Here is the news of greatest interest from last night's Planning Board meeting, which went on for more than three and a half hours.
On a motion by Gabrielle Hoffmann, the Planning Board's newest member, the board, which amazingly was present in full force, voted five to two to reopen the public hearing on the conditional use permit for Colarusso's dock operations. The two dissenters were Theresa Joyner, who chairs the Planning Board, and Gene Shetsky. After much discussion, it was decided that a public hearing would be scheduled for Tuesday, July 15, at the location yet to be determined.
At the Planning Board meeting we also learned that Mayor Kamal Johnson is following through with what he told Jamie Larson and was reported in Rural Intelligence:
The mayor says the planning board's ongoing use permit approval process needs to be halted for a few months so a multi-party working group can be convened to draft conditions and broker a compromise that addresses resident concerns while allowing the company to continue operating.
Joyner announced at last night's meeting that the Planning Board had been invited to participate in the process. Three members of the Planning Board could be part of the mayor's "working group." Joyner said she herself would be one of the three. Instead of asking the two most thoughtful and engaged members of the Planning Board to be part of the group, which in Gossip's opinion would be Hoffmann and Veronica Concra, Joyner chose the two members who have served on the Planning Board longest: Gene Shetsky and Randall Martin.
It is not known who, besides these three members of the Planning Board, will make up this special working group, although it was revealed at last night's meeting that Colarusso was insisting that their lawyer be present. The first meeting of the group takes place on Friday, June 13, and is expected to be the first of a series of meetings. The meetings will not be open to the public, and it is not clear if there will be any public record of the meetings.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
Thank god it’s an election year.
ReplyDeleteYou don’t think this is unfolding like this precisely because it’s an election year? I mean, were some 8 years deep into this, and now, at the last minute, the mayor decides to get involved? I’ve been listening to the same comments re: Colarusso for years. The only think that’s changed is the number of challengers on the ballot.
DeleteIn the contrary. I’m thankful it’s an election year, and a contested one at that, because in the midst of this chaos maybe the voters would finally like to change direction and get things back on track.
DeleteDo I also think the mayor, after years of not caring, is using this new tactic for grandstanding and pandering because he fears his only livelihood is on the line? Yes. However I think it is foolish and legally fraught. Just listen to the actual residents and businesses in Hudson and vote. We’re spinning in circles with all of this. I wrote my letter for each hearing before. There’s nothing more to be said. No matter how I feel about a specific applicant, they all deserve reasonable expediency. Just vote and bring on the lawsuits. They’re coming either way. The batter for the waterfront will end in a courtroom.
Careful readers will also notice that this working group starts meeting on June 13 whereas the public hearing is scheduled for July 15.
DeleteAt this point we also don't know if we're in the 60-days or not. I must assume we are because it would seem odd if you could just willy-nilly snap out of it.
The time period for the PB to rule (62 days from the close of the hearing) may be extended by mutual agreement of the applicant and PB.
DeleteInteresting. I reckon we'll never hear official word of whether that happened.
DeleteThe way I see it is that the desire for an extended public hearing by parts of the public is the ultimate self-own. Currently, Colarusso hauls trucks with very few impediments and this will continue for as long as the public hearing continues.
If I was Our Hudson Waterfront, I'd know that I didn't have any new and fresh arguments that could sway the Planning Board in my favor. All this does is delay whatever conditions the PB will impose.
Per Planning Board attorney at last night's board meeting, 62-day decision period only applies to "site plan" reviews, not C.U.P. reviews. Thus, no time clock.
DeleteThat’s wrong on the law as I read it. NYS Gen. City Law applies the same 62 day limit on CUP apps as it does for site plan review. The PB attorney is about as correct as ACS’s here. Our system of law doesn’t rely on statutes to permit behavior. Instead, our system prohibits what is specifically prohibited and, what’s not prohibited is therefore allowed.
DeleteThe mayor finally steps up to do something on a vital issue and the lawyers on both sides are screwing the pooch. The irony is palpable.
But, absent ACS’s approval for extending the 62 day period, that limit stands and, if the PB doesn’t do something by that date, ACS will surely bring an Art 78 proceeding. And win.
A private meeting being brokered by the Mayor and Colarusso and unknown parties…. Is that part of city law? What sort of guidance from city ordinances is being followed for this?
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line is that if the City Codes of Hudson, and Zoning laws were being followed Colarusso would not be allowed to operate.
Why does Mayor Johnson hold Colarusso’s hand? The city has laws and codes and rules that govern how businesses are allowed to function. Colarusso rammed through that haul road without having a Conditional Use Permit for the dock in place. The Haul Road runs through the sensitive ecosystem of South Bay Marsh, one of the bodies of water of highest protection under NY State ecological law. There is no way that Colarusso can operate as they have been, with impunity, enforced by no one: not the Planning Board, not the Zoning Board, not the Permits Department. But cowboy Johnson is ready to get in there and “broker a deal”. Show me where in Hudson City Law that is allowed. I’m curious what the guidance is for that.
Sienna, there's nothing in the city's zoning code that bars Colarusso from using the dock in the way they currently are.
DeleteColarusso's use of the dock, while not a "permitted use", is a "conditional use": https://ecode360.com/16031827#16031827
A conditional use permit initially wasn't required because the dock's use as a deep-water port was grandfathered in. The need for the conditional use permit only arose when ACS carried out renovations of the dock without filing for a permit in front of the PB. This particular conditional use is what this application is about now.
As far as NY State and the waterfront is concerned, NYSDOS is pretty clear that the priority is commercial and industrial over recreational use.
Negotiations between Colarusso, Joyner, Martin, and Shetsky will produce an outcome favorable to Colarusso, guaranteed.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that at some point Colarusso will sell their operation, and we will end up with one of the big nasty foreign gravel firms on our waterfront. That is the best reason for the Planning Board to put very restrictive conditions on the permit. Otherwise, this community will be condemned to a lifetime of misery.
ReplyDeleteThe only good thing about creating a panel to broker some kind of deal with Colarusso is that it will likely be viewed by NYDOS and the courts as an inappropriate and illegal intervention by the Mayor's office and lead to the entire review process being cancelled and started anew.
ReplyDeletePJ (maybe Peter Meyer - I can never tell you two apart here): My guess would be that, at least as far as Kamal's twisted brain is concerned, the parties involved in this working group would be the city (via select members of the PB), Colarusso and presumably opposing stakeholders. My money would be on Ben Fain and Auf der Maur. Colarusso meanwhile recused itself from this working group so that grand plan isn't happening as anticipated.
DeleteOff the bat, it is already questionable in its whole conception. If Ben and Melissa get to be part of it (of note that their article 78 petition failed because they had no standing according to the courts), why not also me or Kristen Zanotelli? As residents of Greenport, we both care about Colarusso and thus we should sit at the table if Ben and Melissa are allowed to.
You are 100% right that whatever Kamal is doing here is ridiculous. This will wind up in front of a court.