Maplewood Village Development is a propose High Density Housing Development falsely promoting itself as a "conservation" or "open space" development.
FACT: Current Zoing is RU AQ 6
"The permitted residential density Standards for the Rural (RU) district have been mostly retained. However language has been included to clarify the maximum allowable density in an AQ 6 District shall not exceed one unit per six acres." -Current Goshen Comprehensive Plan
FACT: The site does not have municipal Water or Sewer
FACT: The proposed density would require municipal Water and Sewer
FACT: the proposal offers a 20 foot setback to the active farmland neighbors but a 200 foot setback for a cemetery.
Why not treat the farmer the with the same respect?
FACT: The Otter Creek and Black Meadow Stream and their tributaries are deemed Threatened by the DEC and are awarded extra protections because of this designation.
FACT: a tributary of these streams transects this site
FACT: 80% of this land is constrained and not developable for residences.
First and foremost, the only reason we are talking about this development proposal is because the developer apparently sued the town of Goshen. Same developer has sued other towns under other names see Stratford Farms LINK
And sued Middletown in "civil rights" suit LINK.
The Maplewood Village Draft Environmental Impact Sta tement is not accurate in many ways. First, itclaims this is proposal is consistent with the Town of Goshen Rural development Guidelines because this is being proposed as an open space development but it’s really a high density development clustered on the only buildable parts of the property.
The land porportedly set aside for "conservation" could not be developed.
The Permitted Residential density standards of the Rural (RU) District and AQ6 overlay clearly state that the maximum allowable density shall not exceed one unit per SIX acres. The reason for this is because it actually protects the availability and quality of water and the recharge areas.
The site is 80% constrained however Even if it was 100 % usable 15 lots would be the maximum allowed before factoring road frontage, set backs and perc tests.
10 lots would be all you could get out of this property. The builder wants to get 68...
The builder sued the town and from what we can tell the stipulation agreement may be expired.
Why didn't the Town appeal this lawsuit?
This is a dangerous precedent to allow to move forward.
Does this mean anyone who sues the town does not have to adhere to the rules and zoning that are in place to protect the surrounding communities quality of life, right to farm and water security?