The Plattekill Town Board has scheduled a Public Hearing for a short term moratorium on the construction of multi-family dwellings for Wednesday, February 3 at 7 p.m. at the town hall. The Planning Board initiated the request because they have indicated that portions of the code need to be revised. The Planning Board has stated they want clear definitions of what undevelopable land means and have questioned unit density bonuses.

Planning Board Chairwoman, Judith Mayle is unsure if the board understands the need for the moratorium in order to fix the code.

“I think there was a sense initially of ‘why now’, and why didn’t the Planning Board do something before now” she said. “It is the Town Board’s responsibility and they failed to proceed forward on our recommendations.”

Mayle is hopeful the moratorium, if passed, will give them the time to make the proper revisions.

“I am not sure what they are proposing as a moratorium,” she said. “The law has not been given to the Planning Board for comment. Typically my understanding is that Town Boards like to send things to Planning Boards, especially if it’s a zoning issue, for their comments so you do not wind up going to a public hearing and problems are pointed out there. I can’t speak to their reasoning.”

“I don’t know what the proposal is other than it is a moratorium I think it’s for four months with a two month extension,” she said.

It was revealed that Planning Board member Richard Gorres received a call from Town Board member Jennifer Zupan concerning the moratorium issue. Gorres indicated that one of Zupan’s concerns was the Fosler Road project. He said that part of the call was unsettling but is willing to give Zupan the benefit of the doubt, since she is a new Town Board member. Zupan characterized her call as one of inquiry for more background information and not to favor Fosler Road LLC.

“It was more of a fact-finding mission more than anything,” she said of her call. “I wanted to understand better how things had gotten to where they were and how to best move forward whether that means working with a moratorium and stopping all multi-family projects until it is ended, or not doing a moratorium at all and trying to revise the law without a moratorium. It was not that particular project, it was projects in general.”

The developer of the Fosler Road LLC project went to the Zoning Board of Appeals to appeal a Planning Board decision on their lower calculation of the unit density. Mayle said the ZBA received a determination from the building inspector that overturned the Planning Board’s decision. Mayle said the Planning Board is currently appealing the decision of the building inspector to the ZBA on this project

Mayle said the developer may be allowed 3 more units “and may be upwards of more than that.” Mayle said she does not know the increase in population density since the Planning Board has not seen the number of bedrooms for the project.

Mayle said a moratorium may have an impact on all current projects before the Planning Board, but since her board has not seen the actual law, she is unsure if Fosler Road is included.

Loertscher confirmed that Section 6 of the proposed moratorium law would allow the Town Board to exempt any project that makes a hardship appeal in writing to them, if they feel it is warranted. Another public hearing would then be scheduled on that. Loertscher also confirmed that lawyers for the Fosler Road project have called him, spoken at length on the issue and are looking for relief.

“Nothing for nothing, my phone has been ringing off the hook,” he said.

Loertscher said he is not even sure if the Town Board will pass the law.

“I think it’s very iffy, but that’s my opinion” he said.

Zupan said she would be open to hearing from the developer of the Fosler Road project, indicating that she has not made any decision on it at this point.

“I wouldn’t be vehemently opposed just on principle,” she said. “That’s why the clause [sec 6] is there so that everyone has the opportunity for relief from that law. That’s why it was put there. I can’t say yes or no right now.”

Mayle said that although the Fosler Road project has garnered significant attention, density bonuses allowed for multi-family projects are far higher than previously thought.

“Somebody can get up to four times the allowed amount of density and more on a project,” she said.

Mayle says there are two bonus opportunities.

“One, a bonus opportunity within the scope of the law itself of 100 percent,” she said. “Then there is a second bonus in the scope of the bulk area table. When you look at that table, depending what zone you are in, you get another bonus based on whether you have central water and sewer.”

Central water and sewer, Mayle said, can get the developer four times the number of units than one can achieve on a typical lot, in addition to the 100 percent.

“There will be a huge impact on the water table, whether the land can handle the sewage, the impact on the roads, our schools and the services we have to provide these developments,” she said. “On top of it, if the developer comes in and they get preliminary approval from the Planning Board, they get to go out and build the project and when it is finished, that’s when they come back for final approval.”

Mayle said there is the added issue of getting bonds and letters of credit in place and inspection fees.

“There is nothing within the law that addresses those costs,” she said. “There is no other type of project that gets that, no other type of development that gets such a density bonus, no other type of development that you can build before you get final approval.”

By Mark Reynolds
mreynolds@tcnewspapers.com