« NYTimes Endorses Ratner for CD-11 | Main | It came from the Blogosphere... »

August 30, 2006

DEIS Bogus Points: A flawed DEIS may increase the potential for increased impacts to the environment

Page 4 of the Traffic and Parking section of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) states:

The combination of substantial numbers of new pedestrian trips on the crosswalks and new vehicular traffic may increase the potential for vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at this intersection, and thereby potentially increase vehicular and pedestrian exposure to accidents, especially during the weekday and Saturday pre-game and post-game peak hours when the greatest increases in travel demand would occur.

Page 82 states:

Overall, the combination of new vehicular traffic and substantial numbers of new pedestrian trips on the crosswalks may increase the potential for vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at this intersection, and thereby potentially increase vehicular and pedestrian exposure to accidents.
...
As at the Atlantic Avenue/Flatbush Avenue intersection [see photo], the combination of new vehicular traffic and new pedestrian trips on the crosswalks may increase the potential for vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at this intersection, and thereby potentially increase vehicular and pedestrian exposure to accidents.

And on page 83, you will find the following:

The combination of substantial numbers of new pedestrian trips on the crosswalks and new vehicular traffic may increase the potential for vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at this intersection, and thereby potentially increase vehicular and pedestrian exposure to accidents, especially during the weekday and Saturday pre-game and post-game peak hours when the greatest increases in travel demand would occur.

Now we're not traffic-and-parking experts (and definitely not English majors), but we know doublespeak when we hear it.

From the Park Slope Civic Council testimony:

"May increase the potential" for conflicts? If traffic increases substantially, and the number of pedestrians increases substantially, doesn't that definitely increase the potential for conflicts? It's possible that it may not actually lead to more accidents, but doesn't it definitely increase their potential? This is but one of the many, many flaws in the analysis of traffic and parking. Sadly, for someone, it could be a fatal flaw.

Bruce-BogusPoints1.gifThis flagrant attempt at bureaucratic doublespeak earns a lowly ONE out of FIVE BOGUS POINTS. [We figure that since the authors of the DEIS used it not once, but four times, they actually believe what they are writing and can't be taken to task for their own feeblemindedness.]

We will also being submitting all four statements to the Department of Redundancy Department for a full accounting of the potential increase of redundancy, which may thereby increase the repeated potential for redundancy frequently and often.

Posted by lumi at August 30, 2006 2:32 PM