Is this another example of Mayor Joe trying to overstep his boundaries with misinformation? This project did not just appear mysteriously. If Joe Gross had a guenuine concern why did he not voice his opinion during the past 4 years while it was in the development? Oh that's right, there was no sign of Joe Gross at a public meeting until he had the notion to run for Mayor. Does any body else see a soap box here? If so kick it back to the curb where it belongs. This project will bring business as well as residency into the Village... into the heart of the Village. Why would anyone especially an elected official cast or try to cast a negative image on a positive project like this... unless Mayor Joe has some other reasons that he should perhaps be vocal about and be sure that it is accurate.

I don't know enough about this project to comment on it - but I do know that gone2nc868 is wrong in his attack on Mayor Gross. During my residence in COH, I saw Mayor Gross at many village meetings, and he discussed this very project with me on several occassions over the past few years. For one who demands accurracy, gone2nc868 is pretty careless about that requirement when it comes to himself. I look forward to hearing more about the development's pros & cons (and less personal attacks - especially false ones).

We have just moved to COH from a town nearer to NYC. During the 14 years we lived in our previous town, I watched as developers built on every available lot with emphasis on multi-family development. At the end of our residence in this town, it was suffering from infrastructure stress and overcrowding in the schools, as well as traffic density that was impacting everyone's quality of life. The increased revenues that were promised by the development apparently didn't happen, because taxes went up and up.

This project will be like the one that still going up on main street.A big ugly building that was really overprice and taking years to finish.When will someone live in that complex !!! Cornwall needs to be more concered with there empty storefronts.How many nail saloons do we really need and why do we have two chinese food places in the same area.Pretty soon cornwall will look like New windsor,were they just keep building.If they keep building like this are taxes will get raised higher because no one is buying.

The idea of mixed use and density (human) are at the core of walkable/livable communities. The rise of suburbia, which emphasized the separation of homes from services (e.g. commerce), was literally and figuratively fueled by the growing dominance of a car culture. Drive to the shopping center, mall, school, little league field, etc. At a time when gas is approaching $5/gallon and the impact of global warming makes a change from a carbon based economy a matter of necessity. It strikes me as irrational that Cornwall-on-Hudson would consider anything other than mixed-use walkable development. The Mayor's concern about traffic and congestion may be understandable, but it is wrongheaded in the extreme to push development that makes COH less walkable/livable and more car centric.

Dito to MINDFULL
I had also lived in an area in the Midwest while growing up and with first hand I noticed a quaint village turned into an eyesore it is today with promised revenue and storefronts that turned abandoned. Just look uptown for an example and you can see a problem manifesting itself at this very time. The mayor is absolutely right in having careful planed development and one who apposes that should carefully examine what they really want out of life.

There are so many available buildings/stores - why can't we fix those first - then build more if needed.

hudson street the new main street? The old dpw lot the new quaker ave?

In response to cpmomcat, I do remember Joe Gross being at a few very few village board meetings prior to his known intention to run for office. Perhaps you should check some of the minutes to find exactly how many comments or lack thereof were made in a public forum by Mayor Joe. Grateful87: I have absolutely no financial interest in this development and don't even live in the area now. Just pointing out the obvious. How can this project no be in the best interest of the Village? It will provide rateables for taxes (prior this property was tax exempt) it will provide housing in the heart of the Village where residents can walk to all local shops and service, therefore proving financial stimulous to the Village and reducing the dependency on fuels to travel outside of the Village.

Although I understand the Planning Board's enthusiasm for embracing currently popular trends in clustering and high-density mixed use projects, I am surprised that they were so "influencial" in the developer's design concept.

The developers have undoubtably spent many thousands of dollars adjusting their plans and designs in order to please the Planning Board's suggestions. The resulting design places rather large buildings on the parcel instead of the originally envisioned three or so high-end single family homes.

I would have to think that the costs to construct the project as currently proposed would be extreme. The commercial building planned will be a substantial building that will require fire sprinklers and all the other modern requirements of the current commercial building codes. The infrastructure required will be quite extensive too.

I would almost venture to guess that the developers would much rather build a smaller scope project that would require a much smaller effort and a better return on their investment.

And one other point...in this "go green" environmently friendly society we live in these days...is it wise to demolish two fine antique barns and a fairly modern commercial garage facility? Seems wasteful to me.

Kinkos and Starbucks - Print tomorrow's presentations in color format online for pickup, walk down for a venti gingerbread latte!!

Serious note, I do have concern over traffic access onto Hudson St. from the proposed location.

My first choice is to leave things as there are...trees and open must be done then please go back to three nice homes in that area we do not need more people ..or children to stress our schools..I too have see a community spoiled by just what is being proposed.I know the Mayor cares deeply for this community

oops in my haste didn't proof read what i wrote
should read trees and open space..if something must be done....
I have seen another community spoiled

<<Perhaps you should check some of the minutes to find exactly how many comments or lack thereof were made in a public forum by Mayor Joe>>

Attendance does not equal on the record comments. I appreciate the attendance of those who are always there, but seldom speak. They are watching out for all of us - and they communicate what they witness to neighbors and acquaintances, which is highly valuable to those of us who care, but can't or don't take the time to attend the meetings. Joe Gross was a familiar face to all at various village meetings, and has been passionate about COH for his entire life. You can diagree with Joe's opinion, but you can't fault his motivation and dedication.

Leave the village as it is. There are enough empty storefronts in the village and the town already. I also agree with the concerns of traffic at this location. Seems to me that this is nothing more then an opportunity for a certain developer to fatten his wallet.
I also find this attack on Mayor Gross to be completely false. Though I personally have not attended many of the meetings mentioned I know that Mayor Gross has. Joe is and always has been a person who cares very deeply about the village.

In response to the post regarding a "certain developer": Since when is a developer a dirty word? I hope the "developer" is trying to get a return on his investment. If the "developer " is successful, he will add taxable property to the tax roles. If he is really successful, the property will be even more valuable; and, he will pay even more taxes. This would certainly help the rest of us (unless, of course, your taxes are too low). The "developer" is proposing to make an eyesore attractive. The "developer" has invested significant time and money in trying to appease the planniing board. If you had a problem with the project, you should have voiced it years ago. The status quo is nice, but not always right.

Well, that was part of the problem.In the past we did not have a say in things. Thankfully now we have a Mayor and a board that listens. Just ask the administration that is in there now how they had to untangle items that were pushed ahead without proper planning.

what sticks in my mind is how Rick Gioia was often hushed at village meetings? TO me that is not the type of govenment we want

It is not the developer's fault or responsibility to control the meetings, nor how the input by residents is received. The developer has worked, at significant expense, with the administration to meet their requirements. He should not be penalized because the new regime has different opinions than the old regime. He acted in good faith, so should the new administration. We are discussing one of our fellow resident's livelihood - it's not a political game - it's how he feeds his family and pays his mortgage.