DOCSLIB.ORG

Croton Water Treatment Plant Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary 1. Introduction, Background

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Croton Water Treatment Plant Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary 1. Introduction, Background CROTON WATER TREATMENT PLANT DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND SITING ALTERNATIVES ............................. 1 1.1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE CROTON WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM .............................. 4 1.2.1. Existing Croton Water Supply Users...................................................................... 4 1.2.1.1. Upstate Users .................................................................................................. 4 1.2.1.2. New York City Users...................................................................................... 4 1.3. NEED FOR THE PROJECT .......................................................................................... 6 1.4. BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT ......................................................................... 10 1.4.1. Consent Decree ..................................................................................................... 11 1.4.2. 1999 Croton Water Treatment Plant..................................................................... 12 1.4.3. Supplement to the Consent Decree....................................................................... 13 1.4.4. 2003 Croton WTP EIS.......................................................................................... 13 1.4.5. State Legislature’s Approval of Park Alienation.................................................. 13 1.5. SITE SELECTION ....................................................................................................... 14 1.5.1. Site Screening ....................................................................................................... 14 1.5.2. Selection of the Proposed Project ......................................................................... 16 1.5.2.1. Disadvantages of the Eastview Site .............................................................. 16 1.5.2.2. Advantages of the Eastview Site................................................................... 17 1.5.2.3. Disadvantages of the Mosholu Site............................................................... 17 1.5.2.4. Advantages of the Mosholu Site................................................................... 18 1.5.2.5. Disadvantages of the Harlem River Site....................................................... 18 1.5.2.6. Advantages of the Harlem River Site ........................................................... 19 1.5.3. Site Comparison.................................................................................................... 20 2. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.................................................................... 22 2.1. WATER TREATMENT PROCESS............................................................................. 22 2.1.1. Treatment Chemicals ............................................................................................ 26 2.1.2. Electrical Power.................................................................................................... 27 2.2. EASTVIEW WATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE .................................................. 28 2.2.1. Raw Water Conveyance and Pumping ................................................................. 29 2.2.2. Treated Water Conveyance and Pumping............................................................. 29 2.2.3. Interim/Permanent Backup System....................................................................... 34 2.2.4. Long Term Treated Water Conveyance Alternatives ........................................... 34 2.2.4.1. New Croton Aqueduct .................................................................................. 34 2.2.4.2. Kensico-City Tunnel..................................................................................... 36 2.2.5. Emergency Bypass and Blow-Off ........................................................................ 37 2.3. MOSHOLU SITE ......................................................................................................... 38 2.3.1. Raw Water Conveyance and Pumping ................................................................. 38 2.3.2. Treated Water Conveyance and Pumping............................................................. 43 2.3.3. Emergency Bypass................................................................................................ 43 2.4. HARLEM RIVER SITE ............................................................................................... 43 2.4.1. Raw Water Conveyance and Pumping ................................................................. 44 2.4.2. Treated Water Conveyance and Pumping............................................................. 44 2.4.3. Emergency Bypass................................................................................................ 48 2.5. OFF-SITE FACILITIES ............................................................................................... 48 CROTON WATER TREATMENT PLANT DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.5.1. New Croton Aqueduct .......................................................................................... 50 2.5.1.1. 1890 Croton Gate House............................................................................... 50 2.5.1.2. New Croton Aqueduct Shaft No. 9............................................................... 51 2.5.2. Jerome Park Reservoir .......................................................................................... 53 2.5.2.1. Gate House No. 7.......................................................................................... 53 2.5.2.2. Gate House No. 5.......................................................................................... 54 2.5.2.3. New Croton Aqueduct Shaft No. 21............................................................. 54 2.5.2.4. Gate House No. 6 / Microstrainer Building.................................................. 55 2.5.2.5. Gate House No. 3.......................................................................................... 55 2.5.2.6. Gate House No. 2.......................................................................................... 55 2.5.2.7. Jerome Pumping Station. .............................................................................. 56 2.6. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES AND COST ESTIMATES.................................... 56 3. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION................................................................................. 58 3.1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 58 3.2. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION AT THE EASTVIEW SITE............................................................................................................ 59 3.2.1. Introduction........................................................................................................... 59 3.2.2. Neighborhood Character....................................................................................... 60 3.2.3. Traffic ................................................................................................................... 60 3.2.4. Noise ..................................................................................................................... 65 3.2.4.1. Mobile Source Noise..................................................................................... 65 3.2.4.2. Stationary Source Noise................................................................................ 66 3.2.5. Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 67 3.2.6. Historic and Archaeological Resources................................................................ 67 3.2.7. Natural and Water Resources................................................................................ 68 3.2.8. Public Health......................................................................................................... 69 3.3. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION AT THE MOSHOLU SITE............................................................................................................. 70 3.3.1. Introduction........................................................................................................... 70 3.3.2. Traffic ................................................................................................................... 70 3.3.3. Noise ..................................................................................................................... 72 3.3.3.1. Mobile Source Noise..................................................................................... 73 3.3.3.2. Stationary Source Noise................................................................................ 73 3.3.4. Natural Resources ................................................................................................. 75 3.3.4.1. Vegetation and Trees .................................................................................... 75 3.3.4.2. Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 76 3.3.5. Public Health......................................................................................................... 78
Load more

Recommended publications
  • S T a T E O F N E W Y O R K 3695--A 2009-2010
    S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 3695--A 2009-2010 Regular Sessions I N A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2009 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. ENGLEBRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. KOON, McENENY -- read once and referred to the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Sports Development -- recommitted to the Committee on Tour- ism, Arts and Sports Development in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, in relation to the protection and management of the state park system THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Legislative findings and purpose. The legislature finds the 2 New York state parks, and natural and cultural lands under state manage- 3 ment which began with the Niagara Reservation in 1885 embrace unique, 4 superlative and significant resources. They constitute a major source of 5 pride, inspiration and enjoyment of the people of the state, and have 6 gained international recognition and acclaim. 7 Establishment of the State Council of Parks by the legislature in 1924 8 was an act that created the first unified state parks system in the 9 country. By this act and other means the legislature and the people of 10 the state have repeatedly expressed their desire that the natural and 11 cultural state park resources of the state be accorded the highest 12 degree of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • A Snapshot of NYS Parks & Historic Site Friends Groups in 2016
    You Gotta Have Friends A snapshot of NYS park and historic site Friends groups in 2016 Parks-Get-By - version 2.indd 1 12/7/2016 1:59:21 PM INTRODUCTION Non-profi t Friends organizations have been supporting New York’s state parks and historic sites for nearly a century. Yet recent years have seen a dramatic acceleration in the number, eff ort, activities and impact of these dedicated groups. Friends groups are Under the leadership of Governor Cuomo, the state is making a historic multi-year commitment of $900 million in private and public funding for state parks through 2020. poised and ready to Continuing to build and strengthen Friends organizations—and their partnership with the Offi ce of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP)—will provide a signifi cant make an even complement to New York State’s ongoing revitalization of its iconic park system and greater contribution provide more opportunities for the 65 million annual park and historic site visitors to engage with and appreciate our natural, cultural and historical treasures. to the renaissance of the New York State A NATIONAL LEADER IN PARKS New York State has the oldest park system in the nation. From the 1885 establishment park system. of America’s fi rst state park, Niagara Falls, to the protection of Long Island’s beaches in the twentieth century, New York has been a national leader in conserving its diverse and unique natural and cultural heritage. Yet, the existence of parks is not a given—as New Yorkers learned in 2010, when at the height of the Great Recession, the state threatened to close over one-third of the state park system.
    [Show full text]
  • Road and Its Settlers Little Egypt Section of Walton Hills Album
    Dunham (Egypt) Road and its Settlers Little Egypt Section of Walton Hills Album Album 1 Location of Little Egypt The Name - "Little Egypt" First Settlers Little Egypt Roads Indian Trails - Indian Point Ma Parkefs Tavem World's End Egypt Mound Gleeson Family - 7 Generations of Gleesons - Dominick Carey - Clara Gleeson Carey Maple Wood Stock Farm Gleeson House - Astor Day Care Center- Astorhurst Little Egypt pages from'book, Tracing Our Heritage Little Egypt pages from book, Histolic Sites in Our Parks Little Egypt Section of Walton Hills Album Album 2 - - - - Other Little Egypt Families: Black - Kolis/Wills - Kitson Silk/Telicheck Hesoun Rizer Rezac/Chvatal - Timko - Kadarabek/Klukan - Peterman - Ridsdale -·Hunge,ford/Osborne/Benjamin/Carter/Kali-Tonsing - Wolf- VIach - Svec - Grams - Dolejs/Featherstun - Dean Egypt School Cottages along Egypt Road Sagamore Hills Beer Garden Boy Scout Cabin - the Old Hermit - Hermit Hollow Picnic Pavilion Tink's Tavem -TinkeFS Creek Tavem Tate - Mighbn - Groh - Spieth Family Mars Wager Quarry - Black Beauty IRiding Academy Dziczkowski Family New York Central Freight Line - Railroad Houses On this Web SRe also see Links about Dunham / Egypt Road and its Settlers: Book: The VWage of Wa/ton Hms - Tmcing Our Heritage, by Jean and Robert Kainsinger, c. 1986 p. 100-111 Book: Historica/ S#es in Our Parks: Historic Sites in Cuyahoga Va#ey National Park and Bedford Reservation within the Boundaries of the VWage of Wa/lon H#/s, by Jean and Bob Kainsinger, c. 2004,2006 p. 25-36 Album of Maps: Includes many maps of
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Scope for the Modification of the Catalum Spdes Permit
    DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lead Agency: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Applicant: New York City Department of Environmental Protection April 2014 Draft Scope DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................................ 4 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 6 1.3 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OPERATION .............................................................................. 7 1.4 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 10 1.5 CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ............................................................................................. 13 1.6 THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................................................. 14 1.7 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................... 29 1.8 LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS .............................................. 30 1.9 PRIOR STUDIES .............................................................................................................. 30 2.0
    [Show full text]
  • There Are No Long-Term Local Or Regional Economic Impacts Anticipated Due to These Relocations
    Draft Environmental Impact Statement Section IV.B There are no long-term local or regional economic impacts anticipated due to these relocations. NYSDOT Real Estate staff conducted a Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan to determine the availability of adequate replacement sites. The complete relocation plan can be found in Appendix H. Based on this analysis, sufficient available residential and commercial properties exist on the market to accommodate these relocations. There are no highway construction or other projects by any public or private agency scheduled that would affect the availability of replacement property. It is estimated that the relocations on this project can be accomplished within one year from the date of vesting. B.3. Environmental Consequences This section describes the impacts of each of the Build Alternatives on the natural environment, including water resources, wildlife habitat, parks, air quality, noise levels, cultural resources, and contaminated materials. B.3.a. Surface Waters/Wetlands This section discusses the inter-related topics of surface waters, wetlands, coastal zone resources, navigable waters, and floodplains. The descriptions of the No Build and Build Alternatives presented below are relevant to several of the environmental discussions that follow. No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would make no physical or operational improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge, but would continue NYSDOT’s existing maintenance program. There would be little change to existing conditions in the study area, and no fill or excavation would take place in Newtown Creek. Alternatives RA-5 and RA-6 During construction, up to six temporary pile-supported staging platforms would be constructed in Newtown Creek and remain in place until the end of the construction period.
    [Show full text]
  • High Bridge Restoration Complete!
    Volume 17 Issue 1 Summer 2015 HIGH BRIDGE RESTORATION COMPLETE! REOPENS AS A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AND TO BICYCLE TRAFFIC AFTER 45 YEARS ON JUNE 9, 2015! BUILT AND RESTORED WITH ROSENDALE NATURAL CEMENT Tinted lithograph drawn and lithographed by George Hayward, showing view from above the High Bridge over the Harlem River in New York City. The lithography was published in D.T. Valentine’s Manual of the Corporation of the City of New York for 1862. The Manuals are the first illustrated histories of New York City using maps and prints extensively. Statistics of banks, hospitals, schools and gov- Preparing for restoration work on the walkway January 2014. The Collection of Century House Historical Society ernmental records filled the pages. High Bridge water tower in the background provided gravity pres- sure and held a 47,000 gallon tank. Photo by Jim Henderson Built as part of the old Croton Aqueduct system in 1848, High Bridge is the city’s oldest bridge connecting two boroughs. Spanning the Harlem River and connecting the area around West 170th Street in the Bronx to the area around West 173rd in Manhattan, it is an engineering marvel designed by American engineer John B. Jervis. Jer- vis succeeded Benjamin Wright as the chief engineer on the Delaware & Hudson Canal. Prior to the construction, the water supply of New York City was dependent on private wells, water carts, rain barrels and cisterns. Repeated cholera epidemics caused terror and death. The Great Fire of 1835 had leveled most of lower Manhattan. Perhaps worse yet to some, the beer brewing industry had already packed up and relocated further north to Albany seeking water of pure quality.
    [Show full text]
  • NYS OSP Appendix F
    e-Appendix F – ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC COMMENT e-Appendix F ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE 2014 DRAFT PLAN In 2013, DEC and OPRHP began the process of updating the 2009 Plan, asking the Regional Advisory Committees for recommendations. These suggestions and other public comments received since the publication of the 2009 Plan were evaluated, along with changes in the law, regulations and the Agencies' programs, to prepare a revised Plan. The Draft Plan was made available for public comment beginning on September 17, 2014 and ending on December 17, 2014. A statewide set of public hearings and workshops on the documents served to answer questions and receive comments. Public comments were received via the public hearings, mail, E-mail and through DEC's website established for the Open Space Conservation Plan (www.dec.ny.gov/lands/98720.html). A total of 462 people and organizations commented on the Draft Plan. A list of the commenters is included in e-Appendix G. The State open space conservation plan outlines a series of policy and program recommendations to enhance efforts that are on-going in New York State to advance Open space conservation at the state and local level with the many partners that are involved in this effort. Open space conservation provides multiple benefits: it helps sustain economically important sectors including agriculture, forestry, outdoor recreation and tourism; provides habitat for wildlife; protects water and air quality, ecosystems and endangered species; provides the basis for outdoor recreational activities, improves surrounding property values and community attractiveness, and in this era of rapid climate change, helps improve resilience to communities and private land owners.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Commission Meeting Agenda Monday, July 13, 2015
    Design Commission Meeting Agenda Monday, July 13, 2015 Public Meeting 12:20 p.m. Consent Items 25424: Installation of a prototypical newsstand, 1280 York Avenue, northeast corner of York Avenue and East 68th Street, Manhattan. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 5, CB 8) DCA/DOT 25425: Installation of a prototypical newsstand, 1441 Second Avenue, northwest corner of East 75th Street and Second Avenue, Manhattan. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 4, CB 8) DCA/DOT 25426: Installation of a prototypical newsstand, 58 Tenth Avenue, southeast corner of Tenth Avenue and West 15th Street, Manhattan. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 3, CB 4) DCA/DOT 25427: Installation of photovoltaic panels, Engine Company 331, 158-57 Cross Bay Boulevard, Queens. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 32, CB 10) DDC 25428: Installation of rooftop antennae, Public Safety Answering Center II (PSAC II), 1200 Waters Place, Bronx. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 13, CB 11) DDC/DoITT 25429: Installation of windows and mechanical equipment, 77th Precinct Annex, 653 Grand Avenue, Brooklyn. (Final) (CC 35, CB 8) DDC 25430: Installation of a garage door, Q7 Garage, 133-25 32nd Avenue, Queens. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 20, CB 7) DEP 25431: Reconstruction of the Borden Avenue Pump Station, including the construction of an aeration building addition, Dutch Kills and Newtown Creek, 28-45 Borden Avenue under the Long Island Expressway, Queens. (Preliminary and Final) (CC 26, CB 2) DEP 25432: Construction of a water quality monitoring station, 903 East 233rd Street, Bronx. (Final) (CC 12, CB 12) DEP 25433: Reconstruction of Gate Houses No. 2 and 3 and restoration of Gate House No.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering Paradise the History of the Jerome Park Reservoir
    ENGINEERING PARADISE – THE HISTORY OF THE JEROME PARK RESERVOIR COMMUNITY The community that developed on the ridge around the Jerome Park Reservoir and Van Cortlandt Park should be thankful for the early pioneers who found a grand vision on the land we call home. Looking at an old map, one could only imagine what it looked like, how the landscaped developed, and other things for the interested mind. In what could only be describe as the growth of the conservationist environmentalist era, two men, John B. Jervis (1775-1885) and Frederick L. Olmstead (1822-1903), had a great influence on development in the country, state, and city. For our area, their foresight and talent had no bounds. But it took fifty years of planning and building. Surveying streets cut out of the same topography with curves instead of straight lines (1876). Building railroads to go north by the “country” (1880). Connecting parks for the enjoyment of the new settlers (1884), and by discovering that the land at Van Cortlandt Estate was much more beautiful and natural than Central Park (1888). When there was not enough water for the thirsty city, by adding the New Croton Aqueduct to the Old Croton Aqueduct system to enable growth (1890). By opening the first municipal golf course for recreation in Van Cortlandt Park (1895). Importantly, knowing to choose the site of the old Jerome Park Race Track as the site for a reservoir because it was on the high ridge, on an area with soft ground for ease in digging, and topographically configured to enable gravity to continue to bring water to a thirsty city (1906).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D New York City 2018 Drinking Water Supply and Quality Report
    AECOM NRG Astoria Replacement Project SPDES Permit Modification Appendix D New York City 2018 Drinking Water Supply and Quality Report 60609400 April 2020 New York City 2018 Drinking Water Supply and Quality Report Bill de Blasio Mayor Vincent Sapienza, P.E. Commissioner Tunneling through at Schoharie Reservoir OTSEGO RENSSELAER CHENANGO COUNTY SCHOHARIE COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY ALBANY Oneonta COUNTY Gilboa C D a Catskill/Delaware e t s la k w il a l r e Schoharie S Delhi h Watersheds a Reservoir n d a COLUMBIA k GREENE e COUNTY DELAWARE n COUNTY COUNTY Tu Hunter EW YORK n N s n le e i l M 5 Pepacton MASSACHUSETTS 12 iver Cannonsville Walton Reservoir R Reservoir Downsville Phoenicia Ashokan Esopus Reservoir Deposit Creek West Branch East Delaware T Delaware Kingston We st Delaware East Branch Delaware Tunnel unnel DUTCHESS COUNTY Hudson Neversink CUT Reservoir Rondout ULSTER Reservoir COUNTY Delaware Aqueduct Liberty Poughkeepsie Neversink CONNECTI Tunnel Delaware SULLIVAN s Ellenville e il COUNTY M 0 0 1 Croton C Croton a t PENNSYLVANIA s k Watershed i l l A q r u e v e River i R d Lake Boyds Corner k u Reservoir Gleneida s n le i c Middle i s t M r Branch e 5 v Reservoir 7 e PUTNAM lead Bog Brook N Lake i COUNTY G Reservoir ORANGE East Branch COUNTY Kirk Reservoir West Branch Lake g on Falls Divertin Reservoir Crot rvoir Reservoir Rese s ile Titicus M 0 Amawalk Reservoir 5 New Croton Reservoir Cross River Reservoir Reservoir Croton Water N H Muscoot NEW YORK CITY e Filtration Plant Hillview u w dson Reservoir Reservoir C WATER TUNNELS AND ro WESTCHESTER NY t City o Li NEW YORK COUNTY ne ROCKLAND n Jerome Park DISTRIBUTION AREAS Sound A Reservoir COUNTY NEW JER q R Island u CONNECTICUT i e g v n d e Hudson River Lo uc r SEY Cat/Del t Kensico New Croton Aqueduct BRONX UV Facility Reservoir all) y H Cit m fro White City Tunnel No.
    [Show full text]
  • Croton Watershed Catskill Watershed Delaware Watershed
    New York City’s Water Story: From Mountain Top to Tap SCHOHARIE COUNTY Schoharie Reservoir 1,130 FEET Delaware Watershed Gilboa Catskill Watershed Stamford The water we use today is the same water that fell as C rain when dinosaurs roamed a D t Prattsville Siuslaw s DELAWARE COUNTY West Branch Delaware e k l i the earth. In its endless a l Windham l w a W r cycle, water is the only e a t W e GREENE COUNTY rs Schoharie Creek substance that naturally a h te e r d Grand Gorge sh exists as a solid, e d liquid or gas. Delhi Lenox Roxbury East Branch Delaware Hunter Tannersville Andes Walton HUNTER MOUNTAIN Water’s journey from 4,040 FEET mountain top to tap begins Margaretville Shandaken Tunnel when rain and snow fall on COLUMBIA COUNTY watersheds, the areas Massachusetts of land that catch, absorb, Downsville Phoenicia and carry water downhill to gently and swiftly Deposit Pepacton Woodstock flowing streams. Cannonsville Reservoir Reservoir 1,150 FEET 1,280 FEET Esopus Creek SLIDE MOUNTAIN Boiceville West Delaware Tunnel East Delaware Tunnel 4,180 FEET Streams provide life-cycle Neversink Frost Valley needs for fish and other RIver aquatic organisms. Oxygen is Ashokan Rondout trapped in the fresh water as Creek Reservoir Claryville Olivebridge 590 FEET Kingston it tumbles over rocks into deep pools. Overhanging tree branches keep water r C e A v cool as fresh water T i Grahamsville S K R DUTCHESS COUNTY continues its journey. IL L n Neversink A Neversink Reservoir Tunnel Q o s 1,440 FEET U s E d Liberty Rondout Reservoir d Water is naturally filtered D u u U 840 FEET U C C H H T by the soil and tree roots in T dense forests as it travels toward reservoirs.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Development Resource Guide November 2007
    Heritage Development Resource Guide November 2007 New York State Heritage Areas 198225 years2007 Table of Contents Introduction 3 Profiles 5 New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation 7 Heritage New York (HNY) 9 New York State Heritage Area Program 11 Heritage Partners Alliance of National Heritage Areas (ANHA) 13 American Institute of Architects - NYS 15 Audubon New York 16 Canal New York, Inc. 18 Canal Society of New York State 20 Capital District Regional Planning Commission (CDRPC) 22 Center for Economic Growth (CEG) 24 Champlain Valley Partnership Heritage Area 26 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor 28 Genesee/Finger Lakes Regional Planning Council (G/FLRPC) 31 Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commission 33 Hudson River Environmental Society (HRES) 35 Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area 37 Lakes to Locks Passage, Inc. 40 Mohawk Towpath Scenic Byway 42 Museum Association of New York (MANY) 44 National Grid 46 National Park Service (NPS) 48 National Trust for Historic Preservation 50 New York Conference of Mayors and Municipal Officials (NYCOM) 52 New York Empire State Development Corporation (ESD) 54 New York Folklore Society 56 New York Heritage Area Association 58 New York State Canal Corporation 60 New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA) 62 New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets (NYS Ag & Mkts) 64 New York State Department of Education (NYSED) 66 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 68 New York State Department of State (NYDOS) 69 New York State
    [Show full text]