Signatures 770 total
-
1
Name: Sam Pratt on Feb 19, 2010Comments: This is our last, best chance to create a plan for the Hudson Waterfront that will provide ecological, cultural, social, and economic benefits to the residents of Hudson and the surrounding region. The Waterfront should be a jewel in the Valley's crown. It can only do that if the many beneficial uses possible by the river are protected from the damaging, incompatible heavy industrial uses which have blighted it for over 150 years now.Flag
-
2
Name: Peter Jung on Feb 19, 2010Comments: From the 2005 ruling by NY Secretary of State: "As previously discussed, in the last 20 years, communities in the Hudson Valley have been moving away from waterfront industry, toward a more diversified economy with higher valued economic uses. Increasingly, Hudson River communities such as Hudson and Athens rely upon the area's high quality of life, contributed to by the visual appeal of the area, its historic fabric and texture, its pastoral setting, and attractions such as Olana as the basis for continued economic growth. This community character would be jeopardized by the proposed plant and riverfront industrial facility."Flag
-
3
Name: V Mulford on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Bring Back the South BayFlag
-
4
Name: Peter Meyer on Feb 19, 2010Comments: We must protect the public's right to safe and unrestricted access to the waterfront and the environmental and historic integrity of this unique and threatened natural resource.Flag
-
5
Name: Carole Osterink on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Let's make this a document of vision not compromise.Flag
-
6
Name: Sven Huseby on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
7
Name: Barbara Ettinger on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
8
Name: Leo Carlin on Feb 19, 2010Comments: A future waterfront of tranquility , a place to savor the sun rise, the sun set and the changing season. To be able to walk on a path, linger on a grassy patch. With out intrusive industrial elements would be a remarkable legacy to leave. A more livable scenic Hudson would attract new residents and businesses. Added recreational venues should be included; boating, wading pool for kids that becomes an ice rink in winter, skate boarding, basketball, softball - the options are limitless.Flag
-
9
Name: Diane Rodriguez on Feb 19, 2010Comments: There is nothing on earth more precious than waterfront. Don't blow it!Flag
-
10
Name: Curt Ostermann on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
11
Name: Daniel Mackay on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
12
Name: Scott Stackpole on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
13
Name: Enid Futterman on Feb 19, 2010Comments: It would be insane and tragic to further compromise the South Bay when the (alleged) point of the LWRP is to revitalize the waterfront, and, by extension, Hudson. The plan at present does not, in my view, reflect the will of the people of either the City or the County.Flag
-
14
Name: Diana Jelinek on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
15
Name: Russell Hatch on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
16
Name: Ruth Moser on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
17
Name: Windle Davis on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
18
Name: Laurie Fiederlein on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
19
Name: Windle Davis on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
20
Name: Elizabeth Katsivelos on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
21
Name: Nancy Ploeger on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
22
Name: Sue Neale on Feb 19, 2010Comments: As a Columbia County homeowner & frequent paddler on the river, i urge the City of Hudson to do every thing possible to preserve this unique site.Flag
-
23
Name: Moira Stone on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
24
Name: Elizabeth Kanaga on Feb 19, 2010Comments: These precious waters should be protected from further industrial activity.Flag
-
25
Name: John Gourlay on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
26
Name: Lila Pague on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Please, Save the little bit that is left of Hudson's great river heritage. The integrity of the river and community is vital to this area and should be integrated into our daily lives with access to the water visually & physically.Flag
-
27
Name: Nell Washington on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
28
Name: Maryl Fish Acker on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: DeWayne A. Powell on Feb 19, 2010Comments: I live in Ghent, but, obviously, what happens in Hudson will have considerable impact on my enjoyment and use of the public lands in the wider Columbia County community. Please seriously consider the above issues and the impact that further development will have on already overly stressed environment and landscape.Flag
-
30
Name: David Iorio on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
31
Name: Fayal Greene on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Responible citizens should work on reviving, not further destroying, the South Bay and waterfront. This will create an asset for the future of all people in the region, rather than a short-term convenience for local industry.Flag
-
32
Name: Kenneth Jacobs on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
33
Name: Rob Johanson on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Lets honor, protect and sustain all our natural resourcesFlag
-
34
Name: Stuart Thompson on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
35
Name: Cari Naftali on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
36
Name: Anonymous on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
37
Name: Chloe Zerwick on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Succint and masterful petition. I salute you.Flag
-
38
Name: Jennifer Arenskjold on Feb 19, 2010Comments: I have been watching the waterfront for 29 years and hoping for the full recreational, habitat and commercial potential mentioned above to be realized. As business owner and resident of Hudson I participated in the Vision plan way back when and as a member of Friends of Hudson and participant at the Waterfront hearings I hoped to ensure that our spectacular part of the Hudson would be revitalized. The proposed LWRP does not achieve these goals and I would like to see the true public wishes reflected in it.Flag
-
39
Name: Ryan Osswald on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
40
Name: Cora Hales on Feb 19, 2010Comments: The riverfront has the most valuable potential in Hudson. It makes no sense in the long term to industrialize it.Flag
-
41
Name: Bruce C Bergmann on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
42
Name: Alan Hamilton on Feb 19, 2010Comments: This is a decision that could make or break Hudson's vitality. I've watched its recovery from a rural city that industry left behind to one with a dynamic main street representing millions of dollars of private investment and entrepreneurial energy. A main street that has survived a record setting recession. The current Waterfront plan is a thumb in the eye of those who have worked hard and risked much to bring Hudson back. The vision for Hudson's waterfront should put the interests of it's citizens before those of a corporation who's interest is represented by numbers on a spreadsheet.Flag
-
43
Name: LEONARDO SIDERI on Feb 19, 2010Comments: I thought this Saint died....but it appears its sprung back to life like zombie that no one can kill.....we need to drive a final stake through the heart? of this monster once and for all.Flag
-
44
Name: Marcia Mayper on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
45
Name: Fran DeGrazia on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
46
Name: Mary Hack on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Heavy industrial activity has no place on Hudson's waterfront.Flag
-
47
Name: Tony Caio on Feb 19, 2010Comments: NO WAY - SLC is a disaster to the region and the waterfront community. They add nothing of value to Hudson (no jobs - no community services - no social benefits) so why give them more access to the waterfront? The waterfront area of Hudson is a real asset to the town that needs to be developed with the communities interest in mind . . . not a corporations. Sincerely, Tony CaioFlag
-
48
Name: Lenore Packet on Feb 19, 2010Comments: Please, haven't we seen enough damage to the river with the industry already in place!Flag
-
49
Name: Adrienne Bordes on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag
-
50
Name: Alana Hauptmann on Feb 19, 2010Comments:Flag