Comments from Diane May

Comments by Democratic Town Board member Diane May at the public hearing on the Durst DEIS in Milan on March 6, 2008:

Let me start with a general observation and that is the development of the Carvel property by the Durst-Landmark Corporations is just too large, too out of scale with our rural communities.  If the Durst Corporation truly wants to develop this property with our community in mind, incorporating good planning concepts and sound environmental goals, it needs to modify the current plan and do as Dutchess County Planning suggests: redesign the Carvel Property as a true model of sustainable development.  I urge you to work with Roger Akeley who has offered to work personally with the PPPB to review the project and further discuss the DEIS.

Regarding Affordable Housing
Milan’s Comprehensive Plan of 2007 states:  “The CP incorporates tools to expand housing diversity and affordability, particularly for senior citizens, for young families, and for those with moderate incomes who cannot afford large-lot housing.”

When I read the DEIS and Durst’s promotional materials, I note 90 new jobs will be created with completion of the project, yet there is no real discussion of the need for affordable housing. Where do you think these 90 people will live? The DEIS states: “The proposed action will not generate a demand for new affordable housing or lessen the likelihood that affordable housing could be built in the hamlets or rural areas.” Milan already has a limited stock of affordable housing; to add more residents and to dismiss their housing requirements is unacceptable. 

Dutchess County Planning in August 2003 stated: “Although the development’s proposed magnitude is formidable, it should be designed to blend in with the existing community.  The appearance and/or perception of a “gated” community should be avoided.”  And,  “. . . the developer could consider providing some affordable housing units that could be offered to area residents.”

In February 2008 Dutchess County Planning stated again: “Affordable housing has been identified as an important need by the Town and the County including the DC Economic Development Corporation.  The scale of this development should allow for some provision for affordable housing.  The proposed zoning specifies a 10% affordable housing component for large scale developments.  We think this proposed requirement is prudent.”

The DEIS contemplates affordable housing as Alternative 8, but dismisses the issue because “affordable housing would not blend well into the proposed vacation and second home recreation community.”  Please note affordable housing is NOT subsidized housing--it is where our workforce and volunteers live and it does blend in if you actually provide for its inclusion. 

The DEIS reports on the pressure to provide for second/vacation homes.  But what we as a community and what the County Planners feel pressure to provide is affordable housing.  I respectfully ask that you modify your Plan and include provision for affordable housing. 

Also, I think there should be measures in place to guarantee that these homes will in fact be second/vacation homes.  In August 2003 Dutchess County Planning expressed the same concern, stating  “…there is no enforcing mechanism to maintain the residences as second or vacation homes.”

Even the DEIS  acknowledges the value of planning for the future with the following: “The overall benefit to the community associated with knowing exactly what development is to occur on such a significant acreage of land is akin to having an ability to look into the future and plan for it today.”  So why are there no measures in place to guarantee that 90% of the 951 lots will only have second/vacation homes built on them?  What measures are in place to guarantee that when these homes are resold they remain second/vacation homes?  What happens when the goals of the Plan are not met? Certainly that is a possibility considering this is the Dursts’ first rural development and they are not the builders of the project, they are the developers.  Who will be responsible for the negative impacts if and when this project fails to meet its stated goals? 

 

Considering the size of this project, and the concerns expressed by Dutchess County Planning, local residents, environmental and planning experts and organizations, I think the Plan needs to be reviewed and modified to incorporate all of the facts and questions that have been expressed at the public hearings

Back to Milan Insider Home page