Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did you watch the video above? I ask because a question about an environment study not being done was asked and answered(around 50 minutes in). So, the information is there and may come into in regards to the lawsuit.
Yes, I noticed them discussing that the environmental study wasn't done. I'm wondering, since it is federal money, that it's not needed. For instance, we have 2 federally funded low income housing projects in Rochester, and they didn't have to follow local codes, for some reason.
I would think that they would already have some data about emissions, but any kind of surface road would produce even more with stop and go. Someone in the video also said that.
The longer the delay and the more roadblocks that are thrown up, the greater chance the project will never get done. The DOT is not going to spend 1 billion dollars to make things worse. If the residents don't want the tunnel then just forget the whole thing.
Yes, I noticed them discussing that the environmental study wasn't done. I'm wondering, since it is federal money, that it's not needed. For instance, we have 2 federally funded low income housing projects in Rochester, and they didn't have to follow local codes, for some reason.
I would think that they would already have some data about emissions, but any kind of surface road would produce even more with stop and go. Someone in the video also said that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundarr457
The longer the delay and the more roadblocks that are thrown up, the greater chance the project will never get done. The DOT is not going to spend 1 billion dollars to make things worse. If the residents don't want the tunnel then just forget the whole thing.
The rep gave the explanation in terms of a 6% projected increase in emissions, but stated that it doesn't account for changes in vehicles such as the potential increase in electric vehicles, decreased emissions, etc.
As for the other post, there are people that want the cap and some that don't as is(key words), but the overall attitude appears to be one of finding out more information. Even the segment posted from WGRZ was about the Environmental Impact Study, which hasn't been done, as the video stated. So, I think a lot of the apprehension is based off of the lack of an EIS not being done.
With this said, I think this video/presentation goes a long way in letting community members see what the project is going to look like.
The rep gave the explanation in terms of a 6% projected increase in emissions, but stated that it doesn't account for changes in vehicles such as the potential increase in electric vehicles, decreased emissions, etc.
.
I really think the public has had enough of this green push, which really just moves the environmental damage to a third world country, where it is out of our site. So I don't think the EV "movement" would mater.
Good news, however to the grievance community. A new pollutant has been "discovered", and that is that tires produce 1/2 of the air pollution in cars. That would also include EV's.
I really think the public has had enough of this green push, which really just moves the environmental damage to a third world country, where it is out of our site. So I don't think the EV "movement" would mater.
Good news, however to the grievance community. A new pollutant has been "discovered", and that is that tires produce 1/2 of the air pollution in cars. That would also include EV's.
If anything, the community is wondering if the issues that increased with the construction of the highway, such as asthma, will still be an issue even with the cap. Meaning, they care about the environmental impact of the parkway.
I think that is the thing, as I think the representative is thinking that there may be future innovations made in terms of vehicles.
If anything, the community is wondering if the issues that increased with the construction of the highway, such as asthma, will still be an issue even with the cap. Meaning, they care about the environmental impact of the parkway.
I think that is the thing, as I think the representative is thinking that there may be future innovations made in terms of vehicles.
You can't have an environmental study based on what "could" happen in the future.
You can't have an environmental study based on what "could" happen in the future.
That is probably why there is the lawsuit and the questions regarding the lack of an Environmental Impact Study by the state DOT. It is likely that there are people in the community that want to be sure about the environmental impact that this project may/may not have on the community and what it means going forward. Especially given the known environmental impact on the physical health of some in the community.
I really think the public has had enough of this green push, which really just moves the environmental damage to a third world country, where it is out of our sight.
I agree.....and have been saying that for a LONG time, starting with a few articles that were published in magazines such as 'Time' or 'Newsweek', as far back as the mid-80s.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
