At last week's Planning Board public hearing, two members of the public presented recommendations for conditions to be placed on Colarusso's dock operations should the Planning Board decide to grant a conditional use permit. (The Planning Board does have the option of simply denying a conditional use permit.)
Ben Fain presented the set of conditions suggested by Our Hudson Waterfront in a document submitted to the Planning Board on May 29. The document can be found in its entirety here. It contains ten recommendations for limiting dock operations and industrial use.
- Limit hours of operation for truck traffic to 7:00 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, with no trucks on weekends or federal holidays
- Limit truck volume to 126 trips a day (63 round trips)
- Set an annual limit of 5,460 truck trips
- Prohibit expansion of industrial material handling or processing
- Place limitations on materials storage at the dock
- Mitigate nuisance noise
- Mitigate emissions of dust, smoke, and air pollution
- Removal of dust and debris on Hudson city streets
- Installation of DarkSky compliant lighting
- Restrictions on barges and boats
The full proposal from Our Hudson Waterfront can be found here.
A second list of suggested conditions was presented by Nick Zachos, representing the Hudson Riverfront Coalition (the Hudson Sloop Club, Hudson Ferry Company, and the Schooner Apollonia). Most of the conditions suggested in the Hudson Riverfront Coalition document, which can be found here, are the same as conditions suggested by Our Hudson Waterfront, with some variation, but there is one new one.
- Limit hours of operation for truck traffic
- Prohibit expansion of industrial material handling and processing
- Prohibit hazardous or refuse materials
- Secure public access or ownership of the 4.4-acre waterfront parcel
- Permit non-operational hour access to the haul road for recreational use
- Dust mitigation via vegetation buffer
- Pave loading area to minimize airborne particulates
- Replace inadequate culverts to restore tidal flow
The one condition suggested by HRC that was not one of the conditions in the OHW document is "public access or ownership of the 4.4-acre waterfront parcel." The long history of this parcel is told in this post from 2019: "Of the Planning Board and 4.4 Waterfront Acres." The relevant part begins with the fifth paragraph. Gossips reported three years ago that Paul Colarusso had acknowledged that the City owned the parcel: "About Those 4.4 Acres." Providing public access to waterfront land owned by the City shouldn't be a big deal.
In presenting the conditions suggested by HRC, Zachos characterized them as conditions "that could be agreeable to the applicant." Should the Planning Board be governed by what is agreeable to Colarusso or by the community's long-held vision for the waterfront? Only time will tell what this Planning Board understands its mission to be.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
.jpg)


No comments:
Post a Comment