Thursday, February 18, 2016

Tentative Settlement Reached

If you are eager to learn the outcome of Tuesday night's Common Council executive session, John Mason has the story today in the Register-Star: "Hudson approves settlement in Von Ritter case." Mason's report also provides a summary of von Ritter's protracted legal battle with the City.

Back in the summer of 2012, von Ritter put the property that is the heart of the dispute on the market. Asking price: $4 million. Now it seems the price has risen to $6 million. Here's how the listing at Coldwell Banker Prime Properties describes 221-228 Tanners Lane (capitalization and punctuation are as found): "Unique property. Railroad Frontage, In the River revitalization Area. Appx. 1,800 feet from the Hudson River. Zoned Industrial/Commercial/ Warehousing. Walk to Hudson Train Station, Hudson River, Riverfront Park, Boat Club, and State Boat Launch Site. Currently under review for rezoning to allow for High rise condo's. Unlimited possibilities."


1 comment:

  1. Laugh all you want at Von Ritter, or join Alderman Miah in his disgust that a fellow property owner has cost the City in defense fees.

    But from the Register-Star story alone, we see that even the City acknowledges there's a municipal cistern which fills up in the middle of Von Ritter's land. (The story doesn't say it, but it fills to overflowing.)

    The courts are in agreement that Von Ritter has a legitimate claim, and after a series of failed settlements, the City will pay the landowner what amounts to damages.

    When all the expenses are tallied up, it will be interesting to see in retrospect whether or not it was cheaper for the City to have fought Von Ritter, or did City Hall miss an opportunity with some previous settlement scheme.

    In the meantime, it's bizarre to me that some residents are rolling their eyes along with City officials at crazy old Hank Von Ritter, who "has cost the City too much already" (from the R-S story).

    Next time, it might be your property which needs defending. And when you seek legal redress - which anyone would - remember to roll your eyes at yourself. That's if you disagree with several court judgements in this case, and side with a City which is just fed up with people complaining, thank you very much!

    It's a shame that the brick stables will be destroyed though. Go have a look at a piece of local history before it's demolished.