Minutes

City of Beacon Council Meeting

November 7, 2005

 

REGULAR MEETING

 

The regular meeting of the Beacon City Council held at the Municipal Center, One Municipal Plaza on November 7, 2005 was called to order by Mayor Clara Lou Gould at 7:30 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

 

Council Members Present:                   Deanna Leake, Eleanor Thompson, Sam Way, Lee Kyriacou, Fred Antalek and Mike Fasano.

 

Also present were:                               City Administrator, Joseph Braun

                                                            City Attorney, Gerard Pisanelli

 

Media represented by:                         Goldee Green, Beacon Free Press

 

Residents at beginning of meeting:      100

 

Public Hearings:

 

Mayor Clara Lou Gould announced that Hearings No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 would be adjourned until November 21, 2005.  She invited the residents to give their comments at this time with this understanding.

 

1.  Proposed Local Law A:  Changing the Zoning of Property from R1-10 One Family Residence District to R1-40 One Family Residence District. Adjourned March 21, 2005.  Adjourned on June 20, 2005 Will be adjourned until November 21, 2005

2.  Proposed Local Law B:  Changing the Zoning of Property from R-1-40 One Family Residence District to R1-80 One Family Residence District. Adjourned March 21, 2005. Adjourned on June 20, 2005

3.  Proposed Local Law C:  Changing the Zoning of Property from R-1-40 One Family Residence District to R1-120 One Family Residence District. Adjourned March 21, 2005. Adjourned on June 20, 2005.  Read by City Administrator, Joseph Braun.

 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS - PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Beacon will hold public hearings on Monday, March 21, 2005 at the City of Beacon Municipal Center, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda, to consider three Proposed Local Laws:

 

1.    Proposed Local Law A: Changing the Zoning of Property from Rl-10 One Family Residence District to Rl-40 One Family Residence District.

 

2.    Proposed Local Law B: Changing the Zoning of Property from R-l-40 One Family Residence District to Rl-80 One Family Residence District.

 

3.    Proposed Local Law C: Changing the Zoning of Property from R-l-40 One Family Residence District to R 1-120 One Family Residence District.

 

These local laws are intended to implement an updating of the City's Development Plan. The local laws will affect changes to the zoning of parcel No. 6054-02-596808 owned by Preshrock Corp., known as the Ursuline property. The above local laws would take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Complete copies of the proposed local laws are available at the Municipal Center for inspection during regular business hours. All interested persons and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard on said proposal at the date, time and place aforesaid.

 

4.  Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan in connection with housing and the Hiddenbrooke

              (Formerly Ursuline) Property. 

 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City of Beacon will hold a public hearing on Monday, November 7, 2005, at the City of Beacon Municipal Center, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York at 7:30 P.M or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda, to consider a proposed amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and three proposed local laws amending the City’s Zoning Map with respect to the Hiddenbrooke (formerly Ursuline) property.

 

The City Council as lead agency has referred the proposed amendments to the City of Beacon Planning Board and to the Dutchess County Planning Department for review and comment.

 

These local laws would take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State.  Complete copies of the proposed local law are available at the Municipal Center for inspection during regular business hours.

 

All interested persons and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard on said proposals at the date, time and place aforesaid.

 

Public Comments on Hearing No. 1, 2, 3, and 4:

 

The following letter addressed to City Council, City of Beacon dated November 4, 2005 from Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development regarding Referral – 05-563; Hiddenbrooke Plan and Zoning Amendments:

 

The Dutchess County Department of Planning & Development has reviewed the subject referral within the framework of General Municipal Law (Article 12B, Sections 239‑1 and 239‑m). After considering the proposed action in the context of countywide and intermunicipal factors, the Department finds that the Board's decision involves a matter of some concern.

 

Action

 

The City is proposing changes to its Comprehensive Plan and Zoning to reduce residential density for a large parcel in the eastern portion of Beacon along DePuyster Avenue.

 

Comments

 

The City of Beacon has been systematically lowering potential densities for many residential areas in a series of zoning changes over the last decade, as documented in the plan amendment and zoning pattern map. Every one of these incremental changes appears to have reduced more compact and flexible housing opportunities. No counterbalancing encouragement for high quality development in prime central locations has been demonstrated in the plan or zoning amendments. Beacon has existing central utilities and road, rail, and recreational infrastructure to support compact neighborhood and infill development, although the attached housing analysis illustrates a diversity of housing stock and prices, we note that the City has just recently regained its 1950s level of overall population.

 

Despite the stated intention to "maintain higher densities in the central portion of the City with proportionally lower densities as the distance from the center of the City increases," large sections of the City immediately surrounding the Main Street corridor have also been reduced in potential densities. One of the primary benefits of nearby density and housing diversity is the direct economic support it gives to Main Street and other neighborhood businesses. Similarly, more compact housing types should be developed around the Railroad Station to rebuild a mixed‑use, walkable neighborhood, rather than just park‑and‑ ride lots and a few tourist attractions. This would also promote public activities and accessibility around the waterfront parks and to add to the City's economic vitality and tax base, while minimizing traffic and the impacts on schools compared to larger outlying single family houses.

 

We have no strong objection to rezoning the Hiddenbrooke property, given the environmental constraints in the area, but our department has consistently recommended that the, City address ‑its overall housing and zoning needs in a more comprehensive city‑wide approach. We are therefore pleased to see that Beacon has begun an update of its Development Plan. We look forward to working with the City to produce a balanced “smart growth" approach to housing and economic diversity iii its plan for the future.

 

Recommendation

 

The Department recommends that the Board rely upon its own study of the facts in the case with due consideration of the above comments.

 

Roger P. Akeley, Commissioner

Dutchess County Department of Planning & Development

 

By John Clarke

Development and Design Coordinator

 

 

The following memorandum is from Etha Grogan, Planning Board Secretary dated October 12, 2005 and addressed to the Mayor and the City Council Regarding the Proposed Amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan:

 

At the October 11, 2005 Planning Board meeting, the Board reviewed the following proposed local laws and resolution amending the City's comprehensive plan as presented by David Stolman and under consideration since 2003:

 

Local Law A Changing the Rl-10 One Family Residence District to Rl-40 One Family Residence District (part of 6054-020596808)

 

Local Law B Changing the Rl-40 One Family Residence District to Rl-80 One Family Residence District (part of 6054-02-596808)

 

Local Law C Changing the Rl-40 One Family Residence District to Rl-120 One Family Residence District (part of 6054-02-596808)

 

After much review and discussion with the City Planner, the majority of members agreed that all of the proposals and zoning changes made good planning sense, and recommended the City Council proceed with the amendments. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you.

 

Karen Wagner – Attorney for – Preshrock – proceeded to give an unscheduled presentation regarding their project and its positive benefits to the community.  After allowing approximately fifteen minutes of this presentation, Mayor Clara Lou Gould informed the representative that this was a time for community comments and that presentations such as this must be scheduled in advance.  Our community has already heard much of her information.

 

John P. Delano, PE – Engineer for Preshrock - Explained the charts on the easels showing the layout of the project. 

 

Jennifer Zipper – Friends of Hiddenbrooke:  The Friends of Hiddenbrooke would like to state that while the issue of rezoning is an important one, we remind the Council that the over riding issue is the preservation of the Hiddenbrooke property as open space.

 

Peter Gadbois read the following comments at the November 7, 2005 Council Meeting.

 

November 7, 2005 Beacon City Council: Preshrock Corp continues to press to build clustered housing on the Hiddenbrooke land. I recommend that the city zoning prohibit such construction on this beautiful and vital site. Clustered housing has many benefits to the builder, but little benefit to the City of Beacon, and even less benefit to the Hiddenbrooke area. Long-term benefits are non-existent, while short term benefits favor only the developer, but not Beacon, or the community as a whole.

 

Over the next few years there will be plenty of townhouses and condominiums available in the City of Beacon. Clustered complexes may fit beneficially into the city's landscape, so I urge you not to allow such clustered construction on the frontier of one of Beacon's most precious resources.

 

Single-family homes keep their value longer than clustered communal houses built on a townhouse model. I have seen individual properties appreciate and grow in value over a period of thirty years or more while, connected clustered housing tends to depreciate and dilapidate over that same time frame. The communal concept of aggregate payment inhibits the ability of these communities to agree and pursue changes that are needed for the ongoing upkeep of such housing. This type of housing lends itself to becoming rental properties, owned by absentee landlords who in many cases care little for the overall good of the community.

 

I urge the City government to look out over the next 50 to 75 years, when it makes a decision on the how the Hiddenbrooke property should be developed. The Preshrock Corp in turn should support the City Council's decision, especially since civil justice has been a benefactor of that corporation's existence.

 

Tom Baldino, 19 North Street – The Attorney for Preshrock indicated that the project would result in a tax benefit for the city.  The net result will be more taxes.  It is much more economical to keep open space than to develop it.  There would have to be an extensive study as to whether or not the taxpayer will benefit.

 

Writer of this letter, Erin Burke VanBuren, read the following letter addressed to the Poughkeepsie Journal’s Public Opinion Page Editor dated November 2, 2005 into the record

 

On Monday evening, the Beacon City Council may finally determine whether or not it wishes to selectively rezone the Hiddenbrooke property in order to forestall its development. It's a laudable idea. After all, in a perfect world, no one would develop any property; in a perfect world, nothing would ever change; and in a perfect world, municipalities would never need new revenue streams to support emergency services, public works projects, and other requisite services for their citizens.

But we all know the real world operates a little bit differently. In this particular case, no one knows that better than 1. My grandmother and my family own more than 12 acres adjoining the rear of the Hiddenbrooke property, and we would prefer that no one ever develop this very special comer of our community. We recognize, however, that the land was sold to Preshrock Corporation in February and that property owners in these United States have unalienable rights to develop their property.

We believe that Preshrock Corporation has, in fact, put forth a more than responsible proposal that would limit development of the 123 acres to a total area of just 20 acres ‑ that's just 16 percent of the land! They have proposed to cluster townhouses along the DePuyster Avenue frontage of the property. This approach is consistent with current zoning recommendations within every Hudson River Valley Greenway community, and a testament to their willingness to limit the impact of their plans.

Like the Carmelite Sisters who also still call Hiddenbrooke home, we have come to support Preshrock's proposal.

We do so in large part because they propose to leave the remaining 100 acres as open space, deeded to the City of Beacon, the religious order, or the organization that the community deems most appropriate. Some Beacon officials have proposed applying for unspecified grants in order to raise millions of dollars to instead purchase the property for a potential park. As taxpayers here, we think that's frankly a waste of money. Why should we spend anyone's money to protect land that the developer has already agreed to preserve as open space?

Furthermore, tax‑paying townhouses will likely attract smaller family units, as compared to the people that need the expanse of larger, single‑family homes. This will lessen potential impact on our school district, another area that should be of concern to every Beacon property owner and taxpayer.

As proposed, the development would be clustered west of the stream, protecting its flows and the natural beauty of the vast majority of the parcel. They have proposed keeping the mature treeline in order to protect the viewshed of homes in nearby Jessen Park, and they would limit slope development that could create the type of erosion problems that have plagued other areas of Beacon due to recent land development.

If the zoning is changed, there are no guarantees as to how this property will be developed. If we don't embrace this developer's restrained proposal ‑‑ that would place properly scaled units along one of our community's existing streetscapes ‑‑ we could be someday surrounded by the super‑sized homes that have forever changed the character of so much of the rest of southern Dutchess County.

In short, we've come to believe that the Preshrock proposal is in the best interests of Hiddenbrooke, the City of Beacon, and the residents of this rapidly changing Mid‑Hudson River Valley. Would we prefer that no one ever change this land we love? Of course, but we also recognize that this proposal represents a fair compromise that merits our community's support.

 

The following comments were read at the November 7, 2005 Council Meeting by Sister Majorie Robinson, Carmelite Monastery:

 

We are a community of 25 sisters who live at the Carmelite Monastery, and we appreciate the concern that has been expressed by city officials, neighbors and friends for the Carmelite religious life and our presence in Beacon. Our monastery is located on land, which was once part of the original Hiddenbrooke property.

 

The Carmelite Sisters are just as concerned as our Beacon neighbors and city officials for the future of the Hiddenbrooke property. We desire wise development of the Hiddenbrooke property, preservation of the natural beauty of the land, care for sensitive environmental issues, and allowing the wildlife to continue undisturbed.

 

RE-ZONING OF HIDDENBROOKE

 

With information I have received, I feel that the up-zoning of the Hiddenbrooke property is unnecessary. The proposed plan of the Preshrock Corporation would develop approximately 20 acres for cluster development along the DePuyster Avenue section of the property and donate the remaining 78 acres to the city and/or to not-for-profit or land-use organizations with the stipulation that it remain passive open space. According to the proposal, the drainage issues are being addressed and handled, the slopes will remain unaffected by the development, there will be a minimum of tree removal, and 78 acres would remain open space. Creation of clustered housing would retain the integrity and beauty of the landscape, while protecting its natural

Resources

.

NEED FOR BUFFER LAND

 

Although much of the Carmelite property is wooded area, if portions of the Hiddenbrooke property that are adjacent to the monastery are developed for housing or for low-impact public recreation, it would infringe on the way of life as called for by our vocation. Reducing the activity on open space is of paramount importance to us. The uncertainty of the future of the Hiddenbrooke property underscores our need to acquire buffer land to protect the atmosphere of the Carmelite life, unless our vocation can otherwise be protected. Adequate buffer land would protect the $3 million investment our community made at the monastery (by renovations and an addition) and help to maintain the atmosphere conducive to the Carmelite vocation. I desire that such buffer land be protected and secured by a permanent barrier.

 

OTHER ISSUES

We are also deeply concerned about the present and future upkeep of the Hiddenbrooke property. The city, private citizens and developers alike are accountable as good stewards for the lands they own. Sections of the Hiddenbrooke property have not been attended to in recent years. Heavy rains have caused the streams, particularly Dry Brook, to carve other courses for the flow of water. There are fallen trees and debris that have blocked the free flow of the brooks and streams, resulting in flooding of the already fragile access road. It is the only access road to the monastery.

 

Unless responsibility is taken to clear the debris from the stream paths and keep the culverts clear to allow maximum free flow of the water, it will not be long before the road washes out once again as it did during the severe flooding in 1996. I wish to see demonstrated responsible care for the land.

 

PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS

 

I have lived at the monastery in Beacon for over 23 years and have experienced yearly changes in the land around me: from drought, floods, cold, heat, disease, changes in the fields and woods, decimated and rejuvenated conditions, and changes in wildlife and animal behavior. One becomes keenly aware and takes note of such changes, subtle as well as drastic, when one cares about and loves the land. I expect the city council, the planning board and Preshrock Corporation to make careful, wise and responsible decisions regarding the future of the Hiddenbrooke property.  Thank you.

 

Larry Kalkstein – Preshrock – I am against the upzoning.  By not upzoning, this protects the environment. We want to leave the trees – The more homes you have in Cluster housing the more affordable the houses will be.  The remaining land will allow for hiking and jogging trails, etc.  There will be no motorcycles or cars to deal with.  We want to leave all those beautiful trees so people will have the open space.

 

Michael McCullough III - I am in support of rezoning because every time it rains, Jessen Park gets flooded out.  The water problem needs to be addressed before there is any more building done.

 

The following comments were read at the November 7, 2005 Council Meeting by Sister Marita Biscotti

 

I am opposed to changing the zoning for the Hiddenbrooke Property since I see no benefit from doing so. Preshrock's proposal to cluster townhouses in the front portion of the land would involve developing only 20 acres, preserving the remaining property, nearly 80 acres, as permanent open space, whereas if the zoning is changed, the entire property would/could be developed with much larger homes and families, and increased traffic on the property. I am sympathetic to lessen Park's flooding problems and am confident that drainage issues are being addressed by Preshrock. Their proposal would have the least environmental impact to the land.  (As I understand it.)

 

Our Carmelite community at Hiddenbrooke was formed 5 years ago by the union of 3 separate monasteries, that of Barre Vermont, Saranac Lake NY, and Beacon. The decision of the Vermont and Saranac Lake sisters to leave the beautiful North Country was a very difficult one but the Beacon monastery had the potential for renovation and expansion and so the decision was made to form our new community on the Hiddenbrooke site where the quiet setting would be supportive to our way of life.

 

There is the misconception that the Archdiocese of New York supports us financially. I'd like to take this opportunity to let you know that they do not. We raised the money for our building and renovation project. We have invested a great deal in our building and property and so I am concerned when I hear talk of the land being used as a public park. We would need sufficient buffer land to protect our way of life and all we have invested since choosing to make Beacon our home.

 

Sister Marie Gertrude – I am opposed to the rezoning of the Hiddenbrooke property and I do not feel that there a necessity for doing so.  The Preshrock’s proposal is in the best interest of the surrounding community.  I feel that it will help the water problem rather than hinder it.

 

Christine Miller:  I lived in Beacon for most of my life.  I agree with Erin Burke VanBuren.  If they have this water problem, they have had it for a few years and not because of the sale of the Hiddenbrooke property.  This will help the nuns and the Jessen Park people.

 

Lauren Kalkstein - I want everyone to know that we should keep the zoning that we have.  To put roads in, will destroy the open space.  To waste land and to cut down trees just to put a road in does not make sense.  If you put up these houses with so much land, will destroy the trees.

 

Peter Gadbois I am against cluster housing. You have places that are going to be developed with cluster houses because that’s all they can build.  There is no reason to allow a developer to push us into a situation.  All I feel is threats from these people.  Beacon does not need cluster housing in such precious land.  If this happens, we will have an influx of people here that will more than fill our schools.

 

No further comments.

 

Motion to adjourn hearing to November 21, 2005:  Council Member Thompson.  Seconded:  Council Member Leake.  All voted in favor.  Motion carried

 

5.  Special Use Permit - Accessory Apartment – 47 South Avenue – Owner - John Gunn.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Beacon will hold a public hearing on Monday, November 7, 2005 at the City of Beacon Municipal Center, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda, relative to an application for a Special Use Permit, to create an accessory apartment, submitted by John Gunn, property located at 47 South Avenue, identified on City tax maps as Section 5954, Block 34, Lot 679833.

 

A copy of their proposal is available for inspection at the Municipal Center, Lower Level, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York during regular business hours (Monday-Friday ~ 8:30am to 4:00pm)

All interested persons and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard on said proposals at the date, time and place aforesaid.

 

Public Comments:  None

 

Motion to close hearing:  Council Member Way.  Seconded:  Council Member Antalek.  All voted in favor.  Motion carried

 

6.  Special Use Permit - Artist Live / Work Space – 3 Water Street – Owner:  Peter O’Kennedy.

 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Beacon will hold a public hearing on Monday, November 7, 2005 at the City of Beacon Municipal Center, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter is reached on the agenda, relative to an application for a Special Use Permit, for an Artist Live/Work space, submitted by Peter 0'Kennedy, property located at 3 Water Street, identified on City tax maps as Section 6054, Block 38, Lot 170722.

A copy of their proposal is available for inspection at the Municipal Center, Lower Level, One Municipal Plaza, Beacon, New York during regular business hours (Monday-Friday ~ 8:30am to 4:00pm)

All interested persons and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard on said proposals at the date, time and place aforesaid.

 

Public Comments: None

 

Motion to close hearing: Council Member Antalek.  Seconded:  Council Member Fasano.  All voted in favor.  Motion carried.

 

Community Segment:  None 

 

Approval of Minutes:  Mayor Clara Lou Gould asked for a motion to approve the following minutes:

 

Council Meeting -                    October 17, 2005

 

Council Member Way.  Seconded:  Council Member Thompson.  All voted in favor.  Motion carried.

 

Reports: Text from the following reports for November 7, 2005 is at the end of these minutes.

 

Mayor’s Communications read by Mayor Clara Lou Gould

City Administrator, Joseph Braun read his Report of Activities

City Attorney, Gerard Pisanelli read his Report of Activities – 1st Meeting of the Month

Mayor Clara Lou Gould read her Report of Activities

Council Members gave their reports of Activities

 

Public Comments:  Pertaining to This Agenda Only

 

The following report signed by Chair and Co-Chair by John Gunn and Sara Pasti was presented on behalf of the City of Beacon Comprehensive Plan Committee

 

November 3,2005

 

John Gunn - Chair

Tim Dexter

Randall Martin

John Stella

Sara Pasti - Co Chair

Jack Dunne

Chris Ruhe

Joan Van Voorhis

Catherine Allgauer

Patti Dunne

Jay Sheers

Gary Wood

Tom Baldino

Javier Guillen

Tom Skipwith

 

Brian Debronsky

Roberta Marsh

Todd Spire

 

 

To:  Beacon City Council Members 1 Municipal Plaza Beacon, NY 12508 - RE: City of Beacon—Construction Moratorium

 

Considering concerns raised by residents, members of the Comprehensive Planning Committee and members of the City Council regarding the recent increase in population growth and development within the City of Beacon, and given that the City is currently undertaking a full review and update of its Comprehensive plan, the members of the Comprehensive Plan Committee have given thoughtful deliberation to recommending a limited moratorium on development for the City of Beacon. It is our recommendation that the City Council adopt a moratorium for a period of 18 months, which will apply to:

• New residential developments of two units or more in all zoning districts

• New construction within U districts adjacent to or abutting the Fishkill Creek

• New construction in all areas adjacent to wetlands

New construction in sensitive run-off areas adjacent to Mount Beacon. The members of the Committee feel that within the time frame recommended, the City would benefit from a thorough review of the potential negative impacts of development in these areas. It is believed that this limited moratorium will not negatively impact the ongoing revitalization of Beacon because it does not preclude the redevelopment of existing buildings. We hope that the Council shares the Committee's position that a moratorium is in the best interests of the future of Beacon and its residents. Respectfully, and on behalf of the Comprehensive Plan Committee

 

Sharon Bronte - In May I purchased two properties.  There were no dishwashers hooked up.  I got a water bill from the City of Beacon for  $1,300.00.  I should not be responsible for water that past tenants used.

 

Herman McKinney – I got a water bill for $8,000 and the city said that they would send me a corrected bill.  Then they changed the meter.