 a not-for-profit corporation PO Box 424 Kinderhook, NY 12106 518-758-2646 |
| a not-for-profit corporation PO Box 424 Kinderhook, NY 12106 518-758-2646 |
|
ANNEXATION A N N E X A
T I O N = S U B D I V I S I O N S U B D I V I S I O N = H I G H E R T A X E S PURPOSE: Avoid zoning restrictions for Sub Divisions B A C K G R O U N D AUGUST 20, 200 DEVELOPERS TRY TO AVOID ZONING CODE BY MOVING TOWN LINE! DEVELOPERS IN TOWN CONSIDER VILLAGE OPTION By Joe Prout - The Register-Star – August 20, 2005 KINDERHOOK - The days of the five-hour Planning Board meetings are over, at least for now. The board recently encountered something its members couldn’t remember ever happening in recent years: no public hearings. Next month doesn’t look too productive either, since there was no new business proposed in August. Planning Board Chairman Ed Simonsen speculated that some developers are waiting until after the Town Board elections in November before bringing in their proposals. Simonsen’s term with the Planning Board expires at the end of December, and if the political majority of the Town Board changes, there might be a different philosophical approach to town-wide development when new Planning Board members are appointed in January. But there’s another change already in the works. Land owners with parcels either partially in Valatie (and partially in the Township) or directly next to it want to join the village (of Valatie). Valatie Mayor Gary Strevell wasn’t surprised by the news. “After all, we are a popular village,” the mayor said. There are benefits to getting into the village. Anthony Buono is one of the three developers taking initial steps to change his lot’s boarders. Buono wants to get a 35-acre parcel off Rod & Gun Club Road into the village. He’s had a proposal before the Town Planning Board for months and it’s evolved, the developer tried to incorporate a conservation subdivision. Buono’s proposal has a minimum lot size of five acres in the Town of Kinderhook. If he successfully joins the Village of Valatie, he could have minimum lot sizes of a half acre, which neighboring parcels were designed with, Buono’s proposal could go from a maximum of 7 parcels to just less than 70. He noted that not all the land is suitable for homes and if the proposal adds a road, it would cut into the total number. Also, the village offers water and sewer services. Buono said that cuts down on costs, which makes the homes cheaper than something with a septic system. Buono doesn’t have an idea yet what he wants to do, in part because he’s just starting the process to join the village and half-acre zoning isn’t guaranteed. Strevell said at this point, the village’s sewage system capabilities are in question too. While the system is working at one-third of its capacity, he said it’s near or at its sewage concentration level. He said the village did a full build-out study when considering what the sewer system could do, but he said that didn’t account for adding parcels from the town. Strevell confirmed there were three developers considering annexation into the village. Tim Holk’s proposal for Kinderkill Meadows was also before the Town Planning Board at one point, but that was later pulled at the town level. Strevell said the village plans to consider all three annexations at the same time in the future. He said it can be a complicated process that involves petitioning, environmental reviews and a referendum vote. “We don’t want people making up rules as they go along or going into panic mode as they make the rules,” Strevell said. Town Supervisor Doug McGivney said he was conceptually fine with any merge into the village, but he wanted to get more information on the matter first. He said adding parcels and potential residents could help the village with development of its infrastructure needs, and the town doesn’t lose out because it still taxes the parcels since they’re still in the town. Buono said it’s fair to pass the expense of sewer system expansion on to the new residents and expected any cost would be less substantial when spread over multiple years in a bond. “If that’s the way we can help the village, it’s better for all of us,” he said. Would-be Village People: Town land owners start to join Valatie. Services and smaller sizes: Developers note having sewer and water systems, smaller lot sizes a plus. We’ve only just begun: The complicated process is only beginning, and the public has yet to weigh in. KNGG COMMENTS: What we see happening here is just another way for the developers involved to profit greatly by manipulating the law. And could it be legal? Basically what they are trying to do is avoid the Zoning Code of the Town of Kinderhook by moving the Town line so they could incorporate their parcels within the village of Valatie where the zoning is more relaxed (One house per 1/2 acre in the village as opposed to one house per 5 acres in the Town). Is this a valid reason to move the Town line? During its application process with the Town Planning Board, Widewaters requested authorization from the Village of Valatie to hook up to the village water supply and sewer system. They were advised in writing by the Valatie engineer that the system couldn’t handle the extra capacity and were turned down. Now, how does the Village of Valatie expect to handle another possible 200 or more homes? Moving the town line would give developer Buono10 houses per five for each 5 acre plot. 35 Acres are at stake! 35 acres X 10 homes per 5 acres = 70 homes. This is one developer. Two more are asking the similar manipulations totaling a possible 200 new homes in a small area. The average number of children per household in new developments is 2.5 per house. 200 new homes would add approximately 500 additional children to the Ichabod Crane School System. Who will pay for this, Mr. Strevell and Mr. McGivney? The Ichabod Crane budget barely passed. How many school tax increases can the citizens tolerate? We have worked hard to get a good zoning code. Can we let these developers dump it by moving the Town Line? Once the Town parcels become a part of the Village, the parcel next to it will want to join and then the thee next door and so on. Where will it end? Two other developers are awaiting annexation approval. Moving town lines to avoid zoning laws is not a precedent we want to set.
THREE DEVELOPERS IN LINE FOR ANNEXATION: OCTOBER 28, 2005 The
Register-Star Contacted Thursday afternoon for comment, Buono said he no longer intends to annex all of the 35-acre parcel in question. Instead, he wants to annex only 14.6 acres, and said he plans to save the bottom half of the parcel for himself, about 16 acres. There is already a five-acre subdivision with a house associated with this proposal, which he said would remain in the town (Kinderhook) as well. Buono said the reason for the change was simple. “I wanted to make it clear we’re not looking to do 70 houses,” he said. He said people have already been discussing his proposal using that number, which is inaccurate. Buono contends that 70 was an impossible number to begin with, since it doesn’t account for space needed for building a road, driveways or related necessities for a housing development. Since annexing 35 acres into the village (of Valatie from the Town of Kinderhook) meant he’d have to design a project with nearly 70 houses. Buono said he chose to annex a smaller portion to better demonstrate the land’s intended future use. “This more accurately reflects what out aspirations are for the project,” Buono said, which is proposed by him and his partner, his brother Michael Buono. In his new proposal, Buono estimates the worse case build-out for the new 14-acre village parcel is 24 houses. “That doesn’t mean I want to build 24, that doesn’t mean we’re going to,” Buono said. He said due to the state-mandated environmental review process, he has to show the worse case build-out scenario for all of the land in question.” For the Valatie portion of the proposal, Buono said he’s currently planning a cul-de-sac, and expects to connect to Rod and Gun Club Road. “I do not want access through Little Falls,” Buono noted. He said the current parcel has about 485 feet of frontage in the town portion of the parcel that could be used for access from the village portion to the road. Within the Valatie section, Buono hasn’t settled on any particular type of house. He said he’d look at different sizes of houses, and will likely go with 3 -4 bedrooms. Using those guidelines (he) will determine what the use of village water and sewer use will be. Buono has no plans for the remaining 16 acres of landing the town. The southern part of the parcel would remain 5acre zoning, and if he had to propose development now to avoid segmented review, he’d design the lot with three houses. Buono’s decision to change the proposal will add a review step to the process. He said only annexing part of a parcel complicates the procedure, but for what he wants to do it’s necessary. “I don’t know need the bottom half in the village,” he added. After the annexation review consideration, the project would be reviewed for zoning. After that, Buono said he would have to subdivide the village portion out of the current parcel. “there’s environmental review all three times,” he added. Buono didn’t believe the more complicated process would make or break its acceptance. “The half a parcel – I don’t think to make a difference to anybody. They either like the idea or don’t like the idea.” Buono says he believes the project is beneficial to Kinderhook. He said now that more than 1,000 acres of farm (land) is conserved as forever wild, there’s less available developable space. He said putting more houses in Valatie is doable, and the number of houses he’s proposed is still below a number of projected maximum build-out for the town. The public hearing on Buono’s proposal is tentatively set for 7 p.m. November 16 in the Niverville fire station. Public on the other annexation projects – The Holk proposal and the Palleschi proposal – will continue at 7 p.m. Nov. 21 at a location to be announced. KNGG COMMENTS: Here we have learned that what was once a Town of Kinderhook subdivision/housing project application, has evolved into a Village of Valatie annexation project. Why the change in the numbers requested? No concrete answers. Only double talk. 35 acres yesterday, 14.6 acres today. 50 tomorrow? Maybe 14.6 doesn't doesn't sound so bad and would pass more easily? However, if approved, a precedent would be set. And how much easier it would be to get more tomorrow. This precedent would set our zoning, comprehensive plans and open space conservation back centuries. What this will mean: Any developer having land in a community where the zoning does not suit his purposes but where the next door community's zoning in more to his liking, would be allowed to have Town/Village lines changed to his advantage. This change would not benefit the communities but his own bank accounts. This precedent would have far reaching affects. For example, Wal-Mart could own 35 acres in Claverack near the Greenport boarder but the zoning might be prohibitive. Greenport has no zoning. So leave it to Wal-Mart to have that land annexed by Greenport. Where will it stop? It won't until the state legislature put a stop to it by prohibiting annexation for commercial reasons. What can we do? Start writing letters to the editor and your state officials. Kinderhook, Village of Kinderhook and Village of Valatie residents should also write to the Kinderhook Town Board and Valatie Village Board. These two boards will make the final determination. Villages are nice, but not at the expense of open space and farmland. Valatie's encroachment should not be encouraged. Neither the Town or the Village will gain. Mr. Buono and some of the officials would like us to believe that subdivisions bring us a broader tax base. But we know better. "Almost all new residential development increases property taxes for existing homeowners, as previous columns have illustrated. But a surge of new homes over a short period of time causes greater disruption to public services and costs taxpayers substantially more than gradually phasing in the same number of new homes over a longer time frame." -- James Sheldon, Gallatin resident, financial consultant and conservation correspondent ahs lots to say about how new development impacts local taxes. http://gallatininterviews.blogspot.com/
Other articles by James Sheldon on
subdivision from his "Views from Gallatin" may be seen on this site: |