62- Transcripts from Jan. 7 and Jan. 14

Paul Shultis told me, on January 14, that the meeting discussion of January 7, to which I refer, did not happen the way I thought it did. He denied decisions made by the planning board, and attempted to “correct” the record, when in fact the best he could have hoped for was to admit that what happened at the earlier meeting was simply no longer valid. It seems to me that Shultis should not have told me that I misunderstood, when clearly the planning board did put this topic of affordable housing on its workshop agenda, during the January 7 meeting. It's just not cool to "correct" the record of a previous meeting just because you feel like it.

If you are interested in reading the transcript, which I did my best to write, and admittedly missed words here and there amid the mumbling and multiple talkers, then read on.


Planning Board Meeting
Jan. 7, 2010
(the relevant part of this discussion begins after the row of XXXX’s.)

Paul Shultis: OK. So, discussion on workshop meeting content for twenty-ten. Anyone want to jump in?

Peter Cross: ?

Paul Shultis: OK. Speak up.

Peter Cross: Alright. Shall I make it short. I have four suggestions of things I would like us to take up over the following year. One of them is green development, that we find a way to encourage development to be done in green ways. Since we can’t force people to change the way they build- we can’t change the building code, we need to come up with a plan that would put the equivalent of a development fee on a new construction, and everything that they do to meet a green guideline, and there are guidelines for green building, whether it be solar or whether it be whatever- reduces that fee. So they have a choice, to pay a fee, or to build green. The fee would go to the town so they could do green construction of our own facilities. I’m gonna look into that.

Paul Shultis: I like that one.

Peter Cross: I don’t know how we can do it. The second issue is biodiversity zones. I know we talked about biodiversity for Mark..... My belief is that the town ought to be divided into watershed zones, and within those zones, you have your biodiversity because biodiversity follows the watercourse. So, maybe there’s a way that we can approach the biodiversity issue by doing it in watersheds, which eventually will affect zoning. Because eventually, those properties that are within those watersheds might have to be rezoned. That’s one issue. The other one we talked about is parks and rec fees, which is the idea of charging developers a fee, which originally was to buy or build parks and recreation areas. We don’t collect enough now from development to do that, ‘cause the cost of land is so high, and what we charge is five hundred dollars a pop, is never going to buy us land. And for the famous town of Woodstock, to not have adequate parks and recreation areas seems you know unexcuseable. In forty years we really haven’t done anything. So it seems to me that we need to find a way to improve, buy or build, better parks and rec fees.

Paul Shultis: ??? If I may interrupt you one second,... I spoke with Jeff today. At the next town board meeting, they are bringing up our schedule, our fee schedule. I mentioned to him that we are looking at raising the cost that we had. He suggests that we, before their meeting, or tonight, come up with ??? a new figure, whether it’s a thousand, fifteen hundred dollars, and not saying that won’t be able to be adjusted again in the future, but to start an increase right now with....

Laurie Ylvisaker: Put it in the package that we worked on fourteen months ago and gave them.

Paul Shultis: Yeah.

Laurie Ylvisaker: Right.

Paul Shultis: But we didn’t change that.

Laurie Ylvisaker: No, well we did, but not enough.

Paul Shultis: Well,

Laurie Ylvisaker: OK maybe we did.

Paul Shultis: I don’t, I don’t...

Peter Cross: Well we didn’t because we left it open-ended.

Paul Shultis: Open-ended. So his suggestion is we go to a thousand, or between the two of us it was a thousand or fifteen hundred dollars. They would make that...

Laurie Ylvisaker: What about one percent of the assessed value, which is done normally in the..

Paul Shultis: But you know what you’re going to end up with? But you’re going to end up with lawyers[???] I talked about this... down in Zena, when they were doing this IBM subdivision, they gave away that type of land, and own pieces down there that are absolutely useless.

??:You couldn’t create a park on it?

Paul Shultis: Yeah, they’re open space. But, they’re a two acre parcel in the middle of a subdivision. Is that what we want? Do we want little two acre parcels scattered all over town that we own?

??: I don’t think that’s what Laurie...

David Corbett: ... do with space. She’s talking fee...

????

Paul Shultis: Yeah but when the fee exceeds a reasonable number, they’re going to say: I’m going to give you ten percent.

??: I see what you’re saying.
Paul Shultis: I’m not going to give you twenty thousand dollars. I’m going to give you ten percent of the land.

David Corbett: OK but the land has to be...

Paul Shultis: You can’t tell 'em that.

David Corbett: Why not?

Paul Shultis: Because it doesn’t say that in our laws.

????

David Corbett: It has to be accessible to the road, that’s all.

Paul Shultis: Well ....??... the ones from Zena are. But they’re not buildable.

Laurie Ylvisaker: Well, I just say here that my suggestion is to have one percent of the assessed or recent sale value when the applicant comes before the planning board.

Paul Shultis: Then, I’ll tell Jeff not to make any changes.

Laurie Ylvisaker: No-

Paul Shultis: No, because we don’t have time to decide, so we’ll just leave it... go ahead Peter.

?????

Paul Shultis: Because it’s not thorough enough to know if the one percent’s going to be fair, and then...

David Corbett: What’s Jeff’s recommendation? What’s Jeff’s recommendation?

Paul Shultis: It’s just to up the per lot fee, for now, so that we start to gain more and we can readdress it in the future.

??????

??: Irrespective of the size lot?

Paul Shultis: Right now, it’s five hundred dollars per lot.

David Corbett: OK, whether it’s five acres or fifty acres.

Paul Shultis: It’s per lot. So if you have two lots, it’s a thousand dollars. Three lots fifteen hundred dollars. Doesn’t matter if it’s a ten acre lot or fifty acre lot, five hundred dollars, per new lot.

David Corbett: ???? I agree there’s not enough time to do anything before the next meeting, but but clearly that’s unfair in the long run. Because if I you know got a hundred thousand dollar lot and I pay five hundred bucks, and really penalizes a ten thousand dollar lot....??? So we may want to do what you’re suggesting as a temporary measure, but I strongly urge just to advise Jeff that Laurie’s formula is the way they should be looking.

Laurie Ylvisaker: When is the town board going to adopt our zoning changes that we sent them fourteen months ago?

Paul Shultis: I don’t know what else is going to be on their agenda, but i know the fee schedule is.

Laurie Ylvisaker: At the next meeting?

Paul Shultis: At the next town board meeting.

Laurie Ylvisaker: Which is when?

??: Next Tuesday.

Laurie Ylvisaker: It is next Tuesday.

Peter Cross: Definitely, I agree, if we go for fifteen hundred, it’s better than what we have now. The bottom line is it’s not going into a fund, which is to be used strictly for parks and recreation.

Paul Shultis: We talked about that also, and he ...??... have Steve Barshov come up with some language.

X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X

Peter Cross: And my last one is back to our old one, which is the affordable housing. And, regardless of what happens with RUPCO, or anyone else, we still haven’t really addressed the issue. One of the ones we are looking at is the Bearsville corridor, and perhaps we should look at a planned residential development, rather than commercial, neighborhood, but we still have not addressed affordable housing. And so we’re slowly creating our mini mansions and we’re not getting to that. I’d like somehow this year to address that.

Paul Shultis: OK.

Peter Cross: That’s it.

Paul Shultis: So...

Laurie Ylvisaker: So specifically to address turning the Bears- the commercial- the light industrial district in the Bearsville corridor, into...

Peter Cross: Planned residential

Laurie Ylvisaker: Planned residential, or planned neighborhoods.

Peter Cross: Right

Laurie Ylvisaker: That’s a specific...I would second that.

Paul Shultis: Well I think what we’re...

Laurie Ylvisaker: As something to work on.

Paul Shultis: Does anyone else have any workshop...

David Corbett: ...Pedro’s covered a lot of things that we’ve already discussed over the years, and for my money, if we achieve any couple of these, that would be fantastic. So maybe, as far as I’m concerned, this list more than covers...

Paul Shultis: OK, so out of Peter’s list, which one would you like to tackle at the first workshop? Green development, biodiversity, parks....

Peter Cross: Or affordable housing.

Paul Shultis: Affordable housing.

Laurie Ylvisaker: I’d like to do the affordable housing in the Bearsville corridor.

David Corbett: Um, can I...

Paul Shultis: That I thought we were going to leave this up to the town board to appoint a committee.

Peter Cross: We’re still waiting for them to appoint a committee.

Paul Shultis: To appoint a committee.

David Corbett??: That’s a big one.

Dara Trahan: ???? appointed a committee?

Paul Shultis: I mean we can do it on our own if we want.

Laurie Ylvisaker: I thought we were working on that. Why don’t we work on it, and if they appoint a committee, we can...

Paul Shultis: OK, so the first workshop...

Laurie Ylvisaker: We can also do two things in a workshop. I mean it might make the workshop more interesting.

Paul Shultis: It might.

David Corbett: Oh I think sure the question of aff-

Paul Shultis: And we might not get anything accomplished.

Dara Trahan: ??? watershed protection , the LI industrial.[asks for clarification of list of topics]

Paul Shultis: So I would say, yeah, we could put two on the first workshop. We’ll put affordable housing and ...

Peter Cross: Parks and rec?

Paul Shultis: Parks and rec would be a good one to work on right away. ???? first workshop...

Laurie Ylvisaker: That’s next Thursday?

David Corbett: Parks and rec and what?

Peter Cross: And affordable housing.

David Corbett: OK. Peter, ,,,????,you mentioned green development. There’s an overlap there with affordable housing too. As you know we discussed it before, cluster housing, how much less impactful it is on land in general, and therefore contributes to... ?? green development concept. So, we should be looking... not just at... and also what is affordable housing, constitutes affordable housing, not necessarily the cheapest housing.. but also how much of an impact... the land....green development....

Paul Henderson: I wonder if instead of affordable housing should simply be called density housing. and not put the class...

Peter Cross: The money part of it?

Paul Henderson: The class...

David Corbett: I think it’s all part of the same...

Paul Henderson: Do you know what I mean, I mean wealthy people should be living this way. Should be is a big word, but...You talk about going green. Let’s all do it.

Laurie Ylvisaker: Well I mean, actually you can use Maverick Knolls as an example of something where there’s a great diversity of age groups and price range and social status. And it’s a very successful community.

David Corbett: which is?

Laurie Ylvisaker: Maverick Knolls...

???

Laurie Ylvisaker: Whatever.

??: It does look pretty...

:??: The first building is screened in...

Laurie Ylvisaker: ??? nicely built.

Paul Shultis: Alright so, we are going to take those two topics at the first workshop, and we will figure out additional topics for the rest of the year. If anyone has any in the future, we’ll bring them up at the first workshop.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Planning Board Public Hearing on
RUPCO Site Plan and Special Use Permit
Jan. 14, 2010

Robin Segal: What I want to say is, following the last speaker, who talked about affordable housing. You know, I’ve heard that people won’t travel to come and live in Woodstock because that’s not the way affordable housing works, but Woodstock, it’s a pretty attractive place to live and I think that anybody who qualifies to live in this project, would want to come and live here, to relocate here, so you know, whatever the small percentage of residents from Woodstock are going to be, it’s not going to solve affordable housing for the town. And I know that the planning board knows that, because what was so interesting is January seventh, I was attending the planning board meeting, and the person on the board, now I’m not sure what the conflict of interest is, but Peter Cross, who is recused from this project, he came, and there was these workshops that the planning board has every year, I guess, I don’t know because I’m new, but anyway, he had four topics. And the first topic that another member of the planning board wanted to talk about, before green building, before parks and recreation, and before I can’t remember the other one, but the one that they’re starting with is affordable housing in the Bearsville Corridor. This planning board is going to start the year with a workshop on affordable housing in the Bearsville Corridor. What does that tell you about what they believe RUPCO is going to solve?

Paul Shultis: No, I, I, I don’t, I think you misinterpreted our meeting. We were, we had asked, so I can correct, so that everyone is aware, we have asked the town board to appoint a committee,

Robin Segal: Yeah.

Paul Shultis: To address that situation. And we’re hoping that they will appoint a committee, early part of this year. We as a town planning board are not touching the topic until a subcommittee has been formed by the town board. So we are not, that is not our first topic,

Robin Segal: But you had four topics. And that was the

Paul Shultis: That’s not the first one. We will not be addressing, I guarantee you, we will not be addressing it, as a planning board, until a subcommittee has been formed by the town board, and they come back to us with information, and-

Robin Segal: So did you revisit that topic later on in the evening?

Paul Shultis: I, I think you may have heard wrong. I’m not sure how it is [?], or how you interpreted it, I just promise you that our first workshop [?] is either going to be on green zoning, [?] and recreation, and I agree with you, I don’t remember the third one.

Dara Trahan: Remember the board specifically said we had asked them and I was surprised that they hadn’t addressed the memo asking to form a committee.

Paul Shultis: Right. We will not be touching Simulaids, the Bearsville corridor, until the subcommittee comes back with information [???]

Audience member: Why didn’t we have a subcommittee...

[The discussion is pulled away from the specific topic of whether the planning board put “affordable housing in the Bearsville Corridor” on their 2010 workshop agenda. The discussion ensued, and finally I decided, to make a closing statement, over the ensuing discussion.]

Robin Segal: Well, I’ll get the tapes, because, I’ll get the tapes because the phrase “affordable housing in the Bearsville corridor” was said over and over again on January seventh. I heard it, I was there. I mean, you heard it [pointing to Iris York.]

Paul Shultis: Well, I’m going to correct the record and say that we will not be addressing it until the subcommittee reports back to us, and at that point, we will be addressing the revisiting or the possible rezoning of the neighborhood from light industrial.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx