The Woodstock Planning Board is reviewing Zena Homes’ application to extend and widen Eastwoods Drive in Woodstock, which would serve as the sole access road for a proposed 30-home subdivision in the Town of Ulster.

Alec Gladd, an attorney with Cuddy & Feder representing Zena Homes, presented the developers’ latest sketch plan to the board on Thursday, Sept. 17. About 75 project opponents attended, many holding signs calling for additional impact studies and protection of wetlands surrounding the proposed development. The meeting included no public comment period.

The appearance came about five weeks after the Town of Ulster Planning Board determined the project would not have significant adverse environmental effects, allowing its review to proceed without a full environmental impact statement. Although the homes would be built in Ulster, their only proposed access is Eastwoods Drive, a narrow gravel road serving five homes in Woodstock.

The application before the Woodstock board includes a proposed lot-line revision to consolidate three parcels into two, along with plans to extend and widen Eastwoods Drive to meet Woodstock’s major road standards.

The dead-end road varies from 10 to 19 feet wide. Under the standards, it would need to be widened to a uniform 20 feet to accommodate increased residential traffic and emergency vehicles. The proposal would also extend the 3,400-foot road by 1,200 feet.

The developers are requesting two waivers. One would exempt them from providing a second point of access to the subdivision. The town’s subdivision design standards require subdivisions of 20 or more lots to have at least two connections to existing roads.

The other concerns the requirement for a 20-foot-wide asphalt roadway with 4-foot graded shoulders along the entire length of Eastwoods Drive. The developers identified about 900 feet of the road as lying within wetland buffer areas. Their application proposes the required shoulders everywhere except those stretches.

Eastwoods Drive would remain a gravel road, Gladd said, as the Planning Board requested at the developers’ last appearance on Nov. 6, 2025.

Gladd said keeping Eastwoods Drive as the sole access road would minimize harm to the Zena Woods Critical Environmental Area, which a second road would cross. That second road would require clearing an additional 5.6 acres, according to the sketch plan.

Planning Board Vice Chair Judith Kerman expressed dissatisfaction with both options.

“I continue to have concerns about having only one access road,” Kerman said. “You know, a tree comes down, and that road’s closed. And I’m not happy about the idea of cutting through the CEA. You’ve given us two bad options.”

The room erupted in cheers.

Kerman also questioned whether a single access road would be sufficient during an emergency such as a forest fire, when residents would need to evacuate.

“I think our standard for two roads is there for a reason,” she said.

John Lyons, the Planning Board’s attorney, outlined the standard the board must apply.

“The main thing that you’re looking at, when you’re deciding whether to grant a waiver, is whether granting the waiver is going to adversely affect public health and safety,” Lyons said.

Lyons said the board would gather input from planning consultant Nan Stolzenberg and a civil engineer, who would review the Eastwoods Drive plan for safety, traffic, construction feasibility, and environmental impacts.

The board said it would schedule a public hearing after receiving the consultants’ input and completing a comprehensive review, including the developers’ application to the Town of Ulster.

Andy Mossey, executive director of the Woodstock Land Conservancy, which opposes the development, welcomed the thoroughness of the board’s review.

“There’s still a lot of questions that we have, and we’ll continue to ask, but the process is continuing, and it doesn’t look like they’re going to be jumping into anything, which is what we were originally afraid of,” Mossey said.

The conservancy has also turned to the courts over whether the Ulster Town Board must review the development’s site plan.

In an earlier Article 78 proceeding, the conservancy sought to compel the town to respond to its request for an interpretation of the town code. According to the subsequent court filings, a June 2 court order directed the zoning board to consider and decide that request. The building inspector then determined that Town Board approval wasn’t required, an interpretation the zoning board upheld in August.

The conservancy filed another Article 78 proceeding in state Supreme Court in Ulster County on Sept. 11 seeking to overturn that decision. It contends that the proposed development must undergo Town Board site plan review because its combined structures exceed the town code’s 2,500-square-foot threshold.

The zoning board’s position, as described in the filings, is that the code doesn’t expressly require combining the floor areas of buildings on separate subdivision lots to determine whether Town Board review is required. The conservancy contends that the proposal should be considered as an integrated development, including its homes, recreation building, and shared infrastructure.

The September petition also alleges procedural failures at a July 13 zoning board hearing, including inadequate public notice, an agenda that listed the appeal under new business rather than public hearings, and an initial announcement that general public comments wouldn’t be accepted. Although the board later allowed some residents to speak, the conservancy contends that the confusion prevented meaningful public participation. It is asking the court to annul the zoning board’s decision and require a properly noticed public hearing.

Developer Evan Kleinberg told The Overlook in August that he expected the remaining approvals to move quickly.

No date has been set for a public hearing in Woodstock.

Photos by Michael Sofronski/The Overlook.

Isabella Schoonover is a staff reporter for The Overlook covering Woodstock, Saugerties, Hurley, and surrounding Ulster County communities. Send correspondence to isabella@theoverlooknews.com.