Approximately 120 people attended the September 15 Marbletown board meeting for the public hearing on the proposed overlay districts for High Falls and Stone Ridge, a mass audience that extended into the Rondout Municipal Center hallway. The plan is meant to increase housing options, but many have voiced concerns about preserving historic architecture, ensuring safe drinking water, protecting the environment, addressing traffic challenges, and maintaining real affordability.

Marbletown resident Gary Tinterow announced before the meeting that he commissioned a study to examine wide-ranging concerns about the proposed hamlet overlay districts.

“I ask that it be entered into the record of the September 15 public hearing,” Tinterow said, in a cover letter to the town board.

Tinterow explained via email that he hired Nan Stolzenburg of Community Planning and Environmental Associates to conduct her own review of the overlay districts. “I retained Ms. Stolzenburg at my own expense and I offer her report to the Board as a resource,” Tinterow said in the introductory letter.

Community Planning and Environmental Associates is a planning firm from Berne, New York, specializing in “the unique needs of small and rural communities.” Stolzenburg specializes in rural change.

“My work focuses on advancing Smart Growth, revitalizing hamlets and main streets, safeguarding sensitive natural resources, and broadening the use of modern rural planning strategies,” she explained in the study.

Stolztenburg's study, dated September 13 of this year, placed an emphasis on water.

“I question whether either hamlet, but especially Stone Ridge, could even accommodate the proposed housing types,” Stolzenburg stated. “The law repeatedly relies on the proposition that the hamlets are appropriate for increased housing because community water and other infrastructure are available, while simultaneously acknowledging that some development may require individual septic systems and/or wells.”

The document concludes that “lack of public water and sewer is a significant barrier to housing density increases and multifamily dwelling development.”

“It is unclear if there is any rationale for the density and lot sizes to be allowed per the proposal. The density schedule calls for 1/4 acre (multiplex and cottage courts) to 1⁄2 acre lots per unit. So, a duplex, triplex, and fourplex would need 1 to 2 acres. That may be adequate for well and septic systems and may be consistent with existing lot sizes. Without the studies...there is no data provided to show those are consistent.”

Affordability concerns were brought up by many speakers at the hearing, and figured into the report.

“Current law requires that when greater than 20 lots are created in a subdivision, 10 percent of new lots shall be dedicated to being affordable. There is nothing in the proposed law that ensures affordability,” Stolzenburg wrote. “In fact, it is entirely feasible that these new housing units will be market-rate homes and could be second homes. There is nothing to guide these new units towards being affordable for the residents you hope to accommodate.”

Speakers at the public hearing underscored traffic problems and called for more process transparency. Board member Lisa Giannico presented plans for a traffic study at an earlier meeting, Stolzenburg suggests further studies involving “existing traffic on Routes 209 and 213 and major intersections, crash information, pedestrian/bicycle conditions, transit availability. Rather than a full traffic impact study, prepare a planning-level estimate of additional trips associated with reasonable buildout.” A number of speakers at the meeting echoed traffic concerns.

“Most importantly,” Stolzenburg concluded, “the town has not established the factual foundation needed to determine whether the densities, housing types, dimensional standards, or overlay boundaries are appropriate. There is no documented buildout analysis, water and wastewater capacity analysis, environmental constraints analysis, or detailed characterization of the historic and community development patterns the law says it intends to protect. Without this information, the town cannot know how much development the law could enable, where that development could occur, whether infrastructure can support it, or whether its form and scale would be compatible with these historic hamlets.”

Historical character has been a central concern, and is expected to be a key theme when discussions continue at the October 6 board meeting.

“The proposal fails to articulate what the character of Stone Ridge and High Falls is now, so that new development could be compared to it,” Stolzenburg wrote.

“I support the creation of new housing in Marbletown consistent with its historic character and sustainable in its access to water and transposition,” Tinterow concluded.

When asked, a member of the board said that this study is not in the record and the board has not discussed it.