I usually hate this time of year and can’t wait for election day to come and go! The political mailings, signs, adds, just drive me nuts. Admittedly and apologetically, we are adding to that this year in our town.
This is the Danby Roots response to the Golden colored mailer you all received last week. Its long, but instead of multiple posts we will respond to the statements and claims that they have made- if you care to hear from another perspective.
Zoning Changes: it is accurate that working groups began and drove the initial work of the new zoning. Initially we voted in our groups and had equal power amongst a diverse group that came to consensus. Russ and Kevin served on 3 of the 4 groups! The greatest accomplishment was the conservation easement one, which town resident Ted Crane led as he was instrumental in finding existing law in 4 other towns for short term easements. It was really quite a beautiful thing. Yet, when it moved to the Town Board, Planning Board and CAC all things changed. At one point it looked like it would never happen, but fortunately it did and we commend those groups for doing that!
With the Rural and Hamlet groups, things began by votes, but as 6 to 9 months went by, Joel and Planner David West took control. There were no more votes with equal power. It became their decision and the decision of the Town Board to craft the ideas. Consensus and compromise went out the window. What started from the ideas of probably 30 to 50 different residents became the masterpiece of these few. The ideas and agendas of the few became imposed on the many. One hamlet couple were horrified that the planning was ongoing without their being notified (To be fair, there was monthly communication in the then Danby News- but not all residents read it). Why a mailing wasn’t sent out as with the STR situation seems unfortunate. At one point, Joel exclaimed that, “We’ve finally accomplished what we’ve been wanting to do for 30 years!” This new law has taken away landowner’s rights to develop by reducing the number of housing units on their land by at least half to ¾, and in some cases by 80%. It is an example of Regulatory Taking.
Short Term Rentals: The Board currently says its trying to make Short Term Rentals (STR) legal and is for them. Yet, read their survey that you all received and you’ll see they are not simply trying to help the 80 plus residents who are finding another revenue stream to make ends meet in the face of rising taxes and costs of living, but to control and regulate these rentals. Its an example of over reach.
Special Events: A wedding celebration, graduation party, retirement party, 50th wedding anniversary, or any other large gathering where you may want to celebrate- they want you to now have to go the BZA (Board of Zoning Appeals) and PAY for a permit- if permission is granted! I guess this is another thing this Board has Done To Us through the new zoning. It never was an issue in the past. More over reach and more control- fewer choices.
Logging Law: Clearly this Board intends to have one! They have already determined that. “Serious damage from irresponsible logging” is their claim. My neighbor above on Durfee Hill Rd logged from January through September, 5 days a week, removing 400,000 board feet of wood from their 200 acres. There is absolutely no damage nor irresponsible impacts. Even the roads in town held up with no damage (according to Highway Superintendent). Thousands of logging jobs have been successfully accomplished in Danby over the decades. We’ve done 2 on our small woodlot. I’ve spoken to the Board about this and the issue is 2 clear cuts done within the past 10 years. One in West Danby and the other on Deputron Hollow Rd. “Their view” was destroyed and they don’t want clear cuts in Danby. We’re not saying we are for clear cuts, but please keep in mind that every beautiful field you see is the result of a clear cut that began to be farmed.
Here’s the issue. They want to add over reaching regulations on timber harvests greater than cutting firewood for your personal use- any logging job! Selective managed of timber in a woodlot (like my neighbor this past year) would be regulated. There is absolutely no need unless they simply want to control and eventually limit what you can and cannot do on your land. More Regulatory Taking.
Hamlet Development: A small group who don’t even live in the Hamlet have determined what the hamlet should look like. We suggest, let those who reside there decide. Don’t impose regulations on this residents. The Town Board wants to install sidewalks so the Hamlet is “walk-able”. Is this what residents want? Is it realistic with the ditches on either side of 96B?
If you wanted to move to Danby, where would you like to build your home: along 96B (the Hamlet) or along one of the quieter side roads? This Board has decided that development should be focused in the Hamlet area and that was a major component of their rezoning plan. Keeping side roads rural looking instead of the suburban look would be wonderful, but the new zoning also encourages more roadside development than the former zoning law.