CLAVERACK TOWN BOARD MEETS TO CONSIDER OCKAWAMICK
ccSCOOP News
Last Tuesday night, August 27, the Claverack Town Board held a special meeting to consider Columbia County’s request for immunity from town zoning as they move forward with their plan to convert the former Ockawamick School on Route 217 into a county office building. The lease on the Railroad Avenue building in Hudson that houses the Department of Social Services will expire in 2011, and the county needs to find new accommodations for that agency. The meeting, which took place at the American Legion Hall in Philmont, began with a PowerPoint presentation documenting the county’s search for an appropriate building or site to meet its facilities needs. That presentation can be viewed on the county website http://www.columbiacountyny.com/index.html. Click on Ockawamick Project in the lower left.
At issue is the question of whether or not Columbia County should be exempt from Town of Claverack zoning on this project. It is not a question of the county needing a use variance. A governmental office building is currently a permitted use in that location. What the county wants is to be able to skip—in the interest of time—a site plan review by the Town of Claverack Planning Board.
|
|
|
Counties have limited immunity from local land use regulations according to New York State Law. A 1988 New York Court of Appeals case, County of Monroe vs. City of Rochester, established the criteria for balancing public interests and resolving intergovernmental land use disputes. The host municipality—in this case, the Town of Claverack—must consider nine factors when deciding whether or not to grant the county total immunity from its zoning and land use regulations:
The nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity;
The encroaching government’s legislative grant of authority;
The kind of function or land use involved;
The effect local land use regulation would have upon the enterprise concerned;
Alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas;
The impact upon legitimate local interests;
Alternative methods of providing the proposed improvement;
The extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements; and
Intergovernmental participation in the project development process and an opportunity to be heard.
County Attorney Daniel Tuczinski reviewed the nine points, presenting the county’s response to each one. He stressed that the site would remain unchanged, governmental office buildings are a permitted use, the proposed use for the site would be less intensive than the original use as a school, and project would have a positive impact on surrounding area. In response to points 8 and 9, he explained that the offices would provide countywide services and cited the public hearing held in Hudson and Tuesday’s meeting as examples of “intergovernmental participation in the project development process and an opportunity to be heard.”
The public notice for the meeting specified that audience comments were to be limited to the subject of immunity from zoning, but Claverack Town Supervisor James Keegan did not impose that restriction. He entertained comments from the audience about safety issues, the negative impact on property values, the cost to taxpayers of the project, and whether or not the playing fields would remain available for public use. It wasn’t until Cyndy Hall, a resident of the Hamlet of Claverack, asked about plans to build a new Claverack Town Hall on the site that the discussion turned to planning and land use topics. According to Hall, the people of Claverack want the old Claverack School to be the new town hall. Art Baer explained that the county will offer Claverack an option to develop a new town hall on the Ockawamick property.
The theme of planning and land use was next taken up by Claverack resident Joan Steiner who made the point that the Ockawamick project “goes against the thrust of Claverack’s comprehensive plan.” She explained that consolidation was the goal, not spreading things out, and argued that it was not in the interest of Claverack to bring traffic and people to a rural setting.
Howard Brandston of Good Growth Columbia reiterated that the county’s plan did not correspond with Claverack’s comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan calls for development centered on the hamlet, with the former Claverack School becoming the town hall. In contrast, he pointed out, the county plan for Ockawamick promotes sprawl. Brandston urged the county to think through their plan one more time and take a fresh look.
Cheryl Roberts, attorney for Good Growth Columbia, urged the Town Board not to waive their right to do a site plan review. She cited three important goals of the comprehensive plan—maintaining open space, consolidating development in the hamlet, and traffic calming—which are ignored by the plan for Ockawamick. Making the point that “this facility doesn’t have to be here,” she advocated for the purchase and reuse of John L. Edwards School in Hudson for county offices. John L. Edwards had been considered by the county but was rejected because it is uncertain when the building will be available, since its sale is dependent upon the approval of the Hudson City School District’s plan to build a new consolidated K–5 school near Hudson High School. Roberts recommended that the Department of Social Services stay in the current location until HCSD is ready to sell the John L. Edwards building.
Roberts also urged that a full environmental impact study be done, including a “worst case” traffic study. The traffic study commissioned by the county and completed by Morris Associates suggests that the only intersection that will be at all affected by the project is the intersection of Routes 23 and 217, and the impact on that intersection is predicted to be minimal.
The regular meeting of the Claverack Town Board takes place at 7 p.m. on Monday, September 8, in Claverack Town Hall on Route 217 in Mellenville. |
