How Business Friendly Should Putnam Valley Be?
For the last few years, the Town Board has expressed a desire to open up more areas of Putnam Valley to small businesses, "mom and pop" in character, in a way that would integrate them smoothly into residential areas and help boost the town's tax base. The board is now mounting an effort to make that goal a reality and, if successful, it could portend major changes to certain neighborhoods.
At a special meeting on October 29th, the board unveiled a proposal to change the town's zoning code and map to create a more flexible Neighborhood Commercial district. As usual, the devil is in the details and the public can learn more about those details at a Town Hall hearing on November 19th at 6pm.
This zoning drama is unfolding as Putnam Valley is undergoing a major shift in leadership. This week the results of the election for Supervisor and Town Board were decided and the two Republicans who were spearheading this zoning initiative, Supervisor Jacqueline Annabi and Town Board Member Stacey Tompkins, have lost their seats. They are being replaced by two Democrats: Supervisor-elect Alison Jolicoeur and Member-elect C.J. Brooks.
If no significant questions or concerns about this proposal are raised at next week's public hearing, the Annabi-led Town Board has the option of voting on this legislation before the end of the year. Alternatively, they could leave it for the next administration to resolve.
What the town is proposing
According to the draft documents you can find here, the proposed zoning identifies seven hamlets where the town thinks such mixed use development would be desirable. The seven areas are Crofts Corners near Town Hall; three other intersections along Oscawana Lake Road - at Cedar Drive, Sunset Hill and Dunderberg; the intersection at Peekskill Hollow, Mill and Church streets where the Grange, the cemetery and the History Museum are located; Tompkins Corners; and the area along Peekskill Hollow Road near the Taconic Parkway.
The proposal lists 40 properties that would become part of this revised Neighborhood Commercial (CN) district. Of those, 30 are now in residentially zoned districts; the other 14 are in the currently defined CN. These 40 property owners should be receiving letters from the town shortly to explain the proposed changes and to encourage them to give feedback and attend the public hearing on the 19th.
Some potential concerns
Of course, the nightmare scenario for many homeowners in a quiet residential area is that a Dunkin Donuts or a Wendy's moves in next door. Annabi and Tompkins, who worked with the newly formed Neighborhood Business Committee on this proposal, stress that they share that concern and believe they have built in adequate protections. Among other things, the proposal removes theaters, laundromats, bars, and gas stations from the list of establishments that can now apply for a special use permit in the current CN district.
They also point to design standards they are proposing for this new mixed-use district that they believe will mitigate the risk that a hamlet ends up resembling the commercial area of nearby Route 6. On paper, these proposed design standards look reasonable, even appealing. They include 15-foot side and rear setbacks with six-foot screening that would be required for businesses abutting residentially-zoned properties.
However, the proposed law leaves a gaping hole in these design standards: "The Planning Board may use its discretion to waive or modify these standards." That discretion extends to the minimum lot size, height, lot and bulk regulations, minimum street frontage, and related standards that are included in the existing town code. This would give the four members of the Planning Board enormous power to decide how and whether a business gets to establish itself in an otherwise residential neighborhood.
The proposal also contains some confusing elements. For example, the accompanying environmental assessment form states that shopping centers will be excluded from the list of businesses that can apply for a special use permit, but it leaves in mini-malls, which has the same definition in the town code as a shopping center.
At the October 29th meeting, Supervisor Annabi struggled to explain how the Planning Board would administer the proposed code. In the proposal, for instance, fast food establishments and restaurants can apply for a special use permit. But, she said, "Fast food could be considered an ice cream shop... It’s not necessarily fast food as we know it." As for restaurants, "We’re not talking like an IHOP, but we do want, everyone wants, something where you can sit down, cafe style." Is one person's IHOP another person's cafe? The board's intention is clearly to encourage "small-scale" or "low-impact" businesses, as it states in its proposal. But without more definition, it's unclear how the Planning Board would determine what is appropriate and what is not or the legal basis for those decisions. It's also unclear what role the Zoning Board would have in this process.
Supervisor-elect Jolicoeur says she has concerns about the power being given to the Planning Board in this draft as well as its "loose and vague" language. "It's important to continue to look to rezone in ways that could be beneficial to the town, while protecting adjacent property owners," Jolicoeur said. "I think we need more time with this."
What kind of review of this proposal is required?
According to the town's lawyer, this proposed zoning change triggers what is known as a Type 1 action of SEQRA, which she described as "the strictest" of the state's required environmental reviews. The Town Board has asked its part-time planning consultant, Bruce Barber, to prepare that review even though he's also one of the authors of the proposed code. The environmental review form that Barber prepared takes a decidedly positive view of the impact of these proposed changes: "The proposed revisions will not result in any land disturbance, substantive increases in traffic, negative impacts on natural resources or requirements for additional community services."
In addition to Barber and the lawyer, the town's part-time engineer and the building inspector also worked on this proposal. At the special board meeting, Barber said the proposal has gone through half a dozen drafts and had also been reviewed by the Neighborhood Business Committee (NBC) and modified in response. (The NBC's five community members include the wife of Town Board member Christian Russo and the wife of Conservative Party chair Henry Lopez.) Barber said the NBC's review was informed by the results of a "town wide" survey on these issues that was conducted over the summer. The survey is on the town's website and was distributed at local businesses, at Town Day, and was mentioned in Annabi's July newsletter. According to minutes from NBC's late August meeting, there were "up to 45 responses".
To what degree does the proposal reflect the views of the Planning Board and Zoning Board members who will have to administer these changes? The board chairmen were two of only three people in the audience at the October 29th special meeting. Supervisor Annabi says they were "kept in the loop" about these proposed changes, but it appeared at the meeting that they were receiving this proposal for the first time. Annabi and Tompkins thanked them for attending and said they looked forward to getting their feedback. The two chairmen did not respond to questions about this proposal.
At the end of the special meeting, Annabi strongly encouraged community feedback to the proposal and said that if the meeting on the 19th is poorly attended she will consider leaving the public comment period open until December. "It is affecting people’s properties so we want to make sure everyone is aware of this."
If you're not already a subscriber but would like to receive future stories, please click on the subscribe button at watchingputnamvalley.com and provide your email address. If you have ideas for future stories or want to provide feedback, please send an email to watchingputnamvalley@gmail.com.