Statement to Village of Potsdam Board of Trustees
by Richard Brummel
Regarding the Proposed Hospital Zone or Zones
for the Public Record
at the Hearing on the Rezoning
Monday May 18, 2009 in Potsdam NY


Note -- The following statement was hand delivered and certified-mailed to the Village Clerk of Potsdam 5/13/09 along with supporting documents referenced here -- Daily Courier-Observer article of 12/5/09 page 1, "Health Care Zone Plotted"; "Canton-Potsdam Hospital Conceptual Landscape Plan" 2.25.09 HKWP Landscape Architects; Short Environmental Assessment Form, Village of Potsdam, 3/19/09 [signed by Planning Board chairman].

The proposed Health Care Zones or Zone (hereinafter "the Zone") have the potential to create major changes in a residential area over the near and long term - permitting doctors' offices, a new emergency facility, cancer clinic, parking lots, etc. - and yet the village has acted as if no environmental impacts are foreseeable. That is impermissible under state law, specifically the State Environmental Quality Review regulations, or SEQR under New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) regulations section 617 ff.

Please note, all references hereinafter to the Zone should be construed to address either one of both of the Zone elements, as proposed, namely HCZ-1 and HZC-2.

Potsdam Smart Growth (PotsdamSmartGrowth.org) continues to argue that temporary measures including demolitions could be used address the current parking problems while village and institutional leadership analyzes the possibility of an alternatively-sited Health Care Zone on the old Clarkson University campus.

To reiterate, such a centrally located Zone, on three major highways leading to other major population centers, and close to another highway (Route 11 to Canton and west), which is centrally-located in the commercial core across from village offices and emergency facilities, and which is located a block away from the SUNY Potsdam campus, offers a potential ideal synergy of energy efficiency and commerce with a potential for healthcare and healthcare-educational partnerships with at least two large local universities, Potsdam and Clarkson University, with SUNY Canton also a potential partner. Together they could become a unique and vital regional institution.

The Village of Potsdam (hereinafter "the Village" or "the village") and Canton-Potsdam Hospital (hereinafter "the hospital") have created the impression that the Zone is the only way to assist the hospital in expanding. But there has been no financial, economic, transportation, social, or environmental analysis of the plan - or its obvious alternatives.

The Clarkson alternative was compelling enough that the Clarkson President and the CEO of the hospital were scheduled to meet to initially explore the issue in January, 2009.

Absent the other analyses, public discourse has been inexcusably crippled. But absent the environmental analysis required under state law, the process has become unlawful and illegitimate.

For the reasons elucidated below, I therefore request that the village correct their defects as follows: (1) withdraw the proposed Zone law from Village Board of Trustees consideration; (2) make a determination the Zone is a Type 1 action under SEQR; (3) complete a full SEQR Environmental Assessment Form (EAF); (4) issue a positive "determination of significance" under SEQR terms; and (5) require that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be produced.

In the meantime short-term limited measures to support the hospital in its mission should be taken, and alterative sites explored.

Multiple procedural and process requirements of SEQR have been ignored and violated by the village of Potsdam (hereinafter "the village"). They will be identified below.

The village has on the public record an extensive description of the plans that hospital has for the Zone if it is approved. The Zone mentions numerous allowed and contemplated uses such as doctors' offices, parking lots, and multiple and sundry healthcare facilities.

Testimony before the village planning board (hereinafter "planning board") by Dr. David Acker, the CEO of the hospital has clearly spelled out a roadmap of intensive future development in the Zone. (See attached newspaper article, Daily Courier-Observer 12/5/08). The hospital has also posted various drafts of a "concept" for expected future development on its website (attached).

Testimony was also presented to the planning board during its drafting of the proposed Zone amendments to the village land use rules, on the public record, by numerous citizen neighbors of the hospital and others that described reasonably expected impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.

The record clearly indicates a range of "significant adverse" impacts that may be "reasonably expected" (language from DEC regulations section 617(c) (1)). Such impacts include but are not limited to:

"a substantial adverse change in ...traffic," (DEC regulations (SEQR) section 617.7 (c) (1) (i))

"impairment of ... existing community or neighborhood character," (DEC regulations (SEQR) section 617.7 (c) (1) (v)

"substantial change in use or intensity of use of land," (DEC regulations (SEQR) section 617.7 (c) (1) (viii))

"encouraging or attracting of a large number of people" (DEC regulations (SEQR) section 617.7 (c) (1) (ix))

In addition, the Zone provisions create a significant adverse impact in that they conflict with stated objectives of the village Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Smart Growth principles into village laws.

Over years to come, the hospital expects to grow significantly according to testimony by hospital officials before the planning board and village board. A Dr. Maresca even spoke of performing such highly specialized procedures as Bone Marrow Transplants, which at present require isolation rooms, 24-hour intensive care, and specialized laboratory facilities, and can cost $500,000 per patient or more.

As one envisions the hospitals growth in the near-, medium-, and long-term, one sees a growing load of patients needing more and more parking, transportation access, water, supplies, garbage services etc. One sees a trauma center - as Dr. and CEO Acker has described - operating 24 hours a day, bringing patients from all over the region, possibly by air as well.

No one does not want to see Canton-Potsdam Hospital achieve all these goals - they are assets to the community. The issue is how best to maintain a healthy environment outside the hospital walls - a livable, vibrant, verdant community free as much as possible of urban defects such as excess traffic, overcrowding, constant noise.

The current location of the hospital does not even offer direct access to a single highway.

By law and by logic all the impacts described must be evaluated and alternatives explored that mitigate them

The SEQR law forces only some communities hands; others would welcome a rational conscientious procedure to protect and enhance their community, specifically through use of the Environmental Impact Statement analysis process to learn about EXACTLY what they are getting into.

Unfortunately the village of Potsdam is not one of them. So I will elucidate the law as I read it and as two legal experts, one a downstate professor of land-use law and one an accomplished New York land-use litigator confirmed is the correct reading of the SEQR law, and demonstrated the multiple material legal defects in the procedures Potsdam has used.

Under New York State Department of Environmental Conservation regulations for proper public adoption of zoning changes and other projects, the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) law specifies multiple mandatory procedures and actions that the Village of Potsdam has completely ignored:

  • The determination of environmental "significance" that is at the core of the DEC rules is to take place "as early as possible in the design or formulation of the action." Potsdam originally described plans for a Health Care Zone in its 2006 comprehensive plan. The village - through its planning department -- has been redesigning the details of the plan since at least late 2008. Yet to date, the village has made no written or verbal review or determination of environmental "significance" of the rezoning. (DEC Regulations Section 617.6 (b)(1)(i))


  • Village officials have claimed they will review changes to the neighborhood resulting from the rezoning on a piecemeal basis as site plans are submitted. But the law states that where a plan such as a rezoning has a clear roadmap - which we know from published documents means parking lots, an emergency room, doctors' offices, etc. - it is illegal to "segment" the review and pretend various developments are not "reasonably expected" to follow the rezoning itself. (DEC Regulations 617.3 (g), 617.3 (g)(1), 617.4 (a)(1))


  • The village has drawn up a 'short-form' Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) , but because everything on the public record indicates the Health Care Zone proposal can be "reasonably expected" to lead to "physical alteration of 10 acres" or "expansion of existing nonresidential facilities" of more than 5 acres, the rezoning is undeniably a "Type 1" action that requires complete analysis by the full Environmental Assessment Form, almost inevitably leading to a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). (DEC Regulations 617.4 (a) (1), 617.4 (b) (6), 617.6 (a) (2), 617.7 (a) (2))


  • The short form EAF (attached) the village has improperly prepared (see above) fails to meet even the minimal standards that do apply to that highly abbreviated form. The village form is devoid of any environmental assessment, yet the law is clear: "A properly completed EAF must contain enough information to describe...potential impacts on the environment." Instead, the Potsdam form does not describe ANY environmental issue - whether traffic, garbage, community character, water usage, light and noise, etc. The Potsdam form contains only bare administrative information. (DEC Regulations Section 617.2 (m))


    • NOTE: We submitted a Freedom of Information request at the direction of the Village and were given the form (attached) by the Village in its stated complete condition last week. It is a month old anyway. A follow-up call to the village clerk today indicated no additional information has been put on the record for the zone proposal.

  • Village board members have said a vote may occur on May 18th, but such a vote would almost invariably require a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared to be legally-sufficient for proper local policy-making under SEQR rules. An EIS is required when such impacts "a substantial adverse change in ...traffic," "impairment of ... existing community or neighborhood character," "substantial change in use or intensity of use of land," and "encouraging or attracting of a large number of people" are "impacts which may be reasonably expected to result" from the rezoning in the immediate-, medium- and long-term."(DEC 617.7 (a) (2), 617.7 (c) (1) (i), 617.7 (c) (1) (v), 617.7 (c) (1) (viii), 617.7 (c) (1) (ix), 617.4 (a) (1)).


    • The "reasonably expected" developments within the Zone - doctors' offices, parking lots, new emergency room and cancer clinic, etc. - have been repeatedly reiterated on the public record by the hospital, the planning board, village officials, and public testimony.

  • The rezoning conflicts with 2006 Potsdam Village Comprehensive Plan stated objective to "revise its zoning ordinances to better reflect smart growth land use principles" and hence is in "material conflict" with "current plans or goals as officially approved", and therefore creates a significant impact reviewable only by a full Environmental Impact Statement. (Village of Potsdam Comprehensive Plan 2006, p. 24; DEC Regulations 617.7 (c) (1) (iv))

Potsdam Smart Growth wishes to play a constructive role in the process and will be available for further consultation.

Thank you.

Signed

Richard Brummel, organizer
Potsdam Smart Growth
5/13/09