Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

eNEWS is a news bulletin written specifically for KNGG Members.

The contents of eNEWS are the property of KNGG.
eNEWS may not be copied or reproduced in part or full

without consent of KNGG.

ALL KNGG E-MAIL IS SCANNED BY A NORTON ANTI-VIRUS PROGRAM

Parts of eNEWS Bulletins re: ART78 will now appear under

"ARTICLE 78"

DECEMBER 31, 2004

We regret to inform you that Mark Litteken will relinquish his position as KNGG Treasurer effective January 1, 2005.

A

As a founding member of KNGG, Mark’s motivation helped drive the organization in its beginnings. He has put in a tremendous amount of time behind the scenes. In 2 ½ years, Mark never missed a public hearing and missed only one KNGG meeting.

a

Mark’s work as treasurer and the extra reports he volunteered to the board have been of great value to KNGG. Mark set up our books in a logical system for this nonprofit organization. There is more to Mark than numbers. Besides having a good comprehension of accounting and computer skills, Mark is an environmentalist at heart and is very concerned about Kinderhook’s future.

Mark has also proven himself to be a professional orator at KNGG meetings and at all the Widewaters’ and Dunkin’ Donuts’ public hearings. Many of his letters to the press and to the Planning Board may be seen on the KNGG web site.

a

The Board of Directors will greatly miss Mark Litteken’s valued input. We have been fortunate to have his volunteered services. We all wish Mark the best in the future.

Allen Schaefer, President

And the KNGG Board of Directors

The KNGG Board of Directors would like

to wish you and your family

A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

DECEMBER 22, 2001

THIS CHRISTMAS GIVE THE GIFT of MUSIC

Chamber Music Gala

Music by Robert Baksa

“He can write a beautiful tune, cloak it in a warm accompaniment,

and orchestrate it to perfection.” - The Double Reed Magazine

Hosted by the Composer

THE ARTISTS

Michael Clement, Piano;Yvonne Chavez Hannsbrough, Flute;

Sten Yngvar Isachisen, Guitar; Steven Marking, Baritone;

Vladimir Pleshakov and Elena Winther, Duo Pianists

Sunday Afternoon, January 23, 2005, 3:00 PM

North Pointe Cultural Arts Center

Route US9 (66 Chatham Street) Village of Kinderhook

Gala After the Concert Reception

at Fox Point

The Home of Alexandra & Jock Spivy

To Benefit Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth



BENEFACTOR: $150

Priority Concert Seating and Reception

SPONSOR: $100

Concert Seating and Reception

Supporter: $35

Concert Seating

AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT – ORDER EARLY

Please indicate your choice, How many, & mail your check to

KNGG - PO Box 424 - Kinderhook NY 12106

Tickets will be held at the door.

KNGG is a 501 (c) (3) not-for-profit corporation.

Your contribution to KNGG is tax deductible as allowed by law.

Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

www.KNGG.org 518 758-2646 - KNGG@berk.com

NO NEED TO REINVENT WHEEL

Ancram and now Copake and hundreds of communities around the country are waking up to the fact that if they do not take measures now to protect their community from unsightly over development – no one else will. There is no need for Kinderhook to reinvent the wheel. It’s already been done and there are many who’ve been through the experience who would be willing to give a helping hand.

Ancram has implemented a scenic overlay from its southern boarder to its northern boarder with Copake along Route 22. Copake plans something similar to pick up at its southern boarder and run it north to Hillsdale. The idea is spreading. Hopefully, Kinderhook will have its plan in place by this time next year.

There is only one major obstacle – The Kinderhook Town Board has not appropriated funds for the committee to hire a planning expert such as the ones used in East Greenbush, Ancram and Copake. When will they wake up to importance of this issue?

Scenic overlay district unveiled to packed house

By John Mason – Register-Star December 21, 2004

COPAKE -- A standing-room-only crowd of more than 80 heard about plans for preserving the scenic beauty on the eastern edge of town Saturday at Town Hall.

The proposed scenic corridor overlay district is about two miles wide, running west from the Massachusetts border to 1,500 feet west of Route 22, and about eight miles north to south from Copake's border with Hillsdale to its southern border with Ancram.

Although only a small proportion of Copake residents live in this corridor, Strategic Planning Committee Chairman Edgar Masters said, "We believe this will benefit the town as a whole -- it protects its open space and rural character."

Town officials were spurred to action by a threat posed by a gravel mine proposed for the area south of Copake Falls in spring 2003, he said.

In addition, a survey of town property owners revealed support for protecting resources and using zoning to protect open space, Masters said. The survey had an impressive response total of 38 percent of 2,260 surveys sent out, he said.

If adopted, the district would lead to a number of zoning changes in the corridor.

Five types of businesses that are now permitted under certain conditions would be totally prohibited: any extractive operations or soil mining requiring review by the state Department of Environmental Conservation, telecommunications towers, radio and television stations and towers, bus stations and mobile home parks.

Other businesses that are now subject to a special use permit would be "strictly regulated," including hospitals or nursing homes, public utility structures and buildings, recreation uses of mountain land, schools and nursery schools, convenience stores, farm machinery and equipment, motels, theaters and concert halls, animal care businesses, government buildings, clubs, produce stands, summer camps and retreats, gift and antique shops and restaurants.

Many types of businesses that are already prohibited would continue to be prohibited.

Design guidelines were also developed by the committee to protect the visual sightlines of the area within the overlay, Masters said.

General design guidelines for the corridor, applicable to subdivisions and businesses but not to agriculture, would include: preservation of vegetation and topography, mitigation of air pollution from dust, smoke and condensation, buffering using natural vegetation, underground utilities, a 35-foot-height limit and mitigated visual impact for buildings, minimal glare from outdoor lighting, screening of mechanical equipment, loading docks, garbage containers, control of soil erosion and a limit on the footprints of buildings of 7,500 square feet (and more?).

In response to a question, Masters said there is not a no-build zone in the district. When asked whether colors of houses and siding would be regulated, he said the town would want to protect the visual aspect of the area from anything that was “garish or out of place.”

Copake’s proposed scenic corridor district would be the same width as Ancram’s.

Leah Wilcox of Ancram’s Planning Board was on hand to talk about her town’s experience with such a corridor. It took them a year, and several public hearings, she said. “We took what our residents had to say to heart, and modified our proposal.” One change they made was to exempt single-family homes from the restrictions.

Mining was prohibited.

“By prohibiting mining, we’ve taken control out of the hands of the bureaucrats in Albany,” she said. Otherwise it’s DEC that tells you what’s going to happen in the town, not you.”

And she said, they’ve taken the control out of the hands of the wealthy developers.

“Everybody seems to be happy with the scenic corridor,” she said. The only bump worked out well – a Citgo service station sited at Columbia County Route 22 and 3 submitted to modifications that made it acceptable. A bright red roof was changed to earth colors, and a red, orange and blue banner on the canopy was changed to white.

A 500-acre parcel was recently sold for $5 million, a price that wouldn’t have been achieved if there were a gravel mine next door, she said.

One citizen asked Masters whether cutting off commercial development from the corridor would open up the balance of the town to commercial development.

“We aren’t cutting off commercial development for scenic overlay,” Master’s said. “We’re regulating it.” Only five types of businesses are being added to the prohibited uses, he said – the amount of development is not cut off.

“If what this committee is doing had been in place, we wouldn’t have that rubble on 22,” said one man. “So I salute what you’re doing.”

The reaction to the proposal seemed to be positive. No one spoke directly against it, and when Masters asked the audience, “Are we on the right track?” the audible response was “Yes.”

Copake Councilman Carl Ritchie said the committee is “doing a wonderful job. I think the strategic overlay is going to preserve the beauty of Copake for generations to come and we should support it and the committee any way we can. I settled in a beautiful, beautiful place, and it would be a shame not to recognize it.”

Masters said the committee is also considering a proposed zoning change for the town as a whole. Currently, most of the residential portion of the town has three acre zoning. He said the committee is looking at raising that number in some areas of the town and lowering it to one in others.

The Strategic Planning Committee will now fine-tune the proposal for the overlay district, fleshing it out with details. A public hearing for comments on their changes will be conducted February 12. The committee will revise the documents following that hearing, and another public hearing will then be held. Then the proposal will go to the Town Board.

The KNGG Board of Directors wishes you and your family

Happy Holidays.



DECEMBER 17, 2004

OPENINGS ON ZBA, PLANNING BOARD AND CORRIDOR COMMITTEE

Letters are being accepted at Town Hall from those interested in applying for volunteer positions available on these boards. We hope you are interested and will apply because the town needs people on these boards that have no agenda except what is best for the community.

Please send a letter expressing why you’d like to serve and any possible associated experience and your past business experience before the first of the year. Appointees will be announced at the Town Board Meeting on January 10, 2005.

Kinderhook Town Clerk

PO Box P

Niverville NY 12130

Widewaters Cries for Dismissal

     see ARTICLE 78 - Updates (On this site)

DECEMBER 15, 2004

Widewaters' supporter appointed Co-Chair to 9/9H corridor committee

By Joe Prout, Register-Star, Wednesday, December 15, 2004

KINDERHOOK -- One of the newest town Planning Board members now has an
augmented role, being chosen by the Town Board to co-chair the committee
looking into the future of Routes 9 and 9H.

The Town Board on Monday unanimously appointed Bob Cramer to head up the

committee with Joanne Gans.

Cramer was appointed to the Planning Board with Cheryl Gilbert in January,

filling openings left by outgoing members. He was in the public eye a great deal in 2003

as a member of Kinderhook Residents In Support of the Hannaford's Plaza, being

vocal at public hearings related to the Widewaters proposal for a shopping center.

The Widewaters project, proposed at the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H,
highlighted areas of architectural design within the town code that could
benefit from more details. One of the corridor committee's early goals was
to evaluate architectural design and other visual elements, such as
landscaping, for proposals along the two state roads. Some of those topics
have already been reviewed by the Planning Board after Cramer's appointment.

Cramer and (Cheryl) Gilbert had different views on the Widewaters, as Gilbert was
said at the time to be aligned with the views of the Widewaters opposition
group Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth. Cramer will chair the committee
with Gans, who reportedly shares views akin to KNGG.

On Monday, the Town Board again supported Cramer. Councilman Francis
Vecellio said he hopes the group will have members with a variety of
viewpoints, and said he believes Cramer will be a good co-chair with Gans.

Councilwoman Mary Kramarchyk spoke positively of Cramer, whom she said is an
imaginative person and a dedicated worker.

During the meeting, Cramer thanked the board for its support. He said he has
reached out to prominent KNGG members in hopes of incorporating their views
in the committee.

Kramarchyk said the decision had little to do with Cramer's past community
activism. "We're not trying to put titles on people," she said, adding that
the Town Board just wants volunteers.

Councilwoman Debbie Johnson then added that Cramer is open-minded and has
good ideas. She said she expects Cramer and other committee members will
look at each topic for its individual merits and detriments.

Town Supervisor Doug McGivney said it's important for a committee like this
to have a self-starting chairman, and he said Cramer will get things going.
Johnson then added that the position also requires a good deal of free time,
and noted that Cramer is retired.

When asked if Cramer's appointment could be seen as a move to make the
corridor study pro-development, McGivney said Cramer's past stances on
community development weren't that much of a factor.

Kramarchyk then added that the study is meant to create a "better
development" guideline, which will aid developers and the Planning Board.

ARTICLE 78 UPDATE

The Widewaters/Town of Kinderhook response to the KNGG filing of November 1st was to request that the case be dismissed. Attorney Jeff Baker's December 3rd response Memorandum of Law In Opposition is on the KNGG website www.kngg.org

On December 6th Widewaters and the Town of Kinderhook filed an Affidavit with the court, once more asking that the case be dismissed. In Response the "Affirmation of Jeffrey S. Baker, Esq.," dated December 7, 2004 in reply to the Affidavit of John Hoggan dated December 6, 2004 was filed. It may be seen on our web site www.kngg.org

December 10: Widewaters' attorney John Hoggan requested "oral argument."

December 13: KNGG attorney Jeff Baker replied agreeing to "oral argument" and requested a court date. To see Baker reply: www.kngg.org.

Once you have reached the KNGG web site, go to ARTICLE 78, move down and click on "The Filing.

DECEMBER 4, 2004



JOINT MEETING WITH PLANNING BOARD & TOWN BOARD HELD

Board members look at conservation subdivisions, code revision procedures (12/01/04)

By Joe Prout - The Register-Star – December 2, 2004

KINDERHOOK -- A push by the Planning Board to update the town's conservation subdivision regulations has the Town Board also looking at ways it could fast track proposed modification to the Town Code.

Both subjects were on a Planning Board wish list for discussion, brought up at a joint board meeting held Wednesday night. The conservation subdivision option is starting to see use from developers and has the Planning Board looking at key details in the law. Throughout the year the Town Board has been looking at Town Code changes, and conservation subdivisions may be one of the next topics tackled.

Proposals for conservation subdivisions with potential housing developments have come forth recently from developers Steve Bean and Anthony Buono. Both proposals had the Planning Board reviewing the previously infrequently used subdivision option to gain a more in-depth understanding of the law.

The discussion Wednesday night started with a call for mandated conservation subdivisions for any residential proposal. Planning Board member Jim Egnasher said he feared residential over-development in Kinderhook. "Our schools, our road, our economy and our water are all threatened by over-development," Egnasher said.

It was noted during the meeting that conservation easements wouldn't necessarily reduce the number of proposed buildable parcels.

The current law basically states that, in order to preserve Kinderhook's open spaces, a subdivision may have numerous parcels that are smaller than what is usually allowed, if the developer also permanently sets aside key farmable areas for future agricultural use. The conserved area must preserve at least 50 percent of the total acreage in a proposed subdivision.

The end result can be a large farmable field situated next to a cluster of houses instead of the same number of houses spread across a parcel with no farmland.

Planning Board members noted that the language in the conservation subdivision law could use tightening. “The developers are trying to work around it,” member Bob Kramer noted.

One noted the flaw is that language in the Town Code does not specifically forbid developers from including normally undevelopable land in the preserved acreage. Developers can lump wetland areas with farmland to meet the 50 percent requirement, and the members said the town’s Comprehensive Plan states that it shouldn’t be included because nothing could be built on wetlands anyway. Without the distinction, less usable farmland is preserved.

While there are noted flaws with this law, similar code changes have been proposed over the summer, which were either recently adopted by the Town Board or have yet to be approved. Members of the Planning Board asked for a manageable way to prevent their proposals for making changes to the Town Code in future.

“There’s no sense of us swamping you,” member Gerry Minot-Scheuerman said, noting if the Planning Board sent too much work it may not get addressed in a timely manner...

Councilman Francis Vecellio said the town could use an outside planning professional to research a law modification ahead of time ...

McGivney noted that money for a professional planner wasn’t in the town’s budget.

Both boards discussed using a limited moratorium during a redesigning of the conservation easement law, which as presented could allow developers to start a proposal under the understanding they may be required to adhere to the law when it is finished. . . .

By the conclusion of meeting, there was no resolution of these issues. The subjects may come up again at the December 13 Town Board meeting.

THE MEETING AS SEEN THRU EYES OF A KNGG MEMBER

I attended the subject meeting tonight. There were some interesting tidbits that came out.

Ed Simonsen (Planning Board Chair) stated that he was interested in having the code reviewed by experts to see if all the requirements were realistic. In order to do this he has sent letters to colleges (RPI) to see if there would be any students willing to work with the board to do this.

First of all I have nothing against RPI students but I believe they need experienced engineers, each disciplined, to get the best job done for our town. This also smacks of possibly watering down the code.

I overheard some words between planning board members indicating that a hip roof on Widewaters was possible but the refrigeration equipment installation was the real problem.

Simonsen praised the unlicensed architect from Widewaters for helping design some buildings that were more attractive than they started out.

Simonsen said that there was standing room only at the public hearing on the development on Garrigan Road. Most of the people had concerns with the visibility for traffic as they exited Garrigan Road onto Route 203. Simonsen stated that he told them they should petition the Town Board. (I don't know what the town board will be able to do. I thought it was the job of the planning board to work these things out before they approved the project.)

Doug McGivney (Town Supervisor) made a snide remark about KNGG. They were discussing having some of the county planning seminars held locally and trying to see how the facility to hold them could be paid for. Someone made the comment, "Maybe KNGG would pay for it since they want all this good planning done." Doug McGivney then responded, "I wouldn't want to accept anything from such a partisan group."

Frank Moses, December 1, 2004

ART 78 - The LATEST

Because of the disregard of proper legal procedures by the Kinderhook Town ZBA in approving the variance for Widewaters, KNGG filed an Article 78 Action against The Town ZBA and Widewaters on November 1^st in NY State Supreme Court, Albany County. We are not just pursuing legal technicalities, but are objecting to a process that was significantly and fundamentally flawed. If the variance is granted, because of precedence, this will forever weaken the architectural design standards of our new zoning code and give developers the chance to put up big box structures without challenge.

a

Now, the Town of Kinderhook and Widewaters have asked the Supreme Court to dismiss our Article 78 filing based on the grounds of: 1.) Lack of standing, 2.) Failure to exhaust administrative remedies, 3.) Failure to name a necessary party.

a

Jeff Baker: “The respondents’ (TOK and Widewaters) motions have no basis in law and are wholly without merit.”

Attorneys Jeff Baker and Jim Muscato submitted a Memorandum of Law on December 3, 2004 in opposition to The Town and Widewaters’ motion to dismiss the Article 78 action for KNGG.

a

Our attorneys believe the Town and Widewaters have no sound basis on which to stand. They are either worried that the case we have is too good and/or they are trying to bleed KNGG, a not-for-profit group, dry of funding for additional legal fees needed because of this dismissal tactic.

a

Stay tuned! It could get dirtier, we suppose.

In the meantime, we need money to keep this court case going. Please contribute to save the zoning code.

Contributions to KNGG are tax deductible as allowed by law.

Remember to save 1/23 for KNGG!

DECEMBER 2, 2004

ANNOUNCING OUR GALA EVENT

TO: All KNGG Members

On Sunday, January 23, 2005, Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth is holding a special benefit chamber music concert and gala reception, “CHAMBER MUSIC GALA.” The concert will be at North Pointe Cultural Arts Center on Sunday afternoon at 3 pm. This concert offers an unusual opportunity to experience the exceptional talents of musicians who live and work in the Albany and Columbia County region.

Distinguished composer and local Kinderhook resident, Robert Baksa, will present a group of his works. Chamber music has been his main focus for the last three decades. During that time Mr. Baksa has written close to 100 pieces of music for various combinations of instruments as well as solo keyboard music. The Bronx Arts Ensemble, The American Accordion Association, The West Point Concert Band and Harpsichord Unlimited have commissioned his works. His one act opera, “Red Carnations,” was commissioned by Lincoln Center for use by the Metropolitan Opera to perform for students. The Orchestra of St. Luke’s has made the opera a regular part of its repertory and most recently it has been the touring opera for the Santa Fe Opera's 2004 Spring Season.

As an exception to the “modern music rule” Robert Baksa prefers to write melodic music, his favorite composers being Mozart and Handel. Double Reed Magazine said, "He can write a beautiful tune, cloak it in a warm accompaniment, and orchestrate it to perfection."  As one of America’s most prolific composers, Baksa tells us, “I don’t believe that music has to be difficult to understand in order to be good. Traditional harmony is still the best way to communicate with people.”

Mr. Baksa, acting as host for the concert, will introduce his compositions. The program will include his “Aria for Flute (1957) and a new work, “Sonata for Flute and Guitar” (written in 2004) as well as “Three Portraits” (Words by Fenton Johnson), “Sonata No. 1 for Flute and Piano (1976),” and “Spring Games, a Sonata for Piano Four-hands (2002).

Performing these compositions will be pianist Michael Clement, flutist Yvonne Chavez Hannsbrough, and baritone, Steven Marking, with Sten Yngvar Isachsen playing guitar and Vladimir Plesakov and Elena Winther as duo pianists.

A Gala Reception after the concert, hosted by Alexandra and Samuel Spivy will be held at Fox Point, their home on Albany Avenue in Kinderhook.. All proceeds will benefit Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth.

Tickets for the concert alone are $35. Sponsor tickets for the concert and the reception are $100 each. Benefactor tickets, which include special priority seating, will cost $150.00.

To place your order, send your check to KNGG with a note indicating the number of places you wish to reserve and at which price. Tickets will be held to be given out at the door on day on the concert.

NOVEMBER 10, 2004
SAVE OUR CODE!

BY SUPPORTING KNGG and ARTICLE 78

McGIVNEY NOMINATES KRISHP LEADER to CHAIR CORRIDOR STUDY

At Monday night’s Town Board meeting Supervisor Doug McGivney tried to appoint Bob Cramer KRISHP (Kinderhook Neighbors in Support of Hannaford Plaza) leader to the new post of Chairman of the Corridor Study Committee. (This is like putting the fox into the hen house!) For a reason unknown to us, the Town Board tabled the appointment.

It now appears as though McGivney wishes to give the corridor away along with our town code. Cramer has no credentials for this post except to push hard campaigning to get Widewaters approved and sit on the Planning Board for nine months as an alternate. (We add that Cramer was asked and has recused himself along with KNGG member Cheryl Gilbert re Widewaters.) It’s beginning to look more and more like Widewaters is getting more than the 19 Acres originally sought.

The US9/NY9H Corridor Study was born at KNGG meetings in September of 2002 when Marilyn Kaplan and Meg Moran presented detailed plans for a corridor study to the members. Some KNGG members attended corridor study seminars in E. Greenbush. The Membership decided that this would be an important step the Town should take and voted unanimously to make the corridor study a KNGG priority. Marilyn Kaplan and Joanne Gans presented a proposal to the Town Board and it was passed, but tabled. The Town tried for a state grant to fund the study but it was turned down.

OPENINGS ON CORRIDOR STUDY COMMITTEE

If you are interested in serving as chair or committee member, please drop a line to Supervisor McGivney and include a brief resume. Send to Town Hall, PO Box P, Niverville NY 12130. Be sure to let us know you did so we can follow up.

NO LONGER a QUESTION of FLAT ROOF vs. HIP ROOF

It is NOW a question of SAVING OUR CODE.

KNGG challenges this ZBA variance determination because of precedence. The ZBA would have to give the same variance to all big box entities in future. This will weaken our zoning code forever. By law, precedence rules on ZBA area variance determinations. The ZBA will be reduced to rubber-stamping variances approvals on architectural design.

HELP US SAVE OUR ZONING CODE!

We need your support in this effort to be sure that our planners carry out the process as set down by law and in a just manner.

We need your support TO SAVE OUR CODE.

To save Kinderhook from additional sprawl, we urge you to contribute to the Article 78 action today.

Your donation to KNGG is tax deductible as allowed by law.

KNGG is a 501(C)(3) not-for-profit corporation.

HELP US SAVE OUR ZONING CODE. . .

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TODAY!

OCTOBER 27, 2004

TO All Members:

Parking is prohibited on Route 9H from Keegan Rd. North to the US9 Intersection.

This was done because many residents complained tractor-trailers were parked on that stretch making it dangerous and difficult to enter 9H from Old Post Road or from Stewart's and McDonalds.

Trucks have now been seen parking in the center turn lane near Stewart's and McDonalds. This makes for a stronger case against Dunkin' Donuts. None of these facilities are equipped to handle the large trucks, yet are becomming more and more of a truck stop.

If you are passing the area and you see large trucks illegally parked

anywhere on 9H between Keegan Road and the Intersection of US9 . . .

please note exactly where,

the time of day and date you saw this.

Please e-mail this information to us.

It's not necessary to get plate numbers.

We are keeping a tab on the frequency the violations to make our case even stronger.

The following letter letter was sent yesterday to Supervisor McGivney and

Chairman Simonsen of the Town Planning Board.

Via email and Hand Delivery

October 27, 2004

Hon. Douglas McGivney, Supervisor

Ed Simonsen, Chairman Town Planning Board

Members of the Planning Board

Town of Kinderhook

P. O. Box P

Niverville NY 12130

RE: New place for illegal tractor-trailer parking near Stewart’s and McDonald’s

Dear Supervisor McGivney and Chairman Simonsen:

At approximately 11:15 Monday morning, while driving north on NY 9H just prior to the US9 intersection, I noticed that the “No Parking” signs have been replaced by “No Stopping” signs. I believe that “No Standing” signs were asked for because they would be more restrictive. Which would be the more restrictive “No Stopping” or “No Standing?”

I understand the danger posed by trailer trucks parking on this stretch of road causing difficulty entering/exiting McDonald’s and Stewart’s. A similar situation exists on the west side of NY 9H for people exiting Old Post Rd. Today I noticed that the “No Parking” signs on the west side of NY 9H have been removed and not replaced.

On Monday, much to my dismay, I saw two south bound tractor-trailers parked, with their flashing lights on, in the center turn lane near McDonald’s and Stewarts. The drivers could not be seen and it obviously wasn’t an accident or a blown tire. Two drivers had illegally parked their trailer trucks to take advantage of the fast food and/or bank amenities.

This is most likely a police problem and I suggest Supervisor McGivney to ask the local police to keep a closer watch on the area. One truck illegally parked here will give others ideas.

I see no place for these big trucks to park while using the facilities of McDonald’s, Trustco Bank and Stewarts. Like water seeking its level, so will these trucks. We prohibit them from parking on the shoulders and they go to the center turn lane.

Both US9 and NY9H are heavily trafficked by these large trucks. Their drivers find these facilities attractive for a rest stop and will continue to do so. This problem will not go away. It will increase as the traffic will and the police cannot be there at all times.

There seems to have been no foresight by our traffic engineers who advised approval of McDonald’s and Stewarts where parking space is lacking, not only for tractor-trailers, but for automobiles as well.

What disturbs me even more is the proposed Dunkin’ Donuts site next to McDonald’s. As a fast food vendor, they will attract additional truckers. Where will they park their rigs? Illegally in the center turn lane as well? The Dunkin’ Donuts’ parking area, as planned, has hardly enough room for cars, never mind a tractor-trailer or two.

I recently stopped for gas and a donut at the Mobil Station at the NY9H and Route 66 intersection in Ghent. There was a large tractor-trailer unloading goods (many cartons, etc) for Dunkin’ Donuts. It appears that there is no room planned at the proposed Kinderhook facility for tractor-trailer deliveries. Will they be expected to park illegally and so close to the planned roundabout on NY 9H while they unload?

We cannot discriminate against the trucker. Before this gets out of hand and we start getting law suits from truckers and from vendors that may claim we are keeping their customers away, I ask Mr. Simonsen and the Planning Board to please take a good look at the Dunkin’ Donuts situation. The donut shop will have outgrown its parking spaces soon after opening. If approved, more tractor-trailers will park dangerously in the NY9H center turn lane.

We already have a dangerous situation as vehicles try to maneuver in and out of Stewart’s, Trustco and McDonald’s into the north and southbound traffic on NY 9H.

Adding another fast food restaurant to this grouping will only add to the current dangers. And with the reality of the area being used more and more as a truck stop, it would be most advisable for Dunkin’ Donuts to find a more suitable location. To avoid compounding the parking issues for this area, I ask the Planning Board to turn the Dunkin' Donuts' project down.

Sincerely,

Allen Schaefer, President

cc: Jeff Baker

PLEASE KEEP YOU EYE OPEN FOR

ILLEGALLY PARKED TRUCKS ON 9H

Thanks to all who have contributed so far in our current fundraising campaign.

It isn't over yet, so if it slipped your mind, please send in your check today.

Rejoin NOW for 2005!



OCTOBER 25, 2004

ENCOURAGED!

Dear Member:

We are encouraged by the contribution response we are receiving from you for the Article 78 fundraiser and the new membership enrollments that have been attracted to the KNGG Mission. The Board of Directors has voted to go ahead and we have advised our attorney, Jeff Baker at Young Sommer…LLC to proceed with Article 78.

A big THANK YOU to all of you who have given to this just cause so far and to those who are giving time to make it work.

However the amount we received is not enough to complete the action. We still need more contributions to continue. If you forgot to drop your check in to the preaddressed envelope, please do it today. Every check counts. Every check adds up.

KNGG is a 501(C) (3) not-for-profit corporation.

Your contribution to KNGG is tax deductible as allowed by law.

We will have some exciting events news coming soon! If you would like to join the Events Committee, please send us an e-mail or leave a message at 518 758-2646.

Allen Schaefer, President

OCTOBER 20, 2004

FUNDRAISER UPDATE

If you haven’t mailed in your check, there’s still time! Please do so soon.

The KNGG flyer is in today’s mail with a return envelope. Please take advantage of it.

Perhaps you’d prefer to give something now and pledge an additional amount to keep the action going to be paid in one month's time. - For example we have received checks for $XX.00 with a pledge for an additional $XX.00 after the first of the month.

Whatever you choose, please put your contribution to Article 78 in the mail today. We need to have it soon. We need to know we can count on it.

THE REGISTER STAR TODAY

“Officials Denounce KNGG.”

Mary Kramarchyk, Town Board member and liaison to the ZBA commented, “There was no way to make a Widewaters project please everyone.”

This is just the point. Code enforcement is not a popularity contest. Good planning not a question of pleasing. It starts with enforcing the code that has been designed to protect our town. The ZBA did not do its job in that respect.

Doug McGivney, Town Supervisor, is quoted as saying, “They sent some nasty letters to some awfully good people…”

Letters sent out by the KNGG Board of Directors, all of which have been printed in these pages, have criticized the actions of some Town Officials. Town Officials should expect their actions, especially if not responsible, to be open to criticism. Is McGivney saying that if we write something that is not agreeable to him and some other officials it is “nasty?”

However this ZBA did not do its job. If the application in front of them did not comply with the code it should simply be denied. Then the applicant has a choice, come back with plans in compliance to the code or drop the project.

This ZBA had no right to make this determination without the advice of a qualified architect that was not in the developer’s pocket.

KNGG and Alvin Knoll tried to help the ZBA by submitting alternate plans for Widewaters’ roof and showed them that a traditional-type roof could be built using Widewaters’ footprint and could be built in compliance with the code. Instead of taking a good look, the ZBA kept the hearing closed and gave in to Widewaters demands, which hadn’t changed since day one. There was never any negotiation between the ZBA and Widewaters. The variance was simply rubber stamped by three out of the five ZBA members.

This is not responsible planning for Kinderhook.

The Register-Star quotes the ZBA Resolution on the matter of the variance as saying, “We are not a legislative body. We have no authority to change zoning laws, to make new zoning or to change the boundaries of districts. We have no authority to modify an application that is in front of us.”

This ZBA did not do its job. If the application in front of them does not comply with the code it should simply be “variance denied.” Then the applicant has a choice, come back with plans in compliance to the code or drop the project. Sometimes a compromise can benefit both parties. There was none. Widewaters was given exactly what it wanted.

In actuality, KNGG and Alvin Knoll tried to help the ZBA by submitting alternate plans for Widewaters’ roof and showed them that a traditional-type roof could be built using Widewaters’ footprint and could be built in compliance with the code. Instead of taking a good look, the ZBA kept the hearing closed and gave in to Widewaters demands, which hadn’t changed since day one. There was never any negotiation between the ZBA and Widewaters. The variance was simply rubber stamped by three out of the five ZBA members.

KNGG stands behind Alvin Knoll and his designs.

These renderings can be seen on our web site – go to “ARTICLE 78” and click on “KNGG Renderings.”

To see Knoll’s letter referred to in this article, click on “Knoll Speaks Out.”

To see what other local architects have said about this project, click on, “Architecture Evaluation.”

KNGG is a 501[C][3] not-for profit corporation.

Your contribution to KNGG is tax deductible as allowed by law.

"Over many years of my architectural practice I have appeared before a number of ZBAs and architectural review boards in different communities. Their focus was always on meeting the requirements of their code rather than being quick to grant a variance and ignore professional advice and proofs that indicated the variance was uncalled for. Kinderhook deserves better.” – Alvin Knoll, Architect – Valatie NY – 10/14/04

OCTOBER 17, 2004

RE: ARTICLE 78

WE NEED TO BEAT THE CLOCK!

The Statute of Limitations is running out . . .

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE GENEROUSLY TODAY

SO WE MAY CONTINUE TO PROCEED.

KNGG is a 501[C] [3] not-for-profit Corporation.

Your contribution is tax deductible as allowed by law.

Your contribution to KNGG will help us continue to fight badly planned

development, and to work with our local officials to succeede in our mission.

THIS IS NO LONGER A QUESTION OF A FLAT ROOF

Vs. A HIP ROOF ON A BIG BOX.

It is a question of whether or not our public boards are following

SEQRA and obeying the law.

It is a question of justice and integrity.

It is a question of precedence in zoning.

It is a question of not weakening our zoning code.

It's a question of standing up for our rights and justice.

INDEPENDENT EDITORIAL IN POOR TASTE

The Editor of the Independent says, “The wiser path for KNGG lies in restraint and positive action.”

For 2½ years KNGG HAS taken positive action. But we are now being closed out of the process. It becomes suspicious when the ZBA keeps a hearing closed and does not want to hear additional evidence prior to the making of their decision.

KNGG Board Member Meg Moran was on the Comprehensive Plan Committee, served on the Planning Board, is a member of the Kinderhook Democratic Committee and is a practicing attorney. Meg was at the ZBA “Special Meeting for Widewaters” on the night of September 23^rd when the ZBA made their determination.

Meg tells us, “There were several problems that occurred that night, procedurally and otherwise. We are not just pursuing legal technicalities, but we are strongly objecting to a process that was significantly and fundamentally flawed.”

Knowing this, KNGG would not be fulfill its mission if we stepped aside and allowed it to nicely slide by. Our public elected and appointed officials must learn to be accountable for what they do and how they proceed.

Unfortunately, in New York State there is no other appeals process for us. We must pursue an Article 78. We cannot let ourselves be pressured into silence because it would be the “nice” and “friendly” to go. This is not personal attack of any kind. It is an appeal of the way in which the ZBA arrived at irs decision.

We do find it interesting that the Editor of the Independent found room for Kinderhook Town Board Member, Mary Kramarchyk’s letter also telling us to not disturb the status quo, but did not find room to print KNGG’s complaint of its misquote.

MARY KRAMARCHYK’S LETTER
Mary Kramarchyk, Kinderhook Town Board Member, says KNGG will go to court because they are disappointed in the outcome. One doesn’t go to court over “disappointment” of a decision.

The reason for KNGG’s decision to go to court is that we strongly object to a process that was significantly and fundamentally flawed as Meg Moran stated above.

Kramarchyk is misquoting our web site. We are not “going to court to block the project.” We are going to court for a reversal in the ZBA determination.

“Turning to the courts in an attempt to overturn the decisions of our town leaders will be counter productive,” Kramarchyk says. Counter productive to whom? The courts were set up for this reason. Unfortunately there is no other appeals process. We are going to court to seek justice on a process that was significantly and fundamentally flawed.

This is not a, “my way or no way” action by KNGG. Nor is it a “rear guard attempt to overturn valid and thoughtful conclusions reached by these two boards.” This is our way of seeking justice.

To be clear, KNGG is NOT suing the Planning Board. Article78 is to be filed against he Town ZBA and Widewaters. We want to work with our “leaders” but we also expect them to follow prescribed legal procedures in making these determinations.

Ms Kramarchyk's letter is nothing more than a false argument to try to make people feel unjustified guilt for standing up and encouraging good government and responsible action of the leaders of our community.

Your contribution is tax deductible as allowed by law.

Your contribution to KNGG will help us continue to fight badly planned

development, and to work with our local officials to succeede in our mission.

Thank you!

                                        KNGG is a 501(C) (3) not-for-profit Corporation

OCTOBER 13, 2004

INDEPENDENT - “WE DO NOT PRINT RETRACTIONS”



The editor of the Independent, Parry Teasdale, told me today on the telephone that the Independent stands by their reporter’s notes and do not print retractions. He has agreed to publish our letter in full. The following is our letter to the editor of the Independent regarding their misquote.

KNGG DOES NOT “HATE”

To the Editor:

I strongly take exception to the front-page article of the October 13 edition of the Independent where I was grossly misquoted. I never used the word “hate.” KNGG does not “hate” anyone and we do not condone the use of such language in civic affairs. Nor do I believe that those that disagree with us hate us. We strive for dialogue with reasonable discourse.

We advocate educating the community to weigh the consequences of poorly planned development and by presenting information and alternative approaches to support public officials in making sound decisions that guide the Town’s development. This can only be accomplished with understanding, not hate.

KNGG will be seeking judicial review of the ZBA’s decision, because we believe that it was a legally indefensible action. However, our legal actions are without malice and are not intended to divide the community.

I am extremely saddened that the Independent’s reporter so clearly misquoted me and that the Independent has not seen fit to print a retraction.

We all make mistakes at times and I would hope the Independent is not so imbued with self-appointed infallibility to refuse to recognize that its reporters could make a mistake.

To the residents of Kinderhook, I apologize for the Independent’s careless reporting and wish to assure you that KNGG does not hate and will continue to work with everyone for the benefit of the Town we love.

Allen Schaefer, President

Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

OCTOBER 12, 2004

"HATE" RETRACTION REQUESTED OF THE INDEPENDENT

Dear KNGG Member:

In today’s Independent Reporter Matt Sheehey misquoted me regarding KNGG members’ feelings about the recent ZBA determination of Widewaters’ flat roof variance. I was quoted as having said, "There's an awful lot of anger -there's an awful lot of hate."

I did not use the word “hate.” From the very beginning of KNGG we were all aware that Kinderhook is not just a small town, but a neighborhood. We have briefed our membership from the beginning on the understanding of others opinions and right they have to them. We advocated educating the community to weigh the consequences of poorly planned development and by presenting information and alternative approaches to support public officials in making sound decisions that guide the Town’s development. There is no option for hate at KNGG.

We understand that in Kinderhook we have our disagreements. With regards to the recent ZBA determination, there is no hate from this group for anyone on the ZBA or for those who supported this decision.

Yes, there is much anger and lack of understanding of how this decision could possibly have been determined. There is disappointment in the way the process was handled and proceeded. It could even be called unbelievable. But the word “hate,” does not enter into the picture for any KNGG member.

In time, our disagreements over the mall will pass as we all move forward. KNGG will move forward to fulfill its mission. For a better understanding, we are arranging more seminars about planning with good growth for our community. We invite all our neighbors to join us.

Allen Schaefer, President

PLEASE SUPPORT ARTICLE 78

This is the other alternative open to KNGG. There is no other appeals process available for us to challenge the recent ZBA determination. The determination process is legally flawed.

It is our right to ask for justice and if the court is the only way, so be it.

We need to be strong and show that we can no longer accept “business as usual.” We must go through with this action to show our officials that we are serious. We want our code enforced and we want to see justice done.

CONTRIBUTIONS to KNGG

are TAX DEDUCTIBLE

as allowed by law.

Please make your check payable to KNGG

and mail to KNGG, PO Box 424, Kinderhook NY 12106

If you wish the total amount of your check to go towards the Article 78 Action, please write “ART78” in the lower left of the check. Thank you.

OCTOBER 9, 2004

CITIZEN PRESSURE AND PARTICIPATION ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOLS

IN THIS ONGOING FIGHT.

Dear Member:

In August the Town of Kinderhook Planning Board unwisely approved the application for Widewaters Commons without considering several adverse impacts.

For over two years, KNGG members attended all board meetings, wrote countless letters, and argued repeatedly that the proposed development was unsafe and would harm community character. We believe that the Planning Board should have turned the project application down when it became clear that the well-documented significant adverse impacts of the development could not be adequately mitigated. Instead the board relied on recommendations by experts that several of its own members criticized as variously unreliable and inadequate. The board passed the buck and approved the project. Nevertheless, KNGG’s efforts did make a difference to the outcome:

1. The organization advocated successfully for the placement of a conservation easement on the back 9 acres of the parcel, limiting the development to the front 10 acres only. BUT THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT MAY BE IN DANGER. (KNGG is certain that Widewaters intends to increase the size of the shopping mall in a second stage.)

2. Reports by KNGG’s lighting and landscaping experts helped to improve the specifications put forward by the developer.

3. Under pressure from KNGG, Widewaters dropped one 15,000 square foot building from its plan.

There is still a battle to fight. And we must fight it to show our appointed boards and elected officials that they can no longer ignore procedure and bow to the pressure of outside corporate muscle or anything else.

On September 23, in spite of the designs architect Alvin Knoll provided illustrating that a peaked roofline could be built in compliance with the Town Code, the Kinderhook Zoning Board of Appeals voted 3-2 to grant Widewaters’ roofline variance so its 62,192 ft south building could have a flat roof.

Because the ZBA failed to meet the legal standards required to grant an area variance, KNGG must pursue an Article 78 action against that board and Widewaters. This suit will show that citizens will no longer accept such sloppy and prejudiced actions on the part of its appointed boards. KNGG is suing to have the determination reversed.

If we do not demonstrate strength now, we imperil future effective dissent.

This action is actually part of a bigger ongoing struggle. We are in the midst of an escalating countywide battle to preserve the character of our communities. Consider recent local newspaper headlines such as: “Residents Concerned Over Land Development; Still Want a Moratorium” (Chatham); “Residents Fear Creeping Development” (Ghent).

The battle to challenge the ZBA decision will take money. To mount the Article 78 against the Town ZBA and Widewaters, we must raise $15,000 to $20,000. Those funds are essential to pay for research and legal fees. And we also need funds to keep KNGG operational.

This is the time to give as generously as you can to KNGG. Please renew your membership for 2005 now so that the organization may continue to fight badly planned development and commercial and residential sprawl that threatens to overwhelm our rural communities.

BECAUSE OF A 30 DAY STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, OUR TIME TO RAISE FUNDS IS SHORT.

FOR A BETTER KINDERHOOK, WE URGE YOU TO SEND IN YOUR TAX DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTION TODAY.

PLEASE HELP US MEET OUR GOAL BEFORE OCTOBER 21st.

Sincerely,

Allen Schaefer, President

Mark Litteken, Treasurer

Alexander Anderson Spivy, Secretary

Abbey Cash

Margaret Moran

Jayne Zinke

The KNGG Board of Directors

OCTOBER 8, 2004

KNGG BOARD SAY’S "GO FOR IT!"

At last night’s special KNGG Membership Meeting called by the Board of Directors, President Allen Schaefer announced that at it’s recent Board of Directors meeting the Board voted unanimously to file an Article 78 Action against the Town ZBA and the Widewaters Group in New York State Supreme Court.

“I would like to point out that KNGG was never to have been a one-issue organization. We understand that Kinderhook is a growing town. We also understand that it can grow and keep its rural and historic character and qualities. That is why the Town Board instituted the New Code with architectural restrictions,” stated KNGG president Allen Schaefer shortly after opening the meeting.

A

Schaefer said that with the exception of Friends of Hudson, KNGG is the only grass roots group of this nature in Columbia County and especially in Kinderhook that has come so far in advocating for good growth. “Now that the Town Board has given the community the tool of the New Code, we must see that it is enforced. We sincerely believe that the ZBA did not do its job.”

a

Treasurer Mark Litteken noted that many of the members in attendance were at the September 23 ZBA meeting and that most everyone there understood what was happening.  Litteken expressed that he felt anger because the variance approval was simply pushed through too quickly without seemingly following legal procedures and that and the ZBA shouldn’t be allowed to do business in this manner.

Many of the membership present at the ZBA on September 23 were dismayed by the way in which the ZBA proceedings were conducted and were angry and hurt that this type of "railroading" was being allowed to happen right here in Kinderhook. Terms such as, "sham, immoral and railroading" came up in conversation throughout the meeting regarding the decision.

One KNGG member even objected to Mark Gold, the ZBA attorney, having left his position on the podium numerous times to confer with Widewaters' attorneys at the back of the room. The member felt it appeared questionable that the ZBA would listen to Widewaters attorneys and not reopen the hearing to hear the KNGG attorney.

Schaefer stated, “For KNGG to maintain its reputation of strength that we cannot give in on this. As a member in good standing put it to me recently, ‘If we do not take this Article 78 Action, we will be perceived as a paper tiger.’”

A

Board Member Meg Moran emphasized, “This action (Article 78) will lay the foundation not only for KNGG but for the Town. We must pursue this action. It will send a strong message to our officials that we are serious and that we intend to continue to follow our mission. We would not be persuing just legal technicalities, but we are objecting to a process that was significantlyand fundamentally flawed."

A

Schaefer stated, “Public officials should be aware that they are expected to be held accountable for their actions as well as their non-actions. Part of our mission is to educate and we will be happy to work with our officials in this way so they could have a better understanding of this in the future. This is the only course of action open to us. We must go forward with it!”

A

KNGG’s environmental attorney Jeff Baker gave the membership a review of how the Article 78 Action works. “We will file with New York State Supreme Court. Because of a statue of limitations the time frame is important. We will need to file by the end of this month. Most of the work on this type of action is paper work and investigation that needs to be done in advance and to be handed in when we file. There were several legal technicalities in the ZBA’s procedure and we have a good chance of winning. Baker estimated cost for the action for KNGG would be approximately $15,000 to $20,000.

A

Meg Moran pointed out, “Even if we don’t win, it’s important to get our statement out that we are here, we will continue to watch and we will act appropriately. We have every intention of seeing that our code is enforced. This not only a question of architecture, it’s a question of precedence. This is the first large development to apply under the New Code. If it is not enforced now, it will be difficult to enforce it in the future. It is not fair to our smaller local developers to have to honor our code and let the big ones muscle their way in as they please.”

A

There were many intelligent observations and questions by the members asked of Jeff Baker and the Board.

Baker explained that most of the charges are billed as the work continues but that we must remember that most of the work is the preparation prior to the filing. The court procedure usually has no appearances by any of the attorneys. It is usually all paperwork reviewed by a judge.

A

99.5 percent of those present supported the KNGG Board's decision enthusiastically. However there were questions and doubts as to whether KNGG could raise the funds.

A

Meg Moran reminded the group, “Early on we raised $10,000 in eight days to support what we were doing. We now have a good reputation among many residents and we should be able to do this.”

A

Schaefer pointed out, “We got some pledges before the board made its decision. Ally Spivey pledged $1000 towards the Article 78. All we need are 20 Allys! But to be honest, Kinderhook is a diverse community and I certainly understand that we cannot all give as much as we’d like, but what we can afford. With this in mind, we went forward in the past and it worked for us.”

A

Schaefer continued, “Tonight I have filled out an application form for a $50.00 2005 Family membership. This will help keep KNGG operational. I am also giving $200 towards the article 78.” Schaefer presented a check for $250 to Treasurer Mark Litteken with an additional pledge or $250 due in one week’s time.

John Corrigan explained how important it is that everyone feel included no matter what the amount of their donation. All agreed.

A

Schaefer explained that once most of the money is in, and once we feel we can estimate how much we can earn, based on the in coming checks, we can make a final determination to go this route. If you want your check designated for Article 78 only, please indicate it in the lower left corner of the check with "ART 78."

Schaefer exclaimed, "I know we can raise these funds. We just have an urgency of doing so much more quickly than in the past.”

A

Understanding the urgency, John Picket and a few others offered to call everyone they knew to ask them to send in checks. If anyone else would like to join in doing the same, please e-mail or call.

A

In closing Schaefer said, “We have all worked hard to get KNGG to where we are today, recognized and respected. I am optimistic that we can raise the funds we need. And reminded all that that contributions are tax deductible as allowed by law.

A

OTHER NEWS

Allen Schaefer announced, “It gives me great pleasure to welcome Jayne Zinke as a new member to the Board of Directors. “We are delighted to have Jayne, an outstanding life long citizen of the Town of Kinderhook, with us.”

“Unfortunately, for health reasons, Deirdre Leland, has had to give up her position as Secretary. We will miss Deirdre very much and hope to welcome her back in the future.”

The Board has appointed Ally Spivey as Secretary until the board is reorganized. Ally graciously accepted.

STAY TUNED FOR MORE INFORMATION ON ART78.

OCTOBER 2, 2004

SIMONSEN and SCHAEFER EVALUATE WIDEWATERS

Recommended reading for KNGG Members:

In an article in today’s Register-Star, Ed Simonsen Town Planning Board Chairman and Allen Schaefer KNGG President give their opinion on the evaluation of the Widewaters application process.

THURSDAY - OCTOBER 7^thSPECIAL KNGG MEETING CALLED

McNary Center at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Village of Kinderhook

This will be the most important information meeting we have given to date.

This meeting for all KNGG Members has been called to keep you informed on the feasibility of an Article 78 Action against the ZBA.

The ZBA determination process is legally flawed. We will explain more at the meeting. Our attorney Jeff Baker will be here to answer your questions.

One of the important reasons why we are considering an Article 78, is that we must show our public officials that they need to enforce our zoning code and to recognize that the bucolic, rural and historic beauties of Kinderhook are an asset to our Town that need to be preserved. As we already understand, there is room for growth, but it must be good growth, smart growth, growth that makes a good fit.

This is the only way we have of showing our public officials that the ZBA was incorrect in their determination and that KNGG stands firm on principle.

We need to make this stand to show our elected officials, our appointed officials and the community that KNGG is here to stay and we expect fair play and a concern for the community.

A consideration we must look at is the cost factor. Already, without solicitation, we have received pledges to help us out. We will need to increase the amount of the pledges and we will need your help.

This meeting is very important. We look forward to seeing you there.

We believe "good growth" can be accomplished in Kinderhook. We believe we cannot close our eyes to the way our public officials are misshandling our local government.

SEPTEMBER 28, 2004

SPECIAL ARTICLE 78 MEETING CALLED FOR OCTOBER 7th

Dear Member:

Please save the date! October 7^th, 7:30 PM at the McNary Center.

A special informational meeting has been set for all KNGG Members for Thursday October 7^th. This would ordinarily be our October Quarterly Meeting.

We have called this meeting to keep you informed on The Article 78 Action against the ZBA. The feasibility of this action is seriously being considered by your board of directors.

Numerous legal considerations and procedures were avoided by the ZBA in their approval of Widewaters’ variance on roof design, which we will explain to you at the meeting. Our attorney Jeff Baker will be here to answer your questions.

One of the important reasons we are considering an Article 78, besides the fact that KNGG must show its strength to our public officials, is the fact that they must begin to understand that they need to enforce our zoning code and to recognize that the bucolic, rural and historic beauties of Kinderhook are an asset to our Town that need to be preserved. As you already understand, there is room for growth, but it must be good growth, smart growth.

This is the only way we have of showing our public officials that the ZBA was incorrect in their determination and that KNGG stands firm on principle.

A

Another serious consideration is the cost factor. Already, without solicitation, we have received pledges to help us out. We will need to increase the amount of the pledges and we will need your help in this.

The Board of Directors will be having meetings this week to discuss this matter in depth. Whichever road we choose, it must be the best road for KNGG and the community.

A

This meeting is important to the continuation of our mission. Please mark your calendar for October 7^th. I look forward to seeing you there.

Respectfully yours,

Allen Schaefer, President

IN THE PRESS

Monday, September 27^th – for the second time a week the Register-Star has attacked KNGG policy and this time made legal statements they couldn’t substantiate. Tuesday, The Independent covered the last ZBA determination in considerable depth.





AUGUST 31, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

The politicians, your elected representatives on the Town Board,

believe you either don't care about Widewaters and its controversial roundabout

or

that you changed your mind and want it.

SHOW THEM . . .

THEY MUST EARN YOUR VOTE!

TURN OUT AT THE ZBA HEARING

THURSDAY NIGHT 7:30 pm, TOWN HALL

SUPPORT AL KNOLL'S CLASSIC ROOF DESIGN!

SHOW THE ZBA AND THOSE THAT APPOINTED THEM

THAT YOU DO CARE

AND THAT YOU ARE WATCHING!

DON'T GIVE YOUR VOTE TO SPRAWL!

The following Letter to the Editor went out Monday morning:

PLANNING BOARD SADDLED K'HOOK WITH A BIG BOX

BUT ROOFLINE CAN STILL BE ALTERED

To The Editor:

On August 19th the Kinderhook Town Planning Board voted unanimously to accept
the Widewaters site plan. The elevations (what the buildings are to look like) are part of this site plan.

It is surprisingly odd that this vote, probably the most important vote ever taken by this board, was not a roll call vote. It is also discouraging that Town Board Member Francis Vecellio, appointed by the Town Board as its liaison with the Planning Board, was not at this all important meeting. Vecellio has rarely attended any of the Planning Board meetings since he was appointed in January 2004.

Somehow, in the end, the Planning Board got lost in the trees of developer detail and forgot to step back and consider the whole forest. Hopefully, next time a big-time developer appears in Kinderhook, the board will avail itself of appropriate expert help before it becomes embroiled in the trade-offs and co-opting tactics such developers are so expert in forcing on volunteer boards in small communities.

Diligent attention to detail is praiseworthy, but in this case, the Kinderhook Planning Board forgot the big picture and failed to acknowledge the substantial negative impact on future community character that its decision has now made possible if not inevitable.

Now that Widewaters Commons has been given the green light, we will begin seeing other developers lining up at the door to build more and more big boxes in Kinderhook. Ed Simonsen has already been quoted as saying. "There are rumors of other
big developers” waiting in the wings.

There are still things we citizens can do to make the Widewaters mall a bit better than it is. Buildings 4/4A, one of which is to contain a Hannaford Brothers’ supermarket, is currently designed with no imagination to look like the biggest and most ugly warehouse in Columbia County. These buildings (4/4A) have been designed to be covered by a flat roof. The flat roof design does not comply with the Kinderhook Town Code. Therefore, we must ask why the Planning Board, lead by Ed Simonsen, spent several months helping Widewaters' General Counsel, Marco Marzocchi, design a facade to fit below a flat roof which would not be in compliance with our Town Code?

The vast mass and size of the building cannot be changed. However the roofline can be changed. The people of Kinderhook must come out on Thursday evening, Sept 2, to the ZBA meeting, 7:30, at Town Hall to push for a better roof design. We must explain, once more, that the character of Kinderhook is important to us. We do not want the character of this rural historic town changed to one of sprawl and "the geography of nowhere" that has infected so many other places in our state and our region. We must demand an appropriate roof design that meets the code and does not require a variance.
Widewaters wants a variance from the ZBA so they can build their cheaper flat roof,
claiming that no appropriately designed roof could be built on this building without
raising it at least 55 or more feet. To grant this variance would substantially weaken our Town Code.

Kinderhook-based Architect Alvin Knoll, will present a design to prove that Widewaters is wrong in saying no such roof can be built. Mr. Knoll will prove that the building can be built with a hip roof, similar to the other roofs in the complex. Mr. Knoll will be at the ZBA meeting Thursday night to explain his design.

Now before us we have the important matter of precedence. If the ZBA approves this variance, it would be setting itself up to do so for other big box developers lining up for approval to build in Kinderhook. The Planning Board virtually gave our Town away to big development. We ask the ZBA to save what we have left by not approving this variance.

Respectfully yours,

The Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth Board of Directors

Allen Schaefer, President

Mark Litteken, Treasurer

Deirdre Leland, Secretary

Margaret Moran

Alexandra Spivy

AUGUST 29, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

Will the roundabout with its several unsafe and unresolved issues drive you out of town?

Is Widewaters Commons and its traffic jams with all the other adverse impacts we know of, giving you second thoughts about living in a once tranquil and rural Kinderhook.

Before you make your decision, please read the article below. Besides good information, it will give you some insight into what's going wrong in Kinderhook.

See

HOUSE September 2004



WIDEWATERS SITE PLAN APPROVED

AUGUST 20, 2004

Dear KNGG Members and Friends:

At approximately 10:20 last night, after much clarification of details of the Widewaters site plan, the Kinderhook Town Planning Board voted six to zero to approve the site plan, thus giving Widewaters approval to go ahead with their project subject to outstanding variances and of course special permits.

Planning Board members in attendance were Gerald Minot-Scheuerman, Mary Ellen Hearn, Don Gaylord, Ed Simonsen (Chairman), Richard Anderson and Jim Egnasher.

This vote may not finish the Planning Board’s work on Widewaters Commons. There is a little matter of a roof variance application for the approval of a flat roof for buildings 4 and 4A, for which a Public Hearing at the ZBA will be held on September 2.

And now another variance may also be needed. According to the Planning Board’s calculations, Widewaters is over its signage allotment. Widewaters claims they are not. A motion was made to the effect that if the code were interpreted as the Planning Board sees it, Widewaters would need a variance. Therefore Widewaters has been instructed to apply to the ZBA for an interpretation of the code and depending on the ZBA decision, Widewaters will most likely need another variance.

Immediately following the vote, Ed Simonsen thanked all Planning Board members and other related Town staff for all the extra time they spent at special meetings given to Widewaters during the process. He also thanked members of the public both pro and con for their contributions to the process. Marc Gerstman told KNGG attorney, Jim Muscato, and myself that because KNGG put up such a real good fight, Kinderhook will have a much better shopping center.

KNGG believes if it had not monitored all the Planning Board and ZBA meetings, construction would have started more than a year ago and some of the process may have been skipped, such as the SDEIS that our attorney respectfully demanded.

KNGG was there to see that Widewaters did all required testing and made required changes. KNGG retained an environmental attorney, Jeff Baker, to see that the SEQRA process, the Comprehensive Plan and the Town Code were followed. KNGG retained a geologist to check soil conditions, percolation rates and water testing. KNGG retained traffic experts to check traffic mitigation. For all this, we will have a safer, better-built and better-designed shopping center in Kinderhook.

For example, our traffic engineer pointed out that only the west side of the roundabout has two lanes. Land should have been put aside for the future expansion of the roundabout to become totally two lanes when demand requires it.

KNGG attorney, Jeff baker, pointed out to the Planning Board that there was no room for its expansion unless they took land from local merchants or unless Widewaters gave up land. (Since this is not a state project, but a private project, the state would not take land from local owners.)

Baker insisted that Widewaters give up land. In order to give up land, Widewaters would have to delete one building from their plan and move the restaurant into its place. Surprisingly Widewaters agreed, making the mall 12 percent smaller.

Conditions KNGG requested:

Approved: Widewaters fair share of a traffic light for Main Street Valatie and US Route 9 (when the DOT gets its act together). If the DOT does not start work within 13 years Widewaters would not be required to pay its fair share.

Approved: The Easement for the 8 + acres of green space at the rear of the project and an Easement of green space along the front. Because of the Easements, this land will not be able to be developed any further in the future.

On September 2^ndthe ZBA will review architect Al Knoll's new submission. If the ZBA determines that Knoll’s plans show that a hip roof can be built on Widewaters’ buildings 4/4A without changing the footprint, it will prove that a variance would not be needed and Widewaters would be required to comply with the code and build a hip or gabled roof to retain the historic type architecture now required.

We still believe very much that, “This is the wrong project for the wrong place.” But as long as we are forced to put up with the roundabout and the additional traffic that has not been mitigated to KNGG’s satisfaction, the Town should be given something decent by Widewaters to look at.

There is an important message in all of this for the Town Board. The Town Code is not strong enough to keep out sprawl. The 80,000 square foot limit in the Town Code will only induce more sprawl. At the last minute, as the Town Board was to vote to approve the “new” code, there was dissention from one board member. The code would have limited commercial buildings to 40,000 sq. ft. But Francis Vecillio, we have been told, hijacked the code by refusing to vote in favor of the “new” code unless the square footage allowed was increased to 80,000 sq. ft.

The Town should have learned an important lesson last night. This is the time to change the code back to the 40,000 sq. ft. limit for commercial buildings. Now is the time, before those developers waiting in the wings knock on the Planning Board’s door and file applications.

On September 2^nd, let's all get out to support Al Knoll. As a professional architect, licensed to practice in New York State, he has been most generous with his time working on an alternative design and proof of structure for KNGG.  Al's design will show that a classic gabled or hip roof can be built on Widewaters' footprint. Widewaters claim this is impossible without going up 8 stories. Al can design it for forty feet and he will present it to the ZBA on September 2.

If the ZBA denies the variance, we will not have to look at a big box. We will get a more classic style building. The Planning Board would have to amend their approved site plan to include the new design that Widewaters would be required to submit.

It's been a long two years. We have accomplished a great deal in forming this organization so it will continue working for good growth. We have our new historic places program to be implemented in the near future and other projects to look forward to.

Yesterday's Register-Star stated that Ed Simonsen “heard rumors that other large developers are being considered for proposals in this area.” If Simonsen knows of a rumor of this nature, you can bet that it has some validity.

This is our Town. We will need to continue fighting sprawl to save it. We are now much better prepared to fight sprawl than ever before. We have learned a great deal and are now better equipped for the next battle.

Respectfully,

Allen Schaefer, President

DUNKIN’ DONUTS

Peter Faith, the Towns’ traffic consultant was on hand to answer questions of the board regarding the poor location of the site because of traffic concerns.

Dunkin’ Donuts has once more altered their site plan by decreasing the internal customer floor space so less spaces for cars in the parking lot would be required. Peter Faith noted that Dunkin’ Donuts in a similar structure require 6 to 7 employees. If the new parking lot design would be for only 14 cars, ½ would be used by staff.

Lorraine Muller of Old Post Road which intersects with Route NY 9H near the proposed site complained of tractor trailer trucks parking illegally (sometimes 2-3 at a time) on the west side of NY 9H to use McDonald’s or Stewarts. Quite rightly she asked if Dunkin’ Donuts was prepared to offer off street parking for these trailers. She explained the danger of these parked trucks to people trying to enter NY 9H from Old Post Road. The trucks block the view of on coming traffic.

Others have stated these concerns at previous meetings.

Pat Prendergast, Town Engineer, asked if the parking lot would need to be excavated for repaving. At the January 15, 2004 Planning Board meeting, Prendergast advised the board that before being a computer shop and a bank, this site was occupied by a gasoline station. Prendergast spoke of the time when he was on the property while the parking area was torn up after the gasoline station closed. He told of strong odors of oil and gasoline coming from the opened ground. This needs investigation to check any toxic waste, especially if the parking area is to be moved or repaved.

KNGG attorney, Jim Muscato, stated, “There appears to be a problem with this board in allowing new plans to be submitted to the board at the last minute, especially during a Public Hearing when the public has not had a chance to view them. For this reason, KNGG requests to keep the Public Hearing open to allow us to study the new plans.”

Jim restated Jeff Baker’s concern that Dunkin’ Donuts is not providing for future expansion of their business if they build on this site. When they open, they will be at capacity. As the business grows, it will cause backups on Routes US9 and NY 9H. This is not good planning.

No conclusions were made about Dunkin’ Donuts application and the Public Hearing has been held open as requested by KNGG.

KNGG . . . We’re at work for you.

AUGUST 19, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

Dunkin' Donuts Public Hearing continues tonight at 7:30.

     A determination may be made. You can still make comments and turn in letters.

The Widewaters circus, continues tonight at 8:30.

     Site Plan approval is expected. Although no variance has been granted by the ZBA for a flat roof,

     the site plan can be conditionally approved. If the ZBA denies the variance, the portion of the site

     plan dealing with building 4/4A will have to be redesigned because the elevations are part of the

     approved plan.

The WIDEWATERS STRIP MALL proposal

This development will beget more development. Already we've seen a new Stewarts' and a proposal for a Dunkin Donuts at this intersection.

March 5, 2004 - Sara Richards, Attorney and Member of the KNGG Board of Directors

TO BACK THIS STATEMENT UP . . .

Town Board members speculated that once the Hannaford (WIDEWATERS?) project is done, the workload for the Planning Board will decrease. (Ed) Simonsen (chairman) said he's heard rumors that other large developments are being considered for proposal in this area. (Thus the workload is expected continue as Kinderhook is once more threatened.)

Register-Star - August 19, 2004

KNGG has been advising the Planning Board and the ZBA for two years that if the Widewaters' project is approved, there is more sprawl waiting in the wings. They are watching and expecting to get the same approval as Widewaters.  It's called precedence.

What's next? LOWES? TARGET? WAL-MART? HOME DEPOT? WENDY'S? BURGER KING? How about another DOLLAR STORE?

…But there are concerns by many in the community that this project might be the harbinger of change that would turn Kinderhook’s Route 9 corridor into a twin to East Greenbush’s Route 9 corridor. We share those concerns.

Register-Star Editorial, May 30, 2003

KNGG's attorney has supplied the Planning Board with findings that it could use to turn the project down.

KNGG FINDINGS ON THIS PROJECT MAY BE SEEN BY GOING TO "KNGG FINDINGS"                         at www.KNGG.org

The addition of a roundabout to mitigate traffic for Widewaters

will further degrade this gateway into our community. Despite the fact that DOT says that it may technically be "safe," four of the five legs are within 180 degrees at its southern half and large trucks require two lanes to navigate the turns and could cut off traffic in the other lane. This roundabout is not in keeping with the character of The Town of Kinderhook.

May 28,2004, Allen Schaefer, President of KNGG

Be sure to visit our ROUNDABOUT Chapter

See "ROUNDABOUT" at www.kngg.org

   KNGG - We're at work for you.



August 14, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

The Register-Star - August 13, 2004 reports:

Planning Board OKs Widewaters environmental plan

(NOT SO – SAYS KNGG. Once again, the Register-Star gives us a misleading headline. – THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVED ITS OWN FINDINGS STATEMENT – nothing more – at this time, it is unclear what was in that statement. Here’s what the Register-Star had to say.)

By Joe Prout

NIVERVILLE -- The town Planning Board, in a split vote Thursday, decided Widewaters had done all it could to mitigate the environmental impacts of its proposed shopping center.

However, sticking to tradition, the Kinderhook Planning Board decided not to vote on the Widewaters site plan at its voting workshop meeting, instead choosing to wait a week so its special project engineer can review the last of expected wording changes in Widewaters’ plan.

At Thursday's meeting, the board approved the findings in relation to the environmental impact statement. In a motion moved by Don Gaylord and seconded by Tim Ooms, the board agreed that the developer has mitigated as many project impacts as possible to the maximum extent possible.

The vote on the findings was 6 to 1, with Richard Anderson voting against the proposal. Board member Gerry Minot-Scheuermann supported the resolution but blamed the state Department of Transportation for failing to take into account the project's impact on traffic conditions in Valatie.

Minot-Scheuermann said the applicant has mitigated many of the impacts, but the problem at the Valatie intersection still remains. The project is expected to add to traffic and worsen delays for certain turns in the village, and he said the DOT was responsible for proposing a change since it knows the intersection has unacceptable delay limits. He said the DOT didn't do anything about it, even though The Widewaters Group offered to pay its fair share of associated costs.

The Planning Board still has to approve the site plan for the three-building shopping center proposal, located at the intersection of Routes 9, 9H and State Farm Road. Additionally, the Zoning Board of Appeals still has to decide if it will grant the applicant a variance for the flat roof proposed on the larger structures in the center.

The Planning Board had the option to conditionally approve the site plan but opted not to. The members agreed that they would like time to review changes to details they made at the meeting. Additionally, the board noted that it never conditionally approves proposals under these circumstances.

While early indications at the last ZBA meeting suggested the board is leaning toward approving the variance (for a flat roof), it would review the alternate roof design submitted by Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth --a critic of this project-- that reportedly comply with the Town Code (where the Widewaters flat roof does not.)

The ZBA will take up the matter at its September 2^nd meeting. Planning Board special attorney, Marc Gerstman, said the outcome of that vote could significantly change the design of the proposal.

(If the KNGG submission by architect Alvin Knoll to the ZBA is accepted because it works under the Town Code, then building 4/4A where Hannaford would be located would have to be redesigned and the site plan would have to be amended.)

In the meantime, the board reviewed final details, including sign designs for the associated Hannaford grocery store. The board also evaluated a note from the Columbia County Department of Health that suggested additional testing on the parcel’s wells may be needed in the future.

The health department also recommended having the shopping center connect to Valatie’s municipal water system if the village installs a new well in the future. The board discussed ways to make that happen with the applicant.

Valatie officials previously expressed no interest in having the developer attach to the village water system.

COMMENTARY by Allen Schaefer:

I was unable to be in attendance at this meeting. However, I do not understand why the Planning Board is handing Kinderhook to Widewaters on a silver platter. Are there great tax revenues to be gained? NO!

At the last Planning Board meeting, Chairman, Ed Simonsen brought out the fact, (KNGG has stated all along) that this 10 million dollar project was expected to give the Town only 65 thousand dollars per year in school taxes. To be blunt, but honest, Simonsen went on to state that this would hardly pay the salary for one teacher.

It is only common sense that if this Planning Board cannot find a way to keep Widewaters and all of its ADVERSE IMPACTS out of Kinderhook, even when KNGG, with its independent studies, has provided many valid reasons to do so, the Planning Board should demand some amenities from this exploiter to make up for the adverse IRREVERSIBLE impacts it is creating.

In this respect, we praise Gerry Minot-Scheuerman for trying to persuade his fellow board members to insist that Widewaters put in a traffic signal (or pay its fair share as Widewaters had proposed) at the already “failing” intersection of US9 and Main Street in Valatie. At this time it is almost impossible to make a left turn on to Route 9 from Main Street.

However we find it difficult to understand why, in the end, Gerry voted to accept the Findings. A brave Richard Anderson was the only member to vote against the Findings and to find them inadequate.

We have seen that most of the members of this board are concerned for the future of Kinderhook and how it will look to future generations.   However, it was no surprise to hear that Don Gaylord, who has all along been pushing to get Widewaters approved, made the motion to accept the findings which was seconded by Tim Ooms.

It is beyond my comprehension to understand why the others, especially Ed Simonsen and Mary Ellen Hearn, agreed to this as well. They both seem to pride themselves in wanting what is environmentally good for Kinderhook. It can’t be good for Kinderhook to approve the beginnings of sprawl in this historic rural community. It can't be good to lose what we have and follow most of the nation down the path to sprawl. It can't be good for Kinderhook to lose its views to the Catskills to a Hannaford super market, no matter how it is designed.

It is time for the Planning Board to take a good look at the adverse impacts of this project before it is too late.

YOUR PRESENCE IS NEEDED AT THESE MEETINGS

August 19 – 7:00 PM – Planning Board meets to determine Conditions to accept the Widewaters project.

Dunkin’ Donuts – Public Hearing Concludes – Possible determination to be made

September 2 – 7:30 PM – ZBA Meets – Will review Al Knoll’s drawings and make a determination on Widewaters’ flat roof variance

JULY 30, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

IMPORTANT MEETINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK

Monday - Aug 2 - Town Hall 7:00 PM - PB -Special meeting for Widewaters

     Work on PB Findings Statement continues.

Thursday - Aug 5 - Town Hall 7:30 PM - ZBA - public hearing - Widewaters roof pitch

     If you haven't spoken at public hearings or even if you have, please come out to support KNGG at the ZBA against Widewaters' request not to comply with our zoning code with their big box roof. Written comments being accepted by the ZBA till Aug 5.

AT THE LAST KNGG MEMBERSHIP MEETING

KNGG Quarterly Meeting

July 26, 2004-7:30 PM, McNary Center, Kinderhook NY 12106

After the opening and short business meeting, KNGG attorney, Jeff Baker briefed the membership in detail on Widewaters and Dunkin' Donuts.

The outstanding issues on Widewaters are:

1. There is a good chance that the Widewaters project could be turned down. (We, the membership will need to work at it.)

2.     To mitigate the destruction by Widewaters of the natural habitat the Planning Board should and can require Widewaters to make a conservation easement for the rear 9 acre parcel on the Widewaters property. There needs to be a true measure of protection through a designated conservation easement. Widewaters’ proposal for a note on the site plan could be changed at a later date but an easement could not. Jeff suggested that the Columbia County Land Conservancy or similar organization take over the easement if it is granted.

3.     The traffic light at Routes 9 and Main Street, Valatie should be installed before Widewaters is granted a Certificate of Occupancy. The intersection is failing now according to DOT and will be much worse if the proposed mall is approved.

4.     The roof design of the Hannaford building in the mall is before the Town ZBA. Widewaters does not want to conform to our code and seeks a variance. The public hearing at the ZBA is August 5 at 7:30 PM

Jeff feels these issues could cause Widewaters to withdraw its application if the Planning Board is insistent on them being corrected and/or accepted. Or the lack of mitigation on these issues would be grounds for the Board to deny the project.

Dunkin’ Donuts was denied two variances at the ZBA. They were not allowed expanded signage or change in lot coverage. Jeff feels the Planning Board is concerned about this project because it is too big for the available space. The Dunkin’ Donuts data shows that they would be at maximum capacity upon opening with no option for growth. This would create gridlock within and outside the site.

There were several questions from members to clarify points that Jeff made.

Action points for the members to pursue were then discussed.

It was asked that KNGG members call Planning Board members about the issues discussed. (The calls should be based on KNGG Findings now available on our web site. Attendance at Planning Board and ZBA meetings was also encouraged.

Future plans for KNGG include:

1.     Involvement in the Town Tree Board to provide more trees throughout the Town.

2.     Education for the community about moratoriums on commercial building and subdivisions and the need for a corridor study of Routes 9/9H.

3.     Active involvement in historic preservation in the Town using Ruth Piwonka’s Historic Resources in the Town of Kinderhook publication as a guide. Many historic properties have been identified by Ms. Piwonka but have not been designated as landmarks or put on the List of National Historic Places. Ms Piwonka has volunteered to help with this effort.

Monday Night's meeting was "up" and there was healthy dialogue between the membeship and Jeff Baker. We wish to thank Deirdre Leland and Frank Rheiner for their help arranging for the McNary Center, setting up and providing refreshments. Thank you.

TO PERSUADE THE PLANNING BOARD TO DENY THE WIDEWATERS PROJECT . . .

WE NEED YOUR HELP.

1.   Call Planning Board members. Let them know that you want the project denied and why. Your call should be based on KNGG Findings at www.kngg.org. We prefer that you be assertive rather than aggressive. Planning Board members are our appointed representatives and they will listen. Please remember that they are volunteers as well.



Planning Board Members:

Ed Simonsen, Chairman-392-9216

Richard Anderson-758-6433

Gerry Minot-Scheuerman-758-1893/7632

Mary Ellen Hern-784-2322

Don Gaylord-758-6926

Mike Leiser-758-6975

Tim Ooms-758-7296

2.   Put out a lawn sign.

To get your sign, please call:

John Picket- 758-7520 DAILY

Sue Chiafullo- 758-2944 WEEKENDS

Muriel Gibbons- 758-9296 DAILY

3.   Write:

The Independent

letters@indenews.com

The Register-Star

editorial@registerstar.com

THE CHATHAM COURIER

ccourier@localnet.com

Let us know how you make out with your calls and what you think the reaction was.

JULY 21, 2004

Dear KNGG Member:

I would like to thank all of you who have mailed in your check to either renew your KNGG membership for 2004 or for an additional contribution. Support for KNGG is critical at this time as we get nearer to the day of the final Planning Board vote on Widewaters and Dunkin’ Donuts.

WE know you are with us. But some decision makers do not. It is vital, if you want to defeat Widewaters, that you put your lawn sign out, showing the Planning Board and other Town officials that you support KNGG. NO MALL! NO ROUNDABOUT! A lawn sign could swing the vote! Some Town Officials believe there is little support for KNGG’s strategy. We need to prove to them that they are wrong. We have lots of support, but we must show it. We haven’t much time left.

If you would like a sign for your lawn or for a neighbor, please call:

John Picket - 758-7520

Ally Spivey – 758-1426

Muriel Gibbons – 758-9296

Sue Chiafullo – 758-2944 (Saturday and Sundays only)

These good people will arrange for you to have a sign. And they’re free!

Please remember our MEMBERSHIP MEETING.

Monday, July 26^th – 7:30 PM – The McNary Center, Sylvester St., Village of Kinderhook

Jeff Baker will be on hand to update and explain recent happenings. He’ll also take questions. Please introduce a friend or neighbor to KNGG. I look forward to seeing you there.

Allen Schaefer, President

IN TODAY’S INDEPENDENT

Holes Seen in Donuts Data

By Matthew Sheehey

“When you have traffic queued up, you’ll actually have a mini-roundabout within a roundabout.”

Diane Whelton

KNGG

For the full story, see page one of today's Independent.

JULY 18, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

It is important for all members attend the next KNGG Quarterly Meeting On July 26th. Important information will be discussed regarding the Widewaters and Dunkin’ Donuts application. We’ll be announcing our new focus to commence this autumn.

We look forward to seeing you July 26th. Please bring a friend who is interested in saving rural and historic Kinderhook.

IMPORTANT EVENTS - COMING SOON

Monday, July 26^th – 7:30 PM – KNGG Quarterly Meeting

          McNary Center, Village of Kinderhook

Environmental attorney, Jeff Baker will explain recent Widewaters and

          Dunkin’ Donuts’ developments and take questions.

          New focus

Monday, Aug. 2^nd – Planning Board special voting meeting for Widewaters

Proposed Agenda – to work on findings statement Aug. 12^th – address complete file from ZBA – Possible determination on Widewaters’ site plan. Accept ZBA file on Dunkin Donuts

Thursday, Aug. 5^th – ZBA Public Hearing on Widewaters’ roof pitch

Thursday, Aug. 12^th –Planning Board Voting Workshop

Proposed agenda - If Ww findings statement complete, will vote on it

Thursday, Aug. 19^th – Planning Board Meeting – Agenda dependant

           upon what happened at previous meetings with Ww

REGISTER-STAR EVALUATES THURS. PB MEETING

Widewaters asked to dot I's, cross T's

By Joe Prout

Hudson Valley Newspapers, July 17, 2004

KINDERHOOK -- With an eye toward cleaning up details in the paperwork handed in for the Widewaters shopping center proposal, the Planning Board recently reviewed some required site plan changes.

Some of what Jim Green, the Planning Board's special engineer, found during his review of the site plan for the center, to be located at the intersection of Route 9, 9H, and State Farm Road, was that details agreed to by the applicant -- some written on previous plans and some that were omitted -- had to be on the most recent plan for the project lest they be forgotten and potentially skipped.

Green read a list of plan updates that he advised the board should be certain are included on the final site plan for Widewaters.

Green started his presentation by noting that there was a discrepancy in what the Planning Board expected and what the applicant wrote for cross access. This access – a matter that the applicant was not in favor of – was to be included to provide a place for neighboring parcels to connect if they were developed. The correct wording was found elsewhere in the record on this project, and it appeared is was just a matter of having the site plan updated to reflect it.

The most heated exchange of the evening was about whether Widewaters would agree to set aside a conservation easement for a section of property in the southwestern corner dubbed “forever wild.’ Planning Board Chairman, Ed Simonsen, requested that language on the plan notes read that “no additional buildings/structures or building additions shall be added to this site.”

Widewaters representative, Marco Marzocchi, said he felt that language was restrictive enough on future development, but the board noted that anyone could request a site plan amendment in the future, which could allow for more development at this location.

A conservation easement would lock a section of undeveloped land as permanently undevelopable. Marzocchi said he would refuse to allow a conservation easement because some unforeseen future event may require additional construction on that area anyway.

Marzocchi also said he felt the board was “holding (him) over a barrel” on this matter and that it was late in the game to be making such a request.

(KNGG Note: Marc Gerstman, PB attorney, reminded Marzocchi that at the March 25, 2004 meeting, Marzocchi promised an easement, which has not been concluded. Gerstman offered Marzocchi a copy of the minutes.)

Most of the other issues were deemed less worrisome by Green. He said there’s no drainage shown on the plans for the proposed roundabout … The board believed that the water would likely continue to drain as it does now.

Green said he questioned whether the generator for the proposed Hannaford Bros. Store could be moved to a space blocked by a berm, so noise from its use (total use during peak electric hours, meaning most of the summer) would be less noticeable to neighbors. Marzocchi said it had to be where it was designed to coincide with mechanics inside the building.

Green noted that that the plans incorporated 20 foot-tall trees along the western edge of the proposal. He said the trees would likely block the view of the Catskill mountains, which was a concern listed by some opponents (KNGG members) to the project. On the other hand, the trees act as a screening buffer for neighbors. Marzocchi said Widewaters would agree to trim the trees to maintain the view.

After being questioned by Green on low light levels, Marzocchi produced an updated light output chart for a dark area …

The board questioned what the proposed pump house would look like . . .

. . . The board requested additions to the site plan that would include diagrams with dimensions for the pump house and clear images on how the buildings were suppose to look.

Benches and sidewalks on the western end of the property were not drawn on the site plan. Green advised the board to make certain they appear on the final plans.

JULY 17, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

Planning Board Meeting of July 15, 2004

DUNKIN’ DONUTS

The Dunkin’ Donuts Public Hearing began with their attorney presenting a new site plan based on the ZBA variance denials for double the signage allowed and set backs. They were allowed a variance for lot coverage.

This was the first viewing of the revised site plans. Neither the Planning Board nor KNGG had time to analyze the site plan to determine if it now complies with the code.

For this reason, Jeff Baker requested that the hearing be held open until the board and KNGG’s experts have time to study the new plans.

The Planning Board voted to hold the hearing open until the August 19^th meeting.

Because the hearing is still open, the Planning Board is still accepting written comments on this project. If you haven’t written, now is your chance. If you need some ideas, please visit www.KNGG.org. Go to CURRENT ISSUES and click on Dunkin’ Donuts.

WIDEWATERS

The Planning Board’s primary chore was to begin to generate a findings statement. This is the balance sheet that the Planning Board will use to determine denial or approval of the project. It can be used as a legal document in court to prove that the PB had reason to deny or approve.

It is very important for KNGG to give input at this stage. Although this was not a Public Hearing and public comments were no longer being accepted, letters may still be accepted that will not be part of the FEIS.

Planning Board Attorney, Marc Gerstman, made it very clear that this Planning Board has been open and accepting of public comment throughout the Widewaters application process. PB Chairman, Ed Simonsen agreed. Gerstman introduced The KNGG Findings and Conditions Statement to the board. (This statement can be used a guideline for board members to use in creating the PB’s Statement.) Also introduced was a statement created by Widewaters.

A draft statement was also created for the PB by Marc Gerstman (Town Environmental Attorney), Jim Green (Town Engineer) and Shelly Johnston (Town Traffic Engineer) and introduced as well.

The focal point of the evening arrived when Marc Gerstman, in discussing unresolved mitigations, explained to the PB how it could require Widewaters to put the “green space” at the southwest corner of the project under a conservation easement. This should be mitigation for the loss of habitat.

The conservation easement would prohibit Widewaters from putting any structures on it forever. Gerstman explained that Marco Marzocchi offered to put a note on the site plan to the effect that the green space could not be built upon. A future request by Widewaters (or any other future management) could request that the Planning Board or ZBA remove the note. Gerstman stressed that the note is not permanent and recommended a conservation easement that could be held by the Town, the Columbia Land Conservancy or OSI.

Marco emphatically refused to comply. Since Marco offered the note in the first place, it is now obvious that he has no intention of complying with his own offer. The Planning Board must realize that this is not Marco’s call. It is the PB’s call. Should the PB require this condition and if Marco does not comply, there will be no mall and no roundabout.

There was no conclusion or vote taken at this time on the easement. The vote is planned for a special PB meeting set for August 2^nd when it is expected the PB Findings Statement will be completed.

CRAMER, A THORN IN THE PLANNING BOARD’S SIDE

Serving on the board Thursday night was Ed Simonsen, Chairman, Jerry Minot Scheuerman, Jim Egnasher (alternate), Mary Ellen Hern, Richard Anderson and Tim Ooms. Robert Cramer (president of Kinderhook Neighbors in Favor of Hannaford Plaza) had served as an alternate earlier in the evening. Robert was appointed board alternate in January 2004. At this time he recused himself because of a conflict of interest due to his public support of the Widewaters project.

When Widewaters’ portion of the meeting began, he took a seat in the audience. At the end of the meeting, just after Marc Gerstman left for the evening, Mr. Cramer made an opportunity for himself to address the Planning Board. In a loud intrusive voice, he asked the board members, “How could you stoop so low as to accept the KNGG document?”

He continued lecturing the board members for some time, emphasising that the comment period was closed, etc. When Cramer's energy ran down, Jerry Minot Scheuerman quickly moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded and the meeting was adjourned.

Cramer had heard Marc Gerstman explain earlier about the PB being open and the acceptance of the KNGG document as a possible guideling but Cramer conveniently waited till Gerstman was out of the room before he started his performance.



Since Cramer recused himself from the Widewaters application process, he had no right to sit at his temporary planning board seat and address the board about anything to do with the Widewaters application. (He may do so as a member of the public in a public forum as he has done many times in the past.) Robert Cramer should be cited and reprimanded for his unorthodox action and inexcusable poor judgement.

KNGG is a not-for-profit corporation.

Your contribution to KNGG is tax deductible as provided by law.

If you haven’t renewed your membership, please do so by sending your check to KNGG.

Please consider an additional contribution to help our continuing efforts.

KNGG – We’re at work for you.



JULY 15, 2004

FYI

This KNGG e-mail is informational only.

It is too early for KNGG to make any decision or comment on this issue. It is being sent so that our members who reside in the Village of Kinderhook can be made aware of the situation.

Reister-Star today 7/15/04

Faso first to test historic review decision

By Joe Prout
Hudson Valley Newspapers

It is hard to imagine a better test of the controversial landmarks and historic districts law than to have the first person to appeal it be a prominent community resident and to have the primary issue be what, on the very surface, looks like something minor.

In this case, the prominent community resident is the former state Assembly Minority Leader John Faso, a key Republican voice in the assembly who came close to winning a statewide race for the position of New York's comptroller.

Faso, with his wife Mary Frances, came before the Village Board to appeal a recent decision by the historic review commission that related to Faso's house at 14 Sylvester St.

Simply stating the case, Faso wants to change three wooden steps on the house's front to stone. The commission said no.

According to the law, the Village Board has been designated to review appeals. Reviews shall be conducted based on the same record that was before the commission and shall use the same criteria.

Commission chairman Rod Blackburn, reached after the meeting, said the Village Board should have a transcript of their proceedings, which he said will stand as the opinion of the commission. During the initial review of this case before the board, it wasn't immediately apparent if such a transcript was available.

The board started its address of this matter by stating a decision wouldn't be rendered at Wednesday's meeting. Village Attorney Burns Barford did not attend the meeting but requested the exchange between Faso and the board be taped.

Faso told the board he felt the decision to deny the proposal for three blue stone stairs with stone facing was wrong. He said for the last 21 years, they have been trying to restore this house. In that time, they have thrice replaced the wooden steps. He said the stone steps are more practical and there are similar examples in the village and abroad for his type of house.

Faso told the board that the commission's reason for denial was to retain the historic character, and noted that form, texture and material need consistency. Faso said the commission's decision was "arbitrary and capricious," he said he doubted the importance of such a small modification in the grand scheme of historic preservation, and this diminutive change does not change the building's overall historic features.

One of the first criteria established within the landmarks and historic districts law deals with alterations. The law states: "Buildings and structures which contribute to the character of the Historic District shall be retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible."

When addressing compatibility, Blackburn noted that the law states the commission should consider: "Form, texture, material and their relation to the features of the buildings and structures and to similar features of other buildings and structures in the neighborhood."

For Faso's building, trustee Ruth Piwonka noted that it has an architecturally noteworthy deck. Faso and Piwonka have similarly styled buildings, but her house has a smaller version of the same type of deck. The stairs that Faso wants to change lead to that deck. Piwonka's house has wooden steps.

Faso told the board that he has found similarly aged homes in the village and abroad that have stone steps such as the ones he proposes. He pointed out that the church next to his property has similar steps to what he's proposed and they're made of the same material. He said this establishes that such steps exist in the immediate community.

As an example, Faso noted a building in Maine that is on the national historic register has similar steps. He acknowledged it was hard to say who -- if anyone -- approved the local examples he provided, but said it does establish that his proposal would be compatible.

Blackburn said other buildings built or modified before the commission was put in place are immaterial. "Other examples in the village do not constitute precedent," he said, noting that they hadn't been reviewed for appropriateness by the commission.

Blackburn said this commission was established to set what the appropriate, official historic preservation should be for proposed changes to historically significant structures within the village's Historic District.

At one point, Faso questioned whether the law was meant to be this specific, in relation to preservation of certain minor details for the village. "It is not a museum. It is not supposed to be preserved exactly as it was." He later added: "This is not colonial Williamsburg. This is not a village under glass." He said he doubted the law was designed to micromanage every single change a resident wants to make.

A note about glass: Prior to the commission, the village Planning Board often requested that applicants who were changing windows or walls with windows use as much of the existing window materials as possible in new construction.

The law states that the commission members are to have "a significant interest in historic preservation and architecture as evidenced by personal and/or professional involvement, or similar evidence of interest in local history or historic preservation organizations, employment in the field of historic preservation (such as architecture, building trades, or history), and/or education and training in the field of architecture, history, archaeology, historic preservation or related fields."

The current commission members were approved by the Village Board, with their credentials announced at the meeting in which the members were set.

During her time before the commission, Mary Frances said he wasn't provided a copy of the law. Faso said guidelines for appropriateness weren't ready. Blackburn said the commission uses guidelines, Piwonka said they are in the process of being released.

This version of the law is less strict than what some board members desired. Earlier versions of the law included regulations on paint colors and included commission regulation over proposed changes for all sides of a house and other details. The current version dropped the paint requirements and instead only regulates sides visible from a public way.

Faso said the board has to consider whether there will be more appeals on similarly small details if reviews focus on such small details. He questioned whether every wooden house built in this period of time had to have wooden steps.

That's what the commission decided, Blackburn said. "For a wooden house of this type -- that has always appeared to have wooden steps of this type -- it should continue to have that."

Does Blackburn feel the commission's decision is solid? "Very solid. It was not a difficult decision. As I recall, it was unanimous."

He later added, "If that is the style that is appropriate tot he architecture, we would expect it to remain the same. The material -- the steps -- relate to the material of the building. That was on our mind."
JULY 13, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

Widewaters nears final round

By Matthew Sheehey, The Independent, July 13, 2004

NIVERVILLE—The Kinderhook Planning Board meets Thursday, July 15 (7:00PM) to begin what might be the final chapter of the nearly three-year review of the shopping center proposed by the Widewaters Group.

The board is expected to start work on the findings statement, which determines whether the applicant has proven it can mitigate potential impacts.

Thursday’s meeting, which begins at 7 P.M. at Town Hall, also includes scrutiny of minor adjustments to the site plan, said Chairman Ed Simonsen.

The adjustments include the addition of cross access provisions, giving adjacent property owners and their guests the right to cut through if need be . . .

. . . The Planning Board, lead agency for the review, will develop the findings statement with the assistance of consultants.

It could take several workshops, said Mr. Simonsen, but there isn’t much time.

Widewaters was planning to file its Final Environmental Impact Statement with the state Department on Environmental Conservation this week, giving the planners 30 days to reach their final decision on the project.

“(But) our consultants are working on (their findings), so it’s not like we’re starting this from scratch,” said Mr. Simonsen.

The consultants, engineers Jim Green, Shelly Johnston and attorney Marc Gerstman, hadn’t submitted their findings as of yesterday.

Should they find that something in the Environmental Impact Statement fails to mitigate certain concerns, it could mean trouble for Widewaters.

“If they (the planning board’s experts) made a negative finding and the applicant can’t say why it will work, it could lead to non-approval, said Mr. Simonsen. “But that’s not a decision that can be based on emotions—it has to be grounded in fact and scientific opinion.”

Opponents of Widewaters believe the $10 million plaza clashes with Kinderhook’s semi-rural character.

They also fear the applicant’s plan to build a roundabout at the 9/9H intersection creates serious traffic safety threats for drivers and pedestrians, especially students from nearby Ichabod Crane schools.

Fans of the project want a second grocery store in town and point to the need for new jobs and tax revenue.

But like any controversial proposal, opponents have been much more vocal throughout the long review process.

Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth, a local citizens’ group formed in 2002, paid for its own experts to scrutinize Widewaters’ plans.

Comments from KNGG, and dozens of townspeople from both sides, are included in the Planning Board’s official record.

Now its up to the planners to wade through it all and decide whether (if) Widewaters meets all the standards in the Town Code.

The final decision could come as early as next month.

IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE A GOOD SHOW OF SUPPORT AT THURSDAY'S PLANNING BOARD MEETING, 7:00 PM - TOWN HALL



JULY 9, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

IMPORTANT Planning Board Meeting

this Thursday - July 15 - 7:00 PM - Town Hall

The Planning Board will generate its "findings statement" on the Widewaters proposals.

Showing your support for our efforts is most important at this stage in the process.

This meeting is so important that we have asked Jeff Baker to attend.

We look forward to seeing you there.

JOIN CAMPAIGN SIGN-OUT! LAWN SIGNS ARE AVAILABLE and they are FREE! PUT ONE OUT FRONT SHOW THE PLANNING BOARD YOU STILL SUPPORT NO MALL, NO ROUNDABOUT

Planning boards do not like to feel they are out in left field by themselves, especially on BIG ISSUES like Widewaters. Lawn signs have been known to show planning boards that residents still care.

The Planning Board is getting closer to a final vote on Widewaters. We need you to show them there is still opposition to the mall and its questionable experimental roundabout.

Visibility is important. Please help by joining your neighbor and put out a sign.

If you don't have a KNGG lawn sign, please call. If you can't get to us, we'll get to you!

To get your FREE sign, please call:

Abbey Cash -758-7588 DAILY (leave message)

Ally Spivy -758-1426 DAILY (leave message)

Sue Chiafullo - 758-2944 WEEKENDS (leave message)

On SIDE ONE:

WIDEWATERS . NO!

www.kngg.org

On REVERSE SIDE:

SAFETY   YES!

ROUNDABOUT NO!

www.kngg.org

JOIN WITH OUR MEMBERS

GET INVOLVED - PUT OUT A SIGN!

JOIN CAMPAIGN SIGN-OUT TODAY!



JULY 8, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members



The following "NO ROUNDABOUT, PLEASE" letter appeared in:

The Chatham Courier - July 1, 2004

The Independent - July 6, 2004

The Register-Star - July 6, 2004

To the Editor:

July 3, 2004

It's bad enough that the Widewaters land exploitation group chose the most visually beautiful open-to-the-public viewshed in Columbia County (NY) to construct its "new commercial center of Kinderhook," which is in essence a strip mall with outbuildings.   But Widewaters disgraceful defense of their choice -- that those who pass by on Route 9 only see this spectacular view for eleven seconds anyway -- shows even less respect and concern for our people and community.

In response to a comprehensive plan questionnaire some years ago, the overwhelming majority of Kinderhookers recommended that the town preserve this very special location as open space. The people of our town well understand that this site helps to define Kinderhook's unique place in Hudson Valley history. They know it's an important visual resource for our tourist economy, the "unmatchable asset we should be promoting," in the words of Walter Kulash, nationally recognized and reform-minded traffic engineer.

Tech Valley Magazine, a publication of the Albany-Colonie Chamber of Commerce, with which Columbia County is affiliated, is luring the best businesses it can find to our area. The Chamber notes that "while the aggressive marketing, tax incentives and diversity of businesses are getting high-tech companies to notice Tech Valley, it is the quality of life that gets them to locate to this area of "natural beauty and recreational opportunities." Are we to remain a positive part of this program or not? If so, Kinderhook’s planners must do the planning and not leave it to developers.

Because the planned strip mall’s buildings would be placed close to Route 9, which in turn would be twisted into a don't-stop roundabout, this site will be visually stolen from us forever. Why won't Widewaters choose another developable site on Rte. 9 and make those of us who love it here happy? The name of our town is Kinderhook, not Widewatersville.

Frankly, I'd rather stop at a traffic light and take in a wonderful view of the Catskill Mountain for 30 seconds than thread my way through a roundabout. I do not consider that wait to be a "level of service" failure; I consider it to be the reason we stay in this gorgeous area.

Urban roundabouts are generally thought of by state DOTs and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, as not appropriate for urban areas because of their high volume of auto and pedestrian traffic. And make no mistake about it, when development takes off, this will be an urban area. Think Greenport. Think East Greenbush, routes 4 and 20.

Christchurch, New Zealand, as reported in its City Manager's Office Report, vetoed a roundabout because it was felt that the number of accidents would be the same, as it would increase the volume of through traffic on local neighborhood side streets, resulting in no net decrease in the number of accidents; it would simply relocate the problem. Who is planning for Maple Lane traffic?

Remember winter? The 8/19/02 Anchorage Daily News reports the removal of a roundabout because some vehicles spun out of control as they exited, resulting in accidents which caused the loss of five light poles in one year at $4-5,000 a pop.

Davis, CA, turned down a roundabout because of problems which reduced the effective capacity of the intersection, including acute angles of entry, just like 9H, which would only accommodate large trucks if the center island were small and completely mountable, "not a desirable condition as it will eliminate the use of (directional) signs in the center of the island, adding to driver confusion," and "would eliminate all landscaping." Other similar problems were "long, straight sections of roadway leading into deceptively sharp curves and odd-shaped islands;" "sharp turning radii into exits;" "poor sight distance at the entry point."

Emergency vehicles? Kansas State Firefighters Assoc. reports that Kansas won't put roundabouts on major routes because the large emergency vehicles, whose turning radii are wide, forces drivers to "take the left side of the circle and drive against traffic to make a 90 degree turn."

TheChamplainChannel.com, 4/28/04, reports, "One problem: Some vehicles...like this ambulance we watched, couldn't make it through the first time around. Fire trucks might not make it at all...But city engineers say 'not to worry...We didn't landscape the center circle, so that if a very large truck does come down through here he can jump the curb...' Now that's logical. Build something they can't use, and then say it doesn't matter."

A rather scary tight squeeze for the other vehicles in the circle, too. They can't they pull over to get out of the way, and trucks will have the right of way in the circle, according to NYSDOT.

Who is liable for an accident caused by bad design? A 6/02 study for the Santa Barbara Taxpayers Association points out the problems of legality: "...as un-regulated intersection, accident responsibility is difficult to assign. This difficulty exists because vehicles are not required to stop. Right of way determination is at best difficult to determine. Accident rates often increase after installation of a roundabout...no reports are made unless there are injuries or at least one vehicle (is) damaged so badly it was un-drivable and had to be towed."

The study concludes, "It appears that a common tactic by those in favor of roundabouts is to dismiss the expense and other objectionable factors related to them. They then pick an intersection that is in need of long overdue maintenance, and possibly has other factors contributing to hazardous traffic operation such as improper signalization. Multiple options are then presented, all of which include a variation of what they want and leave out other reasonable alternatives...Traffic volume and relative speeds are more important factors in the likelihood of accidents than any other element...The paramount problem with the current intersection analysis is that it is pre-occupied with time delays.

"The level of service (LOS) approach grades intersections on an A through F scale based entirely on delay, i.e., whether queues develop, and at signalized intersections whether all waiting vehicles 'clear' the intersection in one or more signal cycles, and how many seconds they must wait. This approach fails to consider safety, comfort and convenience factors, non-reported accidents, new accidents, fear and road rage incidents."

Who do you trust when DOT seems to answer a question two ways? One lane is safer, but you have to plan for two lanes for future growth? And the entrances and exits from a single-lane roundabout must be wide enough for two lanes, which immediately maximizes the points of conflict within the circle? People will drive courteously, obey the striped markings on the pavement and will stay in their correct lane, yet they can't be trusted to slow down for a traffic light?

Roundabout "expert" Georges Jacquemart says in his 8/16/02 "Draft Guidelines on Accessible Public Rights-of-Way," Safety versus Ease of Use, "(R)oundabouts…do not lull users into an exaggerated sense of security as traffic lights do. At traffic lights users get very simple messages (walk, don't walk, green, red), and unfortunately users associate this simplicity with safety. At roundabouts all users are asked to pay attention and often users perceive this as unsafe."

Drivers, we're told, won't gun out of a roundabout exit because they're "not supposed to," yet half the pedestrian crosswalks would be at the point just beyond the roundabout exit, exactly where your foot comes down hard to accelerate back to the speed limit.

When so many traffic engineers warn us that a roundabout is not always the best answer for every intersection, that is the information Kinderhook should be listening to.

Diane Whelton

Kinderhook, NY 12106

Thank you Diane, for working on this well researched letter. One can easily see the time it took to prepare. There are some good ideas here!

We hope this letter will jog your thoughts and anger and motivate you to write too.

E-mail addresses of the press are listed on our web site. Click on "Press Contacts" at bottom left of the home page.

And if you haven't sent in your check for out late spring fundraiser, we still need help.

Your contribution to KNGG is tax deductible as allowed by law.

JULY 7, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

The following KNGG letter went out to the media late last week.

So far it has been published in the Independent on July 2 and the Register-Star as an editorial on

July 7.

The Register-Star editorial of June 21, “The roundabout is the best way to go,” is simply the opinion of the editor and is in no way based on research or facts. In fact what the editor says is wrong and misleading. Apparently he is not familiar with the Kinderhook intersection under discussion. If he were, he would recognize there are grave safety and traffic congestion issues that make this roundabout the wrong thing for the town and its residents.

The Widewaters Group wants to build a strip mall at the very busy four-legged intersection of US9/NY 9H, which is currently signalized. The unsignalized roundabout has been proposed by DOT as a “mitigation measure” for the extra traffic this commercial development will generate. In addition the mall’s entrance would necessitate a fifth leg for roundabout. The town of Kinderhook can turn down this roundabout. The determination is in its hands, not the hands of DOT.

While New York State DOT appears currently to be infatuated with the concept of roundabouts as a one-size-fits-all, flavor of-the month solution, roundabouts in no way are the answer for every intersection. Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG) have carefully scrutinized the impact of the proposed roundabout, sponsoring two separate expert evaluations of it from the reputable traffic-engineering firms, Vollmer Associates of Albany and CDM of Wethersfield, Connecticut. These studies show that the roundabout is a bad idea for this site. (See the results of those studies on our web site, www.kngg.org under “ROUNDABOUT.”)

Roundabouts can work when they are in the right place. But this one cannot be justified as workable, safe or having the longevity the developer has claimed. [The Kinderhook Town Planning Board must require Widewaters to post an appropriate bond to be used to restudy growing traffic conditions and also to put money aside to rebuild the roundabout if necessary. (For longevity issues see www.kngg.org ROUNDABOUT “Moran Evaluation.”)]

The dangers and hazards posed by the proposed roundabout cannot be overstated. The Ichabod Crane School System with 2,500 students, plus faculty and support staff, is almost opposite the strip mall’s proposed site. The students will be attracted to the mall all day every day. They and other pedestrians will try to cross the two major highways and four lanes of traffic. But the traffic exiting the roundabout has no yield signs as it accelerates to higher speeds, thus making conditions for pedestrians more hazardous than previously recognized. The safety factor of the school is an extremely important issue and still has not been adequately addressed.

If this roundabout should be built, yield signs at its five different entrances will replace the existing traffic signals. This means there will be no breaks in the moving traffic. . DOT’s only concern appears to be how to keep vehicular traffic moving. But the school busses entering and exiting school grounds will have a hard time navigating. How will the school busses enter and exit the school grounds, for example?

At a special meeting for Widewaters on April 21, Kinderhook Planning Board member Gerald Minot-Scheuerman pointed out to DOT engineer Howard McCulloch that existing traffic already makes it hard to turn left from Maple Lane South, Maple Lane North or Herrick Road on to US9 northbound. Drivers need the signal to change at the US9/9H intersection to find a break in the traffic in order to make a left turn. The proposed roundabout will make it almost impossible to turn on to US9 from the side roads because when the traffic signals are removed from the US9/NY 9H intersection, the essential break in the traffic will not occur. If the roundabout works as DOT predicts, it will keep traffic moving constantly. Since there would be a similar situation will exist at the US9 and Main Street intersection in Valatie, Scheuerman asked McCulloch how he planned to solve such problems.

McCulloch, who as designer, is vested in the project, replied: "I don’t know. My focus is on the roundabout." But it is McCulloch’s responsibility as designer of this roundabout, and DOT’s responsibility, to make absolutely sure that all five legs of the roundabout will work. We believe that McCulloch’s answer is simply irresponsible to the public. All parties must stringently analyze The US9/NY 9H corridor as a whole, not just as one intersection. McCulloch has not examined anything beyond the immediate US9/NY 9H intersection to prepare his roundabout design. He did not know where the nearby Keegan Road intersection is, nor did he know that it is signalized. If it is so important to the DOT to see this roundabout built, this agency should provide the Town of Kinderhook with a detailed corridor study.

At the April 21 Planning Board meeting McCulloch theorized that large trucks, oversized loads (and school busses) traveling south on US9 to enter the roundabout would bear left into the new left lane and yield just before entering. At this point, cars and other vehicles headed for the mall or NY 9H south would bear into the right lane. As the vehicles in both left and right lanes determine the coast is clear they would follow the road lane stripes into their destined lanes.

But McCulloch explained that the trailer truck in the left lane would not be able to navigate the turn through the roundabout toUS9 southbound without using the two lanes. The inner apron, designed to help larger vehicles navigate the circle, has been removed to accommodate the new second lane.

Most drivers assume that if the lines on the road are painted to define the two parallel lanes, one should be able to travel safely within his or her chosen lane, driving south to NY 9H. BUT if people do this, the truck driver in the left lane, due to his blind spots, will probably not see the vehicle in the right lane and would collide with it as the truck swings over the line into the right lane. McCulloch says that the truck would have the right of way. This dangerous situation is caused by the two-lane part of the roundabout for the developer’s purpose.

To serve the best interests of our citizens and to protect children, teachers, and drivers, the Planning Board must put the best interests of the Town at heart and turn down this roundabout. It would change the character of the Town and is not what is intended by the Comprehensive Plan.

Allen Schafer, President
Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

Please join me in sending in your letter to the press:

THE CHATHAM COURIER

e-mail ccourier@localnet.com

THE INDEPENDENT

e-mail letters@indenews.com

THE REGISTER-STAR

e-mail editorial@registerstar.com



JULY 7, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

THURSDAY ZBA MEETING - WIDEWATERS

Marco showed up with his attorney, without advance notice, who presented the ZBA with a letter condemning the KNGG architectural studies we had presented to the ZBA.  They still claim their big box of 80,000 sq. ft. although allowed by code, cannot comply with the code's "no flat roof" provision.

Jeff Baker told the ZBA that Widewaters did not provide them with more than one alternate design which is not acceptable with a development of this size. ZBA member, Jim Waterhouse, told Widewaters that a proper roof could be built with same footage if they change the footprint layout. This did not go down very well with Widewaters.

Jeff Baker told the ZBA that KNGG will return next month with further support of the hypothetical design we submitted to prove the code roof could work. And this hardship they claim is one of their own making.

Widewaters also presented their variance application for an additional curb cut.

Please get your letters in to the ZBA, deadline is Aug. 5, re Widewaters flat roof not being unacceptable.

Write to Sean Egan, chairman, Kinderhook Town ZBA, PO Box P, Niverville NY 12130.

Times Union yesterday front page feature - photo featured the KNGG SAFETY YES - ROUNDABOUT NO lawn sign.

If you don't have a sign out, please call:

Abbey Cash 758-7588

John Pickett 758-7520

Sue Chiafuello 758-2944

Roundabout becomes a traffic pattern

Colonie-- DOT using design more to improve road safety, but hasn't convinced the public it's a good idea

By CATHY WOODRUFF, Staff writer
First published: Tuesday, July 6, 2004

It's a word that stirs trepidation and terror in motorists throughout New York.
Roundabout.
Nonetheless, the circular intersections are all the rage these days at the state Department of Transportation, which expects to add about 15 each year to the state's streetscapes.
One opened last year at routes 155 and 85A in Voorheesville. Another in Greenwich, Washington County, began welcoming cars last month. A handful of others are on the way, including a string of five along Route 67 in Malta.
Sound scary? Fear not, say DOT engineers who hope to soothe suspicious motorists and dispel the myths they say abound around roundabouts.
"It is the safest at-grade intersection possible," DOT roundabout designer Howard McCullough assured some skeptical members of the Capital District Transportation Committee recently.
DOT officials say they managed to cut accidents in half with a $260,000 makeover of Latham Circle two years ago using roundabout principles. Technically, the spot at routes 2 and 9 remains a traffic circle because of its larger size and higher traffic speeds, but new signs, pavement markings and other slight adjustments give it some roundabout qualities -- chiefly greater clarity for motorists on how to proceed.
So confident is McCullough of the benefits of roundabouts that he says: "I would love to see roundabouts replacing all the lights up and down Wolf Road."
Still, doubters remain.
"The greatest obstacle we have is overcoming the idea of the traffic circle," said Tom Kligerman, supervisor of DOT's Roundabout Design Unit. "The Northeast is completely sensitized because of the rotaries in Massachusetts. People say, 'I went to Cape Cod, and I almost died!' Whenever they think of a circular intersection, they think of a rotary."
Some 500 wary residents signed a petition opposing the Voorheesville roundabout two years ago. And now, a Kinderhook group against construction of a supermarket and strip mall at routes 9 and 9H has built much of its opposition campaign around the prospect of a roundabout.
"While New York state DOT appears currently to be infatuated with the concept of roundabouts as a one-size-fits-all, flavor-of-the-month solution, roundabouts in no way are the answer for every intersection," said Allen Schaefer, president of Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth.
Schaefer says there are several features of the Columbia County location that make it a poor candidate for a roundabout, including a nearby school. He also says left turns at another intersection would be foiled by the constant flow of cars from a roundabout at routes 9 and 9H.
"This is a corridor, so when you're designing a roundabout, you have to focus on the whole thing, and they have not done that," Schaefer said.
However, the safety statistics for roundabouts have been persuasive for federal and state highway officials, who now actively encourage planners to consider roundabouts when they embark on reconstruction of an intersection.
A recent Maryland State Highway Administration study found that installation of single-lane roundabouts cut total accident rates by 68 percent and injury accidents by 86 percent.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research organization funded by auto insurers, found that roundabouts reduced total crashes by 39 percent and injury crashes by 76 percent. Fatal and "incapacitating" crashes were reduced by 89 percent, according to the institute's research.
If you want to know the difference between a roundabout and a traffic circle, also known as a rotary, look first at the size.
A roundabout is much smaller, with curved entrances that force motorists to slow down to navigate the tight circle smoothly. Vehicles must yield as they enter, waiting for a gap in the circulating traffic before joining the counterclockwise flow.
A key feature of the roundabouts that McCullough and his partner Richard Schell design is the pavement markings, directing drivers into the proper lane for their intended turns and destinations.
Unlike traffic circles, cars in a roundabout generally stay in one lane, rather than weaving from right to left and back again.
"The old rotaries and traffic circles were designed with a freeway-type mentality," with high-speed entrances, lane changes and exits on the right, Schell explained, but roundabouts work more like a standard intersection.
The Voorheesville roundabout, which opened last fall, appears to be overcoming at least some of its initial opposition.
"It seems to be working," said William Hotaling, a village trustee and former public works superintendent. "It does move traffic and the workmanship is very nice."
While evidence may be stacking up in favor of the roundabouts' relative traffic safety, the political perils for local elected officials in New York still inspire caution. At the recent Transportation Committee meeting, Colonie Supervisor Mary Brizzell predicted that town officials will feel the heat if DOT moves forward with a roundabout that residents don't want.
But Kligerman says his staff stands ready to help local officials rehabilitate the image of roundabouts.
"It's not just a traffic signal or nothing," he said. "Really, the roundabout should be the preferred intersection. I think we'll have no problem once we have a few more on the ground. Seeing is believing."

JULY 6, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

DUNKIN' DONUTS VARIANCE REQUEST RESULTS

from ZBA Public Hearing Thursday July 1st

1.   Signage (Additional, not allowed by code.) DENIED 5 to 0

2.   Lot coverage. DENIED 3 to 2

(Wanted to cover 65% of the property. The code allows 50%.)

3.   Setback.   APPROVED 3 to 2

What does this mean? If they conform with the code on signage, it may be possible to redesign the site to allow for lot coverage as allowed by code. Eliminate the parking???

or the drive-thru ??? We shall see.

KNGG is 66 & 2/3 happy with these results.

COMING KINDERHOOK TOWN PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS

With Widewaters:

Thursday - July 8 - Town Hall 7:00 PM WORKSHOP & OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     To Review revised revisions to Planning Board FEIS re Widewaters

     To vote on approval of revisions

Thursday - July 15 - Town Hall 7:00 PM OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     To review new Widewaters' site plans for approval

     To generate findings statement on Widewaters Commons

Thursday - Aug 12 - Town Hall 7:00 PM WORKSHOP

     Uncertain - However, may turn meeting into an OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     as Aug 14 is deadline for findings statement

Thursday - Aug 19 - Town Hall 7:00 PM OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     Agenda is uncertain

JULY 2, 2004

TO: All KNGG Members

DUNKIN' DONUTS VARIANCE REQUEST RESULTS

from ZBA Public Hearing Thursday July 1st

1.   Signage (Additional, not allowed by code.) DENIED 5 to 0

2.   Lot coverage. DENIED 3 to 2

(Wanted to cover 65% of the property. The code allows 50%.)

3.   Setback.   APPROVED 3 to 2

What does this mean? If they conform with the code on signage, it may be possible to redesign the site to allow for lot coverage as allowed by code. Eliminate the parking???

or the drive-thru ??? We shall see.

COMING KINDERHOOK TOWN PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS

With Widewaters:

Thursday - July 8 - Town Hall 7:00 PM WORKSHOP & OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     To Review revised revisions to Planning Board FEIS re Widewaters

     To vote on approval of revisions

Thursday - July 15 - Town Hall 7:00 PM OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     To review new Widewaters' site plans for approval

     To generate findings statement on Widewaters Commons

Thursday - Aug 12 - Town Hall 7:00 PM WORKSHOP

     Uncertain - However, may turn meeting into an OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     as Aug 14 is deadline for findings statement

Thursday - Aug 19 - Town Hall 7:00 PM OFFICIAL VOTING MEETING

     Agenda is uncertain

The KNGG Board of Directors would like

to wish you and your family

Music by Robert Baksa

“He can write a beautiful tune, cloak it in a warm accompaniment,

and orchestrate it to perfection.” - The Double Reed Magazine

Hosted by the Composer

THE ARTISTS

BENEFACTOR: $150

Priority Concert Seating and Reception

SPONSOR: $100

Concert Seating and Reception

Supporter: $35

Concert Seating

AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT – ORDER EARLY

KNGG - PO Box 424 - Kinderhook NY 12106

THE MEETING AS SEEN THRU EYES OF A KNGG MEMBER

I attended the subject meeting tonight. There were some interesting tidbits that came out.

Ed Simonsen (Planning Board Chair) stated that he was interested in having the code reviewed by experts to see if all the requirements were realistic. In order to do this he has sent letters to colleges (RPI) to see if there would be any students willing to work with the board to do this.

First of all I have nothing against RPI students but I believe they need experienced engineers, each disciplined, to get the best job done for our town. This also smacks of possibly watering down the code.

ANNOUNCING OUR GALA EVENT

BY SUPPORTING KNGG and ARTICLE 78

BY SUPPORTING KNGG and ARTICLE 78

McGIVNEY NOMINATES KRISHP LEADER to CHAIR CORRIDOR STUDY

KNGG is a 501(C)(3) not-for-profit corporation.

Via email and Hand Delivery

RE: New place for illegal tractor-trailer parking near Stewart’s and McDonald’s

ENCOURAGED!

FUNDRAISER UPDATE

Your contribution to KNGG will help us continue to fight badly planned

THIS IS NO LONGER A QUESTION OF A FLAT ROOF

Your contribution to KNGG will help us continue to fight badly planned

The editor of the Independent, Parry Teasdale, told me today on the telephone that the Independent stands by their reporter’s notes and do not print retractions. He has agreed to publish our letter in full. The following is our letter to the editor of the Independent regarding their misquote.

KNGG DOES NOT “HATE”

Allen Schaefer, President

"HATE" RETRACTION REQUESTED OF THE INDEPENDENT

PLEASE SUPPORT ARTICLE 78

This is the other alternative open to KNGG. There is no other appeals process available for us to challenge the recent ZBA determination. The determination process is legally flawed.

It is our right to ask for justice and if the court is the only way, so be it.

We need to be strong and show that we can no longer accept “business as usual.” We must go through with this action to show our officials that we are serious. We want our code enforced and we want to see justice done.

Please make your check payable to KNGG

and mail to KNGG, PO Box 424, Kinderhook NY 12106

OCTOBER 9, 2004

KNGG BOARD SAY’S "GO FOR IT!"

OTHER NEWS

STAY TUNED FOR MORE INFORMATION ON ART78.

SIMONSEN and SCHAEFER EVALUATE WIDEWATERS

SPECIAL ARTICLE 78 MEETING CALLED FOR OCTOBER 7th

Dear Member:

IN THE PRESS

DUNKIN’ DONUTS

John Picket - 758-7520

Holes Seen in Donuts Data

It is important for all members attend the next KNGG Quarterly Meeting On July 26th. Important information will be discussed regarding the Widewaters and Dunkin’ Donuts application. We’ll be announcing our new focus to commence this autumn.

We look forward to seeing you July 26th. Please bring a friend who is interested in saving rural and historic Kinderhook.

IMPORTANT EVENTS - COMING SOON

Environmental attorney, Jeff Baker will explain recent Widewaters and

Planning Board Meeting of July 15, 2004

WIDEWATERS

CRAMER, A THORN IN THE PLANNING BOARD’S SIDE

Widewaters nears final round

NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL FOR VALATIE

PLANNING BOARD VOTES ON ACCEPTANCE OF FDEIS

FINDINGS STATEMENT IS NEXT

THURSDAY NIGHT ZBA MEETING – 7:30 PM – Town Hall

DUNKIN’ DONUTS