• It divides the town into various zoning districts with differing lot sizes or densities, varying from 20,000 square feet (15,000 if central sewer is installed) in the central hamlet districts to 5 acres in the rural district, including the agricultural overlay and the wellhead protection district.
• Although a number of commercial uses are allowed throughout the town (i.e. home businesses and other smaller impact commercial uses) major commercial development is concentrated in the hamlet center and hamlet main street districts. The latest zoning map now includes the flat land behind Stewarts on the Village Green property in the hamlet main street district.
• The agricultural overlay zone covering about ¾ of the rural district includes properties currently or previously used in agriculture (raising crops or pasturing livestock), properties with prime soils or soils of statewide importance and properties included in the County Agricultural District. However, none of the Carvel property is included in the Agricultural Overlay even kthough it meets the first two criteria. The zone
  does not differ from the underlying rural district in allowed density but it restricts placement of houses on agricultural fields to the extent practicable.
• The subdivision regulations require that environmentally constrained acreage (steep slopes, wetlands, flood plains, etc.) be subtracted from the total acreage prior to calculating the net buildable acreage.
• Major subdivisions outside of the hamlet districts are in most cases to be designed as conservation subdivisions, with most of the units
  clustered on small lots and at least 50% of the land preserved as open space. In the agricultural overlay (A-O) district this requirement applies to any development of 5 or more housing units. In the rural and well head protection districts not included in the A-O overlay developments of between 5 and 14 units may be of a more conventional layout with Planning Board
  approval; although the preferred layout is still the conservation subdivision layout. Additionally, in all conservation subdivisions after deducting the environmentally constrained land an additional 15% of the
  remaining acreage is deducted from the total prior to determining the net buildable acreage.
• The zoning draft includes a New Neighborhood Development (NND) overlay that can be applied to a development in single ownership of at least 750 acres. The base density in an NND is one unit to 3 net buildable acres rather than one unit to 5 acres. The open space requirement is increased to 60% of the entire parcel from 50%. Prior to approving an NND rezoning
  application the developer will be required by the Town Board to commit to providing a number of community benefits and infrastructure improvements to the town beyond those obtainable through SEQRA review.
• The regulations also include generous bonus density awards for various community benefits-up to 40% additional units in a regular conservation subdivision and 50% in an NND.
• Affordable housing provisions apply to all developments of 10 or more units.

Jane Waters
November 9, 2009

• It divides the town into various zoning districts with differing lot sizes or densities, varying from 20,000 square feet (15,000 if central sewer is installed) in the central hamlet districts to 5 acres in the rural district, including the agricultural overlay and the wellhead protection district.
• Although a number of commercial uses are allowed throughout the town (i.e. home businesses and other smaller impact commercial uses) major commercial development is concentrated in the hamlet center and hamlet main street districts. The latest zoning map now includes the flat land behind Stewarts on the Village Green property in the hamlet main street district.
• The agricultural overlay zone covering about ¾ of the rural district includes properties currently or previously used in agriculture (raising crops or pasturing livestock) and properties with prime soils or soils of statewide importance. The zone does not differ from the underlying rural district in allowed density but it restricts placement of houses on
  agricultural fields to the extent practicable.
• The subdivision regulations require that environmentally constrained acreage (steep slopes, wetlands, flood plains, etc.) be subtracted from the total acreage prior to calculating the net buildable acreage.
• Major subdivisions outside of the hamlet districts are in most cases to be designed as conservation subdivisions, with most of the units clustered on small lots and at least 50% of the land preserved as open space. In the agricultural overlay (A-O) district this requirement applies to any development of 5 or more housing units. In the rural and well head protection districts not included in the A-O overlay developments of between 5 and 14 units may be of a more conventional layout with Planning Board approval; although the preferred layout is still the conservation subdivision layout. Additionally, in all conservation subdivisions after
  deducting the environmentally constrained land an additional 15% of the remaining acreage is deducted from the total prior to determining the net buildable acreage.
• The zoning draft includes a New Neighborhood Development (NND) overlay that can be applied to a development of at least 750 acres. The base density in an NND is one unit to 3 net buildable acres rather than one unit to 5 acres. The open space requirement is increased to 60% of the entire parcel from 50%. Prior to approving an NND rezoning application the
  developer will be required by the Town Board to commit to providing a number of community benefits and infrastructure improvements to the town beyond those obtainable through SEQRA review.
• The regulations also include generous bonus density awards for various community benefits-up to 40% additional units in a regular conservation subdivision and 50% in an NND.
• Affordable housing provisions apply to all developments of 10 or more units.

Jane Waters
September 21, 2009

The other major change they have decided to make in the law after closing the public comment period is to extend the district allowing commercial uses to include the flat land behind Stewarts. They decided not to impose restrictions on the placement of one single family house, which was a change requested by many PPU members.

The Town Board also made many changes in the law prior to presenting their draft to the public. Chief among these (in addition to adding the NND section) are that instead of utilizing an environmental control formula for determining numbers of units that can be built on a parcel this draft excludes environmentally constrained acreage (i.e. land in steep slopes, open waters, flood plains and wetlands) prior to dividing the remaining rural district acreage by 5 in order to determine the numbers of units that can be built. Another difference is that while the agricultural overlay now includes much more land than it did in the Zoning Commission draft, the base density is changed from one unit per 10 acres to one unit per 5 buildable acres. The agricultural district now mainly imposes restrictions on the placement of the units, rather than reducing the number of units beyond what is allowed in the rural district. Another revision is that additional bonus density allowances are given to developers in exchange for inclusion of community benefits in their proposals. Also the new version dictates layout more rigidly than the Zoning Commission draft did.

A public hearing has been scheduled for Thursday, August 20th at 7PM on the second floor of the new library to receive public comment restricted to the revisions the Town Board has made to the zoning draft since the first set of hearings held earlier this year. Copies of the pages with the relevant revisions will be posted on the town website or can be reviewed in person at the library and town hall. It is expected that there will be a very brief period after that hearing for written comment to be submitted after which the board can complete the FGEIS and vote to adopt the zoning law.

All developments not currently approved will have to conform to the new law when it is adopted. The moratorium on new major subdivision proposals ended on January 25, 2009 and will not be renewed.

• The proposed New Neighborhood Development (NND), which appears on Page 41 of the document, is clearly in conflict with goals of the Comprehensive Plan. By shifting the base density from one unit per five acres, as it is in the rural district, to one unit per three acres, the NND allows for development on a scale and of a density inappropriate to the rural character of Pine Plains. It is a recipe for suburban sprawl and as such is entirely inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Further, the NND would allow for the creation of an entirely separate hamlet equal in size to the hamlet of Pine Plains (up to 611 or higher), within which some commercial uses would be allowed provided they don’t compete with businesses presently within the hamlet (just how the town would determine, in any legal fashion, exactly which businesses are competing and which are not is unclear). The Comprehensive Plan states plainly that the historic Pine Plains hamlet is to be the town center and community development must therefore be focused in or adjacent to that center.
• While it would seem that the NND concept was created specifically for the benefit of the Durst Carvel Project, it is by no means certain that it would preclude the construction of additional large scale developments. In fact, there are several other large land holdings within town which could be combined to meet the requirements of the NND and thus create a second and possibly a third hamlet-sized development in Pine Plains. Development on that scale is wholly at odds with the Comprehensive Plan.
• The NND section of the Draft Zoning Plan should be removed until such a time as language is clarified and the allowable development is of a scale and density consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the proposed Draft Zoning Law, exclusive of the NND, provides sufficient flexibility to meet the legitimate concerns of both the town and any developer, making the NND provision unnecessary. Given the looseness of its wording and its potential to cause serious, irreversible harm to the community-both unforeseen and foreseeable-the zoning law would be much better without the NND provision.
• Some additional concerns. We believe site plan review should include single home parcels as well as multi-unit ones. Our concern for our ridge lines, steep slopes, and open farmland should not end just because a single residence is planned for the site. Also, the same lighting restrictions should be applied to all residential sites, not just ones with multiple units.

Please download the Draft Zoning Law if you have not already done so and come to the hearing this Saturday (and the second the following Wednesday evening at 7:30) prepared to voice your concerns. In addition, please put your comments in writing and send them to: Town Supervisor, Town of Pine Plains, Pine Plains Town Hall, 3284 Route 199, PO Box 955, Pine Plains, NY 12567. You have until the close of business day on May 4th to submit your comments.

Thanks and we’ll see you at the hearings.

Public Hearings on the proposed law will be held on Saturday, April 18th at 9:30AM and Wednesday, April 22nd at 7:00PM at the Pine Plains Lions Club Pavilion at 82 Beach Road.

You can download the documents at the town’s website (the main document is titled “Local Law #1 of 2009 – Pine Plains Zoning” but there are other important documents on this web page, including maps and appendices). Or, if you prefer, you can pick up a printed copy at the Town Hall for $12.50.

We’re impressed with the evident time and thought that’s gone into the document but we’d like to examine it more closely before we comment. We recommend you do the same. We’ll share with you any thoughts or concerns we have between now and the hearings and we hope you’ll join us at the Lions Club Pavilion.

–Paul, Jim, and the rest of the steering committee

Work on this new “preferred” alternative plan is being led by Alexander (Alex) Felson, an expert ecological planner on the faculty at Yale, and the multinational planning firm EDAW. This plan has widened buffer zones around important wetlands and vernal pools and has much more dedicated connected open space (see Open Space Map of the new plan). It clusters most of the development around the golf course, away from both the Ham Brook and the Route 199 view shed. The number of housing units has been reduced to 648 (576 in Pine Plains, 61 in Milan and 11 on lots that are partly in both towns). The 18 hole golf course is redesigned with the second nine extending towards 199 on the west side of the property. There will no longer be an additional 9 hole academy course.

While this process of redesign and updating the Planning Board on it continues; the Planning Board must still continue to work on their review of the comments about the original DEIS and reach decisions about what must be done to address them. While the redesign may be part of that process; additional studies may be required as needed, for example, in reviewing the fiscal impacts, school impacts or other environmental impacts. It is not clear at this time whether the board will require a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement based on the revised plan and/or detailed corrections required to address deficiencies in the data in the original DEIS. Alternatively the board could proceed directly to a Final Environmental Impact Statement which must include all the substantive comments and the responses to them by the developer that also might include the new plan as a part of the response.

The original proposal was for 951 new units (some houses are already on the property) on 2,200 acres (1,772 acres in Pine Plains and 428 acres in Milan). PPU has recently learned the Dursts had also planned 71 additional units on the “previously approved” 99 half acre lot subdivision west of Carvel Lake which was carved out of the original plan, making the actual total 1022 new units. The property is on both sides of 199 beginning just west of the hamlet area of town (including the first farm before you come to the wetlands) and it includes sections on Hicks Hill Rd., Stissing Mountain Rd. and Sherwood Rd. and small sections even cross the Taconic Parkway. It includes all of the original Carvel Golf Club. This first proposal included 563 houses and 388 attached units: 526 detached houses on 988 acres in Pine Plains and 37 houses on 142 acres in Milan; and 4 clusters of 358 attached units on 75 acres in Pine Plains and 30 units on 8 acres in Milan. The overall density of the project in Pine Plains was 2 acres per unit and 2.3 for the whole property.

In addition, the Durst Organization recently purchased a contiguous 98 acre farm on Mt. Ross Road, which brings the total acreage they own to nearly 2,300 acres. This recent purchase is not included in the proposal currently before the Pine Plains Planning Board.

PINE PLAINS – Planning consultant Bonnie Franson appeared before the Town Board Jan. 31 to discuss her progress in the review of the proposed zoning law.

Franson, of Tim Miller Associates, was retained last year to work with the Town Board on that review, which she began in November. To start the process, Franson took a look at the town’s objectives, especially in ensuring they kept in line with the comprehensive plan.

The next step was to meet with Town Planner Nan Stolzenburg, which she did in December.

“We discussed the history of the comprehensive plan and the thoughts behind the zoning law, and particularly the concept of the density being proposed, Franson said.

To some extent they also talked about the changes that have occurred since the beginning of the plan’s drafting.

“Since December I’ve spent some time up here and I’ve really gotten a sense of your environment,” Franson said, adding that that includes the agricultural environment, the amount of vacant land and the development pattern in the hamlet.

She also told the board that Stolzenburg provided her with some history and insight to the Carvel Property Development. Her priority remains, however, the town’s zoning needs.

“This month my focus is on getting fully familiar with the zoning code,” Franson said.

That code is what was proposed by the now disbanded Zoning Commission, which was formed specifically to draft zoning regulations for Pine Plains, the only town in Dutchess County without any zoning laws.

Franson said she wants to learn about the procedures and the organization, as well as the substance, of the code.

“Are there definitions in place and are they consistent?” was one question she asked of the board.

To help guide the town through her queries Franson said she will produce one report on the zoning law itself and two reports to address the review of the density formula that has been proposed. She said there’s one basic question that needs an answer.

“Does the zoning as crafted achieve what the town wanted?” she asked.

The three reports will be submitted to Attorney to the Town Warren Replansky sometime this week. He will review them and if he finds them satisfactory the board will then hold its first real meeting with Franson.

“This is not a meeting,” she said last Thursday. “This is just a report.”

In January, Stolzenburg provided Franson with digital files to help her put a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) together.

“We’re moving forward and going full steam ahead as far as the process goes,” Franson said.

“There is a lot to do,” said Councilwoman Dorean Gardner.

“At some point in February we’re probably going to look at scheduling another meeting to talk about our findings and the law,” town Supervisor Gregg Pulver said, as he brought the town up to date on the projected schedule for the zoning review.

Present: Gregg Pulver, Rick Butler, Dorean Gardner, George Keeler and Bob Couse

Gregg Pulver began the meeting by reading the notice placed in the paper about it. He then said we have a temporary vacancy on the Planning Board and put an ad in the papers about the vacancy which is to fill in for Brian Coons who is in Afghanistan. It is for a one year term, actually it ends December 31st of this year and if Brian is still deployed we will reappoint the person for as long as needed. Seven people applied and three people were interviewed. All three were excellent candidates who did very well in the interviews. Really the determining factor was that the person chosen has attended many meetings of the board. There was no further discussion and Rick Butler moved to appoint Sarah Jones. The vote was unanimous.

Zoning Review: Bonnie Franson was present and began by introducing herself to the audience. She is the Senior Vice President and Planning Director of Tim Miller and Associates. She reviewed her activities to date: She spent November reviewing the relevant documents relating to the background of the town, its goals and objectives, the Comprehensive Plan and its appendix, the maps that were prepared in support of the Comprehensive Plan. She met with Nan Stolzenburg in December to discuss the history of the Comprehensive Plan and the thoughts behind the zoning law, the density issues, the environmental formula and the districts and went over the changes that occurred in the draft and why they happened. She has also driven almost all the roads in the town (except two) to get a sense of the environment; for example, the agricultural base, the undeveloped land, settlement patterns, etc. She has also reviewed the Carvel proposal as they are developing their own concept for zoning for their property. She has been getting very familiar with the zoning code-the layout, the procedures and the substance. For example, looking to see if all the definitions are there, are they consistent and is the zoning code consistent with the comprehensive plan? Is the density code consistent with the goals? Is the way for example that the agricultural district is set up consistent with the objectives? She will be sending reports to Warren Replansky next week and if he OK’s it will soon be ready to hold an official meeting about my review. She added that Nan had provided her with electronic files about the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning law to use for existing conditions.

Gregg Pulver asked, “So you expect to have something in Warren’s hand next week, so we are looking for something for a special meeting some time in February?” Bonnie said yes.

Public Comment: Carl Popp asked for clarification about the dates of the Carvel hearings and the snow date for the February 29th hearing. Don Bartles said the first two were at the school but he wasn’t positive whether the first one would be in the auditorium or the cafeteria. He said he wasn’t sure about the snow dates. Jane Waters said the Poughkeepsie Journal had reprinted the wrong snow dates again in their 1/30 editorial. She said the snow date for both the February 29th and the March 6th dates is March 7th and that one would be at the Milan Town Hall regardless of which hearing it is replacing.

Executive Session: Gregg said they were now going to go into executive session to discuss contractual matters and that no action would be taken afterwards.

Respectfully submitted: Jane Waters