Adirondack Forum

Adirondack Forum (http://www.adkforum.com/index.php)
-   Current and Historical Affairs (http://www.adkforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   APA approves Tupper Resort (http://www.adkforum.com/showthread.php?t=16641)

chairrock 01-20-2012 04:52 PM

APA approves Tupper Resort
 
http://www.northcountrypublicradio.o...d-condemnation

stripperguy 01-20-2012 07:33 PM

Holy Cow!!!

I was not expecting a decision, just more delays.
I'm still on the fence about this, but for sure Tupper Lake can use the work, if local labor is used.
I suppose we'll know in 100 years or so if this was beneficial or detrimental...

chairrock 01-20-2012 08:29 PM

Will the new mega community have enough electricity to meet their needs?

(I guess so, with the power line that was run up the past few years to a dying community...am I the only one who sees a long range plan that was slipped past most people?)

stripperguy 01-20-2012 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chairrock (Post 180601)
Will the new mega community have enough electricity to meet their needs?

(I guess so, with the power line that was run up the past few years to a dying community...am I the only one who sees a long range plan that was slipped past most people?)

It's interesting how some of these things happen...
One of my business partners is extremely savvy.


It's been said that he has chess pieces in place 2 years before most people realize there is a game!!

Sounds like the same type of planning, to me.

Buckshot 01-21-2012 06:36 AM

Has the Adirondack Club and Resort released the price range of the units they will be selling?

chairrock 01-23-2012 01:47 PM

APA Press release
 
http://apa.ny.gov/Press/pressrelease...sReleaseID=461

oruacat2 01-23-2012 10:32 PM

The comments section of that first article is interesting.

forest dweller 02-01-2012 08:31 PM

This is horrible. If it fails it will be a mess. If it succeeds it will be a mess. The result of an improved economy is higher demand for just about everything. That's a domino effect. It means growth and development - in a #$%^ing park known for it's pristine wilderness character. The APA, like the Democratic Party, has been corrupted.

forest dweller 02-05-2012 01:27 PM

I just can't believe something like this happens and there is not more discussion and disgust about it at the adk forum. Does nobody want to touch this hot potato? Are we afraid to touch this hot potato around here?

redhawk 02-05-2012 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forest dweller (Post 181161)
I just can't believe something like this happens and there is not more discussion and disgust about it at the adk forum. Does nobody want to touch this hot potato? Are we afraid to touch this hot potato around here?

We threw this hot potato around a couple of years ago, actually before that, when Kevin owned the forum.

forest dweller 02-06-2012 06:42 AM

Yes redhawk, but now it has been approved and there may be little we can do about it but I feel like we're taking this "lying down". This is bad enough but if it sets a precedent and opens the door for more the Adirondacks may be in trouble. It makes me angry. And I'm not even sure it will do anything for the economy of Tupper Lake.

All I know is the state better be ready to balance this out FAST by purchasing what the Nature Conservancy has been holding for them and designating it WILDERNESS, regardless of what the crybaby regressives want. The land BORDERS wilderness - it IS wilderness.

This also makes me wish TNC didn't extend a fig leaf by reselling 70% of the land it purchased from Finch and Pruyn. I know they probably needed money but compromise is weakness to these people, and unappreciated.

It may seem rigid but it appears you can't give an inch to some people because they want a mile.

I just think they did this the wrong way. Tupper Lake is not Lake Placid - the town is a downright eyesore and money would have been better spent redeveloping older already developed areas, especially in and around the ski area.

Is there any place on the internet that this plan (scar) is laid out so I can get a look and see if I'm overreacting? I hope it's not as bad as I fear.

Pumpkin QAAD 02-06-2012 09:56 AM

http://www.theadirondackclub.com/website/home.htm

They have a website. The property section is blang but I'm guessing the scope of the project isn't finalized.

It's far from a done deal.

TCD 02-06-2012 11:40 AM

Reminder...this is private property. Your house is a scar on your property, shall we bulldoze it because there is some wilderness nearby?

redhawk 02-06-2012 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCD (Post 181189)
Reminder...this is private property. Your house is a scar on your property, shall we bulldoze it because there is some wilderness nearby?

If your house is going to destroy the wilderness and effect other people Yes, why not?

As Spock would say, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" \/

TCD 02-06-2012 05:16 PM

Certainly a good point. I was also responding to the suggestion above (not yours) that any land which borders wilderness is wilderness. Obviously illogical - I could as easily say that any land that borders a strip mine should be strip mined.

To your point, though - certainly if the planned development of the private land is shown to damage neighboring state land, that should be prevented / mitigated. But that's what the 7 year (!) review process was about. In 7 years of searching, that problem was not found. Folks here are reacting as though this project was just proposed last week, and was approved "off the cuff" with no reviews.

forest dweller 02-06-2012 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCD (Post 181204)
I was also responding to the suggestion above (not yours) that any land which borders wilderness is wilderness. Obviously illogical - I could as easily say that any land that borders a strip mine should be strip mined.

The wildlife that roam the forest don't know the difference between wilderness and private property if there is no difference in the forest but who owns it.

And, with regards to your latter suggestion, I wonder if the wildlife in the boreal forest surrounding the tar sands strip mining in Alberta feel the same way?

Yeah, the difference is private property should not give you the right to do anything you want. Mankind goes way too far in the name of private property as far as I'm concerned.

redhawk 02-06-2012 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCD (Post 181204)
Certainly a good point. I was also responding to the suggestion above (not yours) that any land which borders wilderness is wilderness. Obviously illogical - I could as easily say that any land that borders a strip mine should be strip mined.

To your point, though - certainly if the planned development of the private land is shown to damage neighboring state land, that should be prevented / mitigated. But that's what the 7 year (!) review process was about. In 7 years of searching, that problem was not found. Folks here are reacting as though this project was just proposed last week, and was approved "off the cuff" with no reviews.

I think I beg to diuffer aboput no problem being found. If I remember right there was/is a huge concerns about the effect of the runoff on the lake and the long term damage it will do.

In spite of that, because of the economy the wh**es allowed politics to be the deciding factopr and not the facts.

Pumpkin QAAD 02-06-2012 10:21 PM

Sounds more like an opinion to me.

forest dweller 02-06-2012 10:22 PM

Yeah, definitely not your father's APA.

Commissionpoint 02-07-2012 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forest dweller (Post 181176)
Yes redhawk, but now it has been approved and there may be little we can do about it but I feel like we're taking this "lying down". This is bad enough but if it sets a precedent and opens the door for more the Adirondacks may be in trouble. It makes me angry. And I'm not even sure it will do anything for the economy of Tupper Lake.

All I know is the state better be ready to balance this out FAST by purchasing what the Nature Conservancy has been holding for them and designating it WILDERNESS, regardless of what the crybaby regressives want. The land BORDERS wilderness - it IS wilderness.

I just think they did this the wrong way. Tupper Lake is not Lake Placid - the town is a downright eyesore and money would have been better spent redeveloping older already developed areas, especially in and around the ski area.

After 7+ years of review nobody is taking anything "lying down". Seems you got to the party very late, in fact, after it was over. Should you have had real concerns about this project you would have discovered it long ago and not after the fact, and not on a discussion forum. Your plattitudes may comfort you, but in reality if you had the concern you express you would have known about this long ago, and might have been able to voice your opinion at a time when it was relevant and constructive instead of besmirching the process and the people who participated in it.

Additionally, I find your comments about the 'eyesore' the community of Tupper Lake is to be offensive. That town is a home to many people, and some of those families have lived there for generations. Just because they aren't financially able to give the town a facelift to comply with what others think is appropriate doesn't give anyone the right to condemn the community as an "eyesore". You should walk a mile in thier shoes before you make a blanket statement about the quality of the place those folks call home. I bet most of them would be less than impressed with your characterization.
.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCD (Post 181189)
Reminder...this is private property. Your house is a scar on your property, shall we bulldoze it because there is some wilderness nearby?

+1


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.