The following letter was written by Donna Streitz on behalf of Our Hudson Waterfront.
Call to Action! If
you're concerned about the future of Hudson and our waterfront, and/or about what
happened at the February 11th Planning Board meeting, write to the Planning Board to voice
your concerns. Also, mark your calendar for the next meeting on Tuesday, March
11th, 6:30pm at City Hall, and plan
to attend in person if you’re able (as there will be no
opportunity to join remotely).
As a reminder, at
last week's meeting, following pleas from the public, Theresa Joyner, the PB
Chair, said that the Board would hold another vote at its March 11th
monthly meeting on whether to allow a Public Hearing on the Colarusso Dock
Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.), and in the meantime the public can write
to the PB to voice any concerns. Also, later in the meeting, the
Board voted to eliminate hybrid meetings in the future (after their
legal counsel advocated for elimination), thus requiring attendance in person.
Following is a
little important background information based on research of Planning Board
(PB) minutes dating back to 2019:
BACKGROUND
- July 2019 to July 2020: The
last PB public hearing involving the Colarusso dock operation was 5-6 years ago
– (July 19, 2019 to July 14, 2020). The hearing involved two separate
applications before the Board from A. Colarusso and Son Inc. for “conditional
use permits with site plan components by a replacement bulkhead and proposed
haul road improvements at 175 South Front Street.” Bottom line, one for the
dock operation and one for the haul road.
- November 2019, Colarusso submitted an
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to PB; the then Board Chair (Betsy Gramkow)
said that “much information regarding the dock operations was still missing.”
- The public expressed concerns about not knowing
about the volume of Colarusso trucks on city streets or at the waterfront.
- February 2020 – Board received site plan from
Colarusso, for which they said they had been requesting for months.
- May 2020 – A PB member stated that the Board
had been asking the applicant for truck traffic volume information for over
three years.
- July 14, 2020 – On final day of the public
hearing, Applicant advised the PB of results of a newly completed traffic study
(7/9/20 report) it commissioned, performed by Creighton Manning engineering,
which reported on Colarusso truck volume from 2014 through 2019 based on
Colarusso truck load tickets. Subsequent to public hearing, PB’s engineering
firm, Barton & Loguidice (B&L), evaluated CM’s report and submitted
findings to PB in August 2020, after close of the public hearing.
- Only ONE member of current Planning Board,
Theresa Joyner, was on the Board during the public hearing. She was appointed
to PB in early 2020, and subsequently became Chair in March 2022.
- July 27, 2020, PB
agreed to pass a resolution classifying the Colarusso application for
continuation of existing commercial dock operation as a Type I SEQRA action.
The Board subsequently commenced a SEQRA Part II and Part III reviews (conducted
from August 2020 until November 2021).
- November 2021, the PB
completed an Environment Assessment Form Part 3 review, which they passed
unanimously that month. Board decided to adopt a Determination of Significance
Positive Declaration. Colarusso subsequently sued the Planning Board for a second time, which prevented PB from
continuing its review for approximately 20 months. One PB member commented
that the PB spent hundreds of hours completing the EAF Part III. It contains a
wealth of information, and addresses many issues that overlap with our City
Zoning Code.
- August 2023, PB
resumed its review of the haul road C.U.P. following a court’s decision
pertaining to the haul road C.U.P. application. The PB proceeded with its
review of the haul road C.U.P., which it subsequently approved December 2023.
- July 2024 - Court
rendered decision on the remaining outstanding lawsuit by Colarusso against the
PB.
- January 2025 – PB
resumed discussion of the Colarusso Dock C.U.P. application following court’s
decision.
- February 2025 – PB, in a split decision, voted
to NOT reopen public hearing for the Colarusso Dock C.U.P. application.
However, following pleas from the public agreed to vote again at the March 2025
meeting, and said that in the meantime, public can write to Planning Board to
express any concerns. Planning Board also voted to eliminate “hybrid” meetings
in the future after elimination was advocated for by their counsel.
Also, the PB discussed the right for the public to be heard at a public
hearing. One individual (engineer?) commented that you’re going to give them
one hearing, one public meeting, that’s all you’re going to do.
We strongly
feel that a public hearing for the Colarusso Dock C.U.P. should be held by the
Planning Board for a number of reasons, including:
- There was much unknown to the PB
and the public during the prior public hearing due to delays by the
Applicant in furnishing requested information, such as critical truck
traffic information. The results of a truck study commissioned by
Applicant wasn’t presented to the PB until July 14, 2020, the last day of
the public hearing. The Board’s engineering firm, B&L, reviewed the
report and issued its’ findings to the PB after the close of the public
hearing. [Report revealed that truck trip volume to/from the dock
almost tripled from 2015 to 2019, to over 15,000 trips per year. Based on
Colarusso’s proposed daily maximums, worst case scenario for our Core
Waterfront District is up to 71,000 trips (or more) per year of 80,000lb
gravel trucks with associated barge activity.]
- The nature of the PB’s review has
changed significantly, as per the court’s July 2024 decision (it cannot be
subject to a SEQRA Type 1 Action). The PB must evaluate the Dock C.U.P.
application under the CITY ZONING CODES.
- Only ONE member of the current
Planning Board was on the Board when the public hearing last took place.
- There have been significant and
wonderful business developments in our waterfront’s Core-Riverfront (CR)
District during the past several years.
Regarding hybrid
meetings, while the Board is not required to provide, they have been
doing so for the past 5 years, since the Pandemic. This has been a great
service and value to the public, as hybrid meetings allow the public to
participate remotely, to view meetings at a later date if they were unable to
attend, and provide full transparency to the meeting.
Another concern
is meeting space. Section 103 of the Open Meetings Law
requires that public bodies make reasonable efforts to hold meetings in rooms
that can “adequately accommodate” members of the public who wish to attend. In
addition to reducing transparency to the meeting, we are concerned that City
Hall will not provide ample enough space to adequately accommodate members of
the public for any contentious issue on the agenda (e.g., Colarusso Dock
C.U.P., Mill St Lofts)
Again we
(OHW) urge you to write to the Planning Board, to express your concerns and/or requests.