This article appeared in the Townsman, February 19 edition
A smaller but still sizable crowd turned out for Round Two, the continuation of the Woodstock planning board’s public hearing for comment on the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) provided by Rural Ulster Preservation Company (RUPCO) with its application to build 53 units of affordable housing (the so-called ‘Woodstock Commons’) behind the Bradley Meadows shopping center in Woodstock.
Of roughly 30 speakers, fourteen expressed approval of the project, ten were against and six made requests for additional information and/or recommended more study of the DEIS, or otherwise made equivocal statements.
Arguments against the project included those made by Judy and Dave Bruck, who expressed concerns with traffic, environment, property values, taxes and the lack of guarantee that Woodstockers would get to live in the units. Thea Hambright, speaking along similar veins, asked the planning board to make RUPCO guarantee Woodstock workers would perform at least 50% of the construction and Woodstock residents reside in at least 50% of the units. Phyllis Lane predicted that increased traffic on quiet Playhouse Lane would devalue adjacent properties. Carol March decried the destruction of what she estimated to be 9600 trees on the proposed site, and thought RUPCO should consider renovating the now-empty Simulaids building in Bearsville. Harry Castiglione worried about traffic. Cheryl Chapman sent a letter expressing a concern with traffic. Loretta Klein, first criticizing what she thought was an exhibit of bad manners on the part of project supporters, expressed concerns about the environment and the availability of units to Woodstockers. Bill Cook also had environmental concerns. Jay Cohen offered a rambling dissertation concerning “group A” and “group B,” and ultimately attacked RUPCO’s “hype” about the project and predicted “chaos” were it approved.
More or less equivocal were statements by David Menzes, who critiqued the scale of the project and the “process” that led to it; Abby Mitchell, who worried that increased global warming might result in flooding to the area; Jay Wenk, who thought the world was becoming too populated, “although I don’t know what you [the planning board] can do about that;” and Dr. Arthur DiNapoli, who does not support the project but felt that a planning board denial would result in a “lawyer fest” that opponents would eventually lose. “I’m against it, but we will get by.”
Speakers for the project included Rene Imperato, Michael Pacut, Judy Flynn, David Boyle, Robert Young and Mike Shaughnessy, each taking the position that the environmental review has been thorough, and that Woodstock’s need for affordable housing is acute.
Former town board members Gordon Wemp and Bill McKenna spoke for the project. McKenna reminded the listeners of how former controversial land use decisions, for instance the firehouse in Bearsville, the cell tower, the highway garage and the senior housing behind the post office, had all been executed without the ensuing doom predicted by opponents. Wemp, addressing the often-repeated idea that Woodstock “do it [construct affordable housing] ourselves,” cast his eye about the widely acknowledged embarrassment of the condition of the Community Center and said, “This facility speaks for itself.” McKenna and Wemp each urged the planning board to work with RUPCO to make the best project possible.
Woodstock Land Conservancy member Michael DeWan, after making it clear he was speaking for himself and not the organization that in the past had taken stands on land-use proposals, but which has remained neutral in this debate, made a passionate speech supporting the project, saying it gives “the potential for Woodstock to exemplify a good community,” and noting, “Our nation has just done something remarkable; so can Woodstock.” DeWan was referring to the election of Barack Obama, whose name had been invoked by several preceding supporters of the project.
Deborah DeWan, director of policy and program development for the Catskill Center for Conservation and Development (CCCD), but also speaking for herself, stated her strong support for the project, noting its positive environmental features and that the opposition “does not represent our better nature.”
Barry Samuels, president of the Woodstock Chamber of Commerce and Arts, but speaking as a private individual, wished that the RUPCO project would be located across Chestnut Hill Road from his residence rather than the ten homes instead slated for development there. “I would choose living across the street from the Woodstock Commons with its 53 units over the development of ten second homes,” he said, looking forward to more full time residents of the town.
Michael Berg, director of Family of Woodstock and a member of the Ulster County Affordable Housing Consortium, speaking in support of the project reminded listeners that “this is not a popularity contest,” and went on to describe the extremely low availability of affordable housing in the area. He took those speakers who had expressed worry that the housing would be available to “non-Woodstockers” to task by asking rhetorically, “Where was the opposition to all the second homes being built here?”
Maryanne Collins asked the planning board to make their decision based “on the merits and not the emotions” surrounding the proposed project, and concluded her statement of support for the project by noting, “Woodstock will become a Hamlin, and no children will be here.” Hamlin, it will be recalled, lost all its children to the Pied Piper.
The public hearing, which had begun at 6:00 PM, ended with a unanimous vote to close it. The next step is for the planning board to digest the comments addressed to it, and to decide within thirty days on a format for RUPCO representatives to respond to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment