Change is Good

Reading the articles about housing on the Hudson reminded me of the thoughts of Pete Seeger, who felt that the revitalization of the river was in the common interest of the public. Although this might not have been what Pete had in mind, I think that developments as mentioned in the New Riverfront article would be greatly beneficial to the growth and maintenance of the Hudson. With new housing on the Hudson, I think there will be an incentive to make the Hudson as attractive and clean as the new buildings planned for construction. With more citizens will come more sources of tax revenue with which even more environmental projects could be funded.
In none of the articles we read did I find a particularly strong argument against the so named "megaprojects." I was skeptical of Scenic Hudson in the presidents statement claiming construction would damage natural views and thus tourism in Kingston. First of all much of the building is to be done on barren mining scenes and will actually replace these with "250 acres of open space, a mile-long promenade, trail systems and parks" as stated by the vice president of AVR realty. Second I don't believe the loss of scenery will harm tourism as much as providing luxury condominiums will help. With the Hudson becoming more swimmable by the day, tourists will need a comfortable place from which to enjoy this natural wonder. Some form of progression is necessary in the advancement of the lands bordering the Hudson and I believe that housing is an economic and attractive option.The beauty of the Hudson is preserved in national parks and I think that to oppose the alteration of other lands is only a fear of change.