Calls for rejection of Terramor’s 75 tent glamour campsite resort proposal aiming at 77 pristine acres in West Saugerties were met with loud applause, cries of “get out of our town” and “carpetbaggers,” as well as an acapella version of Pete Seeger’s song “My Dirty Stream,” as 20 speakers in a row warned a crowd of more than 200 at an “informational” public hearing of what they see as environmental and community devastation should the project be approved. The hearing on the proposal was held by the Saugerties Planning Board at the town’s Greco Memorial Senior Citizens Center, January 17. No one spoke in favor of the project.
Opposition to the proposal appeared well organized with speakers hitting on different points of contention without raking over the same turf again and again.
While many wanted the planners to just say no to the project, others took a more measured approach, urging the board to issue a State Environmental Quality Review (SEQRA) Positive Declaration of Impact, thereby triggering a far more stringent environmental review of the proposal than if a Negative Declaration were to be issued.
Charles Gottlieb of the Albany law firm Whiteman Osterman and Hanna, representing Terramor, said at the end of the hearing, “we listened to all the comments and we listened to the concerns, and we’re preparing response. The only reason we’re here is to listen, more than anything else.”
Susan Paynter, president of Citizens Against Terramor (CAT), began the comments by asking two questions — What’s in it for our communities? And how will Saugerties benefit from this resort?
Since Terramor stressed at an earlier meeting held at Cucina restaurant in Woodstock, that it will be a ‘self-contained resort, with its own music venue, restaurant and bar,’ how, Paynter asked, will it support local businesses? She stressed that because it will be a seasonal resort, good full-time jobs will not be available.
She also said that the resort’s tax liability would be limited by designating the glamping tent structures as ‘temporary.’
Paynter pointed to the fact that Terramor had originally said there would only be 50 campsites, as that was the minimum amount necessary for making it a profitable business, but then changed to 75, and that began to show that local residents of Woodstock and Saugerties could not trust the company.
Paul Rubin, an engineer with Hydroquest, questioned Terramor’s estimated well yield of water on the property, saying that the three 72-hour tests conducted by the resort company were not enough, and that his firm had conducted more than 4500 water level measurements. “The ‘hard look,’ as required by SEQRA (following a Positive Declaration) is warranted,” he said.
Maeve Tooher, an attorney for CAT, called Terramor’s tactics “a bait and switch,’ and urged a Positive Declaration, saying that there was no permission in Saugerties zoning for the accessory uses Terramor describes.
The planners and the crowd heard from Andy Mossey, executive director of the Woodstock Land Conservancy, which cares for nearby forever wild properties, citing endangered species in the wetlands (“conservation is more important than ever…) and Eve Fox, President of the board of trustees at the nearby Woodstock Day School, worrying about traffic at nearby Shultis Corners; Laura Ricci, Woodstock Town Board member said “the requested use is not a permitted use…the applicant cannot make the Saugerties Planning Board do the wrong thing… Catskill Mountainkeeper’s Kathy Nolan (also a county legislator, though not acting in that capacity) argued that the proposed use is not permitted in a Moderate-Density Residential District; Tom Helling of the Sierra Club urged a Positive Declaration. Woodstocker Andy Scherer illuminated what the lighting might look like from 75 campsites (“the scope of what this is has been downplayed…”). Stuart Auchincloss urged a positive declaration, while Mark Pisani detailed how access to broadband communications would likely be diminished in the area. Paul Steinberg urged that there be no tax breaks while others pay their full shares. Douglas Haberer, whose well went “bone dry last summer,” said “if they’re sucking down 10,000 gallons of water, what’s going to happen to ours? We’re all going to be destroyed.”
When it was his turn, Irwin Rosenthal, a Woodstock resident, approached the mic and with a twinkle of the eye, began singing:
Sailing down my dirty stream
Still I love it and I’ll keep the dream
That some day, though maybe not this year
My Hudson River will once again run clear
Rosenthal finished the six verses in a clear tenor voice and the crowd applauded wildly.
Richard Buck, whose property borders Terramor, lamented having to follow Rosenthal, but warned of “Myth versus Truth,” in the proceedings, and spoke of the coming exponential increase in traffic (“The accident rate at Shultis Corners is 5.5 times the national average”); Lori Mendalis spoke of how Terramor would crash the local real estate market (“the scale and location of this project is wrong”). Cory Smith talked of the dangers to human health from 75 campfires; Richard Cohen worried that the local life style would be threatened (“If we had known that Terramor was even a thought, we would not have bought a house in that location.”)
And Gail Albert, of the Woodstock Jewish Congregation finished the comments with a passionate plea to protect the water and streams, especially at a wetland pond on the Congregation’s property that is used for purifications — a symbol of ritual, she called it, “casting our sins into the water. You can’t cast your sins away in an effluent pond…”
After affirming that Terramor would respond to every comment, Gottlieb was asked if he heard anything new.
“The same concerns,” he said. “Basically expressed in different ways…”
In a short interview after the hearing ended, Saugerties planning board chairman C. Howard Post was asked what comes next.
“Our next step is to seriously consider what move we’re going to make on the SEQRA and we’re going to reach that determination. Other than that, I can’t say anything more on that until we consider these comments. But that’s definitely the next step in the process,” he said. “And we’ll hold a regular, formal public hearing. This was only an informational hearing. And once we hold that public hearing, we cannot close that public hearing until we reach a SEQRA determination.”
When might you reach that determination, he was asked?
“I would say, months. It’s going to be well into the spring,” Post said. “We knew this was coming. I’ve gotten, on an average, anywhere from 40-50 emails a day, so a lot of these comments have been forwarded to the board, or at least to myself, and passed on to the members. We’ve got a pretty good board, sensible heads. Of course, our job is to, and I always say this, is to do what’s legal. We can’t go by our heart, we have to think about the legalities, and it’s tough for some people to understand this. We’re not a comprehensive board, we’re the actual enforcement planning board.”
Join the family! 
