Gossips received this letter this afternoon and agreed to publish it.
Dear Mayor Johnson,
As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet, “Something is Rotten in the
State of Denmark.” Well, I fear something is rotten in the City of Hudson with
our Mayor-appointed Planning Board. Ethics and professionalism be damned! Who
needs experience? We don’t need to hear from the public, or Hudson businesses. Let’s
just get this thing over and done with!
… And who cares about Hudson’s waterfront
history?!
- 1982: Hudson Common
Council unanimously resolves to prevent further development in South Bay.
- 1996: Hudson Vision
Plan is introduced, advocating for a deindustrialized waterfront.
- 1998-2005:
Friends of Hudson and allies block the St. Lawrence Cement Plant project,
which fails a coastal impact review.
- 2001: Hudson Planning
Commission applies for party status with NYS Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), affirming the goal of deindustrializing the
waterfront.
- 2005: Secretary of
State Randy Daniels mandates rezoning to phase out heavy industry in favor
of public-benefit uses.
- 2006: A public survey
finds that heavy industry is the least popular waterfront use, while
parks/recreation is the most preferred.
- 2011: Hudson updates
its zoning – Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP) to remove
industrial activities as permitted uses in waterfront zones, establishing
the Core Riverfront (C-R) District.
- 2012: NYS Department
of State designates South Bay Creek & Marsh as a protected wildlife
area.
- 2017: Hudson wins a
$10 million Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI) grant to support
waterfront redevelopment.
Based on their actions at the February 11 monthly
meeting, the Planning Board, and their counsel (legal and engineering), appear
to be taking directions from the Applicant’s playbook, and ignoring the voice
and the will of the public who for decades have overwhelmingly expressed the
desire for positive non-industrial waterfront development.
The public shouldn’t have to:
·
Beg for the Planning Board to do its job, with
ethical standards and professionalism.
· Lose sleep at night worrying about the fate of
its waterfront and its city because of the proposed plans by a single Greenport
business that has been operating without a permit since it acquired the dock in
2014. And whose plans will result in potentially massive industrialization of
the waterfront, create significant hazards to the public’s health, safety and
welfare, and jeopardize existing Core-Riverfront District businesses and the
revitalization of adjacent waterfront areas (e.g., Dunn Warehouse, Kaz
Development).
· Spend countless hours writing letters to the
Planning Board pleading for a lawful public hearing on perhaps the biggest
conditional use permit application ever considered by the Board
· Plead to be allowed to attend meetings
virtually for a myriad of reasons, to be able to speak during public comment
period, and to enable transparency.
· Hire attorneys to interpret court decisions and
the law because the Planning Board’s counsel appears to have misinterpreted
said court decisions and the law.
· Arrange to audio/video-record Planning Board
meetings for fear that the Board will not record and make meetings available to
the public; and resort to bringing posters to meetings to express concerns for
fear of not being able to speak.
A lawful public hearing should be allowed and hybrid
meetings reinstated. And, the scope of review expanded to the entire dock
operations in accordance with the City Zoning Code, as per the independent
legal input recently provided to the Board by two highly respected and
reputable attorneys; one of whom was the City Attorney for the City of Hudson during
the dock conditional use permit review 8 years ago.
Bottomline regarding the Application:
· The Applicant’s expanding trucking operations
threaten public safety at major crossings (Route 9, Route 9G, and the
Amtrak rail at Broad Street), and threaten the health and welfare of residents living in close proximity to commercial docks and the public while recreating and using public facilities adjacent to commercial docks.
· The gravel shipping expansion is incompatible
with Hudson’s long-standing deindustrialization goals and jeopardizes
the South Bay Creek & Marsh protected area.
If the Applicant’s proposed dock operations do not
meet City Zoning Code requirements, and the Applicant is unwilling to
agree to meaningful conditional limitations to mitigate risks, then the Dock Conditional
Use Permit application should be denied.
The Planning Board's reviews should not be taken lightly or made in haste. If this Planning Board is not up to the task of carefully evaluating and determining whether or not the Application meets City Zoning Code requirements, with the utmost professional and ethical standards, then they should be replaced.
Mr. Mayor, the future of our city and our waterfront are at stake. The "legacy" decisions made by the Planning Board will have long-ranging impact on our beloved City of Hudson and its waterfront, for future generations, and for decades to come.
Sincerely,
Concerned Hudson Citizen
.jpg)
