The reward for showing up at the Columbia County IDA meeting this morning at the early hour 8:30 a.m. was getting to learn a little more about the transloading facility proposed for the old Cycletech plant adjacent to ADM on Route 23B in Greenport--a very little more. The plant was purchased in April 2009 by a group of local investors who dubbed it "Lone Star Industrial Park." At that time, it was revealed that Paul Colarusso, Scott Patzwahl, and Michael Bucci were among the investors.
In December 2011, it was announced that the project had received a $2.2 million grant--a significant part of the $3.358 that it was estimated the project would cost. At that time, Ken Flood, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development for Columbia County, indicated that the balance--$1.158 million--would be "private investments by the owners," whom he identified only as LS Industrial, LLC.
Speaking of the transloading facility this morning at the IDA meeting, Flood described it as a "dual loading facility": it will load aggregate onto rail cars for Colarusso, and there will be a "generic loading facility for other industries that may want to use rail to transport goods." Soon after Flood made this statement, the IDA meeting went into executive session "to discuss a real estate transaction." When the IDA came out of executive session, Flood asked for approval for the appraisal of "land related to the transloading facility." He cited three quotes received for doing the appraisal--$4,900, $4,000, $4,700--and asked the IDA to approve a contract with the lowest bidder for an amount "not to exceed $10,000." That approval was granted.
Exactly what's being appraised and for what purpose is not clear. What does seem clear, however, is that the proposed transloading facility will mean a lot more trains moving through Hudson along the ADM spur, which goes through the Public Square and down behind Allen Street, and that the principal cargo of those trains will be gravel. What's more, having gravel moved through Hudson by train will do nothing to lessen the amount of gravel now being hauled through the city by trucks. The gravel traveling by train will come from Colarusso; the gravel being trucked to the dock is being mined in the Holcim quarry and hauled to the dock by O&G to be loaded onto barges bound for Connecticut.
This is absolutely the most destructive proposal for the growth of Hudson I have heard yet! Also, it puts individuals, needing emergency service to the hospital at great risk, as ambulances will have to route around the train tracks, taking valuable minutes away in life or death situations. I say we really need to revolt as a community on this one.
ReplyDelete1.
ReplyDeleteThe evident feasibility of transporting gravel - anyone's gravel - via the ADM spur has been discussed for years, and was brought up in public comments in 2010 concerning the draft Environmental Impact Statement being prepared for the Common Council under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA).
Even though impact statements under SEQRA are required to consider all "reasonable alternatives" to any action being planned by a municipality - in that case the means to transport gravel through the city's South Bay as a component of the city's LWRP - at least one inconvenient public comment addressed the rail alternative which was missing from the review.
That comment (at 3.1.24) was ludicrously misinterpreted.
To the question why such an obvious alternative was missing from the city's study, the official "Response" to the question provided by the single city attorney involved pretended a misunderstanding. It appeared as if the attorney was answering an entirely different question, and that was that. The Common Council deemed the discussion sufficient for their purposes and then proceeded to finalize their document (as-yet unapproved by NY state).
As with the entire impact statement, these less than forthcoming "Responses" were conducted in the name of the asleep-at-the-wheel Common Council, which was acting as SEQR "Lead Agency." (City Hall providing the planning and legal advice, as usual.)
I wish to review these things not as a way to reargue the wisdom of transporting gravel by rail, but only to remind everyone of the procedural shoddiness that accompanies so many of the controversial actions undertaken by this city.
2.
Today the Common Council will likely become SEQR Lead Agency in another debacle which is rapidly shaping up, this time concerning the North Bay.
The earliest stage of a SEQR review calls for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) for all actions undertaken by a municipality (excepting true emergencies).
I'm relieved to be able to report that there's no threat of a full environmental review in the North Bay, which is anyway required when creating an LWRP.
But what people should be very aware of is that the first stage of the EAF is meant to be written by the "agency" which intends the action.
The AGENCY currently planning the direct action is the Office of the Mayor.
The ACTION that's currently under review, the one that's being discussed behind semi-closed doors, is the razing of the historical fisherman's shacks at the North Dock Tin Boat Association (a.k.a. "Furgary").
We know that we can count on the insufficiency of the first part of the EAF, and likely its dishonesty. The acting agency will avail itself of every short-cut and mischaracterization available to circumvent an honest reporting under SEQRA. As we learned during the last SEQR review, there are never adverse consequences that can result from their ambitions; such types having no compunction about rubbing out history, ecology, rights (you name it) in order to achieve their ends.
However, the rest of the EAF is the responsibility of the Lead Agency, which will invariably be the Common Council in this case.
What I really want to say is that signing a petition on behalf of the former occupants of the Furgary community is simply NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
Just as we now forgetfully discuss the once "unreasonable" ADM spur, in a year's time we'll be discussing what looked to have been feasible after all concerning the preservation of the Furgary cabins.
Please let your representatives on the council and the Common Council President hear your defense of the Furgary cabins from the municipal vandalism now being planned.
Also, please somehow avail yourselves of the creative alternatives being discussed in private emails concerning the future uses of these structures.
For further information on EAFs:
http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/45586.html
I know it has been discussed for years, but that does not take away from the fact that it is the most destructive proposal for the growth of Hudson. And, it does not take away from the fact that it puts individuals (children included), needing emergency service to the hospital at great risk, as ambulances will have to route around the train tracks, taking valuable minutes away in life or death situations. Does it?
ReplyDelete"I wish to review these things not as a way to reargue the wisdom of transporting gravel by rail ..." (from above).
ReplyDeleteBarb, my previous comment only concerned procedure, and how our officials can be fast and loose with procedure when it comes time to hoodwink the public.
If it's possible that City Hall could be hostile to whatever your aims might be, then you could do a lot worse than heeding this message!
Barb, You make a very good point if Carole is correct in saying "What does seem clear, however, is that the proposed transloading facility will mean a lot more trains moving through Hudson along the ADM spur, which goes through the Public Square and down behind Allen Street,...."
ReplyDeleteIf a train blocks the track between Allen and State, the only way from most of Hudson to the Hospital, would be to go out 6th/ Glenwood blvd. to rt 9, turn back toward Hudson, over the bridge across the track, to go back to the hospital via Fairview Ave. I'm sure we have all been blocked by trains that sit there for no apparent reason.
Emergency traffic coming up 9G would be affected by a stopped train, also, since the tracks cross 9G at grade level.
As you say, a few minutes could make a difference and this detour would be quite a few minutes.