Urban Renewal Redux

Early aerial photographs of Hudson show that once upon a time the Second Ward looked pretty much the same as the First Ward. The grid pattern of the streets was regular. Houses and buildings stood on 26-foot wide lots with a relationship to the street that is identical to that which still exists in the First Ward. A walking tour guide, written by Ruth Piwonka, to accompany a book signing celebrating the publication of Bruce Hall's book Diamond Street in 1994, suggested that, already in the 19th century, the south side of town was considered marginally more affluent than the north side. It would seem that the economic gap between the neighborhoods on either side of Warren Street--below Third Street at least--had widened by the 1970s, because when the city fathers decided to eliminate what was allegedly the "worst housing stock in the state," they targeted the Second Ward.          

What happened forty years ago during Urban Renewal had an enormous, community-altering impact not only on the neighborhoods of the Second Ward but also on the city as a whole. Today Hudson still deals with the consequences of the decisions made by the Hudson Urban Renewal Agency in the late '60s and early '70s--decisions that concentrated low-income housing in one area of the city and rendered the revitalization that has taken place in the First Ward and elsewhere impossible by destroying much of the historic architecture that has been the engine of Hudson's revitalization. Although the Hudson Urban Renewal Agency seemed not to foresee the long-term effects of their plans, they did make an effort to keep the community informed while these very radical changes were being proposed. The History Room at the Hudson Area Library has a number of brochures published by the Hudson Urban Renewal Agency and newspaper articles touting the benefits to the city of the demolition and redevelopment project--including the anticipated benefits, through PILOTs, to the tax base.

What's being contemplated now--the elimination of Bliss Towers and the creation of dozens of single-household replacement units scattered throughout the Second and Fourth wards or perhaps throughout the whole city--is equally radical and will also have a significant and long-term impact on the city, yet no effort at all is being made to keep the residents of Hudson informed about what's being contemplated. At the informal Common Council meeting on January 10, Council President Don Moore said that Tim O'Byrne has been hired by Omni Development to address the Bliss Towers replacement project. Tim O'Byrne, it seems, is "Site Selection Specialist at BBL Development Group," the design/build firm that brought us the Central Firehouse on Seventh Street and the county office building at 325 Columbia Street. Last Tuesday, before the Council approved the resolution to give land in the 200 block of Columbia Street to Habitat for Humanity, Moore indicated that the lots were not among the parcels being requested by Omni Development, so presumably somebody--perhaps Moore himself--knows what parcels they are requesting, but so far the information has been kept from the public. This project will have an enormous impact on Hudson, and it should proceed, if not with the involvement and input of the whole community, which would be ideal, certainly with the community's knowledge of what's being contemplated before the plan is presented as a fait accompli.

The property tax implications alone are a compelling reason why the community needs to know what's being considered. The single-household units built to replace Bliss Towers will be tax exempt. The vacant properties now owned by the City of Hudson, HCDPA, and HDC, which are likely sought by Omni Development, are currently tax exempt, and if they become the sites of Bliss Towers replacement units, they will be tax exempt in perpetuity. Can Hudson really afford to consign any more of its small land area to decades of tax exemption?  

Consider 13 South Second Street. Until a few years ago, this was a vacant lot, and were it still a vacant lot, although it wasn't owned by the City of Hudson, it might well be one of the parcels sought for Bliss Towers replacement units. Today, however, it is not a vacant lot but rather the site of a house that is on the tax rolls, assessed at $317,300. 

In his "State of the City" address, delivered at the Organizational Meeting of the Common Council on January 10, Moore mentioned Governor Andrew Cuomo's intention to establish a two percent property tax cap and its implications for Hudson. If the City must limit how much it can raise the taxes on existing properties, a logical way to meet its ever increasing budget demands would be to encourage the creation of more taxable property rather than dedicating more of Hudson's limited land area to new tax exempt property. It is hoped that Moore, Fourth Ward Supervisor Bill Hughes, Mayor Scalera, and whoever else is in discussion with the Hudson Housing Authority and Omni Development about this project keep the City's fiscal sustainability in mind as they plan this new scheme of "renewal" for Hudson.