Art and Artifact at Verdigris

The gallery at Verdigris Tea & Chocolate, 135 Warren Street, is currently exhibiting the work of Jack Fenn. Along with his paintings, the exhibition includes an artifact of Hudson history he constructed almost seventy years ago: a soapbox derby racer. 

Fenn says this of the car:

I built my Derby car in the spring and summer of 1956 when I was eleven. My dad was my mentor, and the Ronsani family, the owners of Greenport Lumber (where Williams Lumber is now) were my sponsors. Ken Mynter, owner of the Old Indian Trading Post in Claverack, did the lettering. My car won the award as best constructed.

Somehow, the car survived my younger siblings’ use, then it remained in the garage at Stone Mill until Anne and I took it to Los Angeles in 1983. We kept it in the living room for the next 34 years. When we moved back home of course it came with us and now resides with us in Ghent.

The car has been a part of our home for over 40 years.

The opening reception for the exhibition takes place today, Friday, February 28, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. The exhibition continues through March 25.

The Other Kearney Building

There's been a lot of attention paid, deservedly, to the buildings proposed by Kearney Realty & Development for Mill Street. Meanwhile, the building they are proposing for Fourth and State streets has been off most people's radar. 

The building requires six different area variances, having to do with setbacks, density, and lot coverage. None of these has yet been granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals, but it seems the project may have moved on to the Planning Board. Recently, these elevation drawings for the building were submitted to the Planning Board.

Sadly, the elevations evoke this 1855 image of Sing Sing Prison.

The materials submitted to the Planning Board also include this floor plan. 

As has been pointed out before, when you enter most of these apartments, you are in the kitchen. It's an apartment layout that seems to be standard for Kearney, at least for the buildings they are proposing for Hudson. Mill Street Lofts has similar apartment layouts. Entering into the kitchen was also a standard layout for tenement apartments on the Lower East Side.

Photo: Tenement Museum, New York City

Fortunately, the apartments at State Street Lofts are going to be, by Gossips calculation based on the floor plan, about 728 square feet. Tenement apartments were typically only 300 to 400 square feet.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

Just a Reminder . . . Today Is the Day

Ear to the Ground

On his radio show on WGXC this afternoon, Tom DePietro revealed that he will be running again for Common Council president. If he is reelected, it will be his fifth term, which he says will be his last term. 

In this election, DePietro is being challenged by First Ward Councilmember Margaret Morris, which is a bit of a change for him. In the past two elections, DePietro has run unopposed. 

Screen capture from Tuesday's Parking Study Committee meeting

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

An Opportunity to Serve

The lion's share of our property taxes--approximately half--is school tax, going to the Hudson City School District, whose current annual budget is $55.6 million and current enrollment is fewer than 1,600 students. If you are concerned about what's happening in the district, now is an opportunity to join the HCSD Board of Education. There are three open seats on the board, and the period for gathering signatures on petitions to get on the ballot is happening now. The following information appears on the HCSD website. 

The Hudson City School District Board of Education has three board member seats up for election this year. Those seats, which expire on June 30, 2025, are held by Willette Jones, Mark DePace, and Lakia Walker.

Each seat is a three-year term, beginning on July 1, 2025. Board members are sworn in at the Organizational Meeting which happens within the first seven business days in July.

Each board member is also expected to serve on a committee. There are usually three members on each committee. We have the following committees:

• Policy Committee--Meets once or twice a month a 5 p.m. before the board meeting
• Audit Committee--Meets quarterly (one member is required to be the board president)
• Facilities Committee--Meets monthly at 4 p.m. usually the day of the board meeting

There is required onboarding training called New Board Member Training through NYSSBA [New York State School Boards Association] that the district pays for. It can either be virtual or in-person. There is no out-of-pocket cost to the board member. Mileage is reimbursed.

Here is the link to NYSSBA where you can get more information on the training. Here is a link to get more information on being a board member.

For current board meeting activity, please check out Hudson's BoardDocs page.

Petitions can be picked up from the Board Clerk on business days between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Interested candidates should call ahead, as the clerk's lunch time varies. Proof of residency is required.

Questions can be directed to the Board Clerk, Leslie Coons, at coonsl@hudsoncsd.org.

More Debate Over Charter Change

Last month, on imby.com, Peter Frank published a critique of the charter change being proposed: "A Citizen's Response to the Hudson Charter Change Proposal." Earlier this week, Robert Rasner published a response to Frank, also on imby.com: "Charter Change Response to Peter Frank Opinion Piece." Rasner shared his response with Gossips, and it can be read below.

Peter Frank's analysis of the citizens' initiative makes some valid observations. But most of what Peter identifies as shortcomings or bugs are left in place by our petition for several reasons. As a group of unelected citizens, we consciously focused on the mayor/manager-council dynamic to the exclusion of other perceived problems in the charter. We were conscious of Hudson's history and aware of the flexibility NYS provides municipalities in determining their own governmental structure. Finally, we understand that the process of charter change is ongoing and dynamic and should be.

First and foremost, the study group that authored the proposed changes is entirely outside government. We weren't elected to do this; we have no mandate beyond that of all citizens to do what they can to better our community. So, we never understood what we were doing as comprehensive or wholesale charter reform. Rather, we set out to address a specific, perceived shortcoming based on the observation that over the last 20 years no mayor, Democrat or Republican, male or female, white or black, has been able to either articulate or implement a plan to address the city's failure to address many of our basic needs such as street repair, garbage pickup, our antiquated zoning code and like matters. Equally important, no mayor has been able to articulate or implement a plan to solve the city's dwindling discretionary income given its contractual obligations to both its labor unions and unrepresented employees.

So, we consciously sought to employ the lightest touch possible to achieve the goal of injecting professional management into the city's day-to-day operations.

In reviewing our current charter with those of other cities in NYS that employ the manager-council model, we found a great deal of heterogeneity. This is true even in the narrow scope that we focused on: the manager-council dynamic. Did we ignore the rest of the charters? No. We spent 3 years reading and discussing them. But we did focus. And, again, that's on purpose.

New York's constitution and its statutory framework for municipal governance does not provide a "best practice" or a "preferred embodiment" beyond the core constitutional directive of one person one vote. Indeed, the statutes, and the cases that interpret them, have repeatedly concluded that New York's legislature has consciously and purposefully permitted each municipality to decide for itself how best to organize its city, town, village and county government.

So--mayor or no? After a long debate lasting weeks (can you imagine?) we determined that Hudson has had a mayor for a good long time. And often a mayor brings unique perspective to the task of governance. Being outside the fray, as it were, we felt such an office would provide Hudson a degree of governmental continuity. In some manager-council cities, the chief elected officer is called "president" or "council president" or "mayor." In Hudson, it will continue to be the mayor as it has been. But the day-to-day enactment of the council's policies will be by the manager. I'm pretty sure that doesn't really confuse Peter Frank (though he does go on about a mayor's legislative role when, of course, mayors are part of the executive branch, not the legislative branch of government).

And what about our elected treasurer? It is an outlier, that's true. We've read the charters and didn't find one with an elected treasurer. But this office was outside our self-imposed purview. And besides, Hudson's history, particularly its recent history, with an elected treasurer has been quite good. So, we moved on.

To the council. This was a necessary part of the analysis for us, obviously, since it's a "manager-council" model. What we found was bloat. Our website has the statistics and numbers but as a committee--with its share of former council members, by the way--we felt the over-sized council yields an environment where no one is responsible for anything since everyone seems to be waiting for the other guy or gal to bring something to the floor. That's what we must assume--we see very little work being done and that by just 2 or 3 members.

And there's work to do. The next council and mayor will have to work together to adopt the few changes the petition embodies. Did our group provide any guidance? No--we're not the legislature nor the executive. But there's 2 years between when the charter changes are adopted and when they go into effect. If that's not enough, there are ways to extend that time.

And that really brings me to the final and perhaps most salient point of how we designed the present petition: no charter change, or attempted charter change, is ever the final word. The charter is, and is designed to be, a living document, changing slowly but inexorably to keep pace with both the demands on the city and its resources to respond to those demands.

It shouldn't be up to a citizens' initiative to bring these ideas forward, to seek meaningful and thoughtful charter change. But it is a method that the framers of our state constitution foresaw as being necessary and useful. It's our hope that the work of charter change will continue after our effort concludes. Perhaps the city will follow through with its promise to form a charter commission. Or perhaps Peter Spear will lead the community in the consultative process that he's been studying and advocating. These are all to be hoped for and speak to the flexibility of the charter change process. Nothing is written in stone.

The Evolution of Mill Street Lofts

Earlier this month, Kearney Realty & Development provided this rendering of the proposed Mill Street Lofts. 

Earlier this week, a new rendering appeared in the Planning Board's "portal."

It appears they have dressed things up a bit with some pseudo oriels and a few trees, but it is still as out of character in this neighborhood of single-family houses as it was before.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

Lose One, Gain One

This morning, at about the same time Gossips was sharing the news that Billy Blowers had decided not to run for mayor, Mark Allen was announcing on Instagram that a new candidate has entered the race: Lloyd A. Koedding.

Another Plan for JLE

Tiffany Greenwaldt-Simon reported today in the Register-Star that Penrose Bricks & Mortar | Heart & Soul is interested in buying the former John L. Edwards school building to develop as apartments for low-income seniors: "Developer looks to buy Hudson JLE school for senior housing." 

This isn't the first time a developer proposed adapting the building for housing. In June 2021, Adirondack Community Development expressed interest in buying the building for use as housing. Their initial plan involved constructing a second building, five stories high, close to State Street. 

Six months later, the plan had changed. In December 2021, Adirondack was proposing demolishing the mid-century school building and constructing something new in its place.

For reasons unknown, Adirondack Community Development never pursued their plan, but you can read about it here and here.

In more recent memory, in 2023, Hudson Development Corporation proposed turning the building into a kind of community center. The plan involved satellite classrooms for Columbia-Greene Community College, a commercial kitchen for culinary training, a daycare center, as well City Hall offices, the Senior Center, and the Youth Department.

HDC entered into an contract with Hudson City School District to buy the building, but part of the agreement was a six-month due diligence period. In December 2024, five months into the due diligence period, HDC announced they would not be pursuing their plan to acquire their building because their investigations had revealed "serious and extensive environmental issues"--primarily "mold, asbestos, and 10,000 gallons of fuel oil in a buried tank."

It will be interesting to see how the latest proposal develops.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

And Then There Were Two

Billy Blowers just informed Gossips that he no longer intends to run for mayor in the upcoming election.

Screen capture: Bosom Buddies, The Rivertown Collective

Unless something else changes in the coming months, there are now just two mayoral candidates: Kamal Johnson, the incumbent, and Peter Spear, the challenger.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

Opening Next Week

The monumental exhibition commemorating Hudson's early history, Hudson: A History of Whaling & Maritime Commerce, opens at the Hudson Area Library next week. The exhibition is a collaboration of the Hudson Area Library, the Hendrick Hudson Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and the Columbia County Historical Society. The first event in this three-site, year-long project of exhibitions and programs focusing on Hudson's beginnings and its era of whaling and maritime trade is the Opening Reception, which takes place from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 6, at the library. The library has published the following information about the Opening Reception.

In 1784, Hudson was founded by a group of whalers and merchants, largely from Nantucket, who purchased Claverack Landing from Dutch settlers. The established river port soon became a busy port with whaling and transatlantic voyages. Between 1784 and 1845, there were forty-seven whaling voyagers out of Hudson, some successful and some financially devastating. These three exhibitions will illustrate different perspectives of Hudson's whaling trade.

The reception includes a short panel discussion with library trustees Gary Sheffer and Joseph Ferris speaking with representatives of the DAR and the historical society and with Richard Bazelow, a local history researcher who has spent years searching special collections at museums, libraries, the National Archives, and historical societies for Hudson's artifacts and whaling past. We will premiere a short film, Whaling in Hudson? What!? produced by local filmmaker Karl Frederick Mattson of 542films, which introduces Hudson's rich maritime heritage through interviews with residents and business owners, highlighting the people and narratives that brought this city to life.

The flyer reproduced below provides more information about this year-long exhibition. Click on the image to enlarge.

Morris Announces

Margaret Morris, First Ward councilmember and majority leader, has released the following statement announcing her intention to run for Common Council president.

I am running for Common Council President for the 2026 Term. I have served on the Common Council as First Ward representative for three years. I was elected Majority Leader in 2024 and again in 2025. During my time on the Council, I have shown myself to be detail oriented and pragmatic. As a committee chair, I encourage open discussion and provide committee members with pertinent information so that their decisions are informed and are the result of a democratic process. As Council President, that will be my leadership style. Under the current leadership, the Council is not addressing the long-term financial health of the City. Under my leadership we will be accountable to the people of Hudson and will address issues of importance to Hudson residents. I believe it is time for new leadership on the Common Council and that I can provide that leadership.

Fiscally Responsible:

• We are facing a climate of uncertainty with Federal grants, contracts, and payments, and it is imperative we have local leadership focused on minimizing our fiscal risk and exposure. This responsibility is not solely our Treasurer’s responsibility. I attend the legislative meeting of NYCOM (New York Conference of Mayors) every year. At the most recent meeting, a representative from the National League of Cities presented information on the potential impact of current Federal funding freezes on municipalities. I shared this information with the Treasurer and the full Council. As Council president I will ensure that I continue to stay up to date on State and Federal actions that have an impact for our City and will share that information with the Council.
• I attended all the City of Hudson’s Board of Estimate and Apportionment meetings since 2021 and have developed a detailed understanding of our budget. I am concerned that this City of under 6,000 is spending itself into an untenable position, with no serious efforts to address revenue growth.
• As a property owner in the City of Hudson, I am aware of the tax burdens of fellow middle-class property owners.

Approach to Leadership:

• My approach is collaborative, fair, and inclusive. All committee members are heard. Members of the public are listened to. Decisions and recommendations from my committees are based on informed consensus. Under my leadership at the Council decisions will be made on an informed basis.

Common Committee Work

Legal Committee–Chair (2022 to present)

• Reduced the speed limit within the City to 25 MPH
• Worked with the community and local businesses to revise Formula Retail code
• Lead the committee in working with our counsel to draft local laws and changes to our code
• Brought the ward boundaries into compliance with 2020 census with minimal disruption to residents

Truck Committee–Chair (2022 to present)

• Successfully passed resolution to remove through truck traffic from the 9G–Columbia Street corridor

Finance Committee–Member (2024 to present)

• Work with committee members and Treasurer in reviewing City revenues and expenditures on a monthly basis
• Have attended all Board of Estimate and Apportionment meetings since 2021. I believe it is critical to understand the details behind the budget

As Majority Leader, I also serve on the Hudson Industrial Development Agency and the Hudson Community Development and Planning Agency.

Professional Bio and Contact Information

For 25 years in my professional capacity as a Senior Director in health care, I managed multiple multimillion-dollar state Medicaid contracts.

When not working for the City of Hudson, I enjoy reading, knitting, and feeding my cat, whose name is Cat. I also like crossword puzzles.

Questions/comments regarding my campaign can be sent to morrisforhudson@gmail.com.

Meetings and Events in the Week Ahead

This week sees the end of February and the beginning of March. The good news is it's no longer dark at 5:00 p.m. The better news is that we are just two weeks away from the return of daylight saving time returns. In the meantime, here is what's happening.

• On Tuesday, February 25, Hudson Development Corporation (HDC) meets at noon. The meeting takes place in person at 1 North Front Street, and it can be viewed on Zoom. Click here for the link to join the meeting remotely.
• Also on Tuesday, February 25, the Common Council ad hoc Parking Study Committee meets at 6:00 p.m. The meeting is a hybrid, taking place in person at City Hall and on Microsoft Teams. Click here for the link to join the meeting remotely.     

• On Thursday, February 27, Hudson Community Development & Planning Agency (HCDPA) meets at 5:00 p.m. The meeting is a hybrid, taking place in person at City Hall and on Microsoft Teams. Click here for the link to join the meeting remotely. 
• Also on Thursday, February 27, Randall Martin, recently appointed as First Ward supervisor by the Common Council, holds a town hall meeting for the First Ward. The meeting takes place in person at 1 North Front Street, beginning at 5:30 p.m. The meeting can be accessed on Zoom. The meeting ID is 818 8646 1294.

• On Friday, February 28, the Historic Preservation Commission meets at 10:00 a.m. The meeting is a hybrid, taking place in person at City Hall and on Microsoft Teams. Click here for the link to join the meeting remotely.
• Friday, February 28 is National Spending Blackout--no shopping, no gas, no big box stores, no Amazon, from 12:00 a.m. to 11:59 p.m.

• On Saturday, March 1, it's the Oakdale Plunge, raising funds for the Hudson Youth Department, the Hudson Fire Department Water Rescue Unit, and Perfect Ten After School Program. Plunger check in starts at 11:00 a.m.; the plunging begins at noon.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

Conflicting Visions for Partition Street

Last Friday, the "Me & Mini Me" proposal for 123 Union Street was the subject of a public hearing by the Historic Preservation Commission. Those speaking at the public hearing agreed that the design of the accessory building being proposed was inappropriate.

Henry Haddad, who with painstaking accuracy is restoring a house across the street from 123 Union Street, maintained that there is no precedent in the Northeast for an outbuilding that was a replica of the main house. He called what is being proposed "Disneyland" and "cookie cutter" and completely out of character. He cited the carriage house behind 115 Warren Street (the Seth Jenkins House constructed in 1795) as an example of new construction (the carriage house was built in the early 2000s) that is the right scale and the right period design for its status as an accessory building. 

Matt McGhee similarly called the design "out of character with Hudson," saying it could be better thought out. He expressed the opinion that it would be "more appropriate if it looked like what you would expect in Hudson."

Walter Chatham, the architect for the project, questioned the assumption that the proposed building was out of character. "If the original building is in character, why isn't what's proposed in character?" He asserted, "The current vision is not to build something 'garage-y,'" going on to say, "Hudson is in need of housing, and this is an opportunity to create more housing."

Ronald Kopnicki expressed the desire to see examples from the Northeast of 19th-century outbuildings that replicated the main building. 

When the public hearing was over and the HPC began its discussion of the project, Paul Barrett expressed the opinion that the accessory building is too much like the house. He also said he was concerned about the scale. Kim Wood observed that the outbuilding being proposed is almost as large as the original house, saying it is more a replica than a miniature version. She was concerned about overcrowding on the lot.

  

John Schobel crystallized the problem when he said, "Auxiliary buildings are usually not designed to mimic the main building. This does not look like an outbuilding. It looks like another house." He told Chatham, "Neither the public nor the commission shares your vision of Partition Street as a street of nice little houses." 

It was ultimately decided that Chatham would come back to the HPC in a month with a new design and with renderings that showed the scale of the proposed building in the context of what would be around it.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK

A Call to Action from Our Hudson Waterfront

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.

Charter Change Debate

At the first public gathering about the Citizens' Initiative for Charter Change, Michael Chameides evoked the name of Elon Musk and DOGE in protesting the premise that Hudson would run more effectively and professionally with a City Manager/Council form of government. Last week, Caitie Hilverman, executive director at The Spark of Hudson, equated fiscal responsibility with soulless profit seeking in a post published on imby.com: "Hudson Is Not a Corporation--And It Shouldn't Be Run Like One."   

Today, the response to Hilverman's post from the Hudson Citizens Initiative for Charter Change appears on imby.com: "Hudson Charter Change Initiative." 

Work Begins at the Crescent Garage

Gossips has been following the plans for the restoration and adaptive reuse of the Crescent Garage at Warren and Eighth streets since they were first presented to the Historic Preservation Commission in September 2022. 

Yesterday, work on the project began. To mark the occasion, the following press release was issued:

Today, the groundbreaking ceremony was held to herald the rehabilitation of the long dormant former Crescent Garage on upper Warren Street in Hudson. Thanks in part to a $1.3 million Restore New York grant from Empire State Development, the Crescent Building redevelopment seeks to breathe new life into a historic, vacant building, transforming it into a dynamic hub for creativity, sustainability, and community. Projected opening for the building is 2027.

The 18,000-square-foot building, originally constructed in 1916 as a premier showroom and garage for cars, will undergo a complete adaptive reuse to house an arts space, a film production studio, live-work artist lofts, and a rooftop event space.

Once a symbol of industrial vitality, the Crescent Garage has been vacant for many years, waiting for a vision that could restore its architectural significance and enrich the community. This revitalization project will not only restore the building's original character but will also integrate cutting-edge sustainability practices, making it a model for future historic preservation efforts in the region.

The ownership group which includes Ian Hague of Ancram, NY, Daniel McCabe of Hudson, NY, and Kris Perry, Hudson, NY, who is project manager and design consultant, said, "We're committed to balancing historic preservation with architectural and sustainable building innovation. We hope The Crescent Building redevelopment can serve as a beacon of sustainable development, blending the past with a forward-thinking, environmentally conscious future."

A Vision for Sustainability and Community Impact

The renovation will feature all-electric mechanical and energy generation systems as well as thorough weatherization to create a sustainable site. The building, powered by renewable energy sources, will set an example for how historic buildings can be retrofitted to meet modern sustainability standards. The project has already earned recognition, having been awarded a Restore New York grant in 2023, in partnership with the City of Hudson. Developers are currently working with National Grid to secure additional funding through their Main Street Revitalization Program to help cover critical weatherization and energy systems installations.

A Catalyst for Growth and Creativity

In addition to its environmental contributions, the Crescent Building will be a vital community resource. The project includes 6,500 square feet of office space designed for a film production company.

The 3,000-square-foot event space will become a vibrant venue for community programming, film screening, gallery events, performances, and private gatherings with a projected 100+ events per year. This space will employ local businesses including caterers, photographers, chefs, and artisans, generating new economic opportunities for Hudson's small business community.

A New Home for Artists

The second floor of the Crescent Building will feature three live-work artist lofts, providing housing for local artists and professionals. This addition comes at a crucial time for Hudson which, like many small upstate municipalities, faces a severe housing shortage. By incorporating living spaces into the project, the Crescent Building will contribute to alleviating the community's ongoing housing situation.

A Collaborative Vision for the Future

The Crescent Building will also be part of a growing network of sustainable energy projects in Hudson, including Basilica Hudson, Red Barn Hudson [The Caboose], and Kite's Nest. Together, these projects will form an innovative green energy ring that demonstrates the power of sustainable practices across various sectors from commercial to educational to cultural and community organizations.

"We believe the Crescent Building will help showcase how historic spaces can evolve into thriving sustainable spaces for the future," said Perry, the project's team leader. "We are creating something truly exceptional for Hudson--an anchor for future growth, a space for creativity, and a model for sustainability," said the ownership group of Hague, McCabe and Perry.

About the Crescent Building Project:

The Crescent Building's transformation is spearheaded by a group of local artists and entrepreneurs dedicated to revitalizing Hudson's upper Warren Street corridor. The project seeks to promote balance between culture, education, and creative discourse--fostering a vibrant community space while contributing to a broader economic revitalization of the city. With support from local artists, engineers, and construction professionals the Crescent Building promises to be a cornerstone in Hudson's future--a place where history and innovation intersect.

Word from "the Other Side of the Tracks"

At the end of the Planning Board meeting last Wednesday, Theresa Joyner, who chairs the Planning Board, proposed that they accept an invitation to make a site visit to "the other side of the tracks"--the other side of the railroad tracks from the Colarusso dock, which, having operated without one since January 2017, is seeking a conditional use permit from the Planning Board. 

The following is quoted from a letter from Ben Fain sent to the Planning Board last week:

I wanted to thank you again for your offer to reevaluate the potential for a Public Hearing on the Colarusso Dock Conditional Use Permit.

As a very close neighbor to the dock we are extremely concerned about the consequences this decision will have on our work and hopes for the future of Hudson’s waterfront.

Our businesses (Kitty’s, Grapefruit Wines, The Caboose, The Wick, Robert Taylor House restoration and soon to come Kaz redevelopment) have grown considerably over the last few years. It’s hard to believe but we currently have over 82 full time employees (with plans for significantly more), and almost 4m in payroll in 2024, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of dollars in Hudson property tax we gladly pay. 

To that end, we wanted to share a memo that may provide additional insights into the Conditional Use Permit for Colarusso dock operation discussed in previous meetings. 

This memo outlines specific considerations established by court rulings regarding the authority of the planning board to impose limitations on the dock operation. 

As you’ll see, counter to what the city attorney represented at the last meeting, this memo shows definitively that the court rulings authorized the Planning Board to impose significant conditions on the entire dock operation, not just the bulkhead.

"additional conditions on such [continued] use [of the dock] as may be necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents living in close proximity to commercial docks and the public while recreating and using public facilities adjacent to commercial docks. . . ."

Examples of conditions:

Section 325-17.1(F)(2) imposes special conditions for commercial dock operations. These are mandatory conditions that a commercial dock operation subject to a conditional use permit must comply with. The Planning Board can certainly impose conditions that facilitate and flesh out these conditions.

Such mandatory conditions include: 

• Dust, smoke, gas, odor or air pollution shall not adversely affect the surrounding area
• The Planning Board could impose conditions requiring dust suppression
• The Planning Board could impose limits on the use of the dock for receipt of odor emitting materials (e.g., noxious chemicals, solid waste)
• Compliance with the City Noise Ordinance
• Control measures including barriers, landscaping, and low volume back-up warnings on heavy equipment could be required
• Limits on hours for loading and unloading from dock and truck arrival and departure times (i.e., 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. set in Code) 
• Truck engine idling is prohibited 
• Light sources shall not be visible beyond the lot lines (subject to lighting necessary for safety) 
• The Planning Board could require certain types of down facing, dark sky compliant lighting 
• Visual impacts shall be minimized and direct views from public locations protected. Outdoor storage of goods and materials shall be screened 
• Could require barriers or landscape plantings to block views 
• Could require construction of a building to screen storage of goods and materials
• Public access to and from the river shall be incorporated 
• Could require pedestrian safety and access measures on the property if needed 
• Preservation of natural features, wetlands, wildlife