The Adirondack Club and Resort: A threat to the Adirondack Park
Katelin Isaacson
Liberal Arts A.A. 2009 Paul Smiths College, Paul Smiths, NY
Environmental Studies B.A. 2011 SUNY Potsdam, Potsdam NY
The Adirondack Park established in 1892, encompasses more than 6 million acres of public and private lands. The Adirondack Park Agency (APA) regulates public and private lands and tries to slow development and protect the wild character of the landscape. In 2005, the Adirondack Club and Resort (ACR) was proposed in Tupper Lake. This would be the largest development within the Park if it is approved by the Agency. It could potentially set a precedent for large development projects on private lands. Environmental and other groups show mixed concerns about the impacts to community and to the landscape. The debate has been ongoing since 2005 because of its size and location on Resource Management Lands. Today, environmental and economic concerns are delaying the APA’s decision. If it is approved by the Adirondack Park Agency, then there may be significant implications. No one has factored into consideration the effects of Global Climate Change that could impact this development based around the ski resort. Second, one must look at other recent developments passed within the Park to consider possibly large economic burdens on the towns. Lastly, I will present a critique of the development based on the facts presented. I feel that education on the culture and nature relationship is vital to understanding the reduction of development on private lands.
The ACR would be spread out among 6,400 acres within Tupper Lake surrounding the Big Tupper Ski Area (Bauer). The original 2005 proposal included re-opening Big Tupper, and adding a marina, stable, shooting range and multiple housing units. It was broken into four phases, the first “including 675 single family and townhouse units, a 60 unit motel, and 24 ‘great camp’ housings on the divided lands” (Bauer). Some of the lands are classified as Resource Management Lands, which are supervised by the APA using laws and regulations.
Michael Foxman is the leader behind this large project. His proposal must comply with the regulations set forth by the Agency. The APA considered issues behind large development and ordered a period of review in order to resolve some of the potential problems. Foxman met with individuals and groups to conduct studies and research impacts on the lands from the large housing units. Since 2005, the progress has been slow, but Foxman has recently ended the small meetings. The proposal is back underway as it is being reviewed again by the Agency.
The Adirondack Park Agency was created in 1972 to regulate both public and private lands, especially development, and one of its tools is the Private Land Use Development Plan (PLUDP). The goal of the PLUDP is to slow development within the Park in order to protect open space and wild character of the Park. This plan classifies land into several categories which determine the number of buildings per square mile. Resource Management Lands can only have one principle dwelling every 42.7 acres. One definition of a principle dwelling is that it is a place where one family occupies the space at different times. Secondly it could be a small cabin for rent or a single family dwelling (www.APA.org). The ACR has revised its proposal to only one “Great Camp” every 300 acres, which is in accordance with the Plan. The APA provides interactive maps on land classification at http://www.apa.state.ny.us/gis/FacsimileMap.html.
At a recent town meeting in April 2010, ACR representatives presented changes to the proposal. They expressed their interest in obtaining road access rights from the Nature Conservancy. Also in the meeting, ACR representative Kevin Frank addressed amendments to the proposal from the previous one. One amendment will be that the Great camps will be increased from 24 to 39 and are to be located one per 300 acre parcel (Proulx). This is within the guidelines set forth in the Private Land Use Development Plan created by the Adirondack Park Agency.
As of fall 2010, the project has been scaled way back. Foxman representatives have been collaborating with groups on different environmental issues. Environmental concerns have been fading into the background with recent findings. David Gibson a member of Adirondack Wild complains that “‘great camps’ would be built on 25 to 170 acres, scattered throughout the property” (“Tupper developer”). Despite his concerns with the new changes, the impacts to the landscape will be minimal with the efforts of scaling back development. However, Adirondack Council is the first environmental group to support the project. This winter, the APA will be holding its final hearings on economic and environmental impacts with potential to issuing a permit.
Even though the last hearing is set for winter 2010, there are still controversial topics to be understood. One issue with the Great Camps is subdividing the landscape, which would break the large tracts of wilderness into civilized areas. The fragmentation of the back country is a fancy term for chopping the wilderness into sections for development. This has the potential to reduce wildlife movement and corridors through the once- undeveloped landscape. This is the main environmental impact concerning the Adirondack Council. The Adirondack Council does not want the development to be built, and says a wildlife study has proven it would be harmful to migrating animals (“ADK Council”). However, the Adirondack Residents Intent on Saving our Economy (ARISE) group claims there is no scientific evidence to support effects on wildlife and says the development will limit where the owner can build on the great camp parcels (“ADK Club from ARISE”).
Wildlife are susceptible to habitat loss, and their drinking water could be threatened with development. Clean drinking water and contamination are large concerns that still need to be addressed within the ACR proposal. The large units and motel need to present a plan for wastewater disposal. Gray water and sewage need to be treated in an efficient manner so they cannot seep into ground water. Originally the ACR planned to build a waste water treatment plant. The plant and roads would have to be maintained, costing the town lots of extra money (Protect). According to the ARISE group ACR now plans to hook their sewage into the towns municipal pipelines. Residents are currently complaining of odors from their current system. ACR says if they connect into the town system, it will eliminate the odors by increasing the flow of raw sewage (“ADK Club ARISE). The plan for waste water is still being determined in the permit process through the Agency.
The ACR is stalled because they need to obtain road access for potential residents on great camp lots. There was a controversy over road access into the back country. The ACR wants to buy the access rights from the Nature Conservancy. However, the Nature Conservancy is not willing to negotiate for the public access rights of those potential residents. The debate went to a hearing because of a 150 year old statute of a state highway law. ACR argues that the road is necessary for a great camp that will sit on more than 1200 acres (“Resort gets right”). The Nature Conservancy will not accept a payment for the access rights and will not give it away (NCPR). The developers filed the law suit and Highway Superintendant Dattola will proceed with the hearing. (“Tupper resort look”). This debate raged on for a few weeks and finally went to a 12- person jury with a temporary town highway superintendent appointee overseeing the hearing.
The 12 person jury voted 11-1 for the ACR to obtain the right of way and pay the Nature Conservancy $10,000 (“Resort gets right”). Displeased with the outcome, the Nature Conservancy filed for a hearing with a judge. The group believes the old statute law that allows the small highway hearing was unjust and will demand a trial. This raises the issue that even though the Conservancy owned the road, the state has a law allowing the taking of it to provide access for owners of landlocked lots.
Once the first phase of the project is complete, Tupper Lake’s economy is predicted to grow. The project will include renovations at the ski area, a new marina, and hotel and restaurant. An economic study has determined the potential for jobs and new shops in the small village (ARISE). Therefore, the development will help the community by bringing in outsiders to spend their money within the town. During the construction there will be 519 full time jobs to complete housing units. The developer promises jobs will be from the local job pool. This will allow residents of Tupper Lake to work and increase revenues within their town (ARISE). Employment opportunities will increase with the additions of the marina, hotel, restaurant and other amenities.
There was an economic study to determine the possibility of the number of businesses that would be willing to open once the development was established. Locals have shown interest in new shops and restaurants in order to boost tourism in Tupper Lake. Jim LaValley, a local realtor, remembers a gentleman looking into a site for a restaurant. However, because the development was still in the proposal stage, he backed out and moved on. This scenario shows the willingness of other developers to invest their money into the community once the development is underway.
Volunteers organized in 2009 to reopen the ski area, and generate revenue for local shops within the town. ARISE is a nonprofit organization that was established because the ACR couldn’t obtain the proper permits on its own due to legal complications. The group only had a few months to raise money to open the lodge and Chair lift 2. It was run by many locals and ski passes were only $15.00/ day. They had $75,000 in private donations and raised enough money through ticket sales to break even. They ended with $30,000, to apply to potential renovations and opening of Chair 3 for the 2010 season (LaValley).
However, there is concern that development around the ski area will not support current wild character of the park. Pouring money into the ski area would not be economically or environmentally feasible with current land regulations, an economic recession and an increase in global temperatures. Therefore, there would be a need to reduce the development further in order to protect the wild character of the Adirondack Park. There would be significant impacts upon the landscape if the APA approves the ACR in its current proposed state. Based upon facts and history of the Park and development, I have evaluated and critiqued the ACR proposal as it stands within the APA’s decision process.
The 675 single family townhouses and 39 great camps will have large impacts upon the landscape. The ACR relies upon previous infrastructure around the ski area while also building new roads to the development areas. Placing this development around a ski area is not feasible in the long run for Tupper Lake. Snow fall predictions due to Climate Change may soon shift to shorter winter seasons, thus affecting economies that rely on winter based tourism.”With 5 to 10 degrees of temperature rise, they will lose much of their ice and snow…Winter sports, and the winter economy based on them, will decline” (Jenkins, 3). There will be a need for a new tourist attraction in Tupper Lake, because skiing may become impossible since Big Tupper doesn’t make its own snow.
Winter temperatures are rising and snow fall amounts are dwindling. There is also a warming trend during the summer seasons. “The warming has accelerated since 1970. The summer warming rate, from 1966 to 2006 was 3.5 degrees per century” (Jenkins, 10). Even though summer temperatures appear on the rise, the proposed marina could potentially save the tourist economy in Tupper Lake. However, there are large implications that come with increased jet ski and motor boat access. If people bring multiple boats into the lake and nearby lakes, there is a risk of increased noise and water pollution. Water pollution from heavy boat traffic could cause aquatic plant and animal life to decline because of particulates of oils and gasoline mixing with the water. Residents and paddlers on the lakes may be subject to loud boat noise and reckless driving which could ruin their aesthetic experiences.
More boats could lead to the introduction of invasive species into Tupper Lake and other Adirondack lakes. Invasives like Eurasian Milfoil and Zebra Mussels affect recreation and native species. Eurasian Milfoil is a type of vegetation that creates layers of mats in the water that can reduce sunlight of natural organisms. It also can affect the ability to swim, water ski, fish and boat (“Non-native”). Also Zebra Mussels are sharp as razors, and they can cut feet open, and clog water pipes. Both are transported into lakes on recreational boats. These invasive species are nuisances that would cost the town money and could possibly deter tourists from recreating in the area.
The integrity of the water ecosystem is just as threatened as the forested landscape. An overall wildlife study by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) shows that throughout the United States, urban sprawl is affecting large animals’ migration patterns. Species like the moose, bobcat and black bear depend upon large tracts of lands and could be threatened by the ACR development of great camp lots. Having these houses spread out on subdivided lots within the Adirondacks changes the private lands within which those species can move. The development shifts the ecology from those large roaming species to more domestic species like raccoon and blue jay (“Wildlife Connectivity”). The Great Camps may not be suitable for wildlife migration patterns of larger species and thus should not be built within the ACR development because it borders Follensbee Pond Wilderness area. The species would be forced to move from this region down into towns or their outskirts, potentially causing many problems within communities and their own species’ habits.
The possible habitat loss and changing migration patterns due to suburban sprawl could also result from another development in Tupper Lake. The APA has approved 49 luxury townhouses to be built in spring of 2011on Demars Boulevard. These townhouses will be built upon wetlands and will have direct dock access to the lake (“APA approves”). The nation is still in a recession, and the growth of second home development may be slowing because fewer people have the funds for these lavish getaways. This is a separate development from the ACR, and could set the tone for the future of Tupper Lake. If these houses are built and are not sold, it would show a lack of interest for second homes within the community. The town could be left paying for roads and other infrastructure and may not see any revenues from the development. The Demars Boulevard townhouse development is potentially a big risk for the town. Before the APA approves the ACR, it might want to take into consideration the impacts of such a smaller development within the town.
Also, there is a newer development in North Creek by Gore Mountain that is currently at a standstill. Front Street developers won approval by the APA in 2008 for ski-in ski-out condos, homes, restaurants and shops within the area. It is near the publicly owned Ski Bowl and will have a chair lift to connect it to Gore Mountain (“Resort runs”). “But developers have moved more slowly than expected, building only one town house and a series of roads...” (“Resort runs”). This is a potential problem because the town has not gained any revenue yet, and it is stuck with roads and just the promise of more development soon. This leads to the question of who will pay the bill for the development if it fails, and town residents are not willing to pay for the unfinished project.
Ultimately this Front Street development is stalled. Though they promise more roads and buildings soon, it is enough to show the recession is having a large impact on the buying of second homes within the park. It is potentially dangerous to have spent money on the infrastructure and disrupted the back country and not have potential buyers, and that should be essential in the decision of the APA. If the APA approves the ACR development, then residents should be concerned with the problems that North Creek is facing. Tupper Lake residents could be seeing infrastructure and the great camps and townhouses being partially built but unfinished due to the recession in the economy. That means locals will not have new jobs and shops to boost their slowing economy while the town’s budget will be drained to pay for infrastructure.
Currently the ACR is proposing a PILOT program for potential buyers of the townhouses and great camps. This program allows funds generated from sales to pay back bonds that were taken out to create the infrastructure. “Rather than paying property taxes, the people who buy the resort’s homes and condos would make ‘payments in lieu of taxes’ (PILOTs) to Franklin County’s Industrial Development Agency (“Tupper developer”). This is not a good thing for the community of Tupper Lake because there will be no taxes directly placed into the municipalities funds for services like the school system or fire department. However, potentially in the late future, some money may be received but not in large quantities that would have resulted from direct taxes from sales over the years.
These potentially negative implications for the landscape and the town need to be re-evaluated by both locals and outsiders. The Adirondack Park is unique because it is the largest recovering wilderness in the world. This is extremely important because these lands were once heavily logged, burned, and developed farm lands for cultural purposes. Through regulations and time, public lands and some private lands began to “recover” by re-growth of vegetation and increased wildlife populations. For example, the five ponds wilderness area has new growth and vegetation and ponds are recovering from acid rain. However, the ACR and other development projects threaten these recovering wilderness areas. Increased development projects within the Park results in timber removal, threatens wildlife habitats, and ruins watersheds. Currently the likely impact of the ACR proposal is too extensive upon the landscape and would set a precedent for future private lands to possibly have large developments as well. If large developments begin to spring up in small towns, the recovering wilderness would be threatened by increased pollution, and fragmentation would cancel out the last hundred years’ worth of efforts to save wildlife and the wild character of the park.
Therefore, it is essential to save the Park’s recovering wilderness by reducing and redesigning the ACR proposal. In my opinion, the townhouse development should be scaled way back from 675 to 200 units. The reduction would allow Tupper Lake to test the economic feasibility of such a resort, since there is currently a recession. If the project is scaled back, then there will be less of the town’s money spent in infrastructure. Local residents wouldn’t be stuck with roads and no houses, like the North Creek development. Though the ACR project would be reduced, there would be opportunities for new shops and revenue still within the town from winter and summer tourism.
Along with the reduction of townhouse units, the number of great camps should also be reduced from 39 to 12. This would allow for less back country fragmentation and encouraged wildlife migrations through better preserved habitats. Species like moose and bears which rely on wide ranges to roam would be less affected by fewer roads and large houses. The reduction of great camps would encourage wildlife migrations and protect the Adirondack’s wild character. Also with fewer infrastructures, there would be less degradation of the environment by tree removal and pollution of soils. Runoff from the road salt and possible leakage from septic tanks could penetrate the ground water and have negative impacts on drinking water for humans and wildlife. These effects on water quality would be reduced if the development was reduced and had an accurate plan for their waste disposal system.
As a Paul Smiths College graduate, and as a Potsdam Senior in Environmental Studies, I feel my background provides adequate knowledge of the Adirondack Park and its nature and culture relationship. The ACR development proposal is too ambiguous for the town of Tupper Lake and residents need to be aware of the full impacts upon them and their surroundings. The project has the potential to be an environmental social injustice to the town and to the Park as a whole. Residents and outsiders both need to be educated about the above findings and learn how deeply it could affect the future of the private lands within the Adirondack Park.
The PILOT program is a large economic injustice to the town of Tupper Lake. Residents would not have general funds allocated to the municipalities. There should not be a PILOT program to pay back bonds. Instead the money from the tax sales should be allocated directly into the town to maintain infrastructures. If the goal of the project is to boost Tupper Lake’s economy and to redefine their sustenance, then homeowners should have to pay taxes directly into the school system and fire department etc. The PILOT program does not allow a set schedule or promise when the town could see small tax benefits back into the community. Furthermore there is a soft market for second homes; the development could have no buyers. This would mean that Tupper Lake would be left with infrastructure and no way to pay back bonds.
I want to create an environmental advocacy group dedicated to educating history of the park and why it is necessary to reconsider the nature culture relationship of the park. The group would be called “Forever Enforced” to understand why it is necessary to live sustainably on the landscape and that humans can’t be separate from nature. If we view ourselves as separate from the wild character of the park then we lose its original intent of creation. Development and capitalism for economy will dominate the landscape and therefore nothing will be left to enjoy as an escape from civilization. The group would hold regular meetings to emphasize the need for reduction of development on private lands to keep environmental impacts low. Also, pamphlets and brochures would be passed out to explain the human-culture ties to the Adirondack landscape through history. It would suggest that people have the right to private lands, but not the right to exploit the landscape to the extent of ruining its wild character.
Environmental and Economic impacts lead environmental groups and locals to reconsider their support for the project. The Agency will make the ultimate decision upon the developmental infrastructure. If this development is approved by the APA, then it will set forth a precedent for future developers within the Park. The APA is reviewing each environmental concern to make sure there are no more “Lake George’s” within the Park. If the development is passed should regulations for private lands be re-evaluated? If private land owners can place a large development within the small town for economic reasons, what happens to the environmental quality within the park? The Agency’s job is to slow growth and to protect the wild character of the lands within the park. This has been a struggle for the APA throughout their existence, and is still seen today. If the development is passed by the Adirondack Park Agency, in its current form, it will be the largest within history to be approved within the Park, and could have the potential for other private lands to become developed intensively. The development if approved will be strongly affected by the reduction of snow and ice accumulation due to Global Climate Change. Tupper Lake’s winter economy would potentially be affected and tourism could decrease. The development of back country for great camps would impact migration patterns of large game in the area. The ecology of the landscape would be greatly jeopardized from great camps in the backcountry. Along with environmental impacts, there are economic factors that would not create an increase in local revenue for residents. The reduction of the development is necessary in order to protect the wild character of the Adirondacks.
Works Cited
Adirondack club and resort . (n.d.). ARISE , Retrieved from http://ariseofnny.org/about-the-acr
Adirondack club and resort. (n.d.). ADK Council, Retrieved from http://www.adirondackcouncil.org/ACRtupperlakeinfo07.html
Adirondack Park Agency, Initials. (2009, February 04). Regulations of apa. Retrieved from http://www.apa.state.ny.us/Documents/Laws_Regs/RulesRegs2009feb04.pdf
Adirondack park agency, Initials. (n.d.). Adirondack park facsimile map. Retrieved from http://www.apa.state.ny.us/gis/FacsimileMap.html
Bauer, P. (2007). Background on proposed big tupper ski area development. Residents Committee to Protect the Adirondacks, 1.
Collier, J. (2010, April 28). Tupper resort looking to take right of way. Adirondack Daily Enterprise, Retrieved from http://adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/512697.html?nav=5008
Collier, J. (2010, June 4). Judge to hear arguments in conservancy suit. Adirondack Daily Enerprise, Retrieved from http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/513497.html
Collier, J. (2009, August 21). County tries to draw investors to ad'k club. Adirondack Daily Enerprise, Retrieved from http://adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/508207.html
Collier, J. (2010, September 10). Resort gets right of way valued at $10,000. Adirondack Daily Enterprise, Retrieved from http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/515294.html
Collier, J. (2010, September 17). Apa approves tupper lake townhouses. Adirondack Daily Enerprise, Retrieved from http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/515445.html
Jenkins, J. (2010). Climate change in the adirondacks. Bronx, NY: Wildlife Conservation Society.
Lavalley, J. LaValley Real Estate Tupper Lake, Member of ARISE. Personal Interview. 10/14/10.
Mann, B. (2010). Tupper developer perseveres. Adirondack Explorer, 12-13.
Mann, B. (2010). Resort runs into snags. Adirondack Explorer, 15.
Mann, B. (Producer). (2010, October 13). Town struggles with north creek development [Audio Podcast]. North Country Public Radio. Retrieved from http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/story/16488/town-quot-struggles-quot-with-north-creek-resort
McClelland, D. (2010, July 28). Acr analysis details huge short-term, long-term economic impacts on region. Retrieved from http://ariseofnny.org/582/acr-analysis-details-huge-short-term-long-term-economic-impacts-on-region
Parsons, J. (n.d.). Non-native invasive fresh water plants. Retrieved from http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/plants/weeds/milfoil.html
Proulx, B. . (2010, April 29). Ak club & resort reps update resort plans. Adirondack Daily Enterprise,
Tomberlin, D. (2010). Adirondack club and resort. Retrieved from http://ariseofnny.org/about-the-acr
Wildlife connectivity in the adirondacks. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wilderness Conservation Society. http://www.wcsnorthamerica.org/tabid/3849/Default.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment