Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

Subject: Waterfront plans? Author: Ned Depew [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 10:18:07 12/10/05 Sat SLC is talking about deciding what to do with their waterfront property and lame-duck Mayor Scalera is looking over the prospectus of a "mystery deal" from an unidentified developer. Shouldn't the people of Hudson - who own the abutting property and who will be deeply affected by whatever is done there - have some say about this very valuable municipal asset?" Why the secrecy? Why does SLC aver that they are looking at "possibilities" but fail to let the neighbors in on what any of those possibilities are? Why is the Mayor studying the proposal in private, rather than sharing it with his constituents and asking for public input? The idea, now being floated, of instituting a short-term, temporary moratorium on waterfront development until a satisfactory LWRP can be filed seems a logical response to forestall precipitous and hastily planned proposals and to give time for the community to come up with a long-term, comprehensive plan before anything specific is decided. The DOS guidelines are a good place to start, since any waterfront project would have to satisfy the famous "forty-two criteria" or whatever they are called. But for Hudson to create a blueprint that reflects its own unique history and connection to the river whose name the City bears could be an act of civic creativity and of the rebuilding of community after the divisive tactics of the "us vs. them" mentality so effectively and destructively fomented by SLC's PR machinery. Waterfront development that takes full advantage of the shoreline and the river as a recreational resource, that provides access and connection for all of Hudson's citizens - not just the privileged few - seems essential to me. A plan that speaks to the need for affordable housing and well-paying employment within walking distance of the City center, and that respects the existing landscape and architecture, as well as the existing businesses that currently operate there is equally important. There are models all around - from Kingston's ambitious plans to those in small waterfront cities all around America that suggest the possibilities of the kind of public facility and economic resource such an asset can become. We would do well to learn from them - to take the time to research and learn, and to be as sure as possible of what we are doing before we begin. The Waterfront has been here for millions of years. If we take six months or even a year more to develop a carefully researched and well-thought-out plan for its future, we will only gain, not lose. The citizens of Hudson should insist on such a careful, thoughtful, publicly-transparent process and engage actively in bringing their ideas and energies to a project that will have profound consequences for what Hudson becomes in the next generation. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: Waterfront plans? Author: Gene [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 12:20:52 12/11/05 Sun Bash Scalera to the end. Who are you going to bash next month the Mussratts? That should prove to be interesting hitting on your own Nimby friends.

[> [> Subject: Why not? He's earned it... Author: Ned Depew [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:40:56 12/11/05 Sun For all he's done the City for in the last decade, Rick will hopefully go down in hisotry as an object lesson to the voters of Hudson of what happens when you don't pay attention - sort of a local counterpart to Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon. If the incoming admininstration (who are by and large neither NIMBYs nor particular personal friends of mine - although I have cordial aquaintancships with several of them) were to behave with the arrogance, secrecy, lack of ethical standards and selfishness that the Scalera Administration has demonstrated - you can bet I'd "bash" them - but frankly, I don't think that's likely. They are certainly off to a completely different start than Rick "There'll be no place in a Scalera Administration for Jim Dolan" Scalera - having already kept two of their primary promises before they're even inaugurated - to make a symbolic gesture against over-spending by reducing the bloated costs of the Mayor's office instituted by Scalera and by having an open solicitation of candidates for major appointive City positions. I know the idea of politicians who mean what they say and walk the walk of their talk is an almost unimaginable idea after ten years of Scalera & Friends - but it is possible. Let's hope that will be Hudson's future.