Tuesday, June 22, 2021

Fifty Years Ago in Hudson

There are three proposals for new, multi-unit buildings in Hudson, all to be designated as different levels of affordable housing: the two buildings the Galvan Foundation plans to construct on North Seventh Street, which between them will have 138 apartments; the plan for the adaptive reuse of John L. Edwards school as affordable housing--a plan that involves the construction of the new five-story building; the plan to rebuild and expand the properties owned by the Hudson Housing Authority. These plans, if realized, will have a significant, character altering effect on our little city, reminiscent of the impact Urban Renewal had on Hudson fifty years ago.  

With this in mind, Gossips shares these photographs that show Front Street in 1971, when Hudson's Urban Renewal Agency, which morphed into Hudson Community Development and Planning Agency, presided over the demolition of all the buildings on the west side of the street and the construction of what is now Hudson Terrace.



  1. What do you suppose the density of the blocks that were demolished was? Probably a lot denser than Bliss towers.
    In order to maintain a viable City, The focus should not be on USE, but on form and density, which will stand as long as the buildings do. If the buildings are designed with certain rules; they can be used for different purposes- like loft buildings.
    Large free-standing buildings with not "context" are inherently anti-urban. Warren Street is dense, but as far as I know no one wants to down-zone it.

    Please begin to think of the shape of our city and where some density makes sense. If we do not do this as a community then the decision will be made by outsiders. You cannot stop growth, but you can direct it to benefit rather than harm the city.

  2. If the proposed new housing is going to replace sub-standard existing buildings, fine. But if we're just increasing our capacity to host a larger population of economically disadvantaged residents, those projects should be rejected. We don't need a re-run of the 1970's.

  3. History Repeats Itself -

    It is all about welfare money going to the politicians.

    In the early days of Hudson, the founders of Hudson believed in creating a city based on industry, meaning organization to provide work for everyone, and thrift, coupled with a vison for the the future based on ethics and freedom.

    How far away from that have we gone ? what is wrong with a small scale city for independent thinkers and doers ?

  4. Hudson has been transforming itself fine on it's own, in spite of the havoc wrecked in the 70s. Three decades ago the main feature of much of Hudson was rotting wood, rats and roaches. We now have a vibrant growing economy, the decaying buildings and neglected neighborhoods are being gradually restored. This process should not be disrupted, stifled, tamped down or reversed. Any new construction needs to be strictly regulated in terms of use, scale, density and design. It should blend in and become a part of the neighborhood, not overwhelm and transform it. Large scale, block long apartment buildings have no place in a residential neighborhood of homes and 2 - 3 story buildings.

  5. Just a silly question but where is it written that the low to moderate income housing has to be located in the city of Hudson? I've heard the arguments that being within the city limits gives the tenants access to medical care, transportation etc. Are there any other reasons to justify this?