Stephentown ZBA Approves Scope Of Motocross Park EIS

by David Flint
At a special meeting on April 17 the Stephentown Zoning Board of Appeals approved the final Scope for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be prepared in the SEQR process for Howard Commander’s proposed Motocross park. Commander’s team, led by his engineer Patrick Prendergast, agreed to put together a Draft EIS. It will not be ready for the next ZBA meeting, which would normally be held on May 3, but Prendergast said he would give a progress report sometime next month. [private]The Motocross racing facility is planned for an 88.6 acre site zoned residential off of Webster Hill Road, so, following the SEQR process, a use variance will be required.
The ZBA earlier declared that the project would have significant environmental impact in two areas, noise and change to the character of the neighborhood. The Draft EIS must address these impacts and mitigation thereof and also that of all of the other items identified in the Scoping document. These other items include water resources, vegetation and wildlife, traffic, air quality and odors, cultural resources, utilities and aesthetics. It must also discuss what alternative layouts or sites might be available.
The ZBA’s engineering consultant, Mike Bianchino of Clough Harbour Associates (CHA), noted that many of the comments raised by the community and by involved or interested agencies were incorporated into the final Scope. The possible impact on property values, although one of the most prevalent concerns expressed by neighboring property owners, is not typically considered an environmental issue and will not be addressed as part of the SEQR process.
Last month the ZBA voted to reject an appeal of the Code Enforcement Officer’s determination that no area variance would be needed for the project’s access road which is within 25 feet of a neighboring property. Lewis Oliver, attorney for the opposing neighbors, filed that appeal, and he now declared that he disagreed with the ZBA’s decision and intended to file an Article 78 appeal challenging it. He requested, however, that with the necessary consent of Commander’s attorney, Francis Roche, the Board consider extending the 30 day time limit allowed for filing the Article 78 until a decision is made on the use variance. This, he said, would avoid unnecessary litigation as the question of the access road would be moot if the use variance is denied. Roche, however, said that the “driveway” was a non-issue and declined to give his consent.[/private]