As proposed zoning changes to encourage more housing in Woodstock go through the comment phase, the town planning board is hearing concerns about impacts.
Jude Silato, a ZBA and Zoning Revision Committee [ZRC] member, suggested restricting the number of allowed accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, to one, as it is in the current code. The proposal had expanded it to two, and one unit would be required to be affordable and long-term.
She also criticized the proposed changes that would allow triplexes and quads, in addition to the currently allowed duplexes. “They’re meant for walkable areas in cities. Other than the center of town, what’s walkable in Woodstock? It’s going to strain our water supplies, septic systems, drainage roads are narrow and often mountain roads and all that parking and rural neighborhoods,” Silato said. “They are not suitable for rural areas, nor are they recommended for rural areas.”
She questioned where Woodstock can accommodate increased density. “This proposal to up-zone Woodstock will not create affordable units, and it’s a huge mistake,” she said.
“One of the issues the town is concerned about and people that I’ve heard form is this may open the door to more development, because you can allow more use, you can allow more cluster housing,” planning board chair Peter Cross said. “Is some beneficial person going to come along and say, Oh, yeah, I’ll do this for everyone, or is someone going to say I can put four units on the property or three units on average, and sell them or rent them.”.
Planning board member Jennifer Drue chimed in. “Logically, I would just say the cluster approach seems to make sense, because you’re maximizing, looking at the view without spreading out and taking up more space, but it seems that we would really have to really set some fair rules on making sure that people don’t take advantage, making it into an opportunity just to capitalize on that somehow.”
Some members questioned how deed restrictions on affordability would be enforced.
“Anything in the zoning is just a piece of paper if you don’t have the oomph behind it to enforce it,” planning consultant Nan Stolzenburg said. “That oomph comes from ensuring that there’s adequate staff to enforce it, training of those staff, commitment on the town board’s part to enforce the laws. To make anything in zoning work, you have to be able to be willing to say, these are our rules, and we’re gonna follow it.” she said.
Housing Oversight Task Force co-chair Kirk Ritchey said the housing committee wanted to come with a series of policy recommendations. “They’re now taking up that specific document and expanding it and much of the top priorities of the recommendations are around enforcement,” he said. There is concern that one of the building inspectors has a lot of responsibilities in addition to being the town wetlands inspector.
“Even if we made no changes, there’s still a significant enforcement need in every town,” Stolzenburg observed. “My feeling is the days where we used to have a part-time building inspector that met with people who wanted to do something in the community Wednesday night from seven to nine and Saturday morning from eight to ten … those days are long gone.”
Wetlands and steep slopes were also discussed. “Net acreage is a rule for every district, not just the scenic overlay,” Stolzenburg said.
Planning board co-chair Judith Kerman addressed the idea of zoning changes making it easier for developers to come in with large developments. “I believe one of our newer changes is that multiple dwellings of any kind have to have at least ten percent affordable [units]. Again, it makes it less attractive to the profit motive, and it makes it more likely to have affordable housing,” she said.
She debunked the idea that the new zoning will result in a proliferation of accessory apartments, or dwelling units.
“We have ADUs by right now, and people are not building even one. The county has recommended that any new ones, the first one be affordable. And I believe we have accepted that in our revision process,” she said. “If we were going to have a lot of density from ADUs, we’d already have it. We don’t. So I think that’s a kind of a red herring.”
Cross said the roads need to be taken into consideration, given that Woodstock had been a farming, mountain town with meadows. Most roads started as cow paths and wagon trails.
“No one’s mentioned the roads. How do you get around if you add another 100 houses on a certain road? “The roads aren’t adequate,” he said. “And that’s something that never comes into consideration in the zoning codes. But the planning board has the power to actually question whether a road is adequate enough for proposed development.”
Stolzenburg said that she will be sure adequacy of roads is included in the proposals.
Planning board member Grayson Yearick said affordable housing needed to be in the walkable part of town. “I would like to see a lot more density in town, affordable density in town and less outside of town because some people can’t afford cars, but they need groceries,” he said.
“When you’re in the country, it’s kind of nice if you can live in the village, but there’s not a lot of options for food that’s affordable, necessarily,” responded housing committee member Urana Kinlen. “It’s not so much where you go, or that you live in the village or outside of the village, when you’re living in the country. It’s more about being able to get to where you can have affordable food. Sunflower and the meat market and CVS are very, very expensive.”
Yearick predicted all that would change when more affordable housing was created.
Join the family! 
