On Tuesday, at the Common Council meeting, Mayor Kamal Johnson reported that the lowest bid for the construction of what is planned for lower plaza at Promenade Hill was $500,000 over budget. Last night, during his State of the Community event, Johnson said the project was going to have to be "scaled back."
It is not known how much of the $1.1 million in DRI funds designated for the project was budgeted for construction, but cutting half a million dollars is going to require a lot of scaling back. Johnson said it would add three weeks to the project's schedule for completion. Three weeks suggests the stripped down version of the plan will not get any kind of review by the Historic Preservation Commission or the public. COPYRIGHT 2021 CAROLE OSTERINK
In my opinion, it was a gigantic mistake for the DRI Committee to heed attorney Jeff Baker's usual counsel by closing the DRI meetings to the public.
ReplyDeleteNow that the ground is ripped up the contractor can hold the city hostage. Was that its plan all along?
ReplyDeleteManagement is a verb. It would be so nice if City Hall understood that.
ReplyDeleteI can never remember if the word disfunction is spelled with an I or a Y.
ReplyDeleteThe Promenade project is a debacle. But there may be a silver lining for another DRI project, the “Fishing Village” (aka Shantytown, the Shacks, and/or Furgary).
ReplyDeleteIf the city’s DRI managers are now sharpening their pencils, maybe they’ll take a closer look at the little remaining of the shacks' contaminants that need removal.
Remediation is expensive. Just to tear down a shack the window glazing will be removed by someone in a HazMat suit. In my opinion that's pretty stupid when you can still buy the same glazing at any hardware store! (Albany in its wisdom …)
So if a large chunk of the award is going to site remediation - and it must be remediated in any event - then that’s less money for the actual project.
Till now the committee has sought estimates based on sweeping general assessments, such as substituting an outdated six-year-old contaminants report for an actual site inspection guided by the report.
Henceforth, the Committee should be more particular and realistic, especially when it comes to costs - no, especially about everything!
Thanks to the Promenade debacle, I can now imagine other positive changes in the Committee's approach which are more in line with the project's original vision.
Now that we’re reminded of the risks of relying on expert management, the DRI Committee should reopen the process, and be more relaxed about public comment and participation; prepare to rely on volunteers and reused materials at the shacks (with the proper insurance in place, naturally); adopt a custom-made planning approach to accommodate the site’s idiosyncrasies (there should be two demolition efforts rather than a single event); and be more open to the advice of informed volunteers when interpreting Local Law (it was a city attorney who sold the idea that the committee wasn’t making any discretionary decisions, but how would the great legal expert respond now?).
We can make something unique and attractive at North Bay, but not in the way our DRI Committee has approached the project thus far, at least since 2019.
Concerned residents should finally demand a new approach from the DRI Committee. Both the new approach and the demand itself are long overdue.
I've ridden my bike to Furgary three times this month. All of the buildings are now in such poor condition that it would be a waste of time and money to restore them. Instead, tear the buildings down, install a bike rack and picnic tables, improve the launch ramps, and leave it at that.
ReplyDeleteYou don't know the first thing about the shacks. I'd wager you have no interest in learning either.
Deletehey general, don't engage unhemlick about Furgary, he'll just post another 20 paragraphs about how important the shacks are and how life in Hudson will never be the same if they are all removed. PS -- I love the enormous blue tarp over the roof of one of the shack,s as if that is going to save it from rotting away. We spent $20 on a tarp and paid 3 guys how much to put it up there? Because 7 people in town don't want to let go of the past so we get to see a bunch of shit shacks for years to come? It's embarrassing.
DeleteSeems to be standard with any government project, everything is overpriced and the taxpayers get fleeced. Thousands are wasted first on studies, multiple plans, renderings etc., then the contractors take their turn at the trough.
DeleteAs far as those shacks go, aside from the rot, most of them were never historic in the first place, they were slapped together with stuff (vinyl siding, particle board, plywood, cement block) scrounged from the dump. All that was needed is a historical plaque with a description of what was there. Seems to me the historic designation and fishing village plan is nothing more than a political ploy by Furgary supporters to prevent the city from reclaiming the property and converting it into a public park.
I second Winslow's motion to put up a historic plaque and tear down the worthless shacks. Then, put in a few benches, and people can sit under the trees fishing in a park enjoying a view of the North Bay.
DeleteOur own tarp and our own effort, fool.
DeleteP. Winslow, look up "vernacular architecture." Close trap. Learn.
Yeah! What wonderful leaders, managers, etc. are at work for the improvements for our fair City.
ReplyDeleteDumb and Dumber for our waterfront, bridge to water front, entrance to promenade hill, the shacks, etc.
Somebody give me a hotdog and a beer because the show goes on and on and on.
Where’s the good old boys when ya need ‘em?
Hudson the City of C G S D. As in can’t get sh_t done.
God save us all.
Will "scaled aback" mean no money for trees? That would be precious!
ReplyDeleteIn the proposal to obtain the DRI funding in 2017, wasn't there a budget breakdown of the project? $1.1m was the award, but was that a full funding award?
ReplyDeleteOur project is the last in line, understandably.
DeleteBut because 2017 was so long ago - when we certainly required to provide a budget breakdown - we're now expected to gather all new estimates and come up with a new budget plan. We must repeat the same steps we did to get the award in the first place.
The demolition guy we lined up in 2017 won't even take our calls. Why should he waste his time again? Frankly, who can blame him?
According to Wikipedia, construction elements and materials frequently found in vernacular buildings include: adobe, mud bricks, and thatched roofs. By contrast, the local materials frequently found in vernacular Furgery architecture include tattered plastic tarps, plywood, sheet rock, and cinder blocks.
ReplyDeleteWikipedia? Seriously?
DeleteAnyway, before spouting off you should have inquired which shacks are already slated for demolition.
There are a lot of them you saw on your bikeride that we have no intention of keeping. Did you suppose we aim to spare every shack, or are you just a troll?
We had a site visit from a contractor who told us we could save every shack for the money it will cost to tear them down. But that was never the plan except in the minds of internet trolls.
The people who wanted to save the “historic” shacks have had seven years to accomplish something. And what has been accomplished? Absolutely nothing. Give yourself a pat on the back.
DeleteGot it, you're an armchair hater.
DeleteAre you even from here, or are you an over-opinionated blow-in?
You're worth something anyway, because other readers we'll count on for their interest in this project will see the kind of ignorant crap we've bravely endured for years in our tireless effort to salvage one of the oldest, funkiest, vernacular creations of Hudson which reflects a past tied very closely to the land and river.
As I said above, your own trollish view of the world and history likely contribute very little, if anything.
Shouldn't you be knocking the noses off of statues in some museum? Looking back through history, isn't that aways your contribution? Aren't you exactly that person?
Here's an example of genuine vernacular architecture. Compare and contrast: https://www.lelandmi.com/fishtown/
ReplyDeleteDude, you've got to let it go. You're going against the determination of professional historians at the NYS Museum and at SHPO.
DeleteIt's not on their say-so that I agree with them, but on my own education. You're just wrong, and a bit ignorant if that's alright to say.
What's your fixation anyway? Why do you care so much about erasing a material legacy which embodies a lost local culture documented back the 1860s at least?
About the shacks, the Columbia Land Conservancy published a report saying that "an ecological assessment of North Bay cannot deny the central role of its human occupants - their work, cares nd cultural currents ..."
Can you understand that both the South and the North Bays are themselves artifactual in nature? Both were open water before the coming of the railroad which so upset the painters of the Hudson River School.
But you don't seem interested in any of this. It's so easy to tear down and such an effort to build up, but what do you care?
I think these comments should of been made to the Rector administration the projects were approved before the Johnson administration and they City has no control over what the bids would be.
ReplyDeleteYou are incorrect.
DeleteIn the above comments you'll read how at least one project has been asked to submit a new budget.
Additionally, bids for this same project are being made directly to a DRI Committee which mistakenly believes it isn't making discretionary funding or planning decisions.
That said, I think it's reasonable to up-date budgets after years have passed, but I'm still curious where you're getting your wrong information?
Please grant the courtesy of a reply.
The facts don’t support your claim, “Social Justice Center.” Granted the projects approved by the state were announced during Rick Rector’s term in office https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2018/10/about-dri.html, and Starr Whitehouse was chosen to design the restoration during the Rector administration https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2019/08/dri-update.html, but contracts weren’t signed and planning didn’t begin until 2020, during the current administration https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2020/01/a-gathering-of-first-ward.html.
DeleteWhat we probably should be asking is why was it decided to go ahead with the demolition before the bids were in on the construction?
Why? Because this administration is incapable of managing. This should come as no surprise as neither the mayor nor his aide have any managerial experience of note (if any at all). Neither has had any P&L responsibility, managed complex projects or groups.
DeleteI'll say it again: management is a verb.
John, I do not think they understand what you mean -- management is a verb. Isn't that obvious ? there is no management.
Delete