DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Update FINAL DRAFT July 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Update FINAL DRAFT July 2011 City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Update FINAL DRAFT July 2011 Prepared By: Bergmann Associates Prepared For: City of Rensselaer This Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan was prepared for the City of Rensselaer and the New York State Department of State with funds provided under Title 11 of the Environmental Protection Fund. City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................. 1 Waterfront Planning in Rensselaer ....................................................................................................... 2 Organization of the LWRP .................................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 1. WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA BOUNDARY ............................................................. 5 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Regional Context.................................................................................................................................. 5 Landside Boundaries ............................................................................................................................ 6 Waterside Boundaries.......................................................................................................................... 8 SECTION 2. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 9 Historical Overview ............................................................................................................................ 10 City Profile ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Land and Water Uses ......................................................................................................................... 14 Zoning................................................................................................................................................ 20 Ownership ......................................................................................................................................... 23 Sites of Environmental Concern ......................................................................................................... 26 Community Resources ....................................................................................................................... 30 Natural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 37 Transportation Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 45 Infrastructure..................................................................................................................................... 49 LWRP Character Area Summary and Opportunities ............................................................................ 50 SECTION 3. WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION POLICIES ......................................................................... 57 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 57 Local Responsibility ............................................................................................................................ 57 Index of Policies ................................................................................................................................. 59 Development Policies......................................................................................................................... 65 City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Fish and Wildlife Policies .................................................................................................................... 69 Flooding and Erosion Hazards Policies ................................................................................................ 71 General Policy .................................................................................................................................... 75 Public Access Policies ......................................................................................................................... 75 Recreation Policies ............................................................................................................................. 78 Historic and Scenic Resource Policies ................................................................................................. 79 Agricultural Lands Policy .................................................................................................................... 81 Energy and Ice Management Policies ................................................................................................. 81 Water and Air Resource Policies......................................................................................................... 82 Wetlands Policy ................................................................................................................................. 87 SECTION 4. PROPOSED LAND AND WATER USES AND PROJECTS......................................................... 89 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 89 Proposed Land and Water Uses ......................................................................................................... 89 Overall Design Concept ...................................................................................................................... 92 Proposed Projects .............................................................................................................................. 95 Summary of Priority Public and Private Projects ............................................................................... 109 SECTION 5. TECHNIQUES FOR LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................. 111 Local Planning Initiatives .................................................................................................................. 111 Local Laws and Regulations Necessary to Implement the LWRP ....................................................... 112 Local Management Structure Necessary to Implement the LWRP .................................................... 114 Other Public and Private Actions Necessary to Implement the LWRP ............................................... 117 Financial Resources Necessary to Implement the LWRP ................................................................... 117 SECTION 6. STATE AND FEDERAL ACTIONS AND PROGRAMS LIKELY TO AFFECT IMPLEMENTATION .. 119 State and Federal Actions and Programs Which Should be Undertaken in a Manner Consistent with the LWRP ......................................................................................................................................... 120 State And Federal Actions And Programs Necessary To Further The LWRP ....................................... 141 City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program SECTION 7. LOCAL COMMITMENT AND CONSULTATION WITH FEDERAL, STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL AGENCIES ........................................................................................................................................ 145 Local Commitment and Consultation ............................................................................................... 145 State Agency Consultation ............................................................................................................... 146 Review of Draft LWRP ...................................................................................................................... 146 APPENDICES..................................................................................................................................... 147 City of Rensselaer Local Environmental Quality Review Law ............................................................. 147 City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program City of Rensselaer Local Waterfront Revitalization Program INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Project Overview The Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways Act (Article 42 of New York State Executive Law) was enacted in 1981 by the New York State Legislature in order to execute the Coastal Management Program at the state level. A voluntary partnership between local communities and the New York State Division of Coastal Resources, the Coastal Management Program strives to protect natural coastal resources; advance economic development opportunities; and enhance waterfront opportunities and experiences. The Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) is the comprehensive waterfront management planning process developed under the Act to allow local communities to prepare waterfront
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Submitted by the City of Rensselaer
    Downtown Revitalization Initiative “Resurgent Rensselaer” – Submitted by the City of Rensselaer BASIC INFORMATION Regional Economic Development Council (REDC) Region: Capital District Municipality Name: City of Rensselaer Downtown Name: Rensselaer Transit Village County: Rensselaer Vision for Downtown. Provide a brief statement of the municipality’s vision for downtown revitalization. The City of Rensselaer is in the process of reinventing itself as an active waterfront transit village where residents can “Live, Work and Play.” In order to accomplish this mission, the city plans to completely redevelop its waterfront, redefine Broadway as its Main Street, and improve connectivity from new residential, retail, commercial and recreational uses to the Albany/Rensselaer Train Station. Justification. Provide an overview of the downtown, highlighting the area’s defining characteristics and the reasons for its selection. Explain why the downtown is ready for Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI) investment, and how that investment would serve as a catalyst to bring about revitalization. The City of Rensselaer is the prime example of a community which is in the midst of rebirth as a modern-day transit village. The city boasts a wonderful location with easy access to regional rail transportation, waterfront recreation, new mixed-use housing developments and a traditional Main Street thoroughfare along Broadway. Moreover, Broadway directly connects the waterfront to a number of historic resources within the city, offering an opportunity to rebrand the city as a modern transit village and historic maritime port of call along the Hudson. A historic impediment to redevelopment along Broadway and the waterfront has been the existence of perceived and potential brownfield sites, as highlighted in the City’s New York State Brownfield Opportunity Areas Program Nomination Study.
    [Show full text]
  • No Action Alternative Report
    No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Glacial Lake Albany Butterfly Milkweed Plant Release Notice
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BIG FLATS, NEW YORK AND ALBANY PINE BUSH PRESERVE COMMISSION ALBANY, NEW YORK AND THE NATURE CONSERVANCY EASTERN NEW YORK CHAPTER TROY, NEW YORK AND NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ALBANY, NEW YORK NOTICE OF RELEASE OF GLACIAL LAKE ALBANY GERMPLASM BUTTERFLY MILKWEED The Albany Pine Bush Preserve Commission, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, The Nature Conservancy, and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, announce the release of a source-identified ecotype of Butterfly milkweed (Asclepias tuberosa L.). As a source identified release, this plant will be referred to as Glacial Lake Albany Germplasm butterfly milkweed, to document its original location. It has been assigned the NRCS accession number, 9051776. This alternative release procedure is justified because there is an immediate need for a source of local ecotype of butterfly milkweed. Plant material of this specific ecotype is needed for ecosystem and endangered species habitat restoration in the Pine Barrens of Glacial Lake Albany. The inland pitch pine - scrub oak barrens of Glacial Lake Albany are a globally rare ecosystem and provide habitat for 20 rare species, including the federally endangered Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). The potential for immediate use is high and the commercial potential beyond Glacial Lake Albany is probably high. Collection Site Information: Stands are located within Glacial Lake Albany, from Albany, New York to Glens Falls, New York, and generally within the Albany Pine Bush Preserve, just west of Albany, New York. The elevation within the Pine Barrens is approximately 300 feet, containing a savanna-like ecosystem with sandy soils wind- swept into dunes, following the last glacial period.
    [Show full text]
  • Livingston Avenue Bridge Talking Points
    Livingston Avenue Bridge Talking Points High Speed Rail is on the way. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) have completed a Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to evaluate proposed system improvements to intercity passenger rail services along the 463-mile Empire Rail Corridor, connecting Penn Station in New York City with Niagara Falls Station in Niagara Falls, New York. This corridor includes the stretch of track between the Rensselaer Rail Station and the Schenectady Rail Station. A DEIS describes the positive and negative effects of a proposed government sponsored project by outlining alternative scenarios that may be chosen for a particular project in order to make informed decisions. The DEIS is used to accurately assess the environmental, physical, social, and financial costs of each project alternative. The Empire Corridor DEIS proposes four Alternative Scenarios for the implementation of High Speed Rail in New York State. The scenarios are grouped together by estimated average speed of travel: Base (current), 90mph, 110mph, and 125mph. The Base alternative does not address replacement of the Livingston Avenue Bridge. Each of the remaining scenarios proposes the replacement of the Livingston Avenue Bridge. The current Livingston Avenue Bridge was constructed in 1902 with a pedestrian walkway that provided safe and simple access to both sides of the Hudson River and permitted crossing on foot between the Cities of Albany and Rensselaer. The Walkway, having suffered from years of neglect, was closed decades ago. The likely replacement of this bridge provides an opportunity to reestablish a bicycle and pedestrian connection that is both safe and cost effective.
    [Show full text]
  • Mohawk River Canoe Trip August 5, 2015
    Mohawk River Canoe Trip August 5, 2015 A short field guide by Kurt Hollocher The trip This is a short, 2-hour trip on the Mohawk River near Rexford Bridge. We will leave from the boat docks, just upstream (west) of the south end of the bridge. We will probably travel in a clockwise path, first paddling west toward Scotia, then across to the mouth of the Alplaus Kill. Then we’ll head east to see an abandoned lock for a branch of the Erie Canal, go under the Rexford Bridge and by remnants of the Erie Canal viaduct, to the Rexford cliffs. Then we cross again to the south bank, and paddle west back to the docks. Except during the two river crossings it is important to stay out of the navigation channel, marked with red and green buoys, and to watch out for boats. Depending on the winds, we may do the trip backwards. The river The Mohawk River drains an extensive area in east and central New York. Throughout most of its reach, it flows in a single, well-defined channel between uplands on either side. Here in the Rexford area, the same is true now, but it was not always so. Toward the end of the last Ice Age, about 25,000 years ago, ice covered most of New York State. As the ice retreated, a large valley glacier remained in the Hudson River Valley, connected to the main ice sheet a bit farther to the north, when most of western and central New York was clear of ice.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Hudson Basin
    UPPER HUDSON BASIN Description of the Basin The Upper Hudson Basin is the largest in New York State (NYS) in terms of size, covering all or part of 20 counties and about 7.5 million acres (11,700 square miles) from central Essex County in the northeastern part of the State, southwest to central Oneida County in north central NYS, southeast down the Hudson River corridor to the State’s eastern border, and finally terminating in Orange and Putnam Counties. The Basin includes four major hydrologic units: the Upper Hudson, the Mohawk Valley, the Lower Hudson, and the Housatonic. There are about 23,000 miles of mapped rivers and streams in this Basin (USGS Watershed Index). Major water bodies include Ashokan Reservoir, Esopus Creek, Rondout Creek, and Wallkill River (Ulster and Orange Counties) in the southern part of the Basin, Schoharie Creek (Montgomery, Greene, and Schoharie Counties) and the Mohawk River (from Oneida County to the Hudson River) in the central part of the Basin, and Great Sacandaga Lake (Fulton and Saratoga Counties), Saratoga Lake (Saratoga County), and Schroon Lake (Warren and Essex Counties) in the northern part of the Basin. This region also contains many smaller lakes, ponds, creeks, and streams encompassing thousands of acres of lentic and lotic habitat. And, of course, the landscape is dominated by one of the most culturally, economically, and ecologically important water bodies in the State of New York - the Hudson River. For hundreds of years the Hudson River has helped bolster New York State’s economy by sustaining a robust commercial fishery, by providing high value residential and commercial development, and by acting as a critical transportation link between upstate New York/New England and the ports of New York City.
    [Show full text]
  • Episodes from a Hudson River Town Peak of the Catskills, Ulster County’S 4,200-Foot Slide Mountain, May Have Poked up out of the Frozen Terrain
    1 Prehistoric Times Our Landscape and First People The countryside along the Hudson River and throughout Greene County always has been a lure for settlers and speculators. Newcomers and longtime residents find the waterway, its tributaries, the Catskills, and our hills and valleys a primary reason for living and enjoying life here. New Baltimore and its surroundings were formed and massaged by the dynamic forces of nature, the result of ongoing geologic events over millions of years.1 The most prominent geographic features in the region came into being during what geologists called the Paleozoic era, nearly 550 million years ago. It was a time when continents collided and parted, causing upheavals that pushed vast land masses into hills and mountains and complementing lowlands. The Kalkberg, the spiny ridge running through New Baltimore, is named for one of the rock layers formed in ancient times. Immense seas covered much of New York and served as collect- ing pools for sediments that consolidated into today’s rock formations. The only animals around were simple forms of jellyfish, sponges, and arthropods with their characteristic jointed legs and exoskeletons, like grasshoppers and beetles. The next integral formation event happened 1.6 million years ago during the Pleistocene epoch when the Laurentide ice mass developed in Canada. This continental glacier grew unyieldingly, expanding south- ward and retreating several times, radically altering the landscape time and again as it traveled. Greene County was buried. Only the highest 5 © 2011 State University of New York Press, Albany 6 / Episodes from a Hudson River Town peak of the Catskills, Ulster County’s 4,200-foot Slide Mountain, may have poked up out of the frozen terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Annual Meeting of the New York State Geological Association and the New England Inter­ Collegiate Geological Conference
    Rensselaer New York State Polytechnic Guidebook Geological Institute For Fieldtrips Survey New York Sta-te Joint Annual New England Geo I o·g ica I lntercoll egiate Association Meeting Geological Conference 51st annua 1 meeting 7JSI annual mee11ng October 5,6,7, 1979 JOINI' ANNUAL MEEI':m3 OF NE.W YORK STATE GOOI..CGICAL ASSOCIATION 51st Annual Meeting and 7lst Annual Meeting TIDY, NEW YORK October 5, 6, and 7, 1979 GUIDEI3(X)K Gerald M. Friedman, editor Hosts: Depari:It'ent of Geology Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, New York 12181 and New York State Geological Survey CUltural Education Center Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12230 Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgements, by Gerald H. Friedman........ v Field Trips ............................................... v i Geology at Rensselaer: A Historical Perspective. Address of the Retiring President of the New York State Geological Association, by Gerald M. Friedman...... 1 Devonian Stratigraphy and Paleoecology in the Cherry Valley, New York Region, by Donald w. Fisher •..••••.•..•. 20 Sedimentary Environments and Their Products: Shelf, Slope, and Rise of Proto-Atlantic (Iapetus) Ocean, Cambrian and Ordovician Periods, Eastern New York State, b y Gerald M, Friedman...................................... 47 Sedimentary Environments in Glacial Lake Albany in the Albany Section of the Hudson - Champlain Lowlands, by Robert J. Dineen and William B. Rog ers ......•......... 87 The Structural Framework of the Southern Adirondacks, by James McLelland .........•....• , ........•.. , ........... 120 Microstructure of a Vermont Slate, An Adirondack Gneiss, and Some Laboratory Specimens, W.D. Means and M.B. Bayly. 147 Cleavage in the Cossayuna Area, as Seen at the Outcrop, by Lucian B. Platt. 152 Thrust Sheets of the Central Taconic Region, by Donald B.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Topography of Dutchess County (.Pdf)
    Chapter 3: The Geology and Topography of Dutchess County Chapter 3: Geology and Topography of Dutchess County, NY ______________________________________________________________________________ Roy T. Budnik, Jeffery R. Walker, and Kirsten Menking1 May 2010 INTRODUCTION The topography, settlement patterns, and mineral resources of Chapter Contents Dutchess County are all influenced by the underlying geology. Geologic History For example, the highest mountains contain the hardest rocks, Bedrock Formations Structural Geology communities in the county are generally located in areas of Surficial Deposits sand and gravel because of the relatively level terrain and Mineral Resources Topography abundant water supplies they contain, and construction Trends and Changes Over aggregates are mined where suitable deposits are found. Time Implications for Decision- Understanding geologic materials and processes is essential to Making sound resource management because the geology affects the Resources 1 This chapter was written during 2010 by Dr. Roy T. Budnik (President, Roy T. Budnik & Associates), Dr. Jeffrey R. Walker (Professor of Earth Science & Geography, Vassar College), and Dr. Kirsten Menking (Associate Professor of Earth Science and Geography, Vassar College). It is an updated and expanded version of the Hydrology chapter of the 1985 document Natural Resources, Dutchess County, NY (NRI). Natural Resource Inventory of Dutchess County, NY 1 Chapter 3: The Geology and Topography of Dutchess County quality and quantity of groundwater resources, the migration of pollutants, potential hazards to inhabitants, drainage patterns, mineral resources, and soil characteristics. Geology is the study of the earth, including all materials found at and below the earth’s surface. Geologists analyze the composition, origin, and ongoing changes in the rocks and sediments that compose the earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report of The
    Annual Report of the 2019-2020 To protect and manage the unique and endangered natural communities and species of the Albany Pine Bush, for ecological benefits and controlled and appropriate public recreational and educational use. Table of Contents Overview ....................................................... 1 Background and Mission .............................. 2 Board of Directors ........................................ 3 Project & Programatic Highlights ............... 4 Financial Highlights ..................................... 8 Become a Member ........................................ 10 Preserve Staff & Contact Info ....................... 11 Cover photo by Marty Bannan Photo by Dean Bouton Dear friends, The Albany Pine Bush Preserve Visit us at AlbanyPineBush.org to We’re proud to offer the Albany Pine Commission is a public-private donate to the Friends of the Pine Bush Preserve Commission’s Annual partnership created by the NYS Bush Community or to get details Report. It provides some of the past Legislature in 1988 to protect and on self-guided programs including a year’s highlights from April 1, 2019 manage the preserve and provide StoryWalk, Photo Exhibit submissions, to March 31, 2020 including ways we the public with educational and scavenger hunts and the Karner Kids manage the Globally Rare, Nationally recreational opportunities. Film Festival. You can volunteer as a Significant and Locally Distinct community scientist or as a preserve Albany Pine Bush Preserve and the As the gateway or “front door” to the naturalist, sign up for our newsletter opportunities offered by the Albany Pine Bush, the Discovery Center is a and follow us on social media, Pine Bush Discovery Center. gold LEED-certified interpretive center including Facebook, Instagram and where visitors come to understand Twitter. For some background, the 3,350+/- why the Pine Bush is rare and special.
    [Show full text]
  • NYSSA Bulletin 131-132 2017-2018
    David R. Starbuck, Editor ISSN 1046-2368 The New York State Archaeological Association2018 Officers Lisa Marie Anselmi, President David Moyer, Vice President Gail Merian, Secretary Ann Morton, Treasurer The views expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the publisher. Published by the New York State Archaeological Association. Subscription by membership in NYSAA. For membership information write: President Lisa Anselmi, [email protected]; 716 878-6520 Back numbers may be obtained from [email protected]; 716 878-6520 Or downloaded from the NYSAA website http://nysarchaeology.org/nysaa/ Entire articles or excerpts may be reprinted upon notification to the NYSAA. Manuscripts should be submitted to Dr. David Starbuck, P.O. Box 492, Chestertown, NY 12817. If you are thinking of submitting an item for publication, please note that manuscripts will be returned for correction if manuscript guidelines (this issue) are not followed. Authors may request peer review. All manuscripts submitted are subject to editorial correction or excision where such correction or excision does not alter substance or intent. Layout and Printing Mechanical Prep, Publishing Help by Dennis Howe, Concord, New Hampshire Printed by Speedy Printing, Concord, New Hampshire. Copyright ©2018 by the New York State Archaeological Association Front Cover Photographs The collage of photographs on the front cover are taken from several of the articles in this issue of The Bulletin, which are devoted to the growth and development of the New York State Archaeological Association (NYSAA) over the last hundred years. The collage is a small representation of the many men and women from diverse disciplines who made major archaeological discoveries, established scientific approaches to archaeological studies, and contributed to the formation of NYSAA.
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact
    Chapter 1 – Introduction and Purpose and Need Tier 1 Draft EIS 1. Introduction and Purpose and Need 1.1. Introduction The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) are preparing a tiered Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate proposed system improvements to intercity passenger rail services along the 463-mile Empire Corridor, connecting Pennsylvania (Penn) Station in New York City with Niagara Falls Station in Niagara Falls, New York (refer to Exhibit 1-1). In April of 2010, NYSDOT received a $1 million grant from FRA to conduct analyses of potential Empire Corridor improvements, including preparation of a Service Development Plan, Tiered EIS, and other necessary studies.1 In addition, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) contributed $1.8 million to the Tier 1 EIS preparation, and New York State provided matching funds in the amount of $3.5 million (New York State rail funds). The Empire Corridor connects New York City with the largest cities in New York State, extending north through Yonkers and Poughkeepsie, and turning west at Albany to extend through Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, and terminating at Niagara Falls. The Empire Corridor consists of three main segments: • Empire Corridor South, extending 142 miles north from Penn Station to just north of Albany- Rensselaer Station; • Empire Corridor West, extending 294 miles west from approximately one mile north of the Albany-Rensselaer Station to just east of the Buffalo-Exchange Street Station; and the • Niagara Branch, extending 27 miles west from a point located just east of Buffalo-Exchange Street Station to Niagara Falls.
    [Show full text]