Last night's Planning Board meeting went on for more than three hours, with the only outcomes being a request for Colarusso to submit an updated site plan and landscaping plan and the decision to schedule another special meeting to discuss the Colarusso application on September 23. The entire three hours and nineteen minutes of the meeting can be viewed here. Meanwhile, Gossips will report some of the highlights.
Board member Randall Martin directed attention to truck volume, saying that the daily maximum of 284 trips from the quarry to the dock meant that a truck would be crossing the railroad tracks every two minutes. Sadly, the 284 cap on truck trips was something the Planning Board agreed to when they were reviewing the haul road, and Martin was serving on the Planning Board at that time. Martin maintained that the concern when reviewing the haul road was getting the trucks off city streets. Ruane told Martin, "The haul road application didn't assume that trucks would disappear at the end of the haul road." Martin replied, "I never envisioned it would be that number of trucks crossing the tracks and entering a recreational area." He went on to say, "That amount of traffic flies in the face of what the LWRP (Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan) envisioned."
 |
| Photo: Our Hudson Waterfront |
Air quality and emissions from trucks, tugboats, and other equipment associated with the dock operation were also discussed. Hoffmann argued for a study to determine a baseline so it would be possible to see if the air quality changes. Hoffmann and Martin both expressed concerns about trucks idling while waiting for trains at the crossing. Hoffmann asked if the trucks turned off their engines while waiting for trains. Martin wanted to know many times there were multiple trucks idling while waiting for trains at the crossing.
Two of the conditions proposed by the Hudson Riverfront Coalition (HRC) seemed not to get much traction. Regarding access to the 4.4 waterfront acres, which very likely still belong to the City of Hudson, Joyner declared, "We shouldn't get involved in that." Nevertheless, Planning Board attorney Victoria Polidoro pointed out that Ryan Weitz, the engineer from Barton & Loguidice who preceded Chris Bertram as consultant to the Planning Board, had created a site plan that showed how the 4.4 acres could be accessed, and an updated site plan that showed access to the 4.4 acres was requested from Colarusso last night.
The HRC also suggested that pedestrians and bicyclists be allowed to use the haul road through South Bay, from Route 9G to Front Street, for recreational purposes during nonoperational hours. Citing liability issues, Ruane declared, "We are not going to agree to anything that will give access to South Bay."
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
The haul road may turn out to be a useful thing. When the property is eventually taken over by eminent domain, which appears to be the only sane resolution, the road could be used for cars to directly access the expanded waterfront park and the downtown area of Hudson. This will help to reduce automobile traffic in the City. Before that can happen the property needs to be tested for contamination. There were a lot of factories down there and if the soil is contaminated the cost of clean up would make it worthless.
ReplyDeleteHow can Randall Martin be the First Ward Supervisor (looking out for 1st Ward residents) AND be impartial on the Planning Board?
ReplyDeleteA law school professional can teach a whole course on conflicts of interests and fiduciary duties in Hudson just by following Kamal and his appointees around.
Last night Colarusso--JR Heffner, vice president of operations, and attorney T. J. Ruane verbally attacked Planning Board member Gabby Hoffman. Chair Joyner chose to also verbally insult Hoffman rather than follow the rules of the Planning Board that clearly forbid applicants to personally attack the Board.
ReplyDeleteThis was extremely disturbing. Hoffman was merely making a query into Colarusso operations and Planning Board obligations.
It is heartening to note that finally some members of the board seem to be waking up to the fact that Colarusso does not own Front and Broad Streets. The so called Haul Road (once used for public transportation and sold by a short sighted governance at some point in history)is a private road owned by Colarusso but those streets are Hudson City Streets. Duane insinuated that those streets aren’t important to Hudson, rather than acknowledging they lead to dozens of businesses and two parks.
Joyner expressed the desire to get this work done, once again not understanding the significance of the imports will have on Hudson’s future. She also declared having access to 4.4 acres of land owned by the City isn’t of concern. Fortunately some older members seem to have woken from slumber, with a well needed burst of energy from new members, and are addressing the real concerns at risk.
They already blew it in the Haul Road decision- let’s hope they get this one right.
I don't see how public access to the 4.4 acres plot can be shoehorned into this application. That lot is owned by the city and the only path leading to it right now (bypassing the Colarusso site) is privately owned by CSX.
DeleteAs Ruane pointed out, this being a landlocked parcel, it will require an easement. That goes beyond the pay grade of the Planning Board and would require the involvement of the Common Council (I think).
Associated costs from this meeting: 2 Hudson police officers standing at the chamber door, perhaps providing security, both of them likely making at least $40/hour. One officer left after an hour, the other remained for the entire 2 3/4 hours portion of the meeting devoted to Colarusso's dock. While they were in City Hall being paid to stand around ready to quell any disturbances (enforce the law?), they weren't, for example, making sure drivers at 6th & State weren't running stop signs, as happens there regularly.
ReplyDeleteWhen I noticed both of the officers' vehicles parked out front of City Hall 30 minutes after the meeting began, both of the engines were idling.
In the eight long and tedious years of this review process, the most important and relevant question has never been raised-- what upside is there for Hudson in hosting a gravel dump and industrial truck route? The many downsides of the Colarusso proposal are obvious, so one would expect that there should be a bunch of really attractive upsides to offset all the negatives. Our community self-esteem is in the crapper, and therein lies the root problem. ~ PJ
ReplyDeleteThis morning I drove down 9G towards the bridge, two huge gravel trucks were at the haul road, one on each side, waiting to cross the highway. On the way back, another gravel truck was waiting for a line of cars to pass so it could cross the road. There were several cars and the driver of the truck must has gotten tired of waiting, because after I passed I looked in the rearview mirror and I saw the truck pulling out into the road in front of another oncoming car that was a bit too close for comfort. Whoever came up with the idea for this industrial truck route to intersect the highway as a solution to the truck problem ought to have their head examined. There is no safe way to regulate this without a traffic light which really needs to be installed ASAP before someone gets creamed by one of these huge trucks. This is a disaster waiting to happen.
ReplyDeleteTrucks have been crossing 9G, from west to east, for years with no catastrophic effects. They are now just crossing from east to west, too.
DeleteAdditionally, there is a yellow warning light on 9G that will flash when actuated by a sensor on the haul road.
This particular intersection is not the most problematic in or around Hudson. The double stop sign on Columbia and Prospect, up by the hospital, is most certainly worse and being entirely ignored by the city. Or try to turn left from Ten Broeck Lane onto route 9. That is a fully blind corner where it is flat-out impossible to see traffic coming out of Hudson.
The haul road/9G intersection in comparison is a pretty safe one since there's good visibility from the haul road from both directions.
Trucks have NOT been crossing 9G from west to east. When Colarusso started using the section of the haul road between 9G and the dock, it was only used by trucks heading to the dock. Returning trucks used city streets, going from Broad Street to Front Street to Columbia Street. They did this because NYS DOT would not approve trucks exiting the haul road and making a left turn onto Route 9G.
DeleteMy understanding was, and I believe this was repeated at the most recent workshop, is that empty trucks took their return trip from the dock via the haul road.
DeleteThat would be in line with my observation that fully loaded Colarusso trucks had been going down Columbia St, not empty ones.
Well, whatever it is, it doesn't fundamentally change the argument that trucks have been crossing 9G successfully and it's just going to be twice as many from now on.
It’s going to be quite interesting to see how the 6000 or so private vehicles, on their way in and out of Hudson, on 9 and 23B start interacting with Colarusso trucks. Considering the amount of vitriol expressed in the Hospital District (my proposed name for the area around the hospital that should require triple fines for speeding, honking, blowing coal and road rage incidents that constantly occur with no police presence to dissuade it- incidentally you could build the Eiffel Tower out of all of the annual vehicular debris picked up there). This intersection of Prospect/Columbia/Columbia Turnpike/, i.e. the Bermuda Triangle, where accidents happen nearly every day, and often multiple times a day, (and incidentally, where the cops love to stand around laughing at all those accidents). It’s a great place to examine the human response Of yelling expletives, honking, burning rubber etc… to stressful traffic interactions at a poorly designed intersection. I wager 9 and 23B will become another local representation of human road rage and ambulance calls. So exciting :) Only time will tell…!!!
ReplyDelete