HomeMy WebLinkAboutStein, S DEIS.pdf To: Cayuga Heights Mayor Kate Supron and Village Board of Trustees
From: Stuart Stein, Cornell University Professor Emen City and Regional Planning.
11 Cornell Walk, Ithaca, NY 14850. 607-273-3500
Date: December 15, 2010
t4.-z'
Re: Cayuga Heights Deer Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement
In my professional opinion, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) for
Cayuga Heights'Deer Management Plan does not adequately address several
significant potential negative impacts that may well occur if the proposed program is
carried out. I will lay out these issues in this memo and request that they be addressed
in a Supplemental DEIS. Those issues are directly related to the following:
Impairment of the character or quality of important aesthetic resources or of existing
community or neighborhood character as required under Section 617.7 (c)(1)(v) of NYS
SEQR Regulations). These impacts relate to:
1. The definition and character of the community and neighborhoods that are
likely to be impacted by the proposed action;
2. Important impacts to the larger community, including potential damage to
some of the characteristics that attract tourism and motivate relocation to the
area;
3. The impact on relations with neighboring municipalities in the Ithaca urban
area; and
4. The SEQR requirement to examine and evaluate alternative means of solving
the problem to which the proposed program is addressed.
My credentials in addressing these issues are as follows:
I am a Professor Emeritus of City and Regional Planning at Cornell, having taught
subjects relating to community development, land use and urban design for 31 years.
I hold professional degrees in both City Planning and in Architecture from MIT.
I am a Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners, an honor given to only
three professional urban planners in Upstate New York(north of New York City).
I was an elected official in County and City government for 21 years, including the
Chairmanship of the County Legislature and Ithaca City Council.
I have been appointed to and served as a member or chair of many local and state
government committees including: Chair of the Ithaca-Tompkins County
Transportation Council; Chair of the City of Ithaca Planning Board; Chair of the New
York State Board for Historic Preservation; Chair of the Tompkins County Strategic
Tourism Planning Board; and various others.
1
I was a citizen member of the committee appointed by City and Town governments to
explore inter-municipal cooperation and potential consolidation of services between the
City and Town of Ithaca (of which Cayuga Heights is a part).
I have been a full-time resident of the Ithaca community for the past 48 years,including
some years as a resident of Cayuga Heights.
Impairment of Community Character
Basic to an evaluation of "impairment"is the understanding of the meaning and
definition of"community." Apparently, the DEIS consultants and the Village Board
define the community very narrowly, as that area lying within the legal boundaries
defining the Village of Cayuga Heights. However, in the urban planning field there are
alternative definitions of community that are much broader in scope, and much more
appropriate to the situation being discussed. Urban (and suburban) communities are
seen as a part of a much larger "settlement organism," one that exists with strong
interdependent relations to its neighbors. Cayuga Heights as a municipality is a
component of the larger Town of Ithaca, which in turn is part of the larger still Ithaca
urban or metropolitan area. People live in the Village, but travel to work at Cornell or
elsewhere outside of the Village, shop downtown, and the children go to school in
various locations around the area. Fundamentally, the Village is inseparably integrated
into the Ithaca community. This is expressed in such basic ways as residents of the
Village having an Ithaca, and not a Cayuga Heights mailing address, and the fact that
such commonly-used businesses as grocery stores, movie theaters and auto repair shops
used by residents of the Village are all located in the other municipalities that make up
the larger Ithaca community.
Consequently, elected officials in Cayuga Heights are obligated to consider the impact
of their actions not just on the proportionally small population and area of the Village,
but on Ithaca as a whole, a community that encompasses contiguous municipalities that
share a common landscape, cultural values, economic and environmental interests.
Indeed, this concept is embedded in a number of federal and state laws, regulations and
grant programs.
State and local governments have long recognized this broader definition of community
and have fostered inter-municipal cooperation. In some cases inter-municipal
cooperation is required in order to qualify for public grants-in-aid. One example is the
Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Commission, which,by Federal and State law
defines our community (for grant purposes) as the Ithaca Urban area, which includes
the City and Town of Ithaca (including Cayuga Heights), Cornell and several small
contiguous built-up parts of Dryden and Lansing. Many other public programs also
emphasize the concept of the larger community in programs dealing with youth and
recreation services, water supply,public and fire safety, libraries, assessment, etc.
Clearly, many of today's problems facing local municipalities transcend legal borders
and, therefore,must be addressed on a broader basis. These shared concerns require
public officials and citizens within an urbanized area to work together, and when they
2
do so, they form a shared culture. That certainly is the case in the Ithaca urban area,
and if Cayuga Heights acts without due consideration of its neighbors, this has the
potential to damage that common culture. To maintain the vibrancy of our community,
the trustees of Cayuga Heights, though leading the smallest of all of Ithaca's contiguous
municipalities, must still be responsible for the impact of their decisions on the
character of the community as a whole. Likewise, residents of neighboring Ithaca
municipalities should not be expected to remain silent if Village officials propose a plan
that could damage them or the character of the larger community.
In professional planning terms, and clearly in the minds of many residents who live
beyond those invisible municipal boundary lines that define Cayuga Heights, the Ithaca
community as a whole would be negatively impacted by the deer-killing program being
proposed by Cayuga Heights. This explains why people residing both inside and
outside of the Village have come forward to offer criticism of the DEIS, and why, over
the last two years, large numbers of people from other Ithaca municipalities have
attended numerous public meetings to express their concerns on the deer issue. Some
live within a few blocks of the village boundary, and have spoken of how this proposal
will impact their lives negatively, either through the killing of animals they care about,
or through negative changes in the character of the Ithaca community this plan will
cause. Therefore, it is reasonable that they have come to meetings to be heard. And
they have every right to participate, even though several Cayuga Heights residents
have at times rudely addressed those not residing in the Village as "outsiders,"
"invaders" and "outside agitators," and even told them to "get out." More
significantly,Village officials have expressed the idea that only input from residents of
Cayuga Heights is of consequence in their decision making process. The DEIS itself also
completely fails to address or assess potentially significant impacts on the wider Ithaca
community. In my professional opinion, this calls the validity of its conclusions into
question.
The bonds of community are fragile, and when they are frayed or even broken, the
impact on the well-being of the whole can be serious. That is a risk that is inherent in
this proposal and the process that produced it, and it speaks to a potentially serious
impact that is not addressed by the DEIS. There are troubling signs of increasing
isolation of the village from its neighbors, including acrimonious public remarks
directed at non-residents at public meetings on the deer issue, harsh and sarcastic
comments made in letters to the editor in the local papers and on online forums. It is
obvious that the effects of past Village actions on this issue, plus the impending
possibility of the proposed deer-killing project moving forward, is having a cumulative
negative effect on the broader community character and well-being, fomenting a kind of
inter-municipal resentment that is not characteristic of Ithaca. The widespread
perception that this killing plan is being implemented without consideration of its effect
on the community as a whole, and with indifference to the effect it will have in isolating
Cayuga Heights from the other Ithaca municipalities, is exacerbating the damage being
done, damage that will very likely grow if the killing program is actually implemented.
However, it may still be possible to avoid the worst of this damage if clear actions are
taken by the Village trustees that have the effect of acknowledging their responsibility
to consider the impact on the wider community, and if less drastic approaches than a
mass deer-killing program, which exist, are taken to address deer-human conflict in
3
Cayuga Heights. The simple and cost-effective mechanism of allowing residents in
Cayuga Heights to have access to the same practical fencing options available to
residents of the neighboring Town of Ithaca, which has no equivalent deer controversy,
is just one example. The DEIS does not seriously consider non-lethal alternatives with
less severe negative impacts than the proposed killing plan, and therefore fails to satisfy
the very clear requirements of state environmental law.
External Impacts on the Larger Community
I submitted a letter on October 28, 2009, as part of the earlier EIS process review,
pointing out the impact that the deer-killing program may have on county tourism. I
stated in that letter that such a concern needed to be addressed. However, the DEIS
does not appear to have given any attention to the concerns identified in my letter.
Since I am quite knowledgeable about tourism both as a professional planner, Cornell
professor and former county public official, it is my opinion the trustees of Cayuga
Heights are obligated to consider this issue with the potential to affect many. I am
again requesting that the consultants and the Village Board address this issue.
I want to be clear that, in regard to tourism, I am speaking only for myself, and am not
speaking for the tourism board, for my department at Cornell, nor for the County
legislature. Nevertheless, I do believe that my many years of experience in the field of
tourism give me status to address the issue of economic development and community
character to which tourism is a contributor.
I have a concern that the proposed deer-killing program may have a detrimental effect
on characteristics of the community that make it a tourist destination. Tourism
development is a recognized component of the county's broader economic development
program, which, in turn, is focused on building the tax base and increasing jobs. There
is some evidence that the County is seen as a special place, one that is progressive and
enlightened, and that this attracts a group of tourists who will spend money here.
Ithaca (including Cayuga Heights) consistently shows up on national surveys as a top
place to visit and to live. Most recently, we were ranked number one in the country for
"well-being." Several years ago the Utne Reader magazine rated the Ithaca area as the
"most enlightened" community in the US. Our SPCA is seen nationally as a leader in
the "no-kill" shelter movement for animals. We are recognized nationally as one of the
centers of the healthy food movement with a vibrant farmers market, an innovative
natural foods Co-op, and Moosewood restaurant known far and wide. EcoVillage, in
the Town of Ithaca, is a leader in advanced community-building. Ithaca-Hours is
known throughout the western world as a creative means of supporting local economic
development and keeping money in the community. And we have excellent cutting-
edge theaters, museums, arts and music. These, and more local "attractions", create an
image of our community as a special place to which many people throughout the
country respond. It is an image that is part of what brings them here as tourists.
Moreover, it is an image that many who live here embrace with pride, and one that they
have come to love. In my professional opinion, those who choose to reside in this
community, and those who choose it as a tourist destination, are more likely than
average to share a constellation of values that would include such things as inter-
municipal unity, nonviolent approaches to conflict resolution, and respect for animals
and the natural world.
4
A 2010 report analyzing the County tourism program (Profile of Visitors to Tompkins
County), prepared by Chmura Economics & Analytics for the Strategic Tourism
Planning Board, stated that visitors ranked "the feel of the area—the ambiance,
diversity, the peacefulness," as what they enjoyed the most, or found most memorable,
about visiting here. In fact, the area's "peaceful ambience" is one of several aspects
identified as being likely to bring tourists back for repeat visits, according to the County
tourism program staff (http://www.visitithaca.com/press/41.html). A program that
entails the annual mass killing of deer in neighborhood backyards to protect garden
plantings, in a municipality of Ithaca that refuses to let its own citizens use practical
deer fencing, has the potential to detract from those qualities of the larger community
that define its core values for many who choose to visit, as well as many who may
choose to move here. Thousands around the country and the world have signed a
petition against the Cayuga Heights deer-killing program. Local, regional and national
media have highlighted the deer-killing controversy. Further, as more information is
emerging about the lack of scientific validity behind the justifications for this program,
additional unwanted attention is likely, due to the irony of this happening in the
bedroom community of an Ivy League University.
In 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2010, Ithaca was ranked in the top 100 places to live by Relocate
America. In 2001, Mothering Magazine named it one of "25 Terrific Places to Bring up a
Family." The growing appeal of this community for retirement, relocation, or raising
children could be damaged by the fact that the deer-killing plan calls for not just a one-
time bait and kill effort, but a multi-year program that could potentially be performed
annually over a 5-10 year period, or possibly longer. Each year that the killing is
performed, old wounds will be reopened, leading to an even greater rift than we're
already seeing in relations between people in the village itself, and between residents of
the village and residents of the wider Ithaca community. Since there are already people
residing in Cayuga Heights who are saying they find the plan so morally repugnant
that they will move away if it is implemented, it's possible many people might shy
away from coming to our county for the very same reason,because they may see us as a
community that uses violent means to solve our problems—not the progressive or
enlightened place it once was thought to be. If this image of our larger community
should become widespread, the broader Ithaca community and county, not just Cayuga
Heights, could be impacted negatively in the long-term. This potential significant
impact of the program on our community culture and its attractiveness as a place to live
has not been considered in the DEIS, and I believe it should be.
While the program's negative impact on the tourist program maybe difficult to pin
down statistically(like many aspects of any tourism program), it should be recognized
that such an impact is quite plausible, and therefore should be given further detailed
study before the Village goes ahead with its program.
Conclusion
It is my professional judgment that the DEIS fails to adequately evaluate the potentially
significant impacts outlined in this memo, not just on Cayuga Heights, but on the Ithaca
community as a whole, and that these flaws need to be addressed before a responsible
decision is made about the proposed program.
5