A Former Resident’s View on RiverPlace

March 30, 2007

As a former resident of Hudson for thirty years my heart still resides there and cares about its future. The proposed city within the town concerns me, so I write this to all residents as food for thought.

It amazes me that so many believe a monster sized development equals lower taxes. It is in fact, a myth used by builders and developers to entice support for their projects. How do I know that? In the early 1970’s Hudson had no industry. Land on Route 111 became available. A group was formed to purchase it to develop as an industrial park to increase the tax base. Shares were sold to town resident – all of them enthused about lowering taxes. I was one of them. Did taxes go down? Definitely not.

Later, along came a proposal to develop an even larger parcel of land off Lowell Road for industry. It too was cheered as a way to lower taxes. Did it? No! Not a dime. The fact is, when money comes into a town, all towns, there are ways it has to be spent. Towns are like children – the more they grow, the more they cost. In a town though, costs last forever.

Consider these issues before saying you are for the proposed mega development.

Traffic problems? Lowell Road seems to be the main concern but there are other roads no one has mentioned. Entrances into and out of the development at the bridge and near the state line won’t help that much because the predicted 5,000 employees, plus a huge number of shoppers expected, plus those living in the development will all come and go to and from all directions. They will soon learn they can avoid Lowell Road congestions, stop lights, and the center of town by using side roads and streets. Many people use them now. I do. That means Musquash, Pelham, Burns Hill, Melendy, Belknap, Adelaide to Highland and back, etc. will become prey to overuse in the future. This in turn will require them to undergo major upgrades. The cost will fall on you the taxpayer.

Sewage generated? Will this city within a town have its own sewer utilities? If not, Hudson could be in deep trouble because it is already too close to the capacity agreement with Nashua for comfort. What if Nashua says “No More?” If so, deep tax trouble would result.

Water? It’s fine that the developer pays for some cost for a new tank. Will they have an independent supply? Hudson owns its own water supply now. Will it mean more wells to supply the huge demands of this city within a town? If so, talk taxes again folks.

And then there is the police department. More officers? More cruisers? The fire department. More equipment? More inspectors? And the Highway Department. More plows? More street cleaners? More men? I didn’t see any maintenance buildings in the plans so far. Or a police or fire station? Talk taxes. And what about a 400 room hotel? What is the configuration? Is it a skyscraper? (God forbid!) Hudson zoning law has a limit on how high a building can be. Will this become a request for another exemption? (Pray that the Planning and Zoning Board stay firm and strong on this one).

I salute Mr. Peters for forming an organization in regards to this development. I’ve heard talk about petitions. In the 1970’s a matter came up that upset and divided the townspeople. I think it was zoning. It was settled by petition to change it and petition to put it to special town meeting. They were successful in defeating the request. The laws are very specific about these petitions. We were lucky to have a lawyer who had just come to town, volunteer to help us get the petitions worded correctly. A State Representative assisted him. Petitions were placed on the counters of all small businesses in town. Volunteers went door to door. Volunteers all made phone calls on town meeting day to remind people to vote. The effort was a huge success. Keep up the good work Mr. Peters.

Darlene Piper, Founder of the Hudson News - Litchfield