Some here in Clarkstown, as well as in other Rockland municipalities, may have heard of the potential for a parcel near the Village of Pomona being "redeveloped". Well, for those whose understanding of this is passing at best, this is the time to peer across your fence and gain some understanding of what this project is all about; how it got to where it is, and why it is important to each and every resident of Rockland County.
Drive from Suffern to Pomona Northeast on Route 202. After you see the Town of Ramapo Equestrian Center on the left, look to the right. From Properity Drive up to Route 306 on the right is the North West boundary of the Patrick Farm property. Turn right from Route 202 onto Route 306 and continue again to look to the right and you can continue to witness what is known as the Patrick Farm property.
The Patrick Farm is a parcel of 208 acres situated in and around the intersection of Routes 202 and 306, abutting the Village of Pomona which is also part of my legislative district. You’ve probably passed it a hundred times, and never really took in the understated, wilderness beauty of one of the last large open undeveloped parcels of land in the Town of Ramapo. Some may recall that a few years back, the property was considered as a potential golf course for the Town of Clarkstown. The property not only has a pastoral beauty, but is environmentally critical to all of us, as it is the sole source that supplies water to a vast area of the Lower Hudson Valley as well as the northern parts of New Jersey.
Ever so slowly, a dynamic seen way too often over the years maifested itself. The legal zoning protection of this land has been stripped away. Despite being designated within the Town of Ramapo’s Comprehensive Plan as being ecologically sensitive and recommended for special limited development, it was downzoned from 2 acre zoning to 1 acre zoning in 2004. That doubled the potential for single family homes from 100 to 200. Given the characteristics of the property and local community, one would think that was quite enough.
Then, in 2010, and again contrary to the Comprehensive Plan recommendations, the property was inexplicably downzoned again, this time to include multi-family MF-8 development! Of course, this action was immediately followed up by, you guessed it, an application that would develop the property to approximately 87 single-family homes and 410 multi-family units. Multi-family condominiums are planned to have four bedrooms each. The potential for an influx of over 5,000 residents is a reality!
To put this in context for my local neighbors here in New City .... Picture the Dellwood (Paramount) Golf Course on Zukor Road being sold and bringing in nearly 500 buildings of which 80% were multi-family in construction. Wrap your arms around an influx of over 5,000 people. I presume I now have your attention.
If I have not, or if you are like me and prefer visual characterization, the "now" and "possible later photos" that are included will certainly drive home the point.
As a legislator who represents the village of Pomona also, and one who brings an additional perspective as a former president of the Little Tor Neighborhood Association here in New City, I can state without equivocation that during all those years, I had never seen an application that downzoned property to this extent. Thousands of people; hundreds of homes; a parcel home to wetlands and federal waterway that feed public drinking water supplies; clear cutting 140 acres of land; and an unfathomable impact upon traffic in this community. Frankly, the application shocks the senses, and the scope of this proposal poses an enormous and irreversible impact upon community and environment.
This is not an issue that affects one village or one town ... this will impact each and every family and business in Rockland. It is an inappropriate development of land that we will all feel the effect of in some way, shape, or form. Should this development go forward, it will impact upon all my constituents both in Pomona and right here in New City. And if you feel like I and many others do, and wish to stand up and be counted, contact a local group - Rosa4Rockland.org - that is working to ensure that any land development to this property is consistent with the nature and character of the community, environment, and county.
As a matter of record, below are the text of my comments that I made for the record at the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) public hearing on Monday, January 7th that covered application permits before them regarding the Patrick Farm property and the current planned development:
My name is Ed Day, legislator for the county of Rockland, and direct legislative representative for the village of Pomona, which abuts the planned Patrick Farm development. I thank you for scheduling the hearing so all could provide their concerns directly to your agency.
Just a couple of points to segue into my testimony, and borne from a past experience of representing people as a civic association president. During those years, I have never seen an application that downzoned property to the extent that in front of us tonight. Thousands of people; hundreds of homes; a parcel home to wetlands and federal waterway that feed public drinking water supplies; clear cutting 140 acres of land; and an unfathomable impact upon traffic in this community. Frankly, the application shocks the senses.
But to be direct and specific to the matters in front of you, and with the understanding that many who speak have more details and specifics, I offer the following compelling items for your consideration.
My review shows the following: that the application for stream disturbance is incomplete and the SEQRA scoping required a jurisdictional determination from the army corps of engineers, yet that has not been submitted.
The applicant is planning to rebuild the dam and needs a dam permit. They are looking to lower their dam classification and are planning to increase the culvert under Rte. 202 in order to do that. This also potentially increases the flooding downstream.
I request that you ensure three permits: stream disturbance, dam permit, and water quality and that the submitted information is independent of assertions by the applicant and/or the town. The fact that even united water has expressed strong concerns about the impact of the proposal on their multiple wells underscores the importance of this.
Finally, despite the fact that the town of Ramapo having a scenic road law that limits development within 1,000’ of the center of routes 202 and 306, a proper visual impact has not been done. This is a key concern of many residents and is an issue that should have been addressed in detail during SEQRA review. I ask that this be covered by the DEC as part of your findings.
I have confidence that once your agency does the due diligence that you are known for, and that is clearly indicated as needed here, you will find that my initial observation rings true; this proposal does not belong in a rural area such as this as it betrays both the people who call this area home and the environment all of us in the entire county share. Thank you.
http://newcity.patch.com/blog_posts/which-wins-planning-or-piety in which I described how dangerous this act is. A religious group can take one into court claiming discrimination about a zoning variance it was not granted and the you must pay for the plaintiff's legal fees (which can be millions of dollars) if you lose! Get a copy of this documentary http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/short_takes/rluipa_documentary Note the comment at the bottom of the above link: "I have heard St. Lawrence explain that the 2010 down zoning of Patrick Farm was in reaction to threats from the Hasidic community that if they didn't get the down zoning that they would come back with plans for religious based development and would invoke RLUIPA. In the Town of Ramapo the Hasidic population has been the group taking advantage of RLUIPA and the distress of the community at large is causing them to cast dispersions at ALL orthodox Jewish people because they don't understand the distinctions and don't appreciate that much of the Jewish community in Rockland treasures the rural character as much as they do. Many orthodox in the community are just as distressed by the overdevelopment in the Town of Ramapo and liken it to becoming another Brooklyn."
Since most politicians will not stick their necks out and take a stand on any issue (unless it's so egregious that no one could possibly disagree, like speaking out against the Newtown shooting), having someone like you actually give an opinion is refreshing, especially since that opinion will probably not be popular with the bloc and could hurt you in your quest for County Executive. If you all are like me and are sick of what the bloc is doing to this County, we must support a candidate that isn't afraid to take a stand. Thanks for your past (and hopefully continued) opposition to this ridiculous project Legislator Day.
Elected representatives can take supportive action, and in this case it was not just speaking, but formally (along with Joe Meyers and former legislator Connie Coker) testifying against the project as a legislative representative, which does carry some weight. That also counter balanced the testimony of four legislators in support of the Patrick Farm proposal. All in all, I would like to think my stand makes a tangible difference. Yes, and as you pointed out that as a candidate for County Executive, there are likely negative political considerations, but my feeling is simple and along the lines you stated. If it is wrong and it impacts upon our community in such an overwhelming way, one should formally take a position regardless of that, which I have. If you cannot take the heat, real or perceived or are looking to make political judgments at this stage of a campaign, you have no business offering yourself to the people as their leader. Along those lines, I know that many close to this issue still waiting for FORMAL statements, not blogs or tweets, from the other three announced candidates. You may wish to pose your comment to each of them now that you have an unequivocal answer from this elected official.
As to what can be done, other legal avenues must be pursued, and Rosa4Rockland is aggressively organizing that effort. The DEC hearing is an example. That is why I encourage people to get involved.
can you say mutual aid ?
The very law that is meant to prevent disenfranchising the religious under “burdensome” local zoning actually disenfranchises others who accept such zoning. So, why not take RLUIPA to the Supreme Court? Rights are being usurped here.
Makes me wonder, though, if that development does go through (and hopefully not), aren't you going to be lobbying for those 5,000 votes like other politicians in Pomona in your next campaign in 2017?