For second time
Planning board rejects two-acre rezone



NEW SCOTLAND — The town’s planning board on Tuesday night again voted unanimously not to rezone the northeast quadrant of town to prevent building lots smaller than two acres.

This time, there were two new voting board members who had been appointed last month by the Democratic majority on the town board—Elizabeth Stewart, who was defeated in her run against Supervisor Ed Clark, and water committee member Jo Ann Davies.

In November, the planning board, which then included now-councilman Douglas LaGrange, had passed the same unanimous recommendation on to the town board after the Northeast Neighborhood Association submitted a petition requesting two-acre zoning.

On Tuesday, the planning board was reviewing a proposed law local forwarded by the town board, which called for the same scenario: re-zoning the medium-density residential zone (MDR) that is above and abuts the old D&H railroad bed to a residential two-acre zone.

Currently lots of 22,000 square feet are permitted in an MDR zone.

Also rolled into this proposed local law is rezoning the industrial designation above the Route 85 commercial corridor.

The bill proposes switching the small piece of industrial land north of the D&H railroad to R-2, and the industrial designation south of the vacant railroad bed to commercial to match the acreage to the south.

The planning board unanimously recommended, for a second time, that the MDR zone not be changed, stating that there was still no justification — no changes in the topography, soil, or water supply — to provide a reason for spot zoning.

Also, the planning board on Tuesday night recommended rezoning the industrial area in the routes 85 and 85A commercial corridor because the railroad no longer exists, but board members had a different vision for the land than the bill proposed.

The industrial area north of the railroad bed should to be rezoned to MDR, the planning board said. And, the town board should consider both residential and commercial zoning for the industrial land to the south, the board said.

The planning board did not offer a recommendation as to what type of residential zone should be considered for the land touching the existing commercial plot.

Board views

The town hall was packed. Planning board member Cynthia Elliott was the first to speak. She and planning board members Chuck Voss and the board’s chairman, Robert Stapf, were the most vocal leaders of the night.
"I’m in favor of keeping open space," Elliott said. Based on her 30 years of experience as a land surveyor, she said, she sees time and time again that rural towns with larger-lot zoning are the ones that have more urban sprawl.
"The smaller lots will actually be better for open space," Elliott said. She said it allows for housing to be clustered and then keeps the surrounding area open.

With two-acre lots, homeowners maintain only about 40,000 square feet, Elliott said, so there will be one-and-a-half acres of brush and then another house, with this pattern repeating itself.
"Bigger lots don’t give us what we want," Elliott said. While this might not be what the public wants to hear, Elliott said, looking out into the audience, in the long run she thinks people will actually be happier with smaller lots.

Also, in Columbia County, she said, she has seen how the larger-lot zoning has affected farmers. Smaller lots allow farmers to sell one small lot off of their property. But requiring them to sell at least two acres or even larger lots for development, will take larger chunks out of their farm land and their livelihood, Elliott said.
"I’m a property-rights person," Elliott said.
"I don’t want to use spot zoning to cut people out of the marketplace," she said.

Zoning should not be based on the desires of current public pressure, but instead based on what the land can host, Elliott said.

Chuck Voss, a certified planner, said he takes a professional and practical standpoint when it comes to zoning. As a land-use planner, he said, he depends on documents for guidelines. Based on the town’s current comprehensive plan and the town’s zoning ordinance, which is only six years old, so it is considered current, Voss said, the MDR zone designation fits the guidelines.
The town is now reviewing the comprehensive plan and "we may see some changes," Voss said. (See related story.)
"I think it would be premature to make any zoning changes...." He went on, "We should wait and go through the comprehensive planning process then review our zoning. Zoning decisions should be based on the comprehensive plan."

No new information has been brought forward to support a re-zone initiative, Voss said. If the petitioning citizens proved with an environmental impact study that the landscape or water supply has changed since the Krumkill, Hilton, and Font Grove road area was zoned MDR, then there would be some justification, Voss said.

Board Chairman Stapf said that, regardless of how the town zones this area, the Kensington Woods housing development of 282-units is proposed as a planned unit development, which is a zoning overlay permitted in the town’s law. If approved, the PUD would be a special zone laid on top of whatever the area is zoned.

Under the regulations of New Scotland’s PUD ordinance, lots within a PUD can be 10,000 square feet in size, Stapf said. So, even if the MDR is rezoned to two-acre lots the PUD and Keningston Woods housing development could still exist as an overlay, Stapf said.

About a third of the land in the bill deals with the Kensington Woods site, Stapf said. The other large landowners in this area are the Donatos, the Genovesis, and the Cooks. Anthony Genovesi and Robert Cook have fiercely opposed the rezoning of their land.

This area of town has the potential for public water and sewer, Stapf said. There is a healthy well on the old Tall Timbers property, which was tested over 72 hours and pumped 400 gallons a minute, Zoning Administrator Paul Cantlin has stated.

Others join in

Stapf had drafted before the meeting, a letter to send back to the town board expressing the planning board’s view. After hearing from a few board members that they shared his thoughts on the bill, he pulled out the letter and asked all the board members to give feedback on how they would like the recommendation letter to be adjusted.

Elliott said that she would like to tell the town board that the reason the industrial area is being considered for a rezone is because there has been a change to that land, the railroad is defunct now and this change warrants a zoning change.

Kevin Kroencke said he agreed with Voss’s sentiment, that he hasn’t seen anything to warrant changing the MDR zone. If new information were brought to him, such as data showing that the land no longer has the water, he would consider rezoning. But he hasn’t seen any change in terms of the lands alignment with the 1995 comprehensive plan, Kroencke said.
Board member Lorraine Tuzzolo offered just one sentence of comment, "I think it should stay the way it is."

Jo Ann Davies said that she has reviewed and read the zoning laws and master plan and that she could not detect anything that warrants two-acre zoning. Under the comprehensive plan, this area is designated a good location for a hamlet, she said.

Of course sprawl and water is a concern, Davies said. In this case, the town might have the opportunity to work with the Masullo Brothers of the Garrison Development Group to tap into that currently used underground water supply at the Kensington Woods site which could provide water to residents or commercial businesses outside of the proposed development, she said.

Stewart said she has concerns for runoff going into the aquifer. With smaller lots, there would be more condensed construction, and also more pavement and concrete, which are impermeable surfaces, she said.
"I don’t want the aquifer tainted at all," Stewart said. Which zoning, MDR or R-2, will better protect the aquifer" she asked.

Stapf said he did not have any major concerns for contamination, and that water permits would be addressed by each developer in the approval process for building permits.

The board’s legal counsel, Louis Neri, said that, regardless of how the land is zoned, water tests and state or county approval for water and sewer service will have to be secured for anyone to develop the land, regardless of its zoning.