Thursday, February 22, 2018

DRI Watch: What Did and Didn't Make the Cut

Tonight, at the Common Council Economic Development Committee meeting, Sheena Salvino, executive director of the Hudson Development Corporation (HDC) and member of the local DRI (Downtown Revitalization Initiative) staff, told the committee she had posted the new project list, the outcome of a three-hour meeting of the committee of ten that took place last Friday, on the DRI website. The thirty projects have now been divided into three categories: recommended for DRI funding; recommended to be part of the DRI Investment Plan but not for DRI funding; and recommended to be removed from the DRI Investment Plan.

In the first category, there are twenty-two projects, seeking a total of $14,377,610 in DRI funds, about 50 percent more than is actually available. In the second category, there are three: the electric bus, the renovation of 59 Allen Street as a bed & breakfast, and the facade improvements to The Wareshouse and the DigiFab expansion. In the third category--not recommended for inclusion in the DRI plan--there are five: the skatepark, the North Bay connector, the bioenergy park, cybersecurity workforce development, and the proposal by Hudson Cruises to upgrade and extend tourism and community access to the waterfront. 

Of interest to those who think projects proposed by the Galvan Foundation should not be awarded DRI funding, the only project proposed by Galvan that was not recommended for DRI funding is the proposal to turn 59 Allen Street into a bed & breakfast.

Click here to review the entire list.


  1. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, there's a 3rd category at the bottom of the projects page under the heading "Recommended by LPC Project Development Subcommittee to be Removed From Plan," with five projects listed for potential removal.

    It's hard to understand how a proposal with totally unfeasible components can still be "recommended." Does the Committee appreciate that the ONLY WAY to accomplish the Railroad Pier Proposal is to dredge the bottom of the river?!

    Because dredging appears nowhere in the proposal [warning: I've discovered that it's impertinent to wonder why not], then it's only fair to ask Committee members in advance how they plan to rationalize giving the pier proposal 12.47% of the total available DRI funding!

    Viability, and not uninformed popular support, should be the principal criterion for evaluating proposals and awards.

    1. You're right, unheimlich! Sheena didn't mention the third category, and I completely missed it when I looked at the list. I'm amending the post.