Most eloquent on the legal pitfalls inherent in vague terminology was Kelleigh McKenzie, who serves as an alternate member on the Rosendale Zoning Board of Appeals. “My concerns have to do with clarity, enforceability and process,” she said. “A definitions list needs to be created for terms not included in the standard code.” Noting that in municipal law, the terms “shall” and “may” have very specific meanings whereas “should, will, is and are” do not, McKenzie listed other “terms subject to interpretation” in the proposed legislation, including “compact development footprint,” “large tract of land,” “appropriate scale and design” and “significant expanse.”
Elana Michelson, a resident of Sawdust Avenue, near the development site, also cited “clarity and accountability” as concerns. “I don’t want to live in a two-tiered town: the community who will live behind those gates and the rest of us,” she said. “We don’t know what ‘affordable public access’ will signify to the developers and the people who buy their houses… We don’t want them to be able to wiggle out because of lack of responsibility.”
“There are already two Rosendales,” shot back pro-development resident Gina Hornbeck, who listed a number of local businesses and amenities that had vanished in recent years. “It’s close to becoming a ghost town…How long before we have to move out?”
Town of Rosendale recreation director Tara Burke concurred: “So many things have left us…I think we can trust our town Zoning Board. They know what’s best for us.”
Comments were split vociferously on the questions of whether the proposed Planned Development Area would constitute spot zoning, which is illegal under New York State law, and whether or not the change would be consistent with Rosendale’s Comprehensive Plan. “I have researched this many times. My opinion is this is not spot zoning,” averred town attorney Mary Lou Christiana.
“According to the Comprehensive Plan, significant development projects are targeted for Route 32,” noted Gordon on behalf of the Sierra Club. Resident Lisa Resnick agreed: “This is spot zoning. There was supposed to be major zoning on 213 and 32 for economic development.”
Michael Tucker, who said that his family had lived at Williams Lake and that he had worked there, disagreed, calling HRVR’s revised proposal an “environmentally solid development plan” that “promotes cluster development” and is “consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.”
Kingston insurance broker Robert Ryan (not the Rosendale Town Board member), the former chair of the Ulster County Development Corporation, praised the proposal as “congruent with the Comprehensive Plan,” saying flatly, “This is not spot zoning.”
Attilio Contini, longtime Rosendale GOP chief and former county legislator, advocated scrapping Rosendale’s Comprehensive Plan altogether, noting that he had been the only member of the Revision Committee to vote against the most recent version of the development roadmap. “People are using the master plan to hinder and obstruct development and progress in this town,” he complained.
Jen Metzger, the chair of Rosendale’s Environmental Commission, recommended several changes to the proposed wording that would, in her words, “make this amendment stronger,” noting that “This is the one chance that the town has to get the hoped-for benefits” of the Williams Lake Project. She suggested a perpetual easement so that the portion of the Wallkill Valley Rail Trail that passes through the property can never be rerouted; limitations on uses, citing her concern that the proposed pizza café “will deter rail trail users from coming into town to shop”; requiring local hiring and sourcing of materials; and better definitions for affordable housing and energy use standards.
Noting the unhappiness of many members of the public who had not been able to compress all of their comments into a three-minute window and had not brought a written statement to submit into the record, Metzger proposed that the public hearing be kept open for one more week for written comments only, calling that “standard practice.” “We’ve been talking about this for seven-and-a-half years; what’s another week?” responded Town Board member Bob Gallagher.
The Board voted 5-0 to accept written comments up until Aug. 21. A special meeting was scheduled for Aug. 28 so that the amendment could be voted on at the regular September Town Board meeting.
Build first; zone later. Unless this site is next to a park, nothing the residents can do about zoning because zoning boards and their lawyers decide arbitrarily and capriciously. In other words, zoning codes are of no consequence for any reasons at all. The zoning code is not binding, can always be amended and are out of date before ratified.
At least, it New Paltz it is so?
I was driving on Main Street in Rosendale yesterday, the decrepit houses, the various empty stores, the crumbling, bone dry public pool, the tarnished edges that exist on everything and I thought – as I do every day – why is there such a vocal group resisting this best case scenario for new development? I recalled the days about 8 years ago when downtown Rosendale was on the upswing, the Cement Co, the new galleries…all gone. I continued into High Falls, the close neighbor and marveled at the empty store fronts…
Spruce, Lounge, Blue Cashew, Depuey Canal House, the diner, Mr Apple – ALL GONE!!! All up and relocated to Rhinebeck and Kingston…why because where we once had tons of foot traffic we don’t…why? Because we are failing to sustain the tourism and residential growth that once kept these businesses thriving. The WORST thing we can do is not build Williams Lake. The BEST thing we can do is build it. Stop the Herbal Menace, put down your joints and snap back into reality. WE NEED WILLIAMS LAKE RESORT.
Amen to this. Great examples. Snap out of it!
Build the da*n thing already.
I’m taking my tax dollars and moving to a town that has a vision and the courage to stand up to the
NIMBYs and actually grow the economy. This entire thing is so pathetic and absurd it disgusts me. I know
four other residents who are selling and moving out as well. We’ve had enough. It’s sad, this could be
such an amazing area. But you are failing miserably. And the person who remarked on High Falls as well,
they are so right. This kind of resort would help tourism and locally owned businesses but High Falls practically has tumble weeds today where five years ago it was thriving.