COPYRIGHT 2019 CAROLE OSTERINK
Thursday, August 29, 2019
About Those 4.4 Acres
This afternoon, HudsonValley360 published an article about the 4.4 waterfront acres believed to be the property of the City of Hudson: "City owns land, group says."
There is little information in the article that hasn't already been reported on Gossips, except for these comments from Mayor Rick Rector: "Our city attorney is evaluating all documents and other related materials as to our ownership of the 4.4 acres on our beloved Hudson River south of the Colarusso dock. Additionally, Amtrak is an involved party in this undertaking. We simply want to make sure the city's ownership of the property is backed up with all the necessary arsenal of information and facts including potential title search that has been approved but not yet begun. Why this was not done six years ago is beyond me . . . however, this seems like a good time that this issue be finally resolved."
COPYRIGHT 2019 CAROLE OSTERINK
COPYRIGHT 2019 CAROLE OSTERINK
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The easement and right of way on the access road is our only terrestrial approach to the 4.4 acres. Otherwise, the parcel will be a City-owned island accessible only by boat.
ReplyDeleteShort of understanding the deed for the access road shared between CSXT and Colarusso, how else is Amtrak currently an "involved party" other than its new and probably illegal "No Trespassing" sign at the start of the access road near Broad Street?
If the Office of the Mayor survives another six years, an exasperated future mayor will look back and say "Why a title search on the access road itself was not done six years ago is beyond me."
But anyone can go read it at Liber 787, particularly at page 228 on "pedestrian ingress, egress, and regress on, over, across and through ..."
The HRRR was given a grant of land underwater for all the land needed, how can the city or Amtrak now own land west of the railbed?
ReplyDeleteIt's treasonous once you understand, who "owns" the water...
In South Bay, the land beneath the railroad bed was previously granted to local individuals by the NYS Legislature.
DeleteBy 1851, the railroad needed only approach those individuals whose underwater grants extended west of the tracks we see today.
"Ownership" of the water's surface (by everyone) is totally unrelated. In the 19th century anyway, no one saw any contradiction between private ownership of the river bottom and public ownership of the navigable surface.
Long before statehood, the shore was given (to everyone) so it could be developed. City and state "developers" now charge county motor boaters for access handed out to friends and family members who may be paying nothing.
Delete"Coxsackie Dock Cutters" may have more shore access than city residents who pay.
One hundred years after city and state entrapped taxpaying citizens of the eastern shore, they began charging the outboard motorboater tax. Sixty-two years later this dirty little berg continues to charge for using the goat path to the "State" launch.
DeleteAt the request of Unheimlich: Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956. Motor boats can't navigate roads or bridges.
ReplyDeleteI promise I'll read it.
DeleteFYI:After the Gigger was laid low by the steepest grade in the northeast, the tracks were dug up and if I'm correct, the bed should've reverted back to the grantor, which would make it a public thoroughfare.
Delete