A 250-unit student housing proposal saw its public comment period extended into December after numerous requests for more time during a Village of New Paltz Planning Board public hearing last week. The project, proposed by Commercial Street Partners, is for a 248-unit, 724-bed student housing campus unaffiliated with SUNY New Paltz consisting of townhouse and cottage-style apartments on what is currently two parcels totaling 129-acres located along Route 32 South and Cross Creek Road. The project, dubbed New Paltz Apartments, is also slated to include a clubhouse, fitness center, swimming pool, patio area, a nature trail, and associated parking.
The plans would also require the annexation of the parcels from the Town of New Paltz to the Village of New Paltz, and then the rezoning and subdivision of the parcels to four separate R-3 lots; New Paltz Apartments would be built on a single 60-acre lot, with the remaining lots either remaining vacant or as currently developed with single-family homes.
Ten people spoke during the public hearing, sharing a variety of concerns, including wondering whether, because of its exclusive focus on student tenants, the project would be exempt from village requirements of ten percent of new development being set aside as affordable housing.
“We have numerous questions…in particular how it meets the village’s key responsibility of providing affordable housing,” said New Paltz resident Jackie Brownstein, adding that it was outside of the spirit of village code to have a project open exclusively to students. “Also, since this is one of the largest, if not the largest private developments in New Paltz’s history, we would expect that affordable units be available for individuals and families within the development. The obligation of the village is to provide housing for families at or below 60 percent of Ulster County AMI (area mean income). We do not see how this development will meet that obligation when it’s being developed both in structure and purpose for students. We want to see the village meeting its obligation by requiring the developers to construct separate housing to meet the needs of non-student, individuals and families.”
New Paltz resident Susan Denton agreed, describing the project as “transitional housing” that could also impact the cost of rentals elsewhere in the Village of New Paltz.
“This is not permanent housing, this is transitional housing,” Denton said. “Students come and go, they transfer, they drop out. They go somewhere for the summer. There are presently 413 student-rented spaces in the Village of New Paltz. The DEIS (draft environmental impact statement) posits that the apartments offered will be rented by students who already live in the village. There’s no guarantee that those apartments, if vacated in the village, would remain affordable. There’s no provision for how the town will be kept apprised of the continued commitment to the affordable units, what they will cost, how the rest of the project will be monitored to ensure commitments made by the DEIS will be monitored over time for its promised elements.”
Kitty Brown, a 53-year resident of New Paltz and a recently elected town board member, said that given the variables in the project, including where the land is currently and where it’s likely to wind up, keeping the public hearing open made sense.
“Thank you to the Village Planning Board for taking on the enormous task of reviewing a project that is currently 100 percent not in the village,” said Brown. “Therefore, wouldn’t it make sense to pause the process while the town and village hold public hearings on annexation?”
Brown added that she had reservations about the impact of energy usage in the proposed development and was hoping municipal leaders would get answers before approving anything.
“The DEIS notes that the project creates a new demand for electric, which can be provided by Central Hudson’s existing system,” Brown said. “Will the project opt into the community aggregation program that we’ve all worked hard to establish? The DEIS frequently refers to New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act regarding emissions, but it doesn’t mention solar panels for new construction. None of the buildings or parking lots (in the proposal) include solar panels. Adding these would be a significant benefit to the community by adding to, rather than subtracting from, the capacity of our municipal grid.”
Speakers during the public hearing also included a few current SUNY New Paltz students, like Wren Kingsley, executive vice-president of the student association, vice-president of campus NYPIRG (New York Public Interest Research Group) and a campus sustainability coordinator.
“I hear again and again and again the need for housing and affordable housing for adjunct professors, professors and students and grad students,” Kingsley said. “And I was excited to hear the proposed project because there’s a need for housing.”
Kingsley added that along with a need for housing, there is also a relative lack of mental health and physical wellbeing applied to residential developments.
“I’m interested in a housing development that would benefit the wellness of our students and our environment,” Kingsley said. “I feel very concerned about parking lots and what a huge housing development would demand in terms of parking needs. Given the location of the property, I’m concerned about DDT and arsenic.”
Kingsley added that the inclusion in the proposal of a bike path was a positive step, particularly if it encouraged SUNY New Paltz and the state DOT to connect the property to other areas, like New Paltz High School and the college campus.
“I think in general, the town and the village of New Paltz need to come together to reimagine what transportation in the community could look like,” Kingsley said. “And I feel excited about what a large housing development would do in terms of rallying around these issues rather than pushing them away. Because it’s 2023, and by the time that this goes up, it’ll probably be around 2030. We just don’t have time to be putting up a building that isn’t perfect and is not exactly what our community needs.”
Kingsley encouraged developers and the planning board to reach out to students to get their thoughts on the proposal.
Planning Board chair Zach Bialecki said he was in favor of extending the public hearing through the Board meeting planned for Tuesday, December 5, a measure later approved.
“I think we heard loud and clear from the community that people want more time to comment and to look through the DEIS,” Bialecki said.
Join the family! 
