PUA Associates, LLC

PO Box 312
Highmount, NY 12441
Daniel T. Whitehead
Regional Permit Administrator
NYSDEC
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, NY 12561-1620
RE: Comments on the SDEIS for the Modified Belleayre Resort at Catskill Park
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
This letter contains additional comments I have on the modified Belleayre Resort at
Catskill Park SDEIS (the SDEIS). My initial comments were made at the hearing held
by DEC on May 29, 2013.
I am the appointed asset manager for PUA Associates, LLC, (PUA), the owner of a
parcel of property on the west side of Route 49A (Tax Parcel ID No. 309.-1-50.2 in the
Town of Middletown) that is adjacent to much of the development proposed in the
SDEIS (referred to as the Galli-Curci Property). This parcel and two others (collectively
encompassing approximately 137 acres) constitute the site of a listing on both the
National and State Registers of Historic Places.
The Galli-Curci Property houses the Galli-Curci Mansion which has been listed as a
historic building on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. The Galli-Curci
Property also houses 9 other buildings and structures which were determined to be
contributing resources to the listing.
The other two parcels that are part of the State and National Registers listings are
owned by the applicant, Crossroads Ventures, LLC. These parcels include the area
identified in the SDEIS as the Old Leach Farm (Tax Parcel ID No. 309-1-50.1 in the
Town of Middletown), proposed as the site of the Leach Farm Conference Center and
the area immediately across County Route 49A from the Galli-Curci Property that is
proposed as part of the Highmount Spa complex (Tax Parcel ID No. 3.-1-1 in the Town
of Shandaken).
The Galli-Curci Mansion was constructed over 90 years ago by renowned architect
Harrie T. Lindeberg. It is one of the few remaining examples of an outstanding and
highly intact early twentieth century estate in the Catskill Mountains. It is also significant
as it was the home of Italian-American soprano Amelita Galli-Curci (1882-1963), one of
303063.5A
7/23/2013
the most acclaimed sopranos of the early twentieth century. Among the special
features
is a double-height studio wing and music library where the Ms. Galli-Curci gave recitals.
My wife, Idith Korman, is an accomplished concert pianist and she continues to give

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !2
recitals in the studio wing. Benefits and other public programs continue to be hosted at
the Mansion.
The National and State Registers listings also recognize that the location and bucolic
setting of the Mansion is an important component of its historic, architectural and
cultural significance. The Mansion rests on a plateau in a pristine environment and
commands sweeping views of the Catskill Mountains.
The property boundary to the Galli-Curci Mansion abuts County Route 49A, the sole
access road to the proposed Highmount development and the Leach Farm Conference
Center. The property is within a few hundred feet of both the proposed Leach Farm
Conference Center and the lower detached units identified on plans for Highmount. It is
a mere quarter of a mile from the Highmount Hotel and Spa. The Mansion depends on
the use of deeded rights to potable groundwater located across County Route 49A on
the site of the proposed development.
There is a clear obligation under both the State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) and
the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) to consider the modified
projects impacts on the properties listed in the State Register of Historic Places. SHPA
requires DEC to fully explore all feasible and prudent alternatives and give due
consideration to feasible and prudent plans which avoid or mitigate adverse impacts on
historic resources. (PRHPL 14.09(1)) The law defines adverse impacts as:
1. Destruction or alteration of all or part of the property;
2. Isolation or alteration of the propertys environment;
3. Introduction of visual, audible or atmospheric elements which are out of character
with the property or alter its setting; or
4. Neglect of property resulting in its deterioration or destruction. (PRHPL
14.09(1))
The obligations imposed by the SHPA provide protections for historic properties that go
beyond those available generally under SEQRA. Due to the fact that the Agreement in
Principle (AIP) redirected development onto the western side of Belleayre Mountain,
the uses proposed by the modified project are of greater intensity in the vicinity of the
Galli-Curci Property than those proposed in the original project. Notwithstanding, the
SDEIS is virtually devoid of any site-specific analysis of the projects potential impacts
on the Galli-Curci Mansion.
The following are those issues that impact or potentially impact the Galli-Curci Property.
1. Visual Impact. DECs visual impact policy requires that the potential for adverse
visual and aesthetic impacts on receptors outside of the proposed project be
evaluated. The policy goes on to state that, where a project is in the viewshed of
an aesthetic resource, the Department will require a visual assessment of the

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !3
impact on that resource. The very first aesthetic resource identified in DECs
policy is a property that is on or eligible for the State or National Registry.
Notwithstanding the fact that the proposed Highmount development literally
would be across the street and the proposed Leach Farm Conference Center
only a few hundred feet away on the same side of the road, the SDEIS provides
no visual assessment of the projects potential impact on the Galli-Curci Property.
This is particularly troubling as the documentation supporting the listing for both
the State and National registers cite the views from the Galli-Curci Property as
one of the important bases for its historic significance. It is impossible to
understand how a project of such proportions and in such close proximity to the
Galli-Curci Property could escape a site-specific visual impact review.
This failure violates both DECs visual impact policy and the agencys obligations
under SHPA and SEQRA. The applicant should be required to provide a visual
assessment and such assessment should then be subject to a further public
comment period.
2. Blasting. The SDEIS identifies the fact that blasting will be required for certain
buildings and sections of road. Figure 2-36 of the SDEIS shows blasting on the
project site in areas immediately across County Route 49A from the Galli-Curci
Property. The Mansion and nine other contributing on-site resources are only a
few hundred feet away from the closest blasting sites that have been identified.
Other blasting sites needed to expand County Road 49A have not been identified
in the SDEIS and may be even closer.
The SDEIS concedes that vibration and noise from blasting has the potential for
impacting nearby structures and people (SDEIS at 3-34). The SDEIS offers no
analysis of the risk of damage at various distances nor does it offer any specific
measures that might lessen that risk except to note that the blasting will be
controlled so the vibrations satisfy the particle velocities v. frequency limits
recommended by the U.S. Bureau of Mines Report-8507 (November 1980)
(SDEIS at 3-34). Whether that standard is adequate to protect a century-old
structure or whether other safer standards are available is not discussed. The
proposed mitigation for any blasting damage relies upon repairing damage after
the fact (assuming such damage can be proven) rather than considering
additional measures that might be needed to prevent damage to sensitive
receptors.
Blasting techniques that may be adequate in most circumstances to protect
modern structures may not necessarily be adequate to provide adequate
protection for century-old cultural resources listed on the State and National
Registers. Damage must be avoided to the structures as it may not be feasible

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !4
to repair them consistent with maintaining their historic character and
architectural significance.
The SDEIS needs to analyze whether blasting could have an adverse impact
structures that are on the Galli-Curci Property. If analysis shows that there is
potential for such damage, alternative construction techniques should be
required or the development should be modified.
3. Traffic. The Galli-Curci Property abuts County Route 49A, which is known as
Galli-Curci Road in that vicinity. It lies beyond the main entrance to the Belleayre
Ski Center, i.e. the vast majority of traffic now destined for the ski center enters
prior to passing by the Galli-Curci Property. Under the proposed plan, the portion
of Galli-Curci Road passing by the Galli-Curci Property would be widened and
the entrance to the entire Highmount complex as well as the Leach Farm
Conference Center would be built beyond the entryway to the Mansion. From its
present condition as a rural two-lane road with a very low volume of traffic
(essentially unaffected by traffic to and from Belleayre Ski Center), that portion of
Galli-Curci Road will find itself on the route to one of the main components of the
proposed resort.
Whenever I travel to the Mansion, once I pass the entrance to Belleayre Ski
Center, it is rare that I encounter other vehicles on Galli-Curci Road. The traffic
report in the SDEIS estimates that, once the project is fully operational, the
Saturday peak hourly trips on that section of the Galli-Curci Road will jump to 130
(more than 2 cars on average each and every minute).
This change will surely negatively impact the character and quality of the bucolic
setting in which the Mansion is located. This setting was a distinguishing feature
identified in the documentation supporting its listing on the State and National
Registers.
The approved scope of the SDEIS requires analysis of alternative layouts for the
Highmount Spa Resort, including alternate routing of the access road for the
entire site (DSEIS Scope at 5.2 A). Notwithstanding, the SDEIS does not
analyze the rerouting of the access route to a point north of the Galli-Curci
Property. If such a rerouting were implemented, virtually all of the traffic to the
Highmount complex would avoid the portion of Galli-Curci Road abutting the
Mansion. Only the much lower volume of traffic destined for the Leach Farm
Conference Center would pass by the part of Galli-Curci Road that abuts the
Galli-Curci Property. I would urge DEC to direct the Applicant to analyze this
alternative.
4. Noise. The SDEIS indicates there will be increased noise during the construction
phase due to blasting, rock crushing and the use of heavy equipment. It also

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !5
acknowledges that there will be an increase in noise during the operational
phase of approximately 3 decibels due to increased traffic and the use of snowmaking equipment.
With respect to the construction noise, the largest impact in the vicinity of
Highmount is projected at receptor W1, which is roughly 500-600 feet from the
Mansion. The impacts of the various construction activities at receptor W1 will
increase noise to levels between 68 and 75 dBA. These levels would be
unacceptable at the Mansion and therefore the applicant should be required to
project the impact there in order to determine whether mitigation is necessary.
The analysis with respect to the operational impacts is based on a comparison of
the noise levels pre-development with those when the project is operational. The
pre-development levels are derived from a survey of certain identified locations.
According to Table 2-1 of Appendix 20, the existing ambient noise levels at the
Galli-Curci Mansion (Receptor W-2) were based on measurements at survey
location ML-1. Figure 2-1 shows that ML-1 is located at or in close proximity to
County Road 49-A. By contrast, the existing ambient noise levels at the Mansion
(Receptor W-2) are much lower than at ML-1 because it is set back substantially
from the road. The projected operational noise levels of the project as
determined at Receptor W-2 should be compared to the existing ambient noise
levels at Receptor W-2, not those at ML-1. If that were done, the projected
project impact would be much greater and would likely require mitigation.
In my view, this is another instance of the SDEIS failure to provide site-specific
analysis of the projects impact on the Galli-Curci Property; an analysis that is
required by the SHPA. Such a site-specific analysis is particularly important with
respect to the noise impact analysis because the bucolic setting of the Mansion
is an important component of its historic, architectural and cultural significance.
The rerouting of the access road to the Highmount complex, as suggested in
paragraph 3 above, would certainly be an important measure to mitigate
operational noise at the Mansion. Absent such a measure, other mitigation (e.g.
noise barriers) should be considered. The decision on any such mitigation
should only take place after an appropriate noise survey of existing conditions at
the Mansion has occurred.
5. Flooding, Runoff, Erosion. The potential for flooding, runoff and erosion caused
by both the construction work and the changed landscape has been evaluated in
the SDEIS. Proper stormwater management is critical because of the
construction on steep slopes and the increase in impervious cover.

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !6
I have reviewed the June 18, 2013 comments prepared by Sterling
Environmental Engineering, P.C. submitted by Ms. Julie Weisman on behalf of
Gould Property Company. The comments relating to stormwater management
raise serious concerns about whether the applicants proposal is adequate and I
adopt them as they are highly relevant to my concerns regarding the protection of
the Galli-Curci Property.
The Galli-Curci Propertys proximity to large engineered stormwater retention
ponds is an area of specific concern. As the project will direct large volumes of
stormwater to the retention ponds, either the inability to contain the stormwater or
the failure of the ponds themselves would have severe consequences for the
Galli-Curci Property. In fact, the Sterling comments indicate that its analysis
shows the possibility that unmitigated peak stormwater flows might bypass the
engineered rentention pond (Sterling comments at page 12). In such a case,
stormwaters could seep through and erode the grounds of the Galli-Curci
Property.
The Galli-Curci Property already suffers from drainage problems and the analysis
in the SDEIS does not adequately demonstrate how it would be protected from
the new drainage patterns. This is yet another instance where the SDEIS does
not separately analyze potential project impacts on property listed on the State
and National Registers of Historic Places.
6. Water Supply. The Estate depends on deeded rights to an aquifer on the
opposite side of County Route 49A. The very significant draw downs on local
aquifers needed to support the project will likely disrupt and/or degrade this water
supply. The SDEIS needs to identify an alternative water supply source that is of
comparable quality and reliability. If, as it appears, the only such way to provide
these assurances is to permit the Estate to connect to the projects water supply,
that connection should be made a requirement of any approval.
7. Security. As a steward of this historic property, I am concerned that the
construction and operating phases of the project will bring a large number of
strangers past the section of County Road 49A immediately adjacent to the GalliCurci Property and thus create a security problem that could result in vandalism
or other degradation of this resource. The SDEIS should evaluate this concern
and require reasonable prevention measures (e.g. fencing).
8. Leach Farm Conference Center. The SDEIS indicates the intent to construct a
12,000 square foot conference / clubhouse center on the site of the historic
Leach Farmhouse but does not provide any more specifics about the intended
use. Depending upon the use it is actually put to, the operation of the center
could itself have noise or other impacts. The need for such a center has not
been justified nor have the impacts of any potential uses been evaluated. The

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !7
SDEIS should identify these uses and their intensity and analyze any impacts
associated with them. No different uses or similar uses of greater intensity
should be permitted absent a permit revision process.
Alternatively, the Leach Farm property could be dedicated to non-project uses.
The land on which the Farm is located is already included on the National and
State Registers as part of the lands constituting the historic Galli-Curci Estate.
The applicant should be required to consider the restoration and maintenance of
the building as a historic farmhouse that would be available for public viewing.
As a related matter, I am concerned about degradation that may have already
occurred to the historic Leach Farmhouse. Actions taken by the developer to
remove historic artifacts should not be viewed as separate and distinct from the
modified project now being reviewed. DEC should insist on obtaining a full
inventory of artifacts in the Leach Farmhouse since the adoption of the AIP. In
the event that any of these artifacts have been removed or there has been any
destruction or alteration of the property in anticipation of erecting the Conference
Center, DEC should insist on full restoration.
9. Changes in Use. If a major new resort is approved, proposals for on-site casinos
or other facilities may follow. Any approvals that may be granted should be
specific to the uses proposed by the applicant and it should be made clear that
any change of use will constitute a separate action warranting additional review.
Finally, I am also concerned that the public notice for the acceptance of the SDEIS and
the complete application for associated DEC permits issued on April 17, 2013 is
misleading. It indicates that both the DEC and the OPRHP have determined that the
proposed project would have no adverse impact on properties listed or eligible for the
State and National Registers of Historic Places. As discussed above, the analysis has
failed to adequately assess the projects impact on the Galli-Curci Property. Further,
when my representative contacted OPRHP, the agency denied that it had made any
such unconditional determination and further noted that it had not been provided
requested documents from DEC related to the projects potential impacts on historic
properties. In my view, the notice is defective and should be corrected and reissued.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide additional comments on the Modified Project. I
look forward to working with DEC to assessing potential project impacts on the GalliCurci Property and arriving at approaches to avoid or mitigate any such impacts.
Very truly yours,

Benjamin Korman

Daniel T. Whitehead
July 23, 2013
Page !8
Manager, PUA, LLC
cc:

OPRHP