Monday, October 10, 2011

Small Gains

On September 18 Gossips reported a reader's observation that the boundaries of the Waterfront Revitalization Area as shown in Figure 3 of the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP) did not extend all the way to the city's borders and wondered why the LWRP limited the area it wished to regulate. Recently that same reader pointed out that, in the September 26 revision of the LWRP, the map had been corrected. The blue area on the map at the left shows how much was gained by the correction.

Is this an example of the logical fallacy post hoc ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore because of this"), or did bringing the attention to the problem, in this one instance, bring about change?     
Posted by at

5 comments:

  1. south bay task forceOctober 10, 2011 at 8:42 AM

    It can only have been Gossips which brought about the alteration.

    When the South Bay Task Force heard back from NOAA, there was no mention of the municipal boundary:

    "Thank you for your email to Donna Wieting, Acting Director, NOAA's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM).  In response to your question, we contacted the NY Coastal Program and they responded that they have corrected the LWRP map of the existing coastal boundary, to show that the boundary extends beyond the city limits of Hudson and into the neighboring town.  The map is attached for your reference.

    "Before concurring with any program change for the Hudson LWRP, OCRM would have requested the correction. I hope this satisfies your concerns."

    But if the LWRP maps do matter, then why weren't the Henry Hudson Waterfront park maps corrected?

    If NOAA doesn't care about municipal boundaries, then there's no one but us to care about the wrongly drawn waterfront park.

    Congratulations to Gossips anyway for getting that one thing corrected.

    ReplyDelete
  2. JenniferOctober 10, 2011 at 3:17 PM

    South Bay: Maybe I'm adding confusion to confusion but I thought the boundary should have gone far further out into the river. In fact, doesn't Athens LWRP boundary go at least half way across the river?
    However, it is good that it has been extended at least a few feet into the water, otherwise the LWRP would have been Citybound. Good going Gossips.

    ReplyDelete
  3. south bay task forceOctober 10, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    The City and County don't have accurate maps showing where Hudson's boundary meets Athens.

    But GoogleEarth's boundaries layer for US Cities (which is surprisingly accurate) puts our western boundary even further away from our shore than the September map "edits" allow.

    Seeing as though it's nearly a miracle that the public was able to have any positive affect on the GEIS at all, maybe we ought not to quibble.

    The main reason our March, 2010 comments had no influence on the GEIS was that the responses were an overly-preoccupied, run-on refutation of anything and everything that didn't square with O&G's plans.

    And it was a good strategy. O&G got what it paid for.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Peter MeyerOctober 10, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    As the guy who got them to extend the boundaries INLAND, to include Oakdale, I'll agree with Jennifer in being both confused and (mildly) elated.... I still don't understand, however, why it is so difficult to save the South Bay.... And please remember that HOLCIM is asking for a huge property tax reduction on the waterfront property -- all but conceding that all this sturm and drang is so much smoke -- er, cement dust.

    ReplyDelete
  5. south bay task forceOctober 10, 2011 at 5:21 PM

    Yes, why is it so difficult to save the South Bay?

    The complicated and less protective zoning that was substituted in May at O&G's request isn't even required by them anymore. But there it is, still central to the plan.

    Resurfacing the causeway road changed everything. (Not that anyone is yet aware of it!)

    The current zoning proposal which O&G won against our wishes is a remnant, an artifact of a time before the re-paving when they were making a lame argument that the road was already a use.

    But as soon as the company got its blessings from the crooked or stupid DEC, they did establish their "use" in earnest, and now we are stuck with the newer zoning that we never got an opportunity to comment on. (Now, do you suppose our inability to comment was any accident?)

    The sad comment on citizen awareness is that we are now left with less protective zoning than was the case with the originally proposed zoning, and for no good reason. Why, it's practically ironic!

    That should shed at least a little light on why it is so difficult to save the South Bay.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)