|
|
|
|
|
ABOUT
KNGG
KNGG NEWS
RELEASES
ALL NEWS RELEASES APPEAR IN DATE ORDER
WITH THE
LATEST AT THE TOP
NEWS RELEASE
September 14, 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Allen Schaefer - Home Office 758-8337
The following letter written by attorneys Jeff Baker and Jim
Muscato on behalf of KNGG and has sent to the Kinderhook Town ZBA members in
consideration of Widewaters request for a roof variance. As you may know,
the ZBA has called a "special hearing" for September 23, 7:00 PM, Kinderhook
Town Hall.
Young,
Sommer ... LLC
Young, Sommer, Ward, Ritzenberg, Baker & Moore,
LLC COUNSELORS
AT LAW ALL WRITTEN
CORRESPONDENCE TO: Executive
Woods, Five Palisades Drive, Albany, NY
12205 Phone: 518-438-9907 • Fax:
518-438-9914 )))))))))))))
Writer’s
Telephone Extension:
227 jbaker@youngsommer.com
September 14, 2004 Town of Kinderhook Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box P Niverville, NY 12130 RE: Widewaters Commons - Application for Area Variance Dear Members of the Kinderhook ZBA: We represent Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (“KNGG”) and submit the attached revised drawings by our architect, Alvin Knoll, to address the questions raised by the ZBA at the previous Zoning Board meeting. We have received notice that the ZBA has scheduled a “special hearing” for September 23, 2004 and appreciate the opportunity to provide you this information prior to the hearing. The attached drawings show, despite the ridiculous claims by the applicant to the contrary, that the roof for building 4/4a can be designed to meet each of the Town Code’s design requirements. Given that the Board specifically permitted KNGG to provide an example of a roof plan that complies with the Town Code, and since KNGG has done so, under the law, the Board must deny the area variance requested by the applicant. It would be arbitrary and capricious for the Board, at this point, after KNGG has gone to significant time and expense to provide multiple examples of a design that complies with the Code, to ignore the Code compliant alternative and grant the variance. Especially in light of the alternatives provided by KNGG, the applicant has offered no basis to this Board to justify the granting of the variance. It was clear from the last Zoning Board meeting that the primary concern with the design provided by KNGG was the size of the cupola structure. In response to a question by Marc Gold, Mr. Knoll indicated that the cupola probably could not be reduced. However, upon further review of the plans, Mr. Knoll’s revisions to the roof design have significantly reduced the size of the cupola structure to 400 sq. ft. and a total of 9 ft. in height. Thus the building, including the cupola which is exempt from the height requirements, is only 49 ft. in height. In addition, Mr. Knoll has submitted an alternative design which includes a cupola that is only 128 sq. ft. In any event, each of these cupola are significantly reduced and are considerably smaller than the 4719 sq. ft. cupola allowed under the Code. (Even assuming, for the sake of argument that the structure is two distinct buildings.). Widewaters has continually refused to alter their design to try to meet the requirements of the Code. Widewaters has repeatedly stated to this Board that compliance with the Code is impossible or would require the construction of the equivalent of an 8-story building. The disingenuous nature of this contention is exacerbated by the reasonable Code compliant alternatives provided by KNGG. Courts have held that where an applicant is unwilling to alter their plans to comply with the zoning regulation or to need a less substantial variance, a denial by the ZBA is not an abuse of discretion. See Robbins v. Seife 215 A.D.2d 665 (2d Dept. 1995)(Petitioners application was denied because they did not attempt to comply with the zoning requirements and their difficulty was self-created.). Contrary to the statements of Michael O’Shea, Widewaters’ consultant, who stretches logic when discussing the restrictions on the design under the Code, KNGG has come up with an alternative that Widewaters has ignored, casting doubt on whether Widewaters considered alternatives in the first place. Why was KNGG forced to come up with a design that complied with the Code? Further impairing the credibility of Mr. O’Shea and his statements regarding the design were his responses to the questions regarding his licensing as an architect. Initially, when questioned, Mr. O’Shea indicated that he received his license within the last year. However, when pressed further, Mr. O’Shea admitted that he, in fact, just passed his licensing test this past month. It turns out that from documents obtained from the State Education Department, Mr. O’Shea was licensed as an architect on August 30, 2004. (See Attached). The fact that Mr. O’Shea has been licensed as an architect for mere days may explain why Widewaters seems to be incapable of coming up with a design that meets the Code and why they proposed an alternative that was so outrageous. Since KNGG has provided this Board with an alternative that complies with the Code, it obviates any need for the variance and Widewaters fails to meet their burden under the Code. See Gottlieb v. City of Rye, 139 A.D.2d 617 (2d Dept. 1988); Goldstein v. Orbon, 65 A.D.2d 782 (2d Dept. 1978)(Board was correct in denying variance were there were viable alternatives available to the petitioners not requiring the granting of a variance.). Widewaters has not established that any “hardship” would occur if it were to build the roof in compliance with the Town Code. At best, Widewaters has offered in passing that the code compliant roof would be more expensive. However, Widewaters has submitted nothing in the record to substantiate this claim. Mere inconvenience is insufficient to establish that the applicant is entitled to a variance from the zoning code. See Fuhst v. Foley, 45 N.Y.2d 441 (1978). Further, any “hardship” claimed by Widewaters is entirely self-created. As has been submitted by KNGG many times, Widewaters knew that by applying under the new Town Code, it would be subject to the design requirements. The Zoning Board should not be placed in the position of having to guarantee the investment of a careless developer. See Stengel v. Town of Woodstock, 155 A.D.2d 854 (3d Dept. 1989). In any event, any financial hardship alone is insufficient to justify the granting of the variance. Finally, in contrast with the flat-roof design proposed by the applicant, the design proposed by KNGG is entirely consistent with the character of the community as it is expressed in the new Town Code. The Town Code sets forth in a clear fashion its vision for maintaining the rural character of Kinderhook. The vision set forth in the Code accepts that commercial development in Kinderhook is inevitable. But the Code takes the necessary steps to ensure that despite the commercial development, the Town will protect the rural character of the community by imposing design standards which avoid the standard “big-box” development. This Board should not ignore the delicate balance sought to be maintained by the Code on this initial application under the new Code and eviscerate the design standards for all future large development projects by granting the variance. In conclusion, Widewaters has shown nothing that would indicate that the area variance is necessary. They face no impossibility regarding the roof design, rather just an option that they do not prefer because it may be more expensive. Again, we should emphasize that we are not trying to dictate building design but are merely pointing out that Widewaters' compliance with the Code is not impossible and a variance is not necessary.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrey S. Baker James A. Muscato II cc: ZBA Members Marc Gold, Esq. John Hoggan Jr., Esq. NEWS RELEASE DATE: September 14,
2004 FOR
IMMEDIATE
RELEASE FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer,
president Home office 518
758-8337 Kinderhook
ZBA Bows to Unsavory Pressure from Widewaters
# #
# NEWS RELEASE February 24, 2004 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE KINDERHOOK BOARDS SCHEDULE CONFLICTING HEARINGS FOR MARCH 4th
Kinderhook NY --- Kinderhook citizens, frustrated by the apparent inability of town boards to co-ordinate schedules, are trying to figure out how to be in two places at once next Thursday night, March 4th. The Town Zoning Board of Appeals has scheduled a very important public hearing on the same night as the crucial Planning Board Public Hearing called to review the Widewaters’ strip mall Site Plan. At its January meeting, the Kinderhook Town Planning Board set the Widewaters Site Plan Public Hearing for 7:00 PM on March 4th at North Pointe. Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth views this particular public hearing as one of the most crucial steps in the ongoing Planning Board review of this questionable project. At ZBA's February meeting, Chairman
Sean Egan, scheduled the hearing on the Dunkin' Donuts variance application at
7:30 PM on March 4th at the Kinderhook Town Hall in Niverville, the same night as the Planning Board's Widewaters site plan
hearing.
Today KNGG President, Allen Schaefer advised, "This new
application before the Kinderhook Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals now makes
the planning issues surrounding Widewaters even more intensely problematical."
It is for a high-traffic Dunkin’ Donuts drive-in store right at the apex of
intersection of Routes NY 9-H and US 9. Schaefer continued, "This proposal
compounds the potential traffic safety and congestion issues already associated
with the Widewaters project and its extremely dangerous one-lane roundabout."
KNGG reports that the proposed Dunkin, Donuts, primarily because of the unsafe
traffic management inevitable with this high traffic volume business (estimated
at 2 cars per minute), is highly significant in terms of its potential accrued
impact.
Now Dunkin
Donuts franchise owner Joseph Leal has applied for two significant variances for
the building he wants to build DIRECTLY across from the Widewaters proposed
site. One variance requests permission to double the size of the signs to 160
square feet (twice the 80 square feet permitted by the town code). The other
variance is for 70% lot coverage (the code allows for 50%).
Pleas from the public to change the date of the ZBA hearing have gone unanswered by both the ZBA and Kinderhook Town officials. Mr. Schaefer says, "We wonder what this says about the responsibility local government and local appointed bodies have to their constituents. And what does it say about simple governmental cooperative management of time? We don’t think it says anything positive." KNGG is urging all citizens to show up and make their views heard on the Widewaters issues and the Dunkin' Donuts franchise owners’ request for variances. Schaefer adds, "Only this time they may need to clone themselves to do so.” # # # NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH JUNE 25, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE KNGG QUESTIONS NEW GROUP’S REASONING Ki nderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG), a grass roots group opposed to the proposed Widewaters shopping center that may include a Hannaford super market, to be located at the junction of Routes 9, 9H and State Farm Road in Kinderhook, say they have no objection to a Hannaford market in Kinderhook.A year and three months after the founding of KNGG, another group, calling itself Kinderhook Residents in Support of Hannaford Plaza (KRISHP), has organized. Their slogan appears to be, "Hannaford, Yes." David Usher, the new group’s organizer says, "There is overwhelming support for this project." Unless one takes a good look, it is difficult to see the difference between the two groups . Allen Schaefer, President of KNGG replies, "Supporting a Hannaford market is not the same as blind support for a new 20 acre shopping center with parking for 484 cars at an already dangerous intersection with service roads, loading docks and everything else that comes with it including traffic congestion and noise. Schaefer has some questions about KRISHP; "I would like to know if KRISHP has hired its own consultants to review this whole project. Does this group have an independent analysis, like KNGG has, or is it simply accepting Widewaters’ representations? Last year Widewaters said the traffic was no problem, yet the Planning Board and KNGG consultants said it was and the DOT did also, finding that Widewaters’ proposal was completely unacceptable. Shouldn’t we be taking a careful look at those issues?" KRISHP spokesman, Mr. Ten Eyck exclaimed, "The Planning Board should move forward with this project. Schaefer replied, "Don’t we, residents and neighbors, want our Planning Board to take a careful look at this project and consider all of the impacts? KRISHP supporters should not expect the Planning Board to rubber stamp Widewaters’ SDEIS (Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement) without a careful review by the Planning Board’s experts." Regarding design, KNGG’s Schaefer asks, "Why does Widewaters have a problem with Kinderhook’s new design standards? Sure, they may cost more, but they protect the ambiance of the Town and make sure that new investment is done in a complimentary way. Does it remove some of our less attractive and incompatible buildings? No. But it sets the path for the future. If we are requiring small business owners to make the extra investment to make their buildings more attractive, why can’t a large commercial developer do the same? Isn’t that fair?" When asked about KNGG’s stand on Hannaford, Schaefer replied, "Hannaford is welcome here, but they need to come to town in a way as not to turn the community upside down." FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 788-2646 # # # NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH APRIL 9, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE "Conservation Options and Opportunities" to be given Tuesday The second in a series of Educational Evenings sponsored by Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG) will be presented Tuesday evening April 15, 7:30 PM at the Main Street Café on Main Street in Valatie. KNGG will host "Conservation Options and Opportunities," with Jerry Cosgrove, Northeast Director of American Farm Land Trust (AFT), who will give an overview of programs and strategies to help communities protect land. At AFT, Jerry works on farmland conservation and conservation easements, among other things. The program is designed to show how people can arrange for conservation of land to save it from over development. Jean-Paul Courtens, founder of Roxbury Farm in Kinderhook will also take part. The farm specializes in organic farming. The tie in with Jean-Paul in the program is that Equity Trust Inc., a non profit land trust, recently purchased a 148-acre farm to provide Roxbury Farm with long-term land tenure. The acquisition was made possible through the donations of Roxbury Farms members to Equity Trust Inc. and the purchase of development rights by the Open Space Institute. Jean-Paul has served as a trustee on the board of the Columbia Land Conservancy since 1995. KNGG encourages responsible economic planned growth, while preserving Kinderhook’s architectural and agricultural heritage, open spaces and rural quality of life. Both Mr. Cosgrove and Mr. Courtens have recently been named to the KNGG Advisory Board. The public is invited, refreshments will be served and admission is free. For information you may call 518 758-2646. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 758-2646 # # # JANUARY 13, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DOT NOW Prefers Round-about for Kinderhook at Proposed Mall Site A special meeting was held last Thursday in Hudson between the Town of Kinderhook and the DOT as a result of letters written to the DOT by Supervisor, Doug McGivney and Town Planning Board Chairman Ed Simonsen. Their concern being that the meetings between the DOT and the developer, Widewaters, regarding the development of the Route 9/9-H corridor in Kinderhook was without the knowledge or input of the Town. Redevelopment of the roads would be necessary to handle the extra traffic that would be caused by the proposed Widewaters mall, if approved. Representing the DOT were Charles Vieni, Michael Schaefer, Glenn Boucher and Rich Dillmann. Supervisor Doug McGivney, members of the Planning Board, Neil Sanders representing the School District and some local business people (Van Allen Auto Body) attended a meeting with members of the DOT. The Members of the Planning Board that attended and reported on the meeting at last Thursday’s workshop were Chairman, Ed Simonsen, Richard Anderson and Gerry Minot-Scheurerman. The DOT was asked to partner the Planning Board as provided for under SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) on the over burdened traffic situation created by Widewaters should the mall be approved. The DOT was asked to provide plans to the Town for what they propose. This still has not been done. The DOT examined the mitigation plan that was drawn up for Widewaters by Sears Brown. The plan calls for a single lane "round-about" at the intersection of Route 9/9-H and State Farm Road. (Widewaters tells us a roundabout is smaller than a traffic circle or rotary. Webster's defined a roundabout as a traffic circle.) Widewaters has agreed to pay for the round-about although nothing has been put in writing. This plan would require some land to be acquired because there is not enough room to put in a round-about as things stand at the intersection. There must be enough room for the turn/swing of 16 wheeler trucks and the school busses from the school system across the street from the site. If the alternate plan to reroute Route 9 and Keegan Road were to be used, more land would have to be acquired, the DOT explained. The DOT prefers the round-about. It is expected that 2,200 cars per hour could pass through the round-about including the extra Widewaters mall traffic. It was reported that the round-about would eliminate all traffic lights at the intersection so traffic would continue to move smoothly. No hard facts or technical analysis were presented. The operational representative from the State inquired as to where they are supposed to put the snow. More opposition was presented by Neil Sanders of the School district. With traffic continually moving and no traffic light, it would be almost impossible for the four gear school busses to merge out into moving traffic because they can't get a good enough start. Although crosswalks would be provided from the school to the mall, there will be no traffic lights to stop traffic at the crosswalks. This is also dangerous because children would be forced to run out into the traffic to get across. If the school has to hire traffic wardens to get children across the streets, this is an additional cost the Town doesn't need. "This round-about could be very hazardous. Much more study needs to be done to ensure the Town that it will be safe. I don’t like the idea of no traffic lights for pedestrians who have to dodge traffic to get across two state highways, especially at a school crossing. They must be insane to propose this! This is not the right location for a shopping mall," commented Allen Schaefer, president of Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG). Schaefer goes on, "I really don’t like the fact that Widewaters and the DOT are planning Kinderhook’s future without our in put. Widewaters just goes to the DOT and says they are moving in so x,y, and z businesses will have to uproot and relocate so we can build a round-about. Besides, what comes first here, the chicken or the egg? Will the mall construction be allowed to begin before the infrastructure is in place?" Widewaters claims mall construction and the round-about construction can be done simultaneously. "What a traffic jam this will create!" says Schaefer. Jim Dunham, Mayor of the Village of Kinderhook has called for mitigation of substantial increase in traffic in the Village, especially at the intersection of County Route 21 and Route 9. He believes the current traffic light will not be able to handle the overload in traffic. In the meantime Widewaters must complete the course set up by SEQRA. The next Planning Board Meeting will be Thursday, January 16th at 7:00 PM at the Town Hall in Niverville. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 758-2646 # # # NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH JANUARY 12, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Kinderhook - Developer Widewaters in debt to Town One of the major concerns of the Town of Kinderhook Planning Board’s at their workshop last Thursday evening was the monies owed the Town by the developer, Widewaters. They want to build a $10 million dollar shopping mall at the intersections of Route 9, 9-H and State Farm Road just north of the Ichabod Crane School System and have not paid up on their escrow. The money is supposed to be put into an escrow for the Town to pay expenses for traffic studies, scientific studies, etc in the SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) approval process. At the last Planning Board meeting Chairman Ed Simonsen advised counsel for Widewaters, Marco Marzocchi, to pay up. Marc Gerstman, Special Planning Board Attorney, was to address this issue of monies owed the Town by Widewaters by sending Widewaters a letter stating they must pay up or the Planning Board will cease to review the project until such time payment is received. Jim Green, Town Engineer on the Widewaters proposal put together an itemized bill showing where the money has been spent and it will be included in Gerstman’s letter. It was planned that the letter was to have gone out to Widewaters last Friday. Planning Board member, Don Gaylord wanted to know if the Planning Board legally has the right to discontinue the review if payment is not received. Marc Gold, Planning Board attorney, advised that not only is this provided for by SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) but it is in the Town Code as well. KNGG (Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth) president Allen Schaefer stated, "It is inconceivable that Widewaters should owe the Town thousands in back payments to this escrow. The Planning Board has made the right decision to call off any talks until Widewaters pays their bill." At this same workshop on Thursday, Widewaters submitted their draft scope of the SEIS (State Environmental Impact Statement) by fax to the Planning Board. Widewaters’ representatives are expected to be at the next Planning Board meeting to formally present this document promote it and possibly explain it, providing they have paid their bill to the Town. KNGG’s Schaefer commented, "This draft scope of the SEIS has been a while in coming. I am looking forward to examining it. I hope that Widewaters has provided all the information the Planning Board called for. Otherwise this will cause Widewaters unnecessary delays they could have avoided." The next Kinderhook Town Planning Board meeting will be this Thursday, January 16th at 7:00 PM at the Town Hall in Niverville. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 758-2646 # # # NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH DECEMBER 11, 2002 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Widewaters Attempts to Politicize Planning Process Kinderhook- December 11, 2002-Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth (KNGG), a growing non-profit organization committed to educating the public regarding appropriate development in the Town of Kinderhook, learned recently that the Widewaters Group is taking the political route on behalf of its plan for an 18-acre "Big Box" shopping mall at the junction of Routes 9 and 9-H in Kinderhook. In an apparent attempt to put pressure on the Kinderhook Planning Board to approve the mall as currently proposed, Widewaters has lobbied at least one member of the Kinderhook Town Board and the State Department of Transportation to endorse the current development plan. In doing so, Widewaters is working outside the SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) process by ignoring the lead agency for the SEQRA review, the Kinderhook Planning Board. In a letter dated November 27, 2002, sent to the home of Kinderhook Town Board member Mary Kramarchyk, Widewaters Chief Counsel, Marco Marzocchi, enclosed a copy of a November 13th letter to Widewaters from William D. Fitzpatrick of the NYS Department of Transportation (DOT). In that letter Fitzpatrick states that "through continued discussion with your [Widewaters'] traffic engineering consultant, we have narrowed the alternatives to two potential alternatives. One of the aforementioned alternatives (rerouting Route 9 or a roundabout at the 9/9-H junction) will be implemented in a timely fashion to accommodate development at the proposed site." This demonstrates a reversal from the DOT's previous position outlined in an October 2nd letter to Widewaters where the DOT stated, "The Department finds this proposal unacceptable in concept and in detail." The traffic consultants retained by the Planning Board and as well as those retained by KNGG concurred that traffic patterns and safety concerns at the 9/9H intersection would be compromised by the development of the mall. Upon receiving the November 27th letter from Marzocchi, Kramarchyk wrote a memo to fellow Town Board members criticizing the Planning Board's handling of the matter. In her memo, Kramarchyk wrote, "Widewaters has made substantial progress in addressing our concerns until the planning board [sic] voted to require a supplemental DEIS." She went on to advise that the Planning Board should "be more open-minded and communicate more fully with Widewaters [sic] as to their concerns especially if additional issues should arise." Kramarchyk included a copy of the November 13th DOT letter that Marzocchi forwarded to her home address. On December 3rd, Edwin Simonsen, Chairman of the Town of Kinderhook Planning Board stated in a letter to Kramarchyk, " The process should be deliberative and free of politicizing." He continued, "I find it troubling that an applicant, with a proposal before the Planning Board, is communicating with an elected official." Simonsen wrote to DOT on December 5th, protesting that the Planning Board had not received a copy of the November 13th letter until December 2nd. In addition, Simonsen said, "Unfortunately, DOT did not communicate the two alternatives to the Planning Board. Nor has there been a representative of the Kinderhook Town Board or the Planning Board at the meetings you have apparently held with Widewaters." Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth president, Allen Schaefer, says, "I am very concerned that the Kinderhook Town Planning Board learned of the DOT's 'flip-flop' on the Widewaters issue through a letter provided by Widewaters to councilwoman Kramarchyk, an elected official who is not a member of the lead agency and apparently is not informed regarding the SEQRA process." "KNGG believes that because the November 13th DOT letter came from Widewaters via a member of the Town Board, and not directly from the DOT itself, it suggests that Widewaters is orchestrating a pressured approval by the Town Board," said Schaefer. He added, "Ironically, the DOT letter confirms KNGG's position that a supplemental DEIS is required, because it introduces entirely new concepts that need to be considered by the lead agency, the Planning Board and the public as well." Schaefer continued, "KNGG is very concerned about the way Widewaters, a member of the Kinderhook Town Board, and apparently DOT are manipulating a process for which the Town Planning Board has lawful responsibility. KNGG members are committed to supporting the Town Planning Board in its effort to go forward with the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement process in a fair and open manner. We‘ll see just how serious Widewaters is in adhering to the SEQRA process at the Planning Board’s Thursday night workshop." REFERENCED DOCUMENTS to be sent by FAX: October 2, 2002 Letter, DOT to Marco Marzocchi November 13, 2002 Letter, DOT to Marco Marzocchi November 27, 2002 Letter, Marco Marzocchi to Mary Kramarchyk, Kinderhook Town Board member December 2, 2002 Memorandum, Mary Kramarchyk to Town Board Members, CC: Town Planning Board, Attorney Marc Gerstman December 3, 2002 Letter, Edwin Simonsen, Chairman Kinderhook Town Planning Board to Councilwoman Mary Kramarchyk December 5, 2002 Letter Edwin Simonsen to William Fitzpatrick, DOT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen
Schaefer 518 758-2646 NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH DECEMBER 3, 2002 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth Respond to Widewaters
Complaint
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 758-2646 # # # NEWS RELEASE FROM KINDERHOOK NEIGHBORS FOR GOOD GROWTH SEPTEMBER 2, 2002 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Kinderhook Citizens Outraged by Town Planning Board Decision On Thursday evening, August 22, the Kinderhook Town Planning Board in a vote of 4 to 3 voted to accept the Widewaters’ PDEIS (Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement) as the DEIS (Draft Environmental Impact Statement) without alteration. The PDEIS is supposed to examine the environmental impact of the proposed Widewaters’ project on the community and is the first step in the process of the developer in pursuing their application to build a shopping mall in the Town. Allen Schaefer, president of Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth said, "It is an outrage that these four can hijack the SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) process, prohibiting the law from taking its course and thus shaming the Planning Board and the Town. It is with shock and dismay I see that these four acted without listening to the Town advisors: the Town Attorney, Marc Gold, and the Planning Board Engineer, Jim Green, who were both present and available. All we ask is to permit the time allotted by SEQRA for Widewaters to correct the PDEIS based on the Planning Board’s draft letter of August 22nd, thus allowing the Planning Board to reevaluate the PDEIS with an open mind before it is submitted to the DEC (Department of Environmental Conservation). Unfortunately the actions taken by these four members raise concerns of objectivity." In December of 2001the developer, Widewaters had petitioned the Town of Kinderhook for approval to build a shopping mall on a19 acre Kinderhook landmark viewshed located at the intersection of Routes 9, 9H and State Farm Road across from the Ichabod Crane School System Campus. Widewaters’ representative Marco Marzocchi has been meeting with the Town Planning Board for several months to work out objections about traffic congestion at the most busy intersection in Kinderhook, possible lack of water in the aquifer, possible water pollution from the septic system, (The soil drains quickly at the site.) excess height of parking lot lighting and aesthetic architecture and landscaping. As part of the SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) process the planning board was presented with the PDEIS by the developer Widewaters. By law the planning board had 45 days to review the PDEIS and compose a letter to Widewaters advising them of any inadequacies in the document. The planning board, on recommendation of the Town Engineer, Jim Green, P. E., called for traffic studies and soil and water studies. On receipt of the PDEIS, Jim Green declared that the document fell short in many areas and would need substantial revision. In a July 23rd letter to the planning board, Jim Green wrote, "Please be advised we and our traffic consultant, Creighton Manning Engineers (CME), are discontinuing our technical review of the (P) DEIS because of insufficient information. More specifically: Traffic, Parking, Town Comprehensive Plan, Fiscal Impact, Potable Water, Wastewater, Surface Water, Groundwater, Land Use (Zoning Code violations), Visual and Alternatives (other possible sites)." This quantitative list is given in detail within the letter Green submitted. A July 29th letter from Shelly A. Johnson, PE, PTOE, also of CME wrote, "The Traffic Impact Study (in the PDEIS) is inconsistent with the proposed site plan. It appears that two different reports were submitted to the DOT (Department of Transportation) and the Town for review. The applicant should reconcile the discrepancies and provide an updated traffic analysis that reflects the latest plan." This letter goes on in much more detail. A document was submitted to the planning board by attorney Jeff Baker for Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth, (KNGG), a group formed to prevent urban sprawl that is opposed to the project. It contained ten pages of examples of incompleteness, zoning code violations, density control violations plus water and soil studies done by AlphaGeoscience of Clinton Park, New York, a traffic study by URS Corporation of Latham NY and a report on visual impacts, community character and historic resources provided by historical architect, Marilyn Kaplan of Kinderhook. In addition KNGG pointed out that the Widewaters’ PDEIS traffic study ignored the Ichabod Crane School District, the Village of Kinderhook, the vast economic impact on the village of Valatie and any cumulative, growth-inducing impacts. The PDEIS does not assess the ability of local police; fire and ambulance services to handle increased demand or the potential adverse impacts of noise generated by the project. KNGG and its experts evaluated the PDEIS and made suggestions for further studies. As it stood, the document lacked important information and neglected essential studies. At the August 22nd Planning Board meeting, on completion of the letter that advised Widewaters to amend the PDEIS by clarifying much of the document and calling for more studies, Widewaters’ Marco Marzocchi, ignoring the 2½ hours of discussion and the board conclusions, proposed that a motion be made to accept the PDEIS as is, rather than declaring it incomplete and submitting the list of issues to be addressed. In response, Jeff Baker, attorney for KNGG told the board that the document, "does not have the basic information that allows you to go forward. What Widewaters is asking you to do, is to be a rubber stamp." Knowing of all these facts that were made available to the planning board members and discussed at the various meetings and the possible legal issues involved, Don Gaylord, Mike Leiser, Sal Martino and Tim Ooms voted not to accept the letter the board drafted to Widewaters asking the PDEIS to be revised. They defeated the motion 4 to 3. Gaylord then introduced a motion to declare the PDEIS complete. Sal Martino seconded it. The motion passed by the same four. Ed Simonsen, Richard Anderson and Gerard Minot-Scheuerman voted against it. Ed Simonsen, Chairman, criticized the four board members for not voicing their feelings while the board was reviewing the draft letter. "I don’t understand how people can sit here, go through this entire discussion and not voice their dissent." Gaylord declared, "We’re going to accelerate the whole process by accepting a document that has already been prepared." Responding to Gaylord’s statement, KNGG’s Schaefer said, "Why accelerate the process? The sole benefactor would be the developer when the responsibility of the board is to protect the Town and the community. This is the largest project to be proposed in Kinderhook. Time should be taken to examine the PDEIS thoroughly. This is a big operation. The mistakes made today will be with us for many generations to come." Short of calling the PDEIS incomplete, Gaylord, in a motion reflecting the board’s objections to the content of the PDEIS, proposed, "The document we produced tonight, along with its referenced attachments be put out for public review with the DEIS." The motion passed. Jeff Baker, KNGG’s attorney, commented, "The Town is opening itself up to a lawsuit if the Planning Board did not conduct the SEQRA review process properly. The (Kinderhook Town) Planning Board is asking the public and involved agencies to comment on a document that its own consultants said is inadequate and provides insufficient information on which to evaluate the project. If Widewaters responds to those comments by providing the necessary information, that will require its publication in a Supplemental EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) subject to a full comment period. While Widewaters may be claiming that KNGG is delaying the process, the fact is that KNGG and the Planning Board‘s consultants were trying to assure that the process proceeded efficiently by having an adequate document to begin the formal review. Now Widewaters and the four members of the Planning Board have effectively guaranteed more delay by mandating the eventual preparation of an SEIS (Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement)." The date set for the public hearing is October 15th at 7 PM at a location to be advised. The end of the public comment period was set for November 15th. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Schaefer 518 758-2646 # # # TO SEE KNGG EDITORIALS - CLICK ON "LETTERS TO THE EDITOR"
* * * |
