The Planning Board meets next Tuesday, and before that happens, Gossips wants to share some of what took place at the December 10 meeting of the Planning Board. As usual, residents of Mill Street showed up in force to express their opposition to the project. The current residents of Mill Street are universally opposed to the project which would increase the density of their neighborhood, now comprised of eleven households, by 600 percent. Several of the residents urged the Planning Board to "right-size" the project, making it only three stories rather than four stories. Incentive zoning, which was adopted in 2011 as part of Hudson's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP), makes it unnecessary for the project to be granted a height variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals and allows the Planning Board to give affordable housing projects a "density bonus." The project, as it is currently proposed will have 70 units. A Mill Street resident told the Planning Board, "If you had a 35-unit building proposed, none of us would be here."
Another Mill Street resident pointed out that what is being proposed runs counter to years of community visioning regarding this area of the city. As Gossips has already reported, in 1983, when the City of Hudson took possession of the land that had been the playing fields for Charles Williams School, there was a clause in the deed requiring that ownership of the land revert back to the school district if the City wanted to use it for anything other than park land and recreation. Somehow the City got the school district to agree to abandon that "reverter clause" in exchange for half the proceeds from the sale of the land, although exactly how that deal was reached and why it never came before the Common Council remain a mystery.
At the meeting on December 10, it was pointed out that the idea of this land being preserved for recreational purposes persisted for decades. On page 58 of the City's 2002 Comprehensive Plan, the site is included in the proposals for Parks & Recreation Improvements.
Figure 24 in the City's LWRP, adopted by the Common Council in 2011, shows the parcel as recreational open space.
Interestingly, when the LWPR was mentioned, Victoria Polidoro, counsel to the Planning Board, pointed out that the LWRP had not been approved by the State, implying that the information contained therein could be ignored but apparently not appreciating the irony that incentive zoning, which is enabling the project to circumvent the ZBA, is also part of the LWRP.
At this meeting too, "Friendly Neighborhood Immigrant" told the Planning Board, "There is a clear double standard in how you are dealing with this project" as compared with its treatment of the market rate apartment building proposed for Fairview Avenue, bordering "the Boulevards." He went on to say the board had made a "wrongful determination" when it made a negative declaration on the Mill Street project in the SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review) process, "knowing your conflict of interest." The conflict of interest he referenced is that of Theresa Joyner, who chairs the Planning Board. In addition to chairing the Planning Board, Joyner is the City's Fair Housing Director. Asked about this perceived conflict of interest, Joyner declined to comment.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
It seems nearly every time one of the City's attorneys opens his or her mouth, embarrassment ensues. Sometimes, lawsuits and payment of significant damages do, too.
ReplyDeleteMs. Polidoro can surely appreciate the difference between NYS and the City of Hudson. The City of Hudson has adopted the LWRP -- and as such, is bound by it. The zoning changes contained in the LWRP were codified as a result of the City's adoption. The State is not bound by it. But the Planning Board doesn't make State-level determinations.
The powers that be have decided to screw the existing Mill Street residents and no mere legality is going to stand in their way, apparently. Not sure what Mill Street's denizens did to deserve this perceived ire but I feel sorry for them. They should sue to put a stop to this foolishness.
Also to note from that meeting, when the Mill St resident mentioned the recreational use of the site in the 2002 comprehensive plan, Theresa Joyner replied, with a chuckle, something like, “well that’s just a suggestion, we’re not bound to that.” Which also proves the point about how fruitless the current comprehensive plan in process will be.
ReplyDeleteAnd speaking of Mill St residents, one of the larger homes went on the market this past fall. I guess getting out while the getting’s good.
🤔
ReplyDelete1️⃣ The most experienced and reputable Planning Board members resigned publicly. The cited reasons that lead to their resignation have not been acknowledged, addressed, or investigated.
2️⃣ The Planning Board chair openly cited influence peddling by the Mayor on a hot and recorded mic.
3️⃣ The Planning Board changes its mind/determination without any underlying facts changing or any new evidence entered into the public record.
In other G20 countries, this would have led to a Public/Crown Prosecutor/Defender knocking on their door and asking questions. But in the US, we rely on citizen-led civil actions for the most part… at least until there is a public outcry or really sloppy criminality. Or I guess if the Mayor got free Business Class tickets on Turkish Airlines. 🤣
Sad fact: The Columbia County District Attorney's total annual budget is $2m. And that office -- staffed by hard-working and educated professionals -- is responsible for prosecuting crimes and looking out for 60k residents across the entire County.
Compare that budget allocation to any other County Department (or City of Hudson Departments for that matter) next time you hear about wire fraud, DUIs, sex crimes, pedophiles, child abuse, or wonder why the Mayor of Hudson does not respond to FOIAs or address any of his conflicts of interests.
But back to Mill Street….
🛡️ Reminds me of the famous saying:
First, they came for 11 Warren St, and you did not speak out—because you did not live on lower Warren.
Then they came for (rental) property rights, and you did not speak out—because you were not a landlord.
Then they came for your property taxes, and you did not speak out—because you could still afford them.
Then they came for Mill Street, and you did not speak out—because you did not live on Mill Street.
Finally, they came for your street and your business—but there was no one left to speak for you.
🐳 We all live on Mill Street. But we don't all realize it.