Jamie Larson reported today in Rural Intelligence about the current situation with our waterfront: "A Capsized Barge and the Future of Hudson's Waterfront Plans Stuck in the Mud." Needless to say, the opinion of Planning Board legal counsel Victoria Polidoro, revealed at last week's Planning Board meeting, that Hudson's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP) is not legally binding figures into Larson's report. The following is quoted from the article:
For residents who spent years shaping the LWRP, the notion that it may not hold legal weight is both baffling and demoralizing. If Hudson's long-term plan for its riverfront can dissolve over a missing map, what was all the effort for?
As one of those residents, I say, "Well said."
Larson's article is accompanied by photographs of the capsized barge at the Colarusso dock taken by veteran photographer David Lee, who went out on the river in his canoe to take them. The image below is one of those photographs.
It would have been nice if the Mayor had appointed a Planning Board full of people who are curious about the history of the LWRP process. The present board does not have a clue what is going on, and it's a shame that taxpayer dollars are being squandered on an attorney who offers no sense of empowerment to her Board. I'm expecting that after eight long years of review, the Planning Board will give Colarusso everything the company asked for, and we'll still have a bunch of their trucks on Columbia St. It's impossible to imagine a more disappointing and shameful public policy outcome. ~ PJ
ReplyDeleteI don't know about Route 9, but the City can regulate the trucks on city streets, they just don't care. Just this morning I saw a huge tractor bocking traffic while trying to make an impossible turn off of Union onto 3rd Street. It had no business being on Union and I also see this all the time on State St. No regulation or enforcement.
DeleteCouldn’t agree more - it’s as bad or worse on upper Warren. With more and more residents moving onto Warren + current successful hotels & the new hotel @ SS…something will need to be done!
DeleteIt is always entertaining to watch how politicians, especially career politicians like Kamal, take credit for positive events that occur during their tenure, whether or not they had any real role in creating them.
ReplyDeleteSee Kamal taking credit for UBI (credit belongs to the Spark founders/funders), the Ferry Street Bridge (thanks to then Mayor Martin, DPW, and state taxpayers), and the Wellness Hub (thanks to county supervisors, private area donors like Colarusso, and county sales tax revenue).
But Kamal is nowhere to be found, even for basic coordination or communication, when negative events happen during his tenure within City limits, whether or not he was involved.
Say a ship crashing into the lighthouse, this accident on our waterfront, and major gun crime events and sexual assaults in the heart of the city. Silence from Kamal.
Residents learned of this barge event only through local blogs and disclosures made during a Planning Board meeting on an unrelated matter.
After all, under New York law, the mayor is the city’s chief executive and the designated point of coordination with state agencies such as DHSES, DEC, and the State Police during incidents or accidents.
This leadership vacuum is obvious to anyone who has lived in functioning cities and who refuses to lower their standards for competence.
Kamal, why don't you take credit for the $25m Olana Historic Site improvement?
It was completed during your term, and you had the same level of involvement with it as almost half of the accomplishments listed on your website. You claim to have single handedly built 3 parks, as you said at the last debate: "I Literally Built Three Parks!"
Only one of which is completed, and sub-par, mostly with DRI tax payer funds.
Why dis Olana, Kamal, the classics too quiet for your mix?
Our editors wonder if it because historic parks might be a tad off brand for you...
Kamal could save time and just add “responsible for all good things, none of the bad” to his website. It would sum up his governing style, claiming credit for what works and ignoring what does not.
Editors Note: Olana is the same distance outside Hudson as the Wellness Hub.
https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2025/06/i-literally-built-three-parks.html
Being that Colarusso is one of Kamal Johnson’s biggest donors, it’s inspiring my favorite acronym… AHOD!
ReplyDelete- A Haul of Donations
- A Houseboat of Delusion
- A Historic Opportunity, Drowned
- All Hail Our Donors
While the PB's attorney is technically correct -- the LWRP is not in force or enforceable. But something like 80% of its language has been codified by the City, mostly in its Zoning Code (as the LWRP is all about land usage which tends to take the form of zoning laws). So it was a very "legal" answer that likely served a political purpose whether Ms. Polidoro was in on the messaging or not.
ReplyDeleteGiven that Hudson is still the only Hudson river bordering community without an LWRP that is empowered to have one (as I understand it), it might make better sense for the City to approach the state legislature about creating a better fit for Hudson's somewhat unique situation. It will take a good long time, for sure. But the LWRP would be old enough to vote by now if it had a pulse. Hell, it could drink. But, this, of course, involves actual work and that is something both the mayor and just about every member of the current Council have shown they are incapable of and uninterested in.
I wouldn't really call Hudson's situation unique in that it is entirely self-inflicted through its own proverbial inaptitude.
DeleteIt has only recently become pretty apparent that re-doing the LWRP properly (and that includes Hudson's zoning law that was incidental to its LWRP proposal) is a necessity.
I am not confident this will happen anytime soon. The incoming council does not strike me as one that will put it on anyone's agenda whereas Joe Ferris likewise hasn't ever talked about it. I don't know what Lloyd's opinion on it is but Kamal's is aggressive disinterest.
The proposed comprehensive plan barely talks about the waterfront either. It's all the way down in action item 6.1 ("Continue making the Hudson waterfront a location for recreation and
connection") and it has been assigned a medium priority. It however talks about the Dunn Warehouse development - it's therefore already antiquated.