Mill Street Residents Speak Out

On Wednesday, the Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on the proposed Mill Street Lofts. The project requires three variances: to build four-story buildings in the R-4 District, where three stories is the maximum permitted; to reduce the size of parking spaces from 10 x 20 feet to 9 x 18 feet; and (this was a new variance requested at Wednesday's meeting) to have less than the required amount of "useful open space" on the site.

At Wednesday's ZBA meeting, the available seating in the Council Chamber at City Hall was filled with residents of Mill Street. They expressed concerns about flooding, describing the flooding that already occurs on the street and sharing their fears that development on what is now a grassy field would exacerbate the problem. Pauline Kelsey, who said she has lived in her house at the corner of Mill Street and Second for fifty years, said the excavation involved in creating Charles Williams Park in 2008-2011 made the flooding on her property worse. Joel Funk said water in his basement had ruined the furnace and predicted that "trying to divert water [from the proposed site] will destroy the property of the people already there." Lisa Johnson said in heavy rain events a river formed along the street, large enough for kids to tube on. Lakia Walker explained that the field currently absorbs water in heavy rain events. A commenter who said he was a volunteer fireman who had pumped out the basements of houses on Mill Street many times declared, "I don't want to see this street destroyed." 

Mill Street on December 18, 2023--Photo courtesy Lance Wheeler

Traffic on Second Street and Mill Street was also something that was mentioned by several commenters. Kelsey talked about the increased traffic on Second Street since the dog park opened in 2019, although she said she liked the dogs and welcomed the presence of the dog park. She also mentioned the tractor-trailers that, ignoring the designated truck route, regularly roll past her house, bound for Harney Tea. She also talked about how in winter, when the City is doing snow removal, dump trucks loaded with snow come barreling down the hill, headed for the spot on North Second Street where DPW dumps the snow. Speaking of the traffic on Mill Street itself, Funk predicted it would triple if the project were built.

The residents also talked about parking, indicating that parking is already a challenge for the current residents, who often own more than one vehicle. Because of the narrowness of the street, parking is currently allowed on only one side of the street. The proposed building would have 70 units and only 56 offstreet parking spaces. As a consequence it is feared there will be more people seeking to park on the street, not to mention the anticipated traffic to Charles Williams Park when the improvements proposed by The Spark of Hudson are realized.

Residents expressed concern about emergency vehicles accessing the street, saying that trucks now coming onto the street have to back up to get off the street because it is not possible for them to turn around. The same is true for emergency vehicles. It was also pointed out that emergency vehicles cannot now get through when the street is flooded.

The most poignant testimony came from a young man who told the ZBA he had grown up on Mill Street, in one of the houses built by Habitat for Humanity. Putting the lie to the notion expressed by Cassondra Britton, legal counsel to the Planning Board, that the Charles Williams field had never been used for recreation during the forty years it was owned by the City of Hudson, he recalled how the only argument in the neighborhood during his childhood was over whether cricket or soccer would be played on the field. "People on the street became a family," he said, "because no one wanted to bother us." He spoke of his parents' hard work and the joy of getting the house, allowing their family, which included his grandmother, to move out of the one-bedroom apartment where they had been living. He told the board that his parents, who still live in the house, love and take pride in their home.  

The question of how the deed restriction requiring the land to be used as a park or for recreation had been lifted was raised several times, including by Linda Mussmann, who represents the Fourth Ward on the Columbia County Board of Supervisors. One commenter suggested "they pulled some shenanigans" to make that happen. (How it happened is explained in this post: "Nothing Is Forever.")

That the proposed building will destroy the character of the street was the theme that ran through most residents' comments. Johnson lamented that their beautiful green field is already "all torn up." A young woman who had recently moved to Mill Street called it "the most neighborly place I have ever lived." One resident characterized the street, which has no sidewalks, as a "strolling street," and another called it "a safe route for bikes, pedestrians, and dog walkers." (Mill Street is part of the Empire State Trail.) It was also pointed out that the density of the proposed project was so great that there was no room for landscaping. Mussmann summed up the project as "too much, too big."

Some residents questioned the veracity of the parking and traffic study commissioned by Kearney Development, one of them attesting that the monitoring for the study had been done between 11:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. 

The desire of all who spoke was for the ZBA to deny the variances. Whether they will or not is yet to be seen. The ZBA cannot act until the Planning Board has completed its environmental review.

At a special meeting on Tuesday, the Planning Board failed to get enough affirmative votes to issue a negative declaration on the project. Whether the Planning Board intends to hold another special meeting to consider the matter before their regularly scheduled meeting on September 10 is not known. On Wednesday, Kearney representatives asked the ZBA to hold a special meeting on September 11 or 12 to vote on the variances. The assumption seemed to be that when the full Planning Board met on September 10, the project would get its desired negative declaration, and the ZBA could vote on granting the variances. They were told, however, that the ZBA chair, its legal counsel, and other members of the board could not accommodate their request. They would have to wait until the ZBA's regular meeting, which will take place on September 18.  

COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK