Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Getting It Right

The new zoning proposed in the LWRP for the Waterfront Revitalization Area has been in effect now for slightly more than a year. Although there has not been much opportunity to apply the new zoning, but it has already been decided that it needs to be amended. The subject of change is the new Core Riverfront zoning district, represented in darker green on this map from the LWRP. Currently only eating and drinking establishments are permitted businesses in this zone, which constitutes Hudson's waterfront. An amendment would allow retail shops to exist on the waterfront.  

At the Common Council Legal Committee meeting last Wednesday, city attorney Cheryl Roberts and members of the committee began the process of refining the language and the bulk and area regulations in the proposed law amending the zoning to ensure that the changes will allow the kinds of boutique shops that are deemed desirable on the waterfront but prohibit big box stores and discount warehouses. The language of the draft law describes these shops as "shopping venues for personal and household goods" that would be visited by the public "while visiting, recreating or residing in the Core Riverfront zoning district."    


  1. 1. It's just amazing to consider that this post marks the moment when Hudson's new zoning regime - already in effect for one year - finally becomes public knowledge. Throughout the summer I couldn't find a politician or a public official from a requisite department who was aware of the fact. To be frank, this doesn't reflect too well on the public either.

    2. The alleged need to already amend the new zoning (which was technically only one of a very few actions requiring the city's environmental impact statement) is a tacit admission that the LWRP was flawed due to sloppiness and hurry. This is something the public commented on at the time, before being slapped down by the likes of Mr. Moore and Ms. Roberts. And don't make the facile and disastrous mistake of blaming the ex-Mayor when it was Moore's and Roberts' sloppiness and hurry. (Last year's council doesn't bear dignifying with a mention.)

    3. The signage laws for the Core-Riverfront District (not to mention a dozen other non-zoning laws) have been flouted and broken by the city's Harbormaster since the new zoning came into effect last December. Rather than waiting for an ongoing state-level investigation into the situation to be completed, the city's brilliant legal staff and political leadership (who are in large part responsible for bringing us the Falkenheimer headache) will press ahead with what they maintain are improvements to our waterfront zoning. Don't believe them.

    In other words, city officials who've shown zero interest in enforcing their new laws already want those laws amended in service of something else. But of what, really? It would be an exception to the rule not to find ourselves being snookered by these same people.

    3. During and since the "BOA," or brownfields application process (a process from which the public was intentionally excluded against recommended state guidelines by these same individuals serving on the BOA Steering Committee), the empty lot immediately north of the Dunne warehouse building was imperceptibly joined to the fate of that building itself. Control of the continuous stretch between Broad Street and Ferry Street is being eased into the hands of the one individual who will control the Dunne building, a proposal that I believe was first floated by Mr. Moore, though perhaps while doing someone else's bidding.

    This Gossips post also marks the moment we must decide to have a closer look at what the LWRP has in store for the parcels across from the waterfront park. The fate of those lots is directly tied up with the fate of The Seven Acres and the Hudson Power Boat Association. Oh you didn't think so? Well, think again.

    4. In the end the public will have no say and no control, as usual. We may have a whole half a minute to comment, but what we say won't matter a jot. And it won't as long as we keep electing these same types of people who then appoint people like Roberts, who for some reason serves on the BOA Steering Committee. (We should demand her removal at once!)

    Even though our fates as residents are as good as decided for us, we might still discuss what new evil our masters will have in store by the time they're finished machinating on our dime.

  2. Before monkeying with the next sneaky, hurried thing, how about producing an official Zoning Map which the Hudson Code states is our due?

    It's infuriating how much the people's forbearance is being abused.

    Sympathetic aldermen might like to hear our concerns.

  3. Can anyone give me a good reason why Cheryl Roberts should be serving on our BOA Steering Committee?

    Keep in mind that the members of that committee were not known to the public until after the first, failed public hearing in late September (failed because the public was barely notified there was to be a hearing; failed because even this writer who was in contact with the grant writers at the time was not notified; failed because nobody attended).

    If that's not bad enough, according to DOS guidelines it's this Steering Committee that's charged with encouraging public participation.

    It's the same old story in Hudson, but when will people begin to believe it? Or is it caring that's missing?

    It's doubtless Roberts has already visited mischief serving on a committee on which she has absolutely no business but to further the objectionable goals of her own LWRP. She should step down at once, but why will she as long as nobody else demands it?

    Dear fellow citizens: you totally mystify me. Please explain.

    (My thanks to Gossips though.)