Another Proposal for Partition Street

The westernmost block of Partition Street, from Second Street to Front Street, is seeing a lot of proposed development. Gossips has been covering proposal for an accessory dwelling unit behind 123 Union Street and the proposal to build an addition and an accessory building behind 105 Union Street. Both these projects have been before the Historic Preservation Commission, but there is a third project that would have a significant impact on the character of the street and the immediate neighborhood being proposed for 9 Partition Street.

The proposal, which is now before the Zoning Board of Appeals, is to demolish this little building and construct in its place a three-story building--garage at the bottom, two floors of living space above.

These renderings, which are part of the application before the ZBA, show the building from different perspectives, which are juxtaposed here with Google images of (more or less) the same settings.

The proposed building will occupy 100 percent of the lot and will require nine variances--for lot area and lot coverage, depth and width, front yard, side yards, rear yard, and building height. Chip Bohl, the architect for the project (who served previously as the architect member of the Historic Preservation Commission), argued that Partition Street is a street not an alley. Hence, it is appropriate to build a house there. In this, he is of like mind with Walter Chatham, architect for the ADU proposed for Partition Street behind 123 Union Street, who envisions Partition as "a street of nice little houses."

Partition Street is actually the oldest street in Hudson, predating the arrival of the Proprietors, the founders of Hudson. It was originally known as "waggon-way," because it was the road from the farms in the east to the wharves of Claverack Landing on the river. It got the name Partition Street because it was the boundary between the lands of two of Jan Franse Van Hoesen's heirs, Jan Franse being the European who in 1662 purchased the land on which Hudson was founded from the Mohicans. Despite the name Partition Street, it has the same status as the alleys--Cherry Alley, Prison Alley, Long Alley, Rope Alley--in the grid pattern laid out by the Proprietors, and over time, Partition Street has developed like an alley, with carriage houses, garages, and outbuildings associated with the houses on south side of Union Street and the north side of Allen Street.

Needless to say, neighbors in the vicinity of 9 Partition Street are not happy about what is being proposed. They predict, justifiably, that the building proposed will reduce the quality of life for nearby neighbors, both during construction and after. In a letter submitted to the ZBA, a resident of lower Union Street argues, "Zoning codes are intended to define and unify neighborhoods and should only be bypassed in unique circumstances when they have little or no impact."   

Neighbors have expressed concern about the number of zoning code restrictions that have to be ignored for this structure and about the precedent it would set. They also object that the proposed building is out of character with its setting, both in design and use. Residents of lower Union Street, whose properties back up on Partition Street, have voiced concern about the negative impact the proposed building will have on their quality of life and on the value of their property. In a letter to the ZBA, one Union Street resident had this to say:

The scale of the proposed structure would obliterate my privacy, light, and view. The multiple windows of the proposed house would look directly into my whole yard, back porch, kitchen, bathroom, dining room, and bedroom windows. When we bought our home, it was marketed as having, "Stunning views of the mountains and river. High ceilings, flooded with light and floor-to-ceiling windows . . . ," and we bought it for those, among other, reasons. We did our due diligence to inquire about the zoning laws while considering the purchase so we could rest easy knowing the view would not be taken away by a large building. From the back of our house, we watch the Amtrak trains coming into and out of the station, the foliage changes on Mt. Merino, and evening sunsets over the Catskills. If this project is allowed to be built, that will no longer be the case as the view, privacy, and light we now enjoy will be severely, if not completely, compromised by a house of this size.

The letter writer provided her own renderings, showing how the proposed building would obscure the view from her home. 

She also included a rendering that shows how the view from the patio at the Half Moon would be impacted.

At Wednesday's meeting, the ZBA acknowledged that they had never approved 100 percent lot coverage. They decided to keep the public hearing open so that the applicant might submit revised plans.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK