Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodstock urges Olster planning board to scrutinize 30‑lot Zena subdivision over road, fire‑safety and environmental concerns
Summary
The Woodstock Town Board read and authorized a letter to the Olster planning board raising detailed concerns about Zena Development LLC’s proposed 30‑lot subdivision accessed solely by Eastwood(s) Drive, citing code waivers, narrow and unpaved roadway dimensions, New York State Fire Code appendix D107.1 access requirements, potential impacts to wetlands and vernal pools in a mapped critical environmental area, and intermunicipal emergency‑service burdens; the board also reported a related preliminary court injunction.
The Town Board of Woodstock on June 2 read and moved to transmit a last‑minute letter to the Olster planning board urging careful review of Zena Development LLC’s proposed 30‑lot residential subdivision, which the town says would be accessed solely via Eastwood(s) Drive.
The letter cites multiple technical and safety concerns: Eastwood(s) Drive is currently classified as a minor road serving fewer than 11 homes and is unpaved in places, with travel sections described in the town record as narrow as 13.5 feet and lacking required 20‑foot paved travel lanes and shoulders. The town says the project would create 30 lots and therefore exceed the threshold for a major road under the Woodstock Town Code (cited sections 202‑32 and related subsections) while also requesting waivers from those major‑road requirements.
The board points to appendix D107.1 of the New York State Fire Code, which the letter says generally requires developments of 30 or more units to have two approved fire access roads; the proposed subdivision would rely on a single access. The town further flagged subbase and paving standards, dead‑end length limits, the lack of two connections to existing roadways for subdivisions containing 20 or more lots, and the potential for environmental impacts in a mapped critical environmental area that contains wetlands and vernal pools.
“Given the significant increase in traffic associated with the project, the town board is concerned that a road designed for fewer than 11 homes may be inadequate to safely and effectively accommodate the anticipated demand,” the letter reads. It adds that granting the waivers requested could raise substantial public‑safety and infrastructure costs and asks that the Olster planning board fully evaluate these issues through the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) process.
A board member also reported that the Supreme Court for Olster County issued a preliminary injunction in a pending Article 78 proceeding filed by the Woodstock Land Conservancy, which the member said temporarily prevents the Olster planning board from moving forward until the court clarifies which agency is the permitting authority.
Public commenters raised related concerns during the meeting: Zoe Keller, a long‑time resident of the neighborhood, said she provided the board with an incident report related to a trespassing complaint filed by Zena principal Edwin Greenberg and asked whether the project’s opponents were being intimidated. The board agreed to send a copy of its letter promptly and discussed whether to sign and transmit it before the Olster planning board’s next meeting.
Why it matters: The subdivision, if approved without road upgrades or additional access, could raise emergency‑response, traffic and environmental risks for Woodstock residents and place long‑term maintenance and service burdens on the town despite much of the new development lying across municipal lines.
Next steps: The board authorized the supervisor to send the letter and to include town‑board members as signatories; the town will monitor the Olster planning board’s schedule and the status of the court injunction.
