On Wednesday, August 20, the Hudson Industrial Development Agency (IDA) is holding a special meeting to consider the application from Pennrose for a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) agreement for the redevelopment of the former John L. Edwards school building as apartments for people over 55.
Pennrose presented its proposal for a PILOT agreement at the August 6 meeting of the IDA. It involves full exemption from property taxes during the years of construction. After that, the PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) would be a little less than 12 percent of the estimated actual taxes for the property. The PILOT agreement would go on for thirty years, until 2058. Of course, for the past six decades, the property was and continues to be totally tax exempt.
At the prior meeting of the IDA, an economic analysis of the proposed PILOT was authorized. Presumably that information will be available at Wednesday's meeting. The reason for the special meeting is that Pennrose wants to apply for HCR (Homes and Community Renewal) funding, and the application for that funding is due on September 11.
Pennrose has converted other former schools into apartment buildings. Examples cited in their presentation to the IDA were The Pryde, located in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Boston . . .
What is being proposed for JLE are 65 studio and one-bedroom units for adults aged 55 and older. The income limit is 60 percent of the area media income (AMI), which, based on the current AMI, translates into $50,730. The monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment is expected to be $1,132. Although this detail has not yet been mentioned, both The Pryde and Mary D. Stone Apartments are pet friendly, so it is hoped that the apartments at JLE will be as well.
It was noted at the last IDA meeting that Pennrose has begun the process of getting the Cold War Era school building listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
%20001.jpg)
 |
| Historic photos courtesy Bruce Mitchinson |
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
This town needs a comprehensive plan that includes and enforces that all new or updated developments meet some criteria of landscape plantings - trees, perennials. Too many new construction/updates to properties going up that just look like.....dare i say it, the new (paved over) Rose Garden in DC all around town. We need trees in Hudson, it is hot af.
ReplyDeleteLately I’ve been against pilots for housing developments because: 1) there is enough demand and profit potential without having taxpayers fund your investment, 2) our tax base is already too small to afford it, 3) pilots should be used as intended to attract “industry” (the “I” in IDA) that offsets the lower taxes with economic growth.
ReplyDeleteBut I’m fine with this one because: 1) this blighted property needs enticement to get fixed and isn’t paying any taxes as is, 2) money will go to the school system to buy it, 3) seniors use less public resources (no extra burden on schools, police, roads, etc), 4) this developer seems to have their shit together better than the usual sloppiness seen from Galvan, Kearney and Mountco.
why so they seem to feel a senior citizen would have that type of money . The rent prices are out of hand . half the time the contractors does a crap job and the owner cuts corners. the rent isn't worth it.
ReplyDelete