Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

APA approves Tupper Resort

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Limekiln View Post
    Do you feel that people who live 5 hours away from your home, visit twice a year, and pay no local property taxes should be able to regulate what happens in your backyard?

    I was going to stay out of this since I am an "outsider" but I would like to add something. I think some of the labels used for people were unintentional yet unfortunate. In most areas of NY there are zoning laws that dictate what one can do with their property. I am happy to know that if my neighbor was inclined to build a towering structure on my property line, he cannot do so without a variance and my approval. If he wants to build a berm that could possibly cause flooding to my property, I want to know I have recourse. As far as people living far away having influence, I get that, but I would think, and I don't know the details, that a lot of income taxes from downstate subsidize a lot of what goes on up north. So one could argue that this system is unfair and as long as people in the area don't mind large increases in taxes to make up for the subsidies, then the rest should butt out. The Park is a unique patchwork and these arguments have been around since the formation and will continue well beyond our time here. If all the private land in the Adirondacks were developed, you would lose most of the reason people go there (and spend $$$) and be vastly different. I know nobody is suggesting that, but think about the next 100 years, the growing population and subsequent demand for first homes, second homes and the related infrastructure. Death by a thousand cuts....
    “Once there were brook trout in the streams in the mountains. They smelled of moss in your hand. On their backs were vermiculate patterns that were maps of the world in its becoming. Maps and mazes. Of a thing which could not be put back. Not be made right again. In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery.”
    ― Cormac McCarthy

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Limekiln View Post
      Do you feel that people who live 5 hours away from your home, visit twice a year, and pay no local property taxes should be able to regulate what happens in your backyard?
      If your back yard is in the unique situation of being within the Adirondack Park I do.

      Redhawk mentioned humans not being the only species on earth...that is why my vote is for less development and more protected forested land - it's not only for me to have another place to camp, it's to give species that need lots of space to survive and thrive a fighting chance...specially when only forests within parks have any real protection nowadays.

      I'd be OK with economic development in the downtown part of Tupper Lake, and any new needed homes / apartments to be not too far from there. No real need to grow outward. There has got to be a solution within those parameters that would please the majority.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Limekiln View Post
        Do you feel that people who live 5 hours away from your home, visit twice a year, and pay no local property taxes should be able to regulate what happens in your backyard?

        YES!!!


        Because often what an individual or group of individuals does can impact thousands of others.

        While Americans in particular cling to the belief that they have the right to do whatever they want on their own property, they often conveniently forget that they may impinge on the rights of others. a simple example would be a person feeling that they have the right to play music as loud as they want. However if that interferes with their neighbors right to a little peace and quiet in their own house, then it's wrong. Or if they want to dam the stream on their property and in doing so it effects the flow of water to the people living downstream.

        So yes, we need regulations and they often need to be made by people who are not directly affected either way. There's a word for that, I believe it's Democracy. The common welfare of the masses trumps the rights of the individual.
        "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

        Comment


        • Incidently I am incorrect in thinking that a few years ago the residents of Tupper Lake voted down a Walmart which would have helped economically? Wasn't it because they didn't want it to affect their way of life?

          If that's the case it seems to me it's a matter of "give us help, but only on our terms."
          "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

          Comment


          • The article was pretty clear. The project was favored by a majority of Tupper Lake residents. It was overwhelmingly approved by the APA who is in charge of making sure it doesn't have a detrimental environmental impact on the Adirondacks. The project has been delayed 2 years because of a "spite" lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club. Town officials felt that the lawsuit was groundless and would ultimately fail. I only hope that the courts rule that the Sierra Club is liable for project expenses for the 2 year delay. I would think that would discourage any future frivolous lawsuits.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by cityboy View Post
              The article was pretty clear. The project was favored by a majority of Tupper Lake residents. It was overwhelmingly approved by the APA who is in charge of making sure it doesn't have a detrimental environmental impact on the Adirondacks. The project has been delayed 2 years because of a "spite" lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club. Town officials felt that the lawsuit was groundless and would ultimately fail. I only hope that the courts rule that the Sierra Club is liable for project expenses for the 2 year delay. I would think that would discourage any future frivolous lawsuits.
              First of all whether the suit is "frivolous" or not depends on whether the points the Sierra Club makes are relevant or not. Second, because the people in favor of the development call it a "spite" lawsuit does not mean it is. Obviously they are biased. As for the APA, nothing pure and honest about them. The developers track record (which included several convictions in other areas for misrepresentation on developments) should have been a red flag. For any agency to claim that the development would not affect the water quality over the years or cause erosion is incredoulous.

              And just for the record, I am not a particular fan of the Sierra Club. Mostly because they have sold out when it has benefited them. But they also have put the kabosh on developers and corporations walking all over the environment in many cases.

              So don't let personal prejudices against some organizations cloud reason.
              "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

              Comment


              • Originally posted by redhawk View Post
                Incidently I am incorrect in thinking that a few years ago the residents of Tupper Lake voted down a Walmart which would have helped economically? Wasn't it because they didn't want it to affect their way of life?

                If that's the case it seems to me it's a matter of "give us help, but only on our terms."
                You're close. Saranac Lake mobilized to keep Walmart out. There were rumors of a Walmart coming to Tupper but I don't think anything ever came of it.

                Comment


                • If I'm not mistaken the property in question (which is what this entire thread is based upon?) is private property.

                  Originally posted by forest dweller View Post
                  I'd be OK with economic development in the downtown part of Tupper Lake, and any new needed homes / apartments to be not too far from there. No real need to grow outward. There has got to be a solution within those parameters that would please the majority.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by redhawk View Post
                    First of all whether the suit is "frivolous" or not depends on whether the points the Sierra Club makes are relevant or not. Second, because the people in favor of the development call it a "spite" lawsuit does not mean it is. Obviously they are biased. As for the APA, nothing pure and honest about them. The developers track record (which included several convictions in other areas for misrepresentation on developments) should have been a red flag. For any agency to claim that the development would not affect the water quality over the years or cause erosion is incredoulous.
                    I have not heard too many kind words from Locals about the APA. In fact I'd say that they only thing they hate more than outsiders telling them what to do is the APA telling them what to do.
                    So if two groups with opposing interests agree on something then I think it is worthy of doing.

                    And if the APA doesn't have the Adirondacks best interest who does? The Sierra Club? Greenpeace?

                    Comment


                    • Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if I'm not mistaken the APA has been stacked with pro business people the way the Supreme Court has - I don't necessarily trust their decisions any more.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Alpine1 View Post
                        If I'm not mistaken the property in question (which is what this entire thread is based upon?) is private property.
                        That doesn't come with the same rights as it does with private property outside the blue line.

                        And go read up on the sneaky manner in which Plum Creek obtained "private property" near Moosehead Lake in the wilds of Maine - buying it as logging land for something like $50 an acre and then petitioning to have it rezoned to be developed.

                        I'm just not a fan of people with the money having the private property and calling the shots in these matters.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by forest dweller View Post
                          Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if I'm not mistaken the APA has been stacked with pro business people the way the Supreme Court has - I don't necessarily trust their decisions any more.
                          Yep. Just like a couple of decades ago when the APA was stacked with pro business/devopment interests and they allowed all sorts of deveopment on Lake George.
                          "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Alpine1 View Post
                            If I'm not mistaken the property in question (which is what this entire thread is based upon?) is private property.
                            Whats your point? If the development of that private property negatively impacts other private as well as public property then it should not be allowed.
                            What if I owned some property that contained a lake upstream of you and I decided to drain the lake and in doing so I caused heavy erosion to your property, or even flooding. It's MY property so i should have a right to do whatever I want. Right?

                            Zoning laws are in place to prevent some people from actions that will adversely affect the other property owners or the community in general. Is this situation any different?
                            "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by cityboy View Post
                              I have not heard too many kind words from Locals about the APA. In fact I'd say that they only thing they hate more than outsiders telling them what to do is the APA telling them what to do.
                              So if two groups with opposing interests agree on something then I think it is worthy of doing.

                              And if the APA doesn't have the Adirondacks best interest who does? The Sierra Club? Greenpeace?
                              WOW Sierra Club and Greenpeace again. The bogeymen eh?

                              But in this case the answer might be yes.

                              I really think many people ought to read the history of the Adirondack Park and how many of these agencies came about. There has always been and will continue to be enormous pressure to strike down the protections that the Adirondack Park has and to harvest it's resources and develop it's land. If that happens, then one day there will be nothing left of the lifestyle that those life time residents are so proud of.
                              "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by redhawk View Post
                                WOW Sierra Club and Greenpeace again. The bogeymen eh?

                                But in this case the answer might be yes.

                                I really think many people ought to read the history of the Adirondack Park and how many of these agencies came about. There has always been and will continue to be enormous pressure to strike down the protections that the Adirondack Park has and to harvest it's resources and develop it's land. If that happens, then one day there will be nothing left of the lifestyle that those life time residents are so proud of.
                                That's to balance your bogeymen of the evil rich and their lawyers. And the answer is a resounding no. Greenpeace is even worse than the Sierra Club.

                                Have any of you lived in NYC? If you did you would view Lake George and Lake Placid as heaven. If your main fear is Tupper becoming another Lake George than you needn't worry and I doubt one Ski resort is going to open the flood gates. But even if I'm wrong you still have 3 million acres of State land to enjoy. Be grateful.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X