Is there no room for our plan?
To The Editor:
We have been working on developing Route 30 in Delaware County for tourism and its consequent economic benefits. The route includes five townships: Hancock, Colchester, Andes, Middletown, and Roxbury.
We had initially intended to develop the route as a Scenic Byway. However, because of perceived regulations and the lengthy process involved in getting approval, we, instead, decided to proceed with its development as Catskill Scenic Route 30. Doing it this way involves no government intervention and allows us to proceed without the time delays characteristic of projects that have to be approved at the state level.
We have read the article, “Economic Valuation Study of Public Lands in the Central Catskills: Report Results” in the “Catskill Center Newsletter, Spring 2013” and were particularly interested in the sentence that named “previously identified (italics added) initiatives” that were recommended for further consideration.
We recognize that the initiatives named began before we started our project three years ago, but we are disappointed that our Catskill Scenic Route 30 initiative has not been included in this list.
Is there no room in development for newer initiatives? There seems to be a movement afoot that is trying to divide the Catskills and Delaware County into competing little regions. Of the five townships in Delaware County along our Route 30 project, three are on the well-funded northwest side of the Pepacton. Two are on the ignored southeastern end. We need to work together on inclusive countywide projects if we are going to revive our economies.
Catskill Scenic Route 30