Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jtactile t1_jdevmjd wrote

Reply to comment by moobycow in 902 Brewing to host Paul Fireman backed event by el_tigrox

Here's the thing: I have no idea. I do know that until 50 years ago, it was a pile of garbage and industrial waste from a rail yard that nobody but a few hippies gave a shit about.

Then, direct from what you linked, LSP began as 35 acres in 1976 (vs. a total area of 1,212[via Wiki]). From what I understand 240 acres are closed off due to contamination still. So that's a gain of some 900+ usable acres?

The plan you shared has some prospective dates, but also a giant price tag, reliant on government budgets and lobbying. Then, as others have pointed out, some of the funding needed to be fought out in court with the pollutants. Fighting I imagine versus the types of lawyers only a Fireman type could afford. Then you run into problems like the massive remediation needed. Or a hurricane turns the park into "a disaster movie". https://www.nj.com/hudson/2012/11/liberty_state_park_recovers_af.html

I don't pretend to have an idea of how long this should take as I don't have a full list of contributing factors, nor an engineering degree. However, when you consider even a few of those factors and have the insight of being involved in a large scale, complicated project, describing its Current progress as "broken promises to a community" is not only unfair, it's just wrong.

1

moobycow t1_jdewp8s wrote

Funny you mention, "fighting, I imagine, versus the types of lawyers only a Fineman can afford."

Turns out some of the biggest obstruction over the years has been from Friends of LSP, who very much did not want it cleaned if cleaning it meant a ball field would be put in.

In any case, the point stands, if after 50 years the government can't get the funding done, then it makes sense that private interests would get some traction.

0

jtactile t1_jdexiex wrote

And you’re the exact kind of myopic turd you sounded like originally.

1

moobycow t1_jdf043y wrote

Ha. Serves me right for trying to have an actual discussion.

All the best.

1

jtactile t1_jdf1blp wrote

Hmm

  • cherry picks one line from response
  • and in response to maybe considering the complexity of things and admitting to what you don’t understand
  • doesn’t consider the possible environmental impact of a sports field vs a marsh, how that may have influenced FoLSP’s POV or other contributing factors
  • no response to anything else

“Actual discussion”

1

moobycow t1_jdf3bij wrote

Almost the entire list of points was, "price tag, lobbying, funding, remediation."

With price, lobbying and funding being for the remediation.

My one line addresses most all of them by pointing out a big reason it was so difficult to get funding for remediation is Friends of LSP lobbying against it because it has almost always come in the context of them getting ball fields.

You may think that they were correct, because of environmental concerns, or just different priorities.That's OK.

It doesn't change that a lot of people want the recreation and access that was originally in the plan, and it is not surprising that development interests would capitalize on the complete lack of anything being done for 45 years.

0