At a glance
The Planning Board's August meeting ran in two recordings. It opened with regular business, approving three engineering invoices and the July minutes, then convened the continued public hearing on the HHA / Mountco Bliss Towers Redevelopment, where about 30 residents spoke. After a break the board returned to its agenda, adjourned the hearing to September 8 with written comments open to September 1, scheduled a site visit at the Housing Authority office for August 24 as a special public meeting, and approved two parking projects.
Roll Call, Invoice Approval, and Meeting Procedures
The board convened at 6:00 PM with a quorum (Eugene Shetsky absent due to oral surgery). Members approved three invoices totaling $9,273.00 from Ryan Heiny Engineering and approved minutes from July 14 and July 21. Chair Bogle announced that Common Council President Morris requested formal invoice review going forward.
Key points
- Roll call confirmed five members present (Bogle, Spear, Michael, Black, Woodhull), Eugene Shetsky absent.
- Board approved three engineering invoices totaling $9,273.00 from Ryan Heiny for $3,757.50 plus two others.
- Minutes from July 14 and July 21 approved with no edits.
- Common Council President Morris requested the board begin formally reviewing invoices through Linda Fenoff (the board clerk).
- Chair Bogle noted board members serve without compensation except the reward of community service.
Public Hearing Opens, Chair Explains Process
Chair Bogle opened the public hearing at 6:06 PM on the 41 North Second Street (Bliss Towers) redevelopment. He outlined hearing procedures: three-minute time limit per speaker, citizens address the board (not the applicant or audience), focus on the project on the agenda, no question-and-answer session. The board's role is to listen and consider impacts on neighborhood quality, traffic, safety, and environmental issues.
Key points
- Public hearing opened at 6:06 PM regarding 41 North Second Street.
- Speakers instructed to sign up with Linda, state name and address, address the Planning Board only.
- Three-minute limit per speaker, enforced by Haley (timekeeper on the board).
- Bogle explained public comments help the board identify issues they may have missed and are posted to the project portal.
- Board does not consider project cost or whether it is a good idea, focus is on neighborhood quality, traffic, safety, environmental issues.
- Chair emphasized public hearing is essential civic infrastructure, learning to communicate respectfully across opposing views.
Haley Michael served as timekeeper. Speakers were reminded at 30 seconds remaining.
Public Comments: Residents Describe Deteriorating Conditions
Current and former Bliss Towers residents testified to failing infrastructure: bad floors and walls, nearly $1,000 monthly rent, water leaks, mold, rusted railings, uneven floors, and a frequently malfunctioning elevator. One young speaker said the building's problems prevent community events and birthday parties. Another resident, who grew up in Bliss, described it as home for 47 years and asked the board to consider how residents feel.
Key points
- Mary Decker (vice chairman, Johnson Avenue Board, 47-year resident) described very bad floors and walls, rent nearly $1,000, nowhere else to go in the city at that price.
- A young speaker named Ja (resident since 2020, involved with Kite's Nest community programs) said building issues cause people to move out, interrupting community and memories, fears the building will collapse or mold will worsen.
- Gabrielle Xavier (21-year-old lifelong Hudson area resident) listed water leaks, busted base floors, rusted railings, uneven floors, malfunctioning elevator as ongoing issues since her niece was born 14 years ago.
- Kai P (founder and director of 411 Advocacy and Resourcing, former HHA administrator) read a letter stating she was born into Bliss Towers in apartment 8-14, her mother the first resident while five months pregnant, and that replacing the building after 50 years is a necessity, not a preference.
- A young resident (name unclear, 11 or 12 years old) collected 20 handwritten letters from the public at Waterfront Wednesday and delivered them to the board, saying young people deserve the housing.
Public Comments: Concerns About Brownfield, Timeline, Asbestos, and Who Benefits
Several speakers raised concerns about building on a brownfield (contaminated soil from Hudson's industrial past), the construction timeline, asbestos exposure during demolition, and whether Hudson residents would actually occupy the second phase. Speakers questioned whether the Hudson Housing Authority could manage a complex twice the size of its current holdings, asked for transparency on remediation plans and costs, and said soil remediation, pilings, and construction could take years with no clear timeline presented.
Key points
- M Ali (Friends of Second Street) opposed the plan, asked why the site must be on a brownfield with contaminants and hazardous substances, questioned whether residents want to raise children on a remediated brownfield when other sites exist in Hudson.
- Ali said the Hudson Housing Authority failed to repair and maintain Bliss and Columbia Apartments, asked what makes anyone think HHA can manage a complex twice as big on a brownfield, and noted phase two is open to applicants from the entire country, not just Hudson residents.
- Karen Bramlond (resident, Speed Street) supported affordable housing and bringing Bliss down safely, but opposed this plan, saying no one has looked into the toxicity of the proposed site, no real plan on how many people will live there or who will have the opportunity, no surveys on population or infrastructure or parking.
- Jonathan Meyer (second ward resident) said the biggest concern is lack of transparency on timeline: how long will brownfield remediation take, how long for pilings, how long for construction, and then how long to tear down Bliss after phase one is occupied, with residents living 50 feet from a nine-story asbestos demolition.
- Meyer asked why there is no real plan showing what the final product will look like, noting Alexander Gorland's website has five different versions.
- One speaker said any project has known and unknown issues, soil remediation will far surpass any contingency on this project, asked if the vendor doing remediation is aware of the particulars, said answers are not being publicly presented.
One speaker's name was captioned as 'Karen Brmondland' and another's surname was unclear; both are likely caption errors. The substance of their comments is reported as transcribed.
Public Comments: Brownfield Remediation is Routine, City History of Displacement
Bill Hughes, a lifelong Hudson resident and former member of the city's brownfield remediation committee, said remediation is routine and advanced, citing successful projects at the mental health building, Little Build, and Mill Street. He recalled that Hudson had 12,000 to 13,000 residents when housing downtown was demolished by HUD in the 1970s, and said the Bliss site was already a junkyard before the towers were built. He argued current residents should be able to return and enjoy Hudson like everyone else.
Key points
- Bill Hughes (lifelong resident, born 1965, served on city council in 2003 and brownfield remediation committee) said Hudson had a ton of housing downtown plowed under by HUD in the 1970s, population was 12,000 to 13,000 then.
- Hughes said remediation technology is far advanced, the mental health building was a brownfield project, Little Build area was a brownfield project, Mill Street was a brownfield project, the city has tons of brownfield projects.
- The Bliss Towers site was an old junkyard before the towers were built, so this is not creating a new problem but using advanced technology on an area already under HUD control.
- Hughes said people who had to leave Bliss should have gotten a voucher and should be able to return and enjoy Hudson just like everybody else.
Hughes traced the city's population decline from 12,000-13,000 in the 1970s (when HUD demolished downtown housing) to the current roughly 5,700, a loss of over 50% in 50 years.
Public Comments: Support for Redevelopment, Trees, Green Space, and Ending Displacement
Stephanie Mossa and others spoke in favor of the plan, emphasizing green space, water remediation, trees as a corridor from Kite's Nest to the waterfront, and the importance of dignified living space. Speakers described Bliss Towers as the site of community, culture, and history for black and brown families, and referenced Hudson's long history of erasure dating to urban renewal. One speaker said Hudson is bleeding out and called the retail stores on Warren Street less important than the place where families live and traditions are held.
Key points
- Stephanie Mossa (20-year resident, Tanner's Lane, a brownfield now being redeveloped by a billionaire into a luxury hotel) said Bliss Towers is the site of community, culture, loving families, stories, history.
- Mossa referenced the long history of erasure beginning with the plowing under and seizing of personal property and the erasure of generational roots and wealth for black and brown families, said Hudson is bleeding out.
- Mossa praised the plan's green space and trees, envisioned a corridor of trees from Kite's Nest at the lower end of State Street for water remediation and clean air as climate changes and trucks pollute Columbia Street.
- Mossa called the entire quarter of that part of State Street to the waterfront park the jewel of Hudson, not the retail stores on Warren Street, but the place where families live, culture grows, traditions and history are held.
- Mossa said she is strongly in favor of redeveloping Bliss Towers and her neighbors living mold-free, allergy-free, asthma-free.
Public Comments: Young People, Displacement, and the Need to Welcome Newcomers
Speakers described growing up alongside kids from Bliss, witnessing family displacement due to lack of affordable housing, and losing 2,000 residents (24% of the population) in the last 25 years. One speaker said Hudson's population of 5,700 is unsustainable for businesses, schools, and the economy, and that densely built housing is what makes a city a city. Another said the city has failed generations of young people and that this redevelopment is an opportunity to right historical wrongs.
Key points
- Gabrielle Xavier grew up in the Hudson school district alongside kids from Bliss, witnessed her own family's displacement from Hudson due to lack of affordable housing, said working-class individuals deserve safe, healthy, affordable housing no matter their status.
- Xavier said the space Bliss Towers is on is federally granted for affordable housing units and there is no other way to work around that, noted asbestos concerns are valid but there are ways to mediate asbestos before redevelopment starts.
- A speaker (name unclear from transcript, described as a 13-year-old youth leader and organizer) said young people deserve this housing, the future of the city depends on this level of investment in affordable, healthy, densely built housing.
- The speaker said Hudson has lost 2,000 members from the population in the last 25 years, 24% gone, and Bill Hughes said it is even double that or more since 1965.
- With a population of 5,700, there are not enough people to sustain businesses, schools, and the economy, no business can stay open all weekdays.
- The speaker said the city has failed generations of young people, elders, neighbors, working families, and working-class people, and this board has the ability to right that historical wrong and the wrong that was done when Bliss was built poorly with asbestos and poor materials.
- The speaker said densely built housing characterizes a city, it is what makes a city a city, and if people do not like living in a city there are plenty of suburban towns and rural areas they can move to.
One speaker was introduced as a 12-year-old or 13-year-old youth leader and organizer who collected handwritten letters, but the transcript does not clearly capture the name. The substance of the testimony is reported as transcribed.
Public Comments: Developer Commitment, State Oversight, and Urgency
Lloyd Alvin Kelly (recent resident, known for saving the Tree of Peace) said the building is coming down whether proactively or by collapse, praised the developer's care and attention, and noted the state monitors the brownfield and will not give money unless remediation plans are sound. Eli (a veteran) said he supports the project, cherishes the stories of neighbors who grew up in Bliss, and called dispersing the community another word for breaking it up, which is not in anyone's interest.
Key points
- Lloyd Alvin Kelly (five-year resident, recent savior of the Tree of Peace) said two years ago when the city looked at the $2 million CDBG demolition grant he asked if anyone thinks the building is not coming down, because it is coming down whether proactively or by crumbling.
- Kelly said he has been going to meetings and watched the developers work, they are no schlock operation, they have demonstrated care and attention and love for the city.
- Kelly said the state monitors remediation and will not give money unless remediation plans are sound, remediation happens practically everywhere in Hudson unless you go to a virgin forest.
- Kelly said do not let the perfect get in the way of the good enough, if it is just good enough to provide housing and get people out of the situation they are in, let them have their housing.
- Eli (resident, military veteran) said he was sitting with neighbors getting eaten by mosquitoes listening to their stories of growing up in Bliss, running the hallways, sneaking out to the Third Street snack bar, precious and priceless stories of ties between people, community, and place.
- Eli said dispersing is another word for breaking, breaking up a community, and breaking apart this strong community is not in anyone's best interest.
- Eli said replacing a derelict building and encouraging growth feeds the community at large, it is an overdue investment, and the implication that people moving into the new housing need vetting seemed like a racist dog whistle.
Public Comments: Kai P's Letter, HHA History, and Blaming Tenants
Kai P, founder of 411 Advocacy and Resourcing, read a letter describing her lifelong connection to Bliss Towers. Her mother was the first resident, pregnant with Kai, who moved into apartment 8-14. Kai was born there, raised there, built friendships there, received her first apartment there as a young adult, and later became the first person of color in HHA administration. She said replacing Bliss after 50 years is a necessity, not a preference, and urged the community to stop blaming Bliss tenants for destroying a building the outside community has done.
Key points
- Kai P said her mother was among the first residents of Bliss, five months pregnant with Kai, they were the first family in apartment 8-14, Kai was born into that community.
- Kai returned to Bliss as a young adult, later became the first person of color to work in HHA administration in 2017, served the community that helped shape her.
- Kai now runs 411 Advocacy and Resourcing, helping individuals and families navigate housing challenges through information, advocacy, and resource connection.
- Kai wrote in unwavering support of the redevelopment, said replacing Bliss after more than 50 years is no longer a preference, it is a necessity.
- Kai said she has witnessed the building's gradual deterioration firsthand, the increasing challenges in maintaining aging infrastructure, the limitations of repair systems.
- Kai said there are only 84 residents in Bliss because the building needs to be put together so somebody else can live in it, the tenants deserve it, and the community needs to stop blaming those people for destroying a building the community outside Bliss has done.
Public Comments: Hampton on the Hudson, Gentrification, and Who This City Is For
Pastor Singletary (housing advocate for 20 years) recalled conversations at the turn of the century about making Hudson the Hampton on the Hudson, said people came with an idea of the community and worked to make it that way, now there are luxury hotels and boutiques residents cannot shop in. Singletary said the decision is what kind of community Hudson wants to be, and that opening phase two to applicants nationwide is an opportunity for displaced residents to rejoin family and for people who left because they could not afford Hudson to come home.
Key points
- Pastor Singletary said he remembers conversations in this room as the century turned about making Hudson the Hampton on the Hudson, and when he hears concerns about who is going to be moving here it brings that memory back.
- Singletary said people came here with an idea of the community and worked to make it that community, now there are luxury hotels and boutiques people here cannot shop in, pursuing that dream displaced black and brown people who built this community.
- Singletary said the decision is what kind of community we want to be, the issue of people moving here from other places is a great opportunity for those who were displaced to rejoin family members.
- Singletary said as a housing advocate from 20 years ago, continuing that work in the county, he knows people living in Philmont and Chatham because they cannot live in Hudson, let's bring them back home.
- Singletary said this cannot be delayed, we do not know if money will be siphoned out of government, redirected, or if supply chain pricing and availability will skyrocket if we postpone, and people will stop showing up at meetings and stop believing it can happen.
Singletary referenced turn-of-the-century conversations about remaking Hudson as a luxury destination, linking current displacement and gentrification to that vision.
Public Comments: Claire Cousin on Brownfield Program Goals, Scale, and Legacy
Claire Cousin (5th Ward councilmember) read a letter supporting the redevelopment, quoting the state's brownfield cleanup program goal (encourage private-sector cleanups, promote redevelopment, revitalize economically blighted communities). She said she loves hearing 'I am a supporter of affordable housing but not this project,' asked what solution is on the horizon, and argued Hudson is in a housing crisis that demands action at scale. She said the first phase replaces substandard housing and the second phase is just as important for the future of public housing.
Key points
- Claire Cousin (5th Ward councilmember) quoted the state brownfield cleanup program's stated goal: encourage private-sector cleanups, promote redevelopment, revitalize economically blighted communities, remove barriers, provide tax incentives for urban redevelopment.
- Cousin wrote in strong support, said families of Bliss have lived for 40-plus years without consideration of remediation, and the project was awarded a brownfield grant specifically to address and remediate environmental issues.
- Cousin said she loves hearing 'I am a supporter of affordable housing but not this project in the same sentence,' asked what solution do you see on the horizon.
- Cousin said there are very few places in Hudson where we can build housing at scale at this moment that this moment demands, we are in a housing crisis, we cannot say we want more housing and better housing and then reject one of the few projects that can deliver it at scale.
- Cousin said the project will be one story shorter than Providence Hall and two stories taller than Columbia Apartments, asked too big compared to what, too big for whom.
- Cousin said the first phase replaces substandard housing for current tenants but the second phase is just as important, it allows for demolition and continued redevelopment, we have to think about what this project makes possible for the future of public housing in Hudson.
- Cousin said some of her favorite memories happened in public housing apartments, holidays on camcorder videos full of love, laughter, food, kids running around, people together, people she no longer has in her life, it was on this property she learned what community actually meant.
- Cousin said using the soil study as an argument against the project is an excuse to avoid moving forward with a problem we already know needs to be remediated, the brownfield grant was awarded to address remediate the environmental issues, we are identifying them and putting resources towards them.
Public Comments: Soil Remediation Costs, Transparency, and Known Issues
One speaker (construction project experience) said he is in favor of low-income housing and rebuilding, but not in favor of answers not being talked about. He said soil remediation is just one known issue affecting Bliss Towers, and anytime people have asked about it there has been pushback or dismissal. He said if the project is done well, transparently, with answers publicly presented, it may support people who have concerns, but there are very specific known issues that have not been sufficiently addressed or publicly presented.
Key points
- A speaker with experience on multi-million and billion-dollar construction projects said he knows anything can get built anywhere, but how much is it going to cost.
- The speaker said soil remediation is just one known issue affecting Bliss Towers, and anytime people have asked about it there has been pushback or dismissal.
- The speaker said he is in favor of the buildings getting built well, affecting the legacy not just the next five years, if it is done well and transparently with answers publicly presented it may support people with concerns.
- The speaker said there are very specific known issues on this project that have not been sufficiently addressed or if they are addressed and strategized they are not being publicly presented.
- The speaker said soil remediation will far surpass any contingency on this project, asked if the vendor doing remediation is aware of this particular project and if there is sufficient knowledge to build right.
This speaker's name was not clearly captured in the transcript. The substance of the comments is reported as transcribed.
Public Comments: Displacement, Urgency, and Families Waiting to Come Home
Joan Hunt (Greater Hudson Promise Neighborhood) described receiving dozens of inquiries a month from people about to lose housing who want to stay in Hudson, families in Taconic Hills, Chatham, Coxsackie, Saugerties, and Albany who just want to come home. She said many new faces are speaking against the project without having met Bliss families or spent time in the building, and that everything opposing the project feels like a stall tactic when there needs to be urgency.
Key points
- Joan Hunt (leader, Greater Hudson Promise Neighborhood, 20-plus years working with youth and families) said the organization sees firsthand how displacement has impacted families over the years.
- Hunt said they receive dozens of inquiries a month from people who live here or are about to lose their housing, looking for affordable places in the community.
- Hunt said they see families in the Taconic Hills school district, Chatham school district, Coxsackie, Saugerties, Albany, all they want to do is come home.
- Hunt said so many new faces are speaking against this project, asked how many of you have met the families of Bliss, spent time in that building.
- Hunt said there are concerns but there needs to be a sense of urgency, people are fighting to stay here, fighting to come back, people living in motels who could be housed in a safe building close to resources, close to community, close to a school district where they know other students and teachers.
- Hunt said everything opposing the project feels like a stall tactic, let's look at this, let's worry about that study, when there just needs to be urgency to get this done and moving forward.
- Hunt said whatever we do in this redevelopment is better than what is currently at Bliss Towers today.
Public Comments: The Fabric of the Community is People, Not Just Buildings
Samuel Jackson (affordable housing advocate) said being for affordable housing means we should build it, not wait and make excuses. He said the fabric of the community is people, not just buildings and infrastructure, and when people moved in the fabric changed. He said the building has water damage that will become mold in months, everyone admits the building is hazardous, we cannot tell people to keep living there because we do not like the plan. He said the hospital has over 100 open positions, Warren Street restaurants cannot find workers, this is affordable housing we have to build now, we are one emergency away from planned relocation becoming emergency relocation.
Key points
- Samuel Jackson (affordable housing advocate) said being an advocate for affordable housing means we should build affordable housing, not continue to wait and make excuses.
- Jackson said the fabric of the community is not just the buildings and infrastructure, it is the people, and when people moved in the fabric of the community changed.
- Jackson said we cannot blame the former HHA administrations for what is happening now, this is our time to make a change.
- Jackson said the building has so much water damage, right now it is cosmetic but in a few months or a year it is going to be mold, it is going to hurt air quality.
- Jackson said everyone in here and every letter he has read admits the building is hazardous, we are going to tell people you should continue to live there because we do not like the plan, we do not like the way it looks, that is not right.
- Jackson said the hospital has over 100 open positions, all the restaurants on Warren Street cannot find workers, this is affordable housing we have to build now.
- Jackson said we cannot keep kicking this down the road, we are one emergency away from this being a planned relocation to it being an emergency relocation.
Public Comments: Former Planning Board Member, Project is Well-Reasoned and Proportionate
A former Planning Board member (name unclear) said the project is well-reasoned, proportionate, and well-designed to meet present and expanding community needs. He said this is an invaluable place for affordable housing, he studied it thoroughly for many months, there is absolutely no reason the project should not be approved, and it is the kind of project that keeps and sustains the neighborhoods Hudson historically has.
Key points
- A former Planning Board member said he has seen this project come up and through the stages, it is a well-reasoned, proportionate, well-designed project designed to meet not just present needs but expanding needs of the community.
- The speaker said this is an invaluable place for affordable housing, there is absolutely no reason in his belief and opinion, having studied it thoroughly for many months, that this project should not be approved.
- The speaker said it is appropriate, necessary, and the kind of project that keeps and sustains the neighborhoods Hudson historically has.
The former Planning Board member's name was not clearly captured in the transcript. The substance of the comments is reported as transcribed.
Public Comments: Claire Cousin Wraps Up, Investment in People and Community
Claire Cousin returned to the podium for three additional minutes to conclude her earlier remarks. She said the project was awarded a brownfield grant to address environmental issues, identifying problems and putting resources towards them is the answer, not leaving the existing condition indefinitely. She said the tenants most impacted by the project may not stand up and advocate because they have heard promises before and lost faith, but the development team has earned the opportunity to rebuild that trust. She urged the board to tell HHA tenants they are valued, their homes matter, their future matters, and the memories and community are worth investing in.
Key points
- Claire Cousin said the project was awarded a brownfield grant specifically to address and remediate environmental issues, we are identifying them and putting resources towards addressing them, that distinction matters.
- Cousin said if we know there are environmental problems on the property the answer cannot be to leave the existing condition indefinitely, the answer should be to use resources available to remediate the site and build safer healthier housing.
- Cousin asked the board to listen closely to the people most immediately impacted, this is deeper than aesthetics, deeper than whether a building feels too large from a particular vantage point.
- Cousin said many residents may not stand up and passionately advocate for redevelopment, that does not mean they do not support it, many have heard promises before and waited before and lost faith that anything will change.
- Cousin said the executive director, the board of commissioners, and the development team have been transparent, accommodating, and steadfast in their vision for the tenants, they have earned the opportunity to rebuild that trust.
- Cousin said at this point it is our responsibility as a city to show up for them, as public servants you have an opportunity to tell the tenants they are valued, their homes matter, their future matters, the memories and community that have existed there for generations are worth investing in.
- Cousin said HHA's value cannot be measured only by the buildings that exist today, it is measured by the people who have lived there, the families who have grown there, the friendships formed there, the community built there.
- Cousin said we have an opportunity to build on that legacy rather than allow it to disappear, to take a property with known challenges, bring resources to address those challenges, replace substandard housing, preserve and strengthen public housing, and create more homes for people in a city that desperately needs them.
Public Comments: Reverend Cross, the Building is a Sick Friend, We Need to Take Action
Reverend Edward Cross (78-year resident who saw the first lady move into the highrise) said he goes in there every day and it looks like a sick friend, it scares him how we have let things go. He said it is not just brick and mortar, it is people, and we need to do something right now. He challenged the room: when was the last time you were actually down there. He said we need to stop dragging our feet, take some walks, get together and talk about where we are going.
Key points
- Reverend Edward Cross (78-year resident, saw probably the first lady move into the highrise) said he goes in there every day and it looks like a sick friend.
- Cross said it scares him how we have let things go like this, we need to step up, it is not just brick and mortar, it is people.
- Cross said we need to do something right now, challenged the room to think back: when was the last time you actually were down there.
- Cross said we need to be about the business of getting this thing right, stop dragging our feet, take some walks, get together and talk about where we are going.
Public Comments: Stop the Roller Coaster, Let This Happen
A speaker (name unclear, Gloria or Lori) said she hears a roller coaster that goes round and round, was at meetings where they talked about the environment, the soil, how they were going to protect it, showed the designs and landscaping. She said she is tired of the roller coaster, the project has been in your face for years, it is time for it to stop, time to do what needs to be done. She said the questions being asked have actually been answered, people missed that meeting, but the team will be happy to show the information. She said the building's condition has nothing to do with tenants damaging it, every tenant today and in the past could sue the city because of the condition, it is demolished, dying, take it off the roller coaster and move forward.
Key points
- The speaker said she hears a roller coaster, literally a roller coaster that goes round and round, she was at meetings when they talked about the environment, the soil, how they were going to protect it.
- The speaker said she was there when they showed the designs on the project, the landscaping, what is going to take place, she is sorry people missed that meeting.
- The speaker said she is tired of the roller coaster, it has been going on for years, this project has been in your face, maybe not the current board members but it is time for it to stop.
- The speaker said the questions being asked have actually been answered, she was there, those who were not there the team will be more than happy to show the information people are inquiring about.
- The speaker said the roller coaster needs to stop, this needs to happen, everything she sees in that building has nothing to do with tenants damaging it.
- The speaker said every tenant today and in the past can sue the city of Hudson because of the condition of that building, it is demolished, it is dying, take it off the roller coaster, stop it, let's get this started and move forward.
The transcript renders the name as both 'Glory' and 'Lori' and the surname is unclear. The substance of the testimony is reported as transcribed.
Public Comments: This City is About People, Not Tourists
Tiffany (from New York City originally) said she is emotional because of the negativity and comments, when she moved to Hudson it was a community of people, now it is a community of tourists trying to exclude the people of this community. She said people are trying to blame residents for the building's conditions while residents dealt with those conditions and still found happiness celebrating birthdays and anniversaries. She said the board is in charge to give people a better opportunity and asked why we are having this discussion, criticized fear tactics about asbestos and brownfields when the entire city is filled with them. She asked if the board has had this type of meeting with Bliss Towers residents, not just people from the community but the actual residents, and said residents could come downstairs to the community room where elected officials and nonprofits can meet them.
Key points
- Tiffany (from New York City, moved to Hudson) said she is emotional because of the negativity and comments, when she moved to Hudson it was a community of people, now it is a community of tourists trying to exclude the people of this community.
- Tiffany said people are trying to blame residents for the conditions of the building, the people in that building were dealing with the conditions and still finding happiness celebrating their children's birthdays, their grandparents' anniversaries while enduring those conditions.
- Tiffany said the board is in charge to give people a better opportunity, make it happen, she does not understand why we are having this discussion while people are begging to pass this.
- Tiffany said people using fear tactics talking about asbestos and brownfields, this entire city is filled with them, know the actual history of this place.
- Tiffany said buildings in New York City project buildings are in worse conditions, this is one building, you have the opportunity to continue to give people that feeling of protection, no one should be treated any sort of way because they are living in low-income housing.
- Tiffany asked if the board has had this type of meeting with Bliss Towers residents, not just people from the community but actual residents, said people unable to come out of their apartments can come downstairs to the community room where elected officials and nonprofits can meet them.
Chair Bogle Closes Hearing, Explains Process and Next Steps
Chair Bogle thanked everyone for participating, assured them the board is engaged in a process progressing through the steps required by state law with intentionality and purpose. He said the four new board members have made substantial progress in six months, stayed in close contact with the applicant team to communicate and understand how to move forward. He said the process is confusing and sometimes feels calcified and bureaucratic but they are required to do certain activities, and public comments are an essential contribution to helping the board become properly informed and deliver a sound decision in support of the community, residents, and the future of the city. The board took a 10-minute break.
Key points
- Chair Bogle thanked everyone for being part of the discussion, said it is a valuable part of the process, the board is engaged in a process progressing through steps required by state law.
- Bogle said from the time four new board members joined until now (six months) the board has made substantial progress in moving through necessary steps.
- Bogle said he has stayed in close contact with Jeff and Briant (the applicant team) to communicate and understand how to move forward through the process.
- Bogle said when he first joined the board he did not know how this worked, it is confusing and sometimes feels calcified and bureaucratic, but the board is required by the state to do certain kinds of activities.
- Bogle said have confidence, you were a part of this tonight, your comments and voice were an important contribution to helping us become informed properly so we can deliver a sound decision in support of the community, residents, and the future of our city together.
- The board took a 10-minute break before returning to the agenda.
The public hearing is one step in the state-required process. The board will review written and spoken comments and continue deliberations at future meetings.
Bliss Towers Public Hearing Adjourned
The board adjourned the Bliss Towers public hearing until September 8, keeping the record open for additional written comments through September 1. The adjournment is necessary because a pending Zoning Board application makes the project non-compliant with code, preventing board action.
Key points
- The public hearing was adjourned, not closed, to allow time for the Zoning Board to act on a pending variance application.
- Written comments will be accepted through September 1.
- The Zoning Board meeting for August was cancelled due to lack of quorum; July's meeting was also cancelled.
- By adjourning rather than closing, the board avoids starting the 62-day clock for action while still allowing a vote in October if issues are resolved.
- One board member noted the board cannot take action in September anyway given the zoning issue and outstanding questions.
September 8 at the next regular Planning Board meeting. Written comments accepted through September 1.
The project requires Zoning Board action before the Planning Board can approve it. Two consecutive Zoning Board meetings were cancelled for lack of quorum.
Board Site Visit Scheduled
The board voted to conduct a site visit at the Housing Authority office on August 24 at 1:00 PM, treating it as a special public meeting to allow transparency.
Key points
- The visit will include the Housing Authority office at 41 North Second Street and a walking tour of the Bliss Towers site.
- The meeting must be posted in advance as a special meeting because more than three board members will attend.
- The applicant will host the board; the public may attend as it is an open meeting.
- One board member noted the visit demonstrates the board's thoroughness to the public.
- The date accommodates member schedules; one member is unavailable Wednesdays, others requested afternoon timing.
Monday, August 24, 1:00 PM at 41 North Second Street (Housing Authority office).
Public Comment Review Process
The board discussed and approved a framework for reviewing 103 written comments and 18 oral comments received during the public hearing, organizing them into thematic categories to send questions to the applicant.
Key points
- As of mid-afternoon, the board had received 103 written comments and 18 oral comments; more came in during the evening meeting.
- Comments were grouped into categories: scale and density, construction and demolition, site conditions, phasing and resident relocation, parking and transportation, municipal infrastructure, streetscape, and neighborhood character.
- Some topics raised in public comments fall outside the board's authority: overall project cost, state and federal housing policy, distribution of affordable housing, local taxation, and whether the applicant has sufficient funding.
- The board drafted questions for the applicant organized by theme, intending to send them the next day.
- Several members debated whether to ask new questions or refer to answers already provided in the May 13 applicant letter.
The board has no legal opinion on overall project cost, state housing policy, regional distribution of affordable housing, local taxation priorities, or the applicant's funding sufficiency.
Applicant Requests Direction on Responses
The applicant's team asked for direction on which public comments the board considers relevant before submitting written responses, noting they have already answered some questions.
Key points
- The applicant's attorney said the team has internally reviewed most comments and is prepared to respond in writing.
- They requested guidance on which comments the board found relevant to avoid duplicating prior answers.
- One applicant representative emphasized the housing industry is highly regulated by state and federal agencies, calling suggestions that details could be hidden offensive.
- The Housing Authority chairperson noted she lived in West Towers and her mother still lives there, emphasizing personal stakes in avoiding negative consequences.
- The applicant's engineers are working with the board's engineer on technical reviews separately from public comment responses.
Debate on Question Specificity
Board members debated whether to send broad thematic questions or specific detailed questions to the applicant, with concerns about duplicating previously answered questions and about being too vague.
Key points
- One member argued several categories ask questions already answered in the May 13 letter and suggested the applicant could simply refer back to prior submissions.
- Another member worried some questions were too vague to be useful, such as asking about design objectives without specifying what aspect needs clarification.
- The chair explained the document was meant to be representative of community concerns, even if some answers already exist, as an educational tool.
- One member noted public comments showed confusion about phasing, though federal law requires the Housing Authority to safely rehouse every resident before demolition.
- The board discussed whether to ask for building height in feet, which one member said was in a data table but not on elevation drawings.
The applicant confirmed one building is 60 feet, the other 50 feet, per a data table in the record. Heights were not shown on elevation drawings, which will be corrected.
Construction Plan Questions
Members identified construction management as a clear category needing additional detail from the applicant, including vibration, noise, dust control, staging, and timeline.
Key points
- Public comments expressed concern about construction impacts: vibration, noise, dust, traffic, and how long the project would take.
- One member noted the SEQR submissions describe a one to two year construction timeline, while public comments assume the work will last a decade.
- The board agreed construction management is an area where the public record is incomplete and the applicant should provide more detail.
- Questions about staging and traffic impacts during construction were flagged as needing answers.
- One member suggested this category is less about repeating prior answers and more about collecting genuinely new information.
Decision to Send Draft Questions
After debate, the board voted to send the draft question document to the applicant immediately, allowing refinements after the September 1 comment deadline and expecting written responses by the end of August.
Key points
- One member proposed posting the draft immediately so the applicant can start working, with refinements to follow after the public comment period closes.
- The applicant's executive director said they would rather receive all questions now, even if some were already answered, and can refer back to prior submissions or expand on them.
- The board's attorney suggested classifying the document as a draft and allowing the applicant to respond across themes rather than to every individual question.
- The board will review comments received between the meeting and September 1 to see if new issues need to be added.
- The applicant agreed to submit written responses by the end of August for discussion at the September 8 meeting.
Written responses from the applicant expected by the end of August, to be discussed verbally at the September 8 meeting.
Fatigue and Process Concerns
One board member expressed exhaustion after listening to hours of public comment and proposed delaying the detailed review, but the board ultimately decided to move forward with sending the draft.
Key points
- One member said listening to deep emotions from many speakers was tiring and they did not have energy to thoroughly review the document that evening.
- The member suggested incorporating the review into the August 24 site visit but worried that might delay the process too much.
- The chair proposed converting the discussion into a letter to the applicant and posting it publicly.
- The board's attorney advised posting the document as a draft under discussion so the applicant can start working rather than waiting for a final version.
- The board voted 6-0 to approve circulating the document to the applicant as a first step.
Pocketbook Hudson Parking Lot Approved
The board approved a site plan for a 34-space parking lot at 604 Washington Street, behind the fire station, to serve Pocketbook Hudson tenants under a five-year lease from the city.
Key points
- The lot replaces an informal gravel parking area on city-owned land, adding ADA spaces, electric vehicle charging, lighting, landscaping, and a paved access path.
- The lot includes two ADA spaces, six electric vehicle charging stations (Tesla Level 2), and a pedestrian path less than 300 feet to Pocketbook Hudson.
- A row of evergreen trees will buffer the southern edge; six 16-foot light poles will illuminate the lot with full cutoff dark sky compliant fixtures.
- The city negotiated the lease with the fire department and DPW to preserve snow storage space and fire department parking.
- The board classified the project as a Type II action under SEQR (replacement in kind of an existing gravel lot) and waived the public hearing.
The lot fulfills a condition from the original Pocketbook Hudson site plan approval requiring 40 parking spaces either on-site or through permits in city lots.
The city leased this portion of the lot to Pocketbook for five years. The remainder is reserved for fire department use and snow storage.
Basilica Hudson Solar Carport Approved
The board approved a solar carport at 110 South Front Street for Basilica Hudson, replacing shipping containers in an existing parking lot with a covered charging structure.
Key points
- The carport will include LED accent lighting, described as low-intensity aesthetic lighting similar to mood lighting.
- The applicant argued no additional exterior lighting is needed because the area is already well-lit by street lights, Amtrak lot lights, and Basilica building lights.
- The board's engineer raised minor concerns about pedestrian pathways and exits needing clearer detail on the site plan.
- The applicant requested no screening requirement, noting the industrial surroundings (factory, railway tracks, parking lots).
- The board classified the project as Type II under SEQR and approved it contingent on resolving easement agreements and minor engineering details.
A strip of land owned by a third party lies between Basilica Hudson's properties. Final approval is conditioned on securing the necessary easements or utility agreements.
Common Council Referral Withdrawn
The chair reported that a local law change referred to the board for opinion by the Common Council has been withdrawn, removing it from the agenda.
Key points
- The Common Council president withdrew the referral, so the board no longer needs to act on it.
- The subject was briefly mentioned as a dry road matter but no details were provided.
About this page
FUTURE HUDSON is an experiment in civic engagement: every public meeting of the City of Hudson since January 2026, transcribed and made readable, so any resident can follow what the city is deciding without attending every meeting. This page covers one meeting; see the full archive.
How it was made
The meeting video was transcribed automatically; the transcript was then organized into sections and summarized. The raw transcript is above, every claim can be checked against it.
What to be skeptical of
The transcript is automated and contains speech-recognition errors; names and numbers may be wrong. This page has not been reviewed by a human. Nothing here is an official record, the city's official minutes are authoritative.