At its May meeting, the Common Council ad hoc Truck Route Committee proposed trying to eliminate one of the two truck routes through Hudson: the one that enters on Route 9G and passes through the city on Third Street and Columbia Street before exiting the city on Green Street. At its meeting last week, the committee discussed next steps.
A letter directed to the NYS Department of Transportation has been drafted by Donna Streitz, a member of the ad hoc committee, which makes the case for eliminating the Route 9G/23B truck route. Much of the discussion at last week's committee meeting concerned the timing of submitting the letter. Should there be a public hearing before the letter is submitted to the DOT, or should the public hearing come after the letter has been submitted and DOT has responded? It is not clear if the sequence question was ever resolved, but it was determined that the letter would require approval from the full Council before it was sent to the DOT.
It is expected that after the letter is submitted the next step would be to study the impact of eliminating one of the truck routes. An effective way to study the impact might simply be to shut down the Route 9G/23B truck route for a few weeks and see what happens. Do all the trucks going from one part of Greenport to another part of Greenport take the Route 9 truck route through Hudson, or do they find another way to get to their destination? It seems pretty straightforward, but DOT may not think that kind of empirical research is practicable.
Update: At Monday's informal Common Council meeting, Councilmember Margaret Morris said she had distributed the letter to DOT to the Council for review late that afternoon. Council president Tom DePietro asked her to create a resolution to submit the letter to DOT. He also advised her to get two other members of the Council to introduce the resolution with her because he does not intend to put it on the agenda. (Resolutions can be put before the Council by the Council president or by three councilmembers.) DePietro lives on Worth Avenue, which could be negatively impacted by eliminating the Route 9G/23B truck route.
COPYRIGHT 2023 CAROLE OSTERINK
Really appreciate the diligence of the truck committee members. Trying to get anything done in the local political culture is like pushing a big rock up a steep hill.
ReplyDeleteA simple way to get a lot of trucks out of town would be to ban heavy truck traffic south of 3rd Street, allow only light deliver vehicles. Then the gravel traffic would be required to use the gravel road to the waterfront in two directions. They could manage it and it is a simple fix.
ReplyDeleteAnother related issue would be to require houses to put their garbage cans in the alley, not on the street side. This would get the garbage trucks off the streets. I see a lot of houses putting garbage cans on the street side when they have an alley behind to put cans. Probably too lazy to walk the bags to the back. The trucks are a nuisance, pollute the air, block traffic and have damaged parked cars, breaking mirrors, dents etc.
Not putting trash and recycling cans along the alley when one is available is a code violation. Yet another violation the Code Enforcement Office has no interest in enforcing.
DeleteThe following comment from Susan Meyer was submitted by email:
ReplyDeleteI too appreciate the work of the truck committee members but I have significant concerns about the shell game of moving trucks from one part of town to another. I live on Worth Ave., the route 9 truck route including all of Worth, upper Warren, and Park Place; this area will bear the brunt of the proposed change. Truck route 9 is already a concern; it is on the committee’s docket as such. My neighbors and I can attest to the noise and safety concerns posed by living on streets traveled by more truck traffic than they can logically bear. Add to that an all-around lack of adherence to speed limits and the lack of resources required to monitor those limits.
Having attended the most recent committee meeting, I learned there are no measures yet proposed to mitigate the effects of eliminating truck route 9G/23B. The admitted concern is that the truck traffic from 9G/23B will migrate to the other side of town, route 9. One committee member expressed hopes, but no assurances, that, if the proposed change goes through, trucks might find the remaining truck route, 9, so congested that they finally choose to go around the city. Another committee member repeatedly noted that the resulting congestion might dissuade people from coming to Hudson.
There are numerous residences, many restaurants and shops, two hotels, two hair salons, an animal clinic, doctor’s offices, and a public park on the route 9 truck route. Much of the parking is street parking. There are tight turns; the four-way stop sign at the top of Warren and the turn at Warren and Park are cringe-inducing when two trucks are involved. The hospital is nearby – let’s add an ambulance to the mix. Nowhere is there a traffic light (only a pedestrian light at Park). To dump more truck traffic onto route 9 without conditions in place to mitigate the damage and safety concerns, would not be fair. As the committee continues their work, I urge them to address more fully the effects of the proposed closure.
Note: According to the committee, an upcoming public meeting will be part of this process.
P. Winslow, the problem with the 'haul road' solution that Colarusso is proposing means a massive increase in the volume of heavy truck traffic. The company refuses to accept ANY upside limit to the number of trucks. That route would require two brand new right-angle intersections on Rtes. 9 & 9G. A total of 13,000 vehicles per day pass along those two highways, so we would be creating a scenario fraught with danger and congestion. In addition, all the gravel trucks would cross the dangerous rail intersection at Broad St. at a time when we're trying to clean up the tired old waterfront zone and make it more accessible to the public. The trucking operation is imposing huge downside impacts on the City, with nothing in the way of upside for Hudson. WTF???
ReplyDeleteI understood P. Winslow to mean the simplest of fixes: having the owner use the existing gravel road in two directions, as planned in the LWRP.
DeleteWhen Colarusso bought the land in 2014, the company knew the zoning and it knew the city's plan. It's time they accept it. It's time the city accept it, too.
I totally agree with Susan Meyer and commend the truck committee and Margaret Morris for their efforts, however I think their present idea would be a disaster for Rte 9 N through Hudson as she so clearly states. The turns for large trucks are extreme, especially at Park and Upper Warren. I live on the 800 block of Union and already the exit onto Rte 9 N (Worth Avenue) is another disaster waiting to happen, it is very difficult to get out of Union and onto Worth Avenue to turn left to get to Prospect
ReplyDeleteAvenue and up past the Hospital. Traffic at all times of the day and particularily at 'rush hour' (3-5) is extreme. Adding more trucks barrelling down Worth is not going to help. I think both routes should be banned and trucks (except for local Hudson deliveries) should be directed to 9H on R23 and back to Hudson on 23B where there is easy access to Rte 66 and Fairview Avenue. Also trucks speed down the 800 block of Warren at dangerous speeds. Very bad situation all around.
It is encouraging to see even a few Hudson residents voicing
ReplyDeleteconcerns and showing interest in the truck problem in our City.
Margaret Morris, Donna Streitz and the other members have spent countless hours wading through reams of regulations in an effort to resolves the issue.
They are doing the work for us and they need our engagement and support.
It’s the job they signed up for. And it’s not as complicated or difficult to grasp as it seems to be from observing their glacial work on this. But, as has been said many times here by myself and the few others who have actually worked on this topic, only our mayor and assembly member, working with the county and the leaders of our neighbors in Claverack and Greenport can solve the problem. Given that the mayor is about as useful as teats on a bull and our assembly member hasn’t the political will, all the ad hoc committee can do is jerk the routes around as they are attempting to do now.
DeleteBut you can keep patting them on the head and telling them they’re doing yoemen’s work if it makes you feel better. Good boy!
The increased vehicle traffic over the years with the rebirth of Hudson is doing way more damage than the trucks do. People running red lights, driving the wrong way down a one-way street etc.... should be more of a concern. Just my opinion.
ReplyDelete