8/3/2019 5 Questions From FoH Attorney Bowitch

1/2

Listed below are what Friends of Hudson attorney Gary Bowitch terms "threshold questions."They were provided [10/18/11] to the Hudson Planning Commission Chairman as well as toselected commission members. The City Attorney tasked with the LWRP is Cheryl Roberts,who also happens to be the attorney for the Hudson Planning Commission.

Christopher H. ReedFriends of Hudson

To: Donald Tillson, Jr.,

Hudson Planning Commision

For your upcoming special workshop meeting on October 19 at City Hall, please consider thefollowing questions regarding the latest draft LWRP which we hope you will seek answers tofrom the City Attorney. As you will see, these questions focus on legal protections for thecitizens of the City of Hudson concerning the use (and any expansion of use) of the causewayfor trucking aggregate to the Port of Hudson.

We'd greatly appreciate your forwarding these questions to the other Commission members,in case we are unable to contact them directly.

Thank you for your consideration of the following.

1. The September 2011 draft LWRP contemplates the temporary use of theSouth Bay Causeway for Holcims and/or its tenants transport of materials via truckbetween Route 9G and the port.

Please state what legal authority or control the City believes it has or can exertover any future (even temporary) such use of the Causeway.Please state the Citys view on precisely what permits or other local, State orfederal approvals will need to be obtained by Holcim and/or its tenants prior to

any such use of the causeway?

2. Pages 27 and 62 of the September 2011 draft LWRP indicate that use of thecauseway will be a temporary measure to be later replaced by a new, permanentpublic access route from 9G to the port.What is the specific time frame for the temporary use of the causeway?Whatis the time frame for the development of a new public access route as thepermanent alternative to use of the causeway"?

3. Page 139 of the of the September 2011 draft LWRP states:The Citys support of this project does not eliminate or insulate development of thecauseway from the requirements of environmental review pursuant to the StateEnvironmental Quality Review Act, and it is anticipated that land conservation orwetlands restoration measures will be necessary to mitigate possible adverseimpacts to the South Bay from using the causeway for a truck route in order to meetthe conservation goals of the LWRP. Upon completion of any upgrades necessary touse the causeway for aggregate transport and issuance of all necessary approvals,the use of Columbia Street below Third Street by trucks transporting aggregate orother goods to the port will be prohibited.

8/3/2019 5 Questions From FoH Attorney Bowitch

2/2

Please describe in detail the action which will trigger the SEQRA review ofthe use of the causeway. Please explain how this SEQRA review will proceed.

4. Page 139 of the of the September 2011 draft LWRP further states:

The second phases of this transportation strategy would involve the developmentof a new public access route from Route 9G to the port and waterfront most likelyusing portions of the LB and possibly the Basilica properties. Development of thisroute could enable more intensive restoration efforts in the South Bay, as the Citywould seek a commitment from Holcim and its tenants to cease using thecauseway for port access.This statement strongly implies that the City believes that it must obtain avoluntary agreement from Holcim and its tenants to cease use of thecauseway for port access. Please indicate whether the City believes that ithas any legal authority or power to require Holcim to cease use of thecauseway and, if so, identify specifically what this authority is.

If the City does not have such authority, can Holcim still choose to use thecauseway for truck transport even after the City develops the permanent,alternative access route from 9G to the port?

5. Page 90 of the of the September 2011 draft LWRP states:Should the State designate the South Bay as a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlifehabitat, a habitat impairment test will be required for any activity that is subject toconsistency review under federal and State laws, or under applicable local lawsimplementing the citys approved local waterfront revitalization program. Theproposed activity is subject to consistency review with the habitat protection policy ifthe proposed action affects the designated habitat.Please identify for us tonight specifically what activities will trigger the use ofa habitat impairment test because they are subject to such consistencyreview under applicable law.

Please explain in detail what the habitat impairment test entails.