Fjord Trail comments now due by March 4
The state parks department announced Monday (Dec. 30) that it will extend the deadline for submitting written public comments on the Hudson Highlands Fjord Trail environmental impact statement by 30 days, until March 4.
The deadline for comments had been Feb. 4, a 60-day window following the release of the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS). However, some elected officials pushed for more time to digest the contents of the 709-page report, which is online at dub.sh/state-parks-HHFT. Physical copies are also available at local libraries, the Cold Spring and Nelsonville village halls, Philipstown Town Hall, Beacon City Hall and the HHFT office at 14 Coris Lane in Beacon.
Public comments will be addressed in the final DGEIS, scheduled for release over the summer.
How to Comment
Comments can be submitted by email to [email protected] or in writing to Nancy Stoner, Environmental Analyst, NYS OPRHP, DESP, 625 Broadway, 2nd Floor, Albany, NY 12238.
Virtual online hearings will be held at 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. on Jan. 14. Those who attend can make comments at the hearing, although the state Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation requests that lengthy responses instead be submitted in writing. To register for the meetings, visit dub.sh/HHFT-jan-14.
Years in the making, the DGEIS considers the effects the proposed trail could have on the Highlands in 14 areas, including land use, emergency services, traffic and transportation, biological resources and community character.
It also lists suggested mitigation efforts for HHFT to receive permits for the project, such as limiting construction in certain areas to specific times of year to avoid disturbing threatened and endangered wildlife, and replacing invasive species with native plants.
The 7.5-mile trail for pedestrians and cyclists would function as a linear park connecting Beacon to Cold Spring. It would also include 5 miles of narrower, pedestrian-only meanders, spurs and loops branching off the main trail.
When the trail was conceived in 2006, it was imagined as a simple walking path. But after Breakneck Ridge became one of the most popular hiking trails in the country, the project underwent a significant expansion and redesign that was unveiled in 2020. The goal was to address the throngs of hikers and cars along Route 9D; the lack of safe access to the Hudson River; Main Street in Cold Spring becoming overrun with visitors on weekends; the need for public restrooms; a dearth of accessible recreational activities; and the threat to riverside attractions from projected sea-level rise because of climate change.
There is far too much fearmongering from the purveyors of this park; what “dearth” is there of “accessible recreational activities” in our area? None that I can see, or have experienced. There are trails aplenty, kayaking, tours of all kinds, both on land and water. I have lived here 25 years and there is no dearth of activities. There is only a dearth of imagination when it comes to resolving a small local issue of keeping hikers safely off Route 9D. We don’t need to spend hundreds of millions, or destroy our quality of life, to achieve it.
The basic premise of connecting Cold Spring and Beacon by trails is admirable, although it elides the fact that the two municipalities are already connected by trails, and many hikers already opt to walk from one to the other without problem, every day, even into the winter. But the implementation proposed, and the work already begun, is so profoundly wrongheaded it is all but guaranteed to become a burden for Beacon and Cold Spring for generations to come – something that the vast majority of citizens in both places have already, repeatedly, told the deaf ears of Scenic Hudson.
The basic premise of the main trail begins in obfuscation. First of all, call it what it is. It’s not a trail, it’s a boardwalk. And if this were Piermont or Brooklyn, a boardwalk might be a nice idea – but these are two communities on the edge of rural New York, placed in charge of one of our most cherished national landscapes. The Hudson River was polluted and defiled for generations, and it was only brought back to life by grassroots work that began here, in the Beacon area, by dedicated people who simply agreed to go out and clean up other people’s messes every day.
Because of that work, and what came after it, we have our eagles back, we have our otters back, and we have, for the first time in any of our lifetimes, a real sense of an ecosystem gradually re-emerging for a century of darkness. To celebrate that revival by paving over a large chunk of it is an obscenity that goes against the very heart of Scenic Hudson’s responsibility to care for this land.
I am opposed to the pouring of any concrete for “trail” work along this route. It’s not just the main trail. The idea of a bridge across the magnificent, untouched Fishkill Creek outlet turns my stomach. Like most pieces of this plan, it’s needlessly wasteful as there’s already a crossing over that creek which could be simply strengthened and expanded, but I guess they’d rather save every one the extra 800 feet, even at the expense of one of the most purely beautiful views in the city of Beacon.
In addition, the plan involves building two new parking lots and expanding one more, to add a total of 218 parking spots to the trail corridor. The idea here, presumably, is that there’s already demand, so this new parking will help ease some of the street parking along crowded, chaotic 9D. The problem is that study after study after study has shown every time that adding parking does not reduce congestion, it incentivizes more driving and worsens existing problems. Entire conferences have been held about this problem, and most places are left shrugging their shoulders because the solutions are so insurmountable – how can anybody add reliable public transportation at this point in time?
Well, Cold Spring and Beacon already HAVE reliable public transportation, and that fact is one of the core reasons why this trail corridor is popular to begin with. Ninety-nine percent of the nation can only dream of the public transportation opportunities that this trail proposal, which is supposed to be an environmentally-friendly one in one of the greenest lights in the world, has uniformly ignored and shunted aside for the same old mistake made in every shopping center in every dead-end town. Parking lots generate traffic. It’s 2025. We know this. We choose to ignore it, why?
There is a fixation with amenities that points to a crisis of “more” here – why are we talking about kayak launches? There are already kayak launches in both bookending parks. Why are we talking about three parking lots and a massive storage building off Denning’s Point (with another 20 parking spaces)? Rent one of the empty buildings on 52 if you need storage, instead of chopping down another little forest to store your UTVs and the road salt that’s going to rain into the river every winter.
How did we reach the point where we’re talking about a staggering 10-bathroom buildings? And yet, how about trash collection? Who’s going to carry that weight? How does this end with anything other than chip bags and Clif bar wrappers floating in the water?
I’m not the only one sharing these concerns. Along with many residents of both communities (drive along and do a yard sign count if you want a real sense of the sentiment), I’m pretty confident that the slowly returning, shy species like herons, otters, and eagles will not be thrilled with the endless construction and the sealing off of a portion of river under highly-traffic concrete. Scenic Hudson has danced around the edges of these concerns, using loaded concepts like accessibility and adding “much-needed” recreational activities (which already exist) to mischaracterize work that’s wasteful and intrusive on a profoundly delicate ecosystem.
We’ve already seen a lot of unsightly construction for this project, including the needless eviction of birds from underbrush around Dennings Point to widen a viewshed. I would love to see a waterline route between Beacon and Cold Spring. Activating that corridor would be lovely.
But if it’s a choice between this or nothing, I, like most people in the affect area, would choose nothing.
Cold Spring and Beacon deserve better, but so does the river and so do the trees about to be sacrificed for a parking plan that every sensible study every undertaken can tell you won’t ease an ounce of traffic.
On Jan. 14, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation hosted its public hearing for the Hudson Highlands Fjord Trail Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS). More than 200 people attended the hearing over two sessions, and about 90 people gave verbal comments. It was a powerful testament to this community’s level of engagement with the project and in the public process. We know how busy you all are, so we are extremely grateful to everyone who devoted their time to participate.
We heard a lot of positive comments — over two-thirds of speakers expressed strong support for the project. Just as importantly, we heard concerns about specific aspects of the project, and we received some constructive feedback that will enhance the project as we move forward. This is how the public process should work: present information, get feedback, make the project better.
As someone who is new to this community, I was quite moved by it all. The level of understanding of the project, the thoughtful articulation of the project’s attributes, including expanding accessibility to our state parks and protecting our landscape’s ecological resilience, and the commitment to the needs and aspirations of the community were truly inspiring. I’ve been involved in several public space projects, in a variety of contexts.
While projects of this type share consistent elements, taking full account of their unique characteristics (including the physical and cultural) is what makes them successful. The Hudson Highlands is a unique part of the Hudson River Valley, with an extraordinary landscape and close-knit communities, and I look forward to continuing to find ways to foster a more intimate connection with it.
I encourage all who are interested to review the DGEIS and share their comments on the Fjord Trail project with NYS Parks during the public comment period, which continues through March 4. Thank you for your interest and engagement.
Mullan is the president & CEO of Hudson Highlands Fjord Trail Inc.
I was disappointed by the hearing. As Stephanie Hawkins so aptly noted in her comment, many speakers expressing strong support were employed by, consultants to or family members of HHFT. To tout their number here is a bit disingenuous. I would have thought that HHFT would want to know the true feelings and opinions of community members at this point, not just those of their devotees.
Many expressions of support did not qualify as substantive, as laid out by the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and the lead agency is bound to assess the relevance of those comments on that basis. The Hudson Highlands is unique and intimate. How do you preserve that uniqueness and create intimacy? By pouring concrete in the river, compromising wetlands, expanding parking, increasing traffic and impervious surfaces and generally placing an unsustainable load on an already-fragile ecosystem?
I’m still waiting to hear how, without budgets and construction bids, HHFT will raise upward of $200 million to $500 million over the lifetime of its contract with state parks to pay for the trail when so far it has raised only $60,000 from individual donors. Is [HHFT Board Chair] Chris Davis going to bankroll the entire cost, using 20 percent to 25 percent of his foundation’s assets?
The Hudson River Park Trust, which manages a 4-mile-long park along the river, spends $30 million a year in operating costs. The Little Island in the Hudson River cost $260 million to build. Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg paid for it and will also maintain it to the tune of $120 million over 20 years. Mr. Mullan, if you are sincere, how about showing us the money?
If one thing makes Cold Spring truly special, it is the Highlands. These hills protected Washington’s troops and stopped the British. They awed Hudson River painters, enchanted Washington Irving and Pete Seeger, and gave birth to the modern environmental movement. They attract thousands of visitors (some settling here, like me and my wife). No wonder everyone calls this landscape iconic.
That is what is so astonishing about the Fjord Trail plan. The “visionaries” of this massive construction are seeking to alter and improve what generations have known better to leave well enough alone. They plan to clear-cut many acres of trees, pour thousands of tons of concrete in the river, disfigure Breakneck Ridge and disturb the habitat of a dozen threatened species, from bats to sturgeon. All to install a fabulous Disney-style boardwalk, with lighting.
The irony is that Scenic Hudson — which was founded here 60 years ago to defend green spaces and protect rattlesnakes — has switched sides, with an oligarch donor seeming to dictate the grandiose design.
Their project will forever change our community, and not for the better. We should be grateful to our elected officials who have questioned the undertaking. I urge all residents who care about the river, the landscape and the village to comment on the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement before the March 4 deadline. You can send your comment to [email protected].
I grew up in Philipstown, as did my father. The Hudson River was always a magnet for us kids. This was in the 1950s, long before the Clean Water Act. The raw sewage floating about added to the importance of keeping your mouth closed if you happened to fall.
As teenagers, we spent — or, some would say, misspent — summer evenings messing about down at Mine Point below the town dump south of the Garrison train station. We often went night “fishing” along the banks of the river north of Little Stony Point. Seldom were carp or “suckers” the prey.
I hope that today’s youth are no less adventurous. I expect that they too will have their “fishing” endeavors along the shores north of Stony Point. Perhaps they will be out in their homemade rafts or more likely in their canoe or kayak, tying up their vessel on the concrete piling of the Highlands Highline. Perhaps they will simply be drinking a few beers or smoking a fat one with their friends, dangling their legs over the edge of the concrete erection.
Perhaps others, less naive, may be patrolling the “trail” with less-benign intentions. Perhaps their prey will be other humans rather than the piscine suckers.
Of course, my point is security. It is vitally important to have the sheriff’s departments of Putnam and Dutchess counties spell out clearly what they consider the minimum requirements to protect the public’s safety. Certainly, the state police will have their concerns, as will the Metro-North police.
What are the lighting requirements? What fencing is required to prevent intentional swimming, diving or, God forbid, suicidal actions? Will it light up the night sky, disorienting flora and fauna, especially, of course, birds during their migrations and normal nocturnal activities? Will the light pollution affect the “dark sky” designation we deserve? What will the lighting look like from the perspective of boats on the river or to residents of Cornwall?
Will the trail have to be built to accommodate patrol cars and emergency vehicles? If it must be patrolled, by whom and how? And at what cost, not simply financial, but also in the loss of ambiance and peaceful harmony? Will security cameras be required to record the movement of animals (human or owl?) that will trigger those lights to flash on?