Hudson Community Development & Planning Agency (HCDPA) owns several parcels of vacant land. Hudson Housing Authority (HHA) needs more land to carry out its plan to replace or completely renovate Bliss Towers. HDCPA wants HHA to have its properties, but HHA is not yet in a position to buy them. In the meantime, HCDPA is facing insolvency and must sell something immediately to raise some cash and stay afloat. That is the situation, but once again, at yesterday's meeting, the HCDPA board decided to table the question of which property they would sell.
There are four parcels being considered: 238 Columbia Street, a single building lot; 202-206 Columbia Street, what remains of the community garden at Columbia and Second; 2 to 12 State Street, the land on the north side of State Street, beginning at Front Street; and 2-4 Warren Street, the northeast corner of Warren and Front.
At yesterday's meeting, Dominic Merante, who as Common Council majority leader serves ex officio on the HCDPA board, suggested that, because Habitat for Humanity was interested in acquiring the parcel back in 2013, 202-206 Columbia Street should be the property sold. (HCDPA tried unsuccessfully to sell it in 2019.)
Nick Zachos, who is serving as interim director of HHA, noted that 202-206 Columbia is adjacent to HHA properties and therefore was most appealing to HHA. He explained that a relocation plan was needed if HHA is to carry out its plan to demolish or do a "gut renovation" of Bliss Towers, and they needed to "maximize every property around them." That would make 202-206 Columbia Street and 2 to 12 State Street most desirable to HHA, leaving 238 Columbia Street and 2-4 Warren Street as properties HCDPA could consider selling at this time. HCDPA has tried twice to sell 238 Columbia Street in recent years, with no success, which seems to narrow it down to 2-4 Warren Street.
Zachos said 2-4 Warren Street was of "little or no interest to HHA" and suggested it would be "a valuable property to sell to someone else." He speculated, "It could be liquidated sooner and wouldn't affect HHA's plans." Mayor Kamal Johnson concurred. Still, no decision to sell that property or any other was made at yesterday's HCDPA meeting.
COPYRIGHT 2022 CAROLE OSTERINK
These people should have their heads examined. The footprint and impact of HHA on the city is monstrous enough. Why would any sane person consider giving more property to the HHA to expand their already dysfunctional footprint. If you want to wreck Hudson, why not give the 7th Street park to HHA for another 9 story housing hellhole and convert City Hall into a homeless shelter.
ReplyDeleteThe following comment was submitted by email:
ReplyDeletePlease note that I’m quite concerned about a possible sale of our Park at 2-4 Warren St.
Each time there’s an update from a planner for Front and Warren the Park is shown as a part of the revitalization for the area.
But which is it? The HDC to sell it or will it remain a park?
The Front and Warren area needs to remain an open view for both driver and pedestrian.
In the past Front and Warren was used as a U turn for drivers coming down Warren and wishing to drive back East up Warren. Believe it or not it was The thing to do for people to spend time driving up and down Warren, especially if you were a teenager.
Maybe Warren and Front could become a round about for safer traffic flow and pedestrian crossing. It’s just a thought. It works for the Rip VanWinkle bridge approach.
Ok. Here’s a sidebar. Did you know that Mt. Merino had a beacon tower and rotating light for aircraft safety? The light came on each and every evening. I recall walking to it and climbing up the steel ladder to the top. What a view. I believe it was deemed obsolete once the power line structures were built on the shores of the Hudson River.
And many thanks for your unending works at GOR.
best regards
D’Onofrio
I remember everyone used to U turn at Front & Warren. A parade of cars up & down Warren, stopping for a Johnnie Ware's Hot Dog, etc.
DeleteI also hiked up to Mt Merino's Beacon tower with friends, quite a view!
It's possible that no action was taken on the sale of the properties, because the newly retained attorney (in December) has already resigned (as per the Register Star Article).
ReplyDeleteKristal Heinz