The Planning Board just gave site plan approval to 75 North Seventh Street and 708 State Street, the two apartment buildings proposed by the Galvan Foundation to be constructed in what Galvan is calling the Depot District. Five members of the Planning Board--Larry Bowne, John Cody, Theresa Joyner, Gene Shetsky, Clark Wieman--voted to approve the project. Laura Margolis voted against it. Stephen Steim, chair of the Planning Board, was absent from the meeting.
This is happening in communities all over upstate. Developers are taking advantage of inexperienced or unethical local officials to push through taxpayer-subsidized developments with generous PILOTS in small towns with limited workforce development, institutionalizing generational poverty and closing off a viable path to home ownership for low-income individuals and pricing out the workforce and middle class.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, groups like Hudson/Catskill Housing Coalition and Citizen Action laud these actions as progress, all the while their bills are footed by an organizational chain that ultimately leads to hedge funds and investors who dump their money into commercial mortgage backed securities that ultimately draw income from the subsidized housing market.
Let me know when it clicks.
Similar to urban renewal in the 1970s, short term profit for construction companies and developers, and then you are left with a wrecked neighborhood and the social consequences for decades to come.
DeletePoverty Capitalism at work. Unhealthy for the occupants, and the social fabric of these towns and cities.
DeleteWe fought urban renewal's disaster that was Hudson from the 1980's on, and at least Warren Street progressed to what it is today - we fought for better government too but unfortunately we didn't get it. Individuals and sweat equity made a difference in Hudson, an improvement, we tried for better Government but we are now being defeated by the Government. Big money talks. Thank you Laura Margolis for voting no.
DeleteIndeed, this is Urban Renewal 2.0, and it will hurt a generation of the Hudson community as a whole but particularly the lower-income households whose economic opportunities and social mobility will be hurt by the constellation of terribly thought-out policies being pushed by 'activists' and politicians who are, wittingly or unwittingly, lining the pockets of developers and hedge fund investors.
DeleteI would think the Planning Board would demand that Galvan finish up a bunch of their other projects before starting another one.
ReplyDeleteThey can’t. It’s not within their power to look beyond the application itself.
DeleteDoes anyone know if it is possible for residents to band together and sue a planning board for failing to do their due diligence? B Huston
ReplyDeleteI think that is called "voting".
DeleteI would think an Article 78 should be possible.
DeleteYou could say it was a conspiracy to defraud the public and intentionally damage the business community and developing economy of the city. A reasonable case to make.
DeleteThe board voted on the largest and most controversial residential development in decades and the chair of the board was absent. I saw Stephen walking on Warren Street on Wednesday afternoon. Would love to hear why he couldn't make it. B Huston
ReplyDeleteI'd love to hear that, too.
DeleteThis is a critical question we should be posing: stephen.steim@cityofhudson.org
DeleteLast night's stand-in chair, Larry Bowne, did not even mention the fact that Steim would not be chairing the meeting, nor a reason why he wasn't there. Not on the Zoom. So unprofessional and suspect. However Steim would have voted would not have influenced the outcome, but that's besides the point. Why didn't the only member who voted against the project chair the meetings instead of Larry? B Huston
DeleteLets see: The PB gave the okay for 148 residential units and 9 retail spaces at 7th and State and no off-street parking at the site. After the 6 parking spaces on 7th are full, people will try to park on State Street -- tenants, visitors, employees and owners of the shops, and, of course, customers of the shops -- before they park in the 40 space lot Galvan might build 2 blocks away. Their Depot Brewery is slated to open soon -- where are their employees, owners and customers going to park -- not in the City Centre Lot or any lot nearby because none exist nearby. They will park on State Street, or try to if there is a space. And the other brewery ON STATE STREET across the street that the board took up last night -- parking AND noise being a large part of the discussion -- where are their ten employees and customers going to park? The board also got another presentation from the Pocketbook factory, 2 blocks away. What were the issues discussed then? PARKING and NOISE. Where are any of US living on and near State going to park when all this arrives? IT'S INSANITY, AND DUMB GROWTH, NOT SMART GROWTH. The stand-in chair of the board summed things up last night after the vote, basically saying "Galvan's project won't be done for two years. The City has plenty of time to figure out the parking problem, it's not our job to deal with this." Which is to say, WE ARE SCREWED!
ReplyDeleteIf I have to regularly park two blocks or more blocks from my house because of all this dumb development, I do my best to leave Hudson. Guaranteed, I wont be the only one.
I find it interesting that the Pocketbook project to revitalize this long empty historic building receives so much negative feedback, meanwhile Galvan continues to do as they please, in spite of a proven negative track record. For what it's worth, it's very interesting to talk to actual residents of their current affordable housing. I have spoken to a few, and they have nothing positive to say, but of course are afraid of jeopardizing their homes, so they can't really speak out in a meaningful way. I do think judging what their history is as a landlord is a valid concern before authorizing them the right to expand.
DeleteLarry Bowne, last night's meeting chair, in his comments after the vote, also said to all residents, "Get involved in city politics. You can change the parking rules overnight" to ease the parking issues Galvan's development will inevitably create. He is referring to Alternate Side Rules, of course, and it is so ridiculous for him to say this. Rob Perry is the only person that is going to change the Alternate Rules, and he isn't going to one bit. Others have tried to persuade him to do it. Ask John Rosenthal, ask Jane Trombley - they tried and failed. Ask Rob Perry, he will just laugh at you.
ReplyDeleteIt's insulting to hear Larry oversimplify and be so casual about this when so much is at stake. He has no idea what he is talking about. Alternate Side Rules are here to stay and parking will be a f'n nightmare in the the neighborhood around 7th and State. And his "solution" is for everyone else to change the Alternate Side Rules? Boy, that's helpful, Larry. Did your eloquent offer of a solution ease your conscience after you voted for Galvan's project based on a parking study that you were aware was full of false data showing dozens, if not hundreds, of parking spaces that don't actually exist?
WE ALL DESERVE BETTER
I happen to know why PB Chair Steve Steim was absent for the meeting. He had a very good, legitimate reason. We're fortunate to have him on the Board-- he's incredibly diligent and devoted and has his hands more than full with all the various developments in Hudson.
ReplyDeleteSo "good and legitimate" that it had to go unmentioned at one of the most significant PB meetings ever? You okay with that? B Huston
DeleteYes, I'm OK with that, because I know the reason for his absence. You don't.
DeletePeter, I like Stephen, and I think he's shown dedication to his job at a time when there are some very complex issues facing Hudson, but if he did have a reason important enough not to be there that he can't share, he's going to have to accept that his non-answer might not be satisfactory to a swath of the community who need the Planning Board to function.
DeleteIf it were not for the 1970s Urban Regeneration program, many properties along Warren Street would have crumbled years ago, taking their neighbors down with them. The cost of reinforcing all those aging walls would have been for too costly for the owners.
ReplyDeleteJust sayin.