Dover Knolls Liason Comments on The Millbrook Independent’s coverage, and TMI responds
May 5, 2010
Dover Knolls Liason comments on TMI’s coverage, April, 2010
To the editor:
A March 31 article on the Dover Knolls Public Hearing states in the first paragraph that John Fila issued the Town Board “a wake up call” asking “the why of this development.” I am guessing a wake up call would be for those people who have not been involved in Dover for the last seventeen years. Those who have closely followed this project know the “why.” The closure of Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center (HVPC) left the region without thousands of jobs, 850 acres off the tax rolls, and 2.5 million square feet of abandoned, deteriorating space that community leaders have been trying to deal with for the past seventeen years. For those people, the question is “when?” When will enough time and effort be spent to allow the redevelopment to take place?
In 1994, the town and county leaders energized the Harlem Valley Partnership to focus on finding the ways and means to recover from losing the region’s major employer and spent years on studies, plans, public hearings, and marketing for reusing the HVPC. In 1999, the Town Board created a zoning overlay district to attract development to the site. In 2002, the County included portions of the HVPC in the Poughkeepsie Dutchess Empire Zone to provide further incentive for a developer. After ten years on the market, state and local leaders approached Mr. Benjamin after he successfully redeveloped two other state facilities and the HVPC was finally sold in 2003. Now, seven years later, a project may be in sight.
The article also states the Town Board did not trust the planning board to handle the SEQRA process, and thus declared itself lead agency and conducted all SEQRA hearings in order to speed up the process. This is a fabrication as the Dover Zoning Code written in 1999 clearly states that the Town Board must approve a comprehensive development plan and a conceptual site plan. To date, Dover Knolls submitted a zoning amendment application to the Town Board as required in the 1999 code for the Mixed-Use Overlay District. The current Town Board picked up where the process left off with the previous board. There was no hi-jacking of lead agency from the Planning Board.
In 2008, the Town Board did change the 1999 code to assume the role the Planning Board had in a site plan application for individual components of the plan, a step that Dover Knolls has not even reached yet. The SEQRA process and Town Board approval of the Master Development Plan needs to take place before that next step can begin. The erroneous implications written in the article are unfortunate and lose sight of the big picture, the benefits of redeveloping a large site that was intensively and extensively used for decades and continues to have a blighting influence on our home.
The developer funded environmental mapping of the site before planning, brought in nationally recognized architects and economic analysts, and spent over $20 million working through almost seven years of process. The Dover Town Board went above and beyond at every step of the SEQRA process by extending comment periods, extending speaking times and posting each and every version of any EIS to the town’s website. Anyone asking “why?” should speak to the over 500 people who have requested an application for work, ask residents who have lost their homes, ask the long-time businesses that couldn’t hang on any longer and ask those that are barely hanging on now, hoping that some new investment monies will begin to come into Dover. The intent of SEQRA is to find the suitable balance of social, economic and environmental factors in planning. Dover has not recovered from the losses in 1994. Lots of time has passed and times have only gotten worse. We all need to pay attention to what is happening to the social and economic health of our community.
Kathleen Schibanoff
Former Executive Director of the Harlem Valley Partnership
Current Local Liaison for Dover Knolls Editorial reply:
Contrary to Ms. Schibanoff’s charges, TMI did not fabricate the view that the town board appointed itself lead agency “in order to speed up the process.” That view was expressed by members of the town board, the planning board and others TMI interviewed in connection with the preparation of the article.
The chair of the planning board submitted a letter in the SEQRA hearings pointing out that the planning board was better equipped to deal with the SEQRA, a view that is generally held in the planning community. Ms. Schibanoff confuses lead agency status under SEQRA with the role of the town board in making zoning changes and approving a master development plan .“Lead agency” is a term unique to the SEQRA process required by the Environmental Law. Zoning changes are, by law, reserved to town boards.
We share Ms. Schibanoff’s desire to see the last of the derelict institutional ghost town that haunts our region, but also know haste in planning a project of the size and complexity of Dover Knolls is not a recommended tactic.
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Comments
Got something to say?
