Zena Homes advanced through two Town of Ulster reviews this week after the Planning Board issued a negative declaration for the proposed subdivision and the Zoning Board of Appeals denied a challenge from the Woodstock Land Conservancy.
The Planning Board voted Tuesday to determine that the controversial project in the towns of Woodstock and Ulster is unlikely to have significant adverse environmental impacts. The decision means the project will not be required to undergo a full environmental impact statement before moving ahead in the review process.
The Zoning Board of Appeals denied the appeal Wednesday. The conservancy had argued that the Town Board, rather than the Planning Board, should review the Zena Homes application.
The appeal followed a June court order directing the Town of Ulster to provide an interpretation on whether the Town Board was required to review the project under the town’s zoning law. The court didn’t decide which board had jurisdiction; it ordered the town to answer the question so the administrative process could proceed.
The proposal calls for a 32-lot subdivision, including 30 single-family residential lots, one lot for a 2,400-square-foot recreation and fitness facility for subdivision residents, and a 12.34-acre nonbuildable lot that would be transferred to the adjacent Ruby Rod and Gun Club.
The project still needs site plan review in Ulster and approval from the Town of Woodstock for work on Eastwoods Drive, the private Woodstock road that would serve as the subdivision’s only access. The Planning Board’s resolution said the project would require approval for improvements to portions of Eastwoods Drive and an extension of about 1,200 feet to reach the Ulster parcel.
Eastwoods Drive has become one of the central points of opposition to the project. Residents and the Woodstock Land Conservancy have argued that the road is too narrow, environmentally constrained, and inadequate to serve as the only access for 30 new homes.
Andy Mossey, the conservancy’s executive director, said the group was disappointed by the Planning Board’s decision.
“We don’t agree,” Mossey said. “There is significant environmental impact.”
Mossey said the conservancy expects to explore other ways to challenge the review process as the project moves ahead. He also said the group objected to how the ZBA appeal was handled, saying the process was “incoherent” and didn’t give the public enough opportunity to participate.
Eddie Greenberg and Evan Kleinberg, the developers behind Zena Homes, praised both boards in a written statement after Wednesday’s decision.
“We want to thank the Ulster Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals, as well as the town staff, volunteers, and consultants for the tremendous time and effort they have devoted to reviewing the Zena Homes submission,” Greenberg and Kleinberg said.
The developers said the unanimous decisions followed a review of “thousands of pages of studies, reports, and legal materials” and said the process improved the project.
“While anyone has the right to oppose a project, it’s clear that our opposition has refused to explore the possibility that responsible development of low impact single-family homes can occur in harmony with environmental care, consideration, and protection,” Greenberg and Kleinberg said.
After Tuesday’s Planning Board vote, some residents objected to the board’s decision and questioned why the negative declaration came before a public hearing.
A consultant for the town said state law requires the board to either adopt a negative declaration or find a draft environmental impact statement complete before holding a public hearing on the subdivision application. He also said the board could reopen environmental review if significant new information emerges during the public hearing process.
The board didn’t immediately schedule a public hearing. On the advice of outside counsel, officials said they would first complete required SEQR filings, then consider scheduling a hearing at the board’s September meeting, likely for October.
The Town of Ulster Planning Board became lead agency for the project’s environmental review after the Woodstock Planning Board objected to Ulster taking that role. The state Department of Environmental Conservation designated Ulster as lead agency in October.
The project, formerly pitched as Woodstock National, was once proposed as a 191-home development with a golf course and helipad before being revised amid public opposition.
Noah Eckstein is the editor-in-chief of The Overlook. Send correspondence to noah@theoverlooknews.com.
