By Rob Sample
At a public hearing on Monday, January 8, the Marlborough Town Board tackled the thorny subjects of cannabis retailing and ridgeline regulations and protections. In the regular semimonthly meeting that followed, it again heard a plea for action from a Milton homeowner dealing with a collapsed roadway adjacent to her home.
The proposed regulations cover three categories of cannabis establishments, including both medical and non-medical or “retail” dispensaries and establishments where cannabis could be consumed onsite. The latter could not also be retail dispensaries.
The rules would restrict cannabis establishments to areas of town zoned HD, or high density. Cannabis establishments would also be prohibited from setting up shop from within 500 feet of any school, day care center or nursery school, drug or alcohol rehab facility, correctional facilities, places of worship, or another cannabis facility.
The changes to the ridgeline regulations would eliminate a current requirement, which restricts any structure from being closer than 50 feet in elevation to the ridgeline affected by the application. The proposed change would also removes a section stating that “there shall be no disturbance within this 50-foot area.” An exception is made for access driveways that cannot be located outside the 50-foot area.
The code changes would leave in place an existing requirement that any proposed buildings or structures not extend above the predominant tree line.
Most commenters voiced opposition to the proposal to alter the ridgeline ordinance. Resident Mary Ellen Glorie said the current ridgeline law is not stringent in comparison to other towns and should be left intact. “It’s not 500 feet, it’s not 200 feet, it’s not even 100 feet like so many others – it’s just 50 feet,” Gloria said. “That seems to me to provide a good balance between private property rights and protecting the community’s natural beauty and resources.”
Planning Board member Cindy Lanzetta also spoke in opposition to the proposed change, describing the Town of Marlborough as “the Tuscany of the Hudson Valley.” Lanzetta explained that the forested ridgeline provides the microclimate that enables the cultivation of grapes, apples and other fruits. A reduction to 40 feet, which the town Planning Board has discussed, would be one possible compromise and would still allow for a two-story home to be built under the ridgeline height.
“The proposed change to the current law would have a significant impact to the community by allowing additional stormwater runoff, fragmenting forest land, and ruining the viewshed,” Lanzetta said. “When people come to Marborough … they are here to enjoy the natural scenery that some of us take for granted. That scenery attracts dollars.
“Remember the Joni Mitchell line, ‘Don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone’?” Lanzetta added. “We need to do better than this.”
“The amended law takes away all restrictions as to the accepted level of elevation for new buildings,” said Mici Simonovsky, chair of the Town of Marlborough’s Conservation Advisory Committee. “What is the reasoning and the urgency of this amendment? I feel the board has an obligation to inform the CAC and the public in general about this change in more detail…I [also] respectfully request that the public hearing not be closed on this issue.”
Dan Heavens of Mountain Road said there already are issues with water runoff on the ridgeline. “It’s running right into our house,” said Heavens. “I was afraid for our carriage house to be swept away this past week. This will directly affect that as it seems to encourage development.”
“The fairest approach may be to conduct a public referendum,” noted resident Douglas Glory. “We are dealing with a natural beauty asset. Let the 6,296 registered voters of Marlborough decide.”
Also calling for a public referendum was Tyler Pagano, though his comments were more in favor of the rules changes. “I see a lot of faces here all [from]a slightly different generation than myself, and all have kind of a closed-minded view on this topic,” Pagano said. “I look at it as progress. Sometimes, needs change… I would say a public referendum may be the best option. You’re not going to find out here with this grouping of people what the whole town believes.”
Cannabis regulations
Two Marlboro residents spoke on the proposed cannabis regulations. Both said the proposed distance between cannabis establishments and school facilities must be more than 500 feet.
Marlboro Schools Superintendent Michael Rydell was the first to speak. He noted that in his roles as a parent and as an educator, he must constantly battle against what he called dangerous influences – both on social media and in the community itself.
“As we leave this building this evening, if you were to stand on the north end of our [Marlboro schools] property Walkill (Federal Savings & Loan) is 500 feet away,” said Rydell. “That would be compliant with the proposed distance. The beverage center is about 1,000 feet. I don’t think anyone here would look at those as a great distance from the from this building.
“Distance does matter when you’re talking about the distance from a school and an establishment of that nature,” he continued. “We would literally have students passing by that location every single day. On behalf of the Board of Education, I respectfully ask that each of you consider expanding the distance significantly beyond 500 feet.”
Marlboro resident John Cantone also said the 500-foot distance was too short – particularly for places designated for recreational cannabis consumption – as opposed to medical purposes. “I do think in general that it [the 500-foot limit] is too close to a school and is just going to be too visible,” he said. “The more things are seen, they become more acceptable. Our teenagers are very influenced by that.
“I don’t know what the right distance is, but it’s more than 500 feet,” he summed up.
The Town Board ultimately voted to close the hearing on the cannabis proposals but to keep open the hearing on the ridgeline issues.
Road collapse
In public comments following the business portion of the meeting, Maryanne Quick of Old Indian Trail voiced frustration about the collapsed roadway immediately to the north of her driveway.
“The road collapsed on April 23 of last year and nothing, absolutely nothing, has been done,” said Quick. “We are forced to travel the south end of Old Indian Trail, which is dangerous…I’ve asked for guide rails to be put up if we have to go the south end, which we do have to because the north end is barricaded.”
Town Supervisor Scott Corcoran responded that the collapse occurred on a section of Old Indian Trail that is not town-owned. The people who own the property under it have not yet given the town permission to do the work.
“You can’t do things if land owners who own property do not want to give easements,” Corcoran said. “I told you from the beginning this could be over a year or it could be two years [to rectify].”
Among other business, Board Member Sherida Sessa reported on the work of the Recreation Committee, which will hold an Easter-egg hunt at a date to be announced. Similarly, Simonofsky noted that the Conservation Advisory Committee will hold an Earth Day event sometime in April.