The much-debated Zena Homes project on the Ulster-Woodstock border moved closer to clearing a key environmental hurdle after a Town of Ulster consultant said the development doesn’t pose a significant impact on the environment.
Max Stach of Nelson Pope Voorhis, whom the town appointed as town planner last year, told the Planning Board at its May 12 meeting that concerns about habitat fragmentation and septic feasibility don’t require a full environmental impact statement.
His recommendation marked a reversal from the position he took at the Feb. 10 Planning Board meeting. He said the developers had since added septic testing, increased conservation land, reduced grading, added wildlife culverts, and committed to avoiding wetlands.
While Stach’s recommendation for a so-called negative declaration doesn’t mean that Zena Homes will be approved, it suggests that the Planning Board may decide to proceed without a full environmental impact statement. The board is expected to make its SEQRA determination at its June 9 meeting, according to Woodstock Land Conservancy’s Executive Director Andy Mossey, with a public hearing on the project to follow.
Zena Homes, initially pitched as Woodstock National, a 191-home community with a golf course and helipad, was revised amid public opposition. The current proposal calls for a 30-lot residential subdivision. Of the roughly 624-acre property, 106 acres lie in Ulster, with the remaining land in Woodstock. The developers say construction would occur only on the Ulster portion of the site, while the main road into the property is in Woodstock. The Town of Ulster was named by the state as lead agency for the project’s environmental review in November.
Stach’s change of heart drew immediate criticism from the Woodstock Land Conservancy, which has raised environmental concerns about the project that include its proposed septic system.
“For him to all of a sudden change his outcome, it makes no sense,” said Mossey. Ulster is moving closer to a decision on the environmental review before the public had a full chance to weigh in, he said.
“Bait and switch,” Mossey said. “Completely disingenuous.”
In a letter to the town on May 12, before that day’s meeting, the conservancy raised concern about forest fragmentation, septic feasibility, Eastwoods Drive, and what the group described as improper segmentation of the environmental review. No decision should be made without a public comment session, the group said.
The conservancy says the developer’s latest habitat and forest fragmentation study doesn’t include a detailed replanting plan requested by the Planning Board and also omits or minimizes nearby protected lands including Woodstock Land Conservancy properties, the Ruby Rod and Gun Club lands, and the state-recognized Zena Critical Environmental Area, according to the letter.
In addition, the conservancy says a review by Sterling Environmental Engineering found that the project file doesn’t include enough information to conclude that septic systems would be feasible on each lot. The soil investigation summary lacked required details, the Ulster County Department of Health didn’t observe the soil testing and soil survey data shows it isn’t conducive to onsite septic systems, Sterling found.
The conservancy also said that Ulster must evaluate the project’s impact on Eastwoods Drive, the private road in Woodstock that would serve as the project’s only access. The developers want waivers from Woodstock subdivision road standards, including limits on road length, requirements for a second access road, and roadway design standards, the conservancy said in its letter.
Eastwoods Drive residents Tana and Thomas O’Sullivan said in a separate letter contained in the conservancy’s submission, that about 500 feet of Eastwoods Drive is only 13 ½ feet wide and that portions in wetland buffer areas would remain as it is.
“Eastwoods is a substandard road that is proposed to remain substandard,” the O’Sullivans wrote.
Representatives for the developers countered at this week’s meeting that they’ve answered the town’s two major environmental questions: Whether individual septic systems could work and whether the subdivision would fragment forest and wildlife habitat. Town Engineer Bruce Utter reviewed soil testing for septic systems and found it suitable, they said.
The developers also submitted a habitat and forest fragmentation study by LaBella Associates that says the project would leave about 70 acres of the 106-acre Ulster portion undisturbed and that a proposed conservation area along the western boundary had been expanded to 30 acres from 18.
“There is a large surrounding forested area,” said Cindy Von Haugg, an environmental scientist at LaBella Associates. “No islands or unbroken areas are being created as a result of this project.”
Nelson Pope Voorhis ecologists haven’t completed a written review of LaBella’s submission. Still, Stach said they’d substantially reviewed it and concluded that habitat fragmentation concern isn’t significant.
Noah Eckstein is the editor-in-chief of The Overlook. Send correspondence to noah@theoverlooknews.com.