidence levels rests the effectiveness of these guidelines in avoiding a repetition of the events of 2005 along Rt. 3 between Saranac Lake and Tupper Lake.

1. At Minimum TRP’s or greater Public Process for Significant Timber or Hazard Tree Cutting and Removal.  The amendment to Article XIV which permitted the construction of Rt. 3 and other major highways in the Park never removed land from the Forest Preserve. The amendments were permissive in that they allowed highways on or across the Forest Preserve. Forest Preserve trees, be they inside the DOT ROW or outside, should be considered Forest Preserve trees. Therefore, all trees to be cut on a highway abutting the NYS Forest Preserve must receive a temporary revocable permit from the DEC – irrespective of whether or not those trees are deemed to be inside or outside the ROW.
2. Joint State Agency Review Preferred.  On page 341 it states that DOT and DEC are directed “wherever possible to jointly review hazard tree work in the field in advance of the project and to document, through the permit, the scope of work planned.” The words “wherever possible” trouble us. We contend that if these guidelines are to prevent repeat occurrences of the events precipitating the order on consent that such consultations be mandatory. DOT and DEC must jointly review hazard tree work in the field in advance. There is just no way around this.