OPINIONS IN TOWN Charlton Road Resident's Letter on Zoning

BALLSTON ZONING

Copy of a letter sent to the Town of Ballston on March 21, 2019
By David W. Christensen

I don't think commercial development or dense apartment complexes are a good fit for Middleline Rd. or Kingsley Rd. either, but I'll focus mainly on Middleline.

On balance, Rt. 50 seems a better fit for such development and is probably a natural evolution.

Residential two (2) acre lots for the rest of it sounds good to me.

Zoning ordinances were originally implemented for a reason -to preserve the character of a community by preventing unmanaged development.  Residents apparently thought that was a good idea at the time -and is what attracted me to the town.

If I didn't care much about high density & high traffic, I may have moved to somewhere like Clifton Park.

If the current residents of the town no longer feel as I do about the topic -if it came up for a vote and was carried, I'd be disappointed, but I would find a way to accept it and move forward.

The town government, as is, doesn't work that way.  We have a small handful of elected officials who admirably give their time to weigh these issues and decide -based upon, (I would like to think) the collective will of the people who voice their opinion.

As well as the populace at large, it is, I think, a safe assumption that there are a small handful of landowners and developers who have been whispering 'sweet somethings' in their ear.

I fully understand there may well be a handful of landowners situated in a place where they could cash out of their holdings and walk away.

Couple that with the likelihood of a small handful of developers who already have options on some of that land and, perhaps even, financing in place and blueprints in their hands.

It puts the board in a sensitive position.  It is not possible to keep everyone happy. Not even close.

The board's allegiance, I think, should be for the good of the many.

Why?

It seems like a lofty goal.

Anyone who lives in this town and needs more talking points -things to ponder . . . reasons why it might not be such a hot idea to give the proposed zoning the green light, -here are a couple that come off the top of my head.  There are probably more:

In case you hadn't thought of this, it goes much further than whether or not a PUDD will be allowed to re-characterize Middleline Rd., (as an example of just one spot on the map).

If the proposal is passed, in less than 20 years our esteemed elected officials' names will be long forgotten while town residents will still be subjected to the lingering negatives that come along with 'Clifton Park type' development.

If these proposed zoning changes are accepted for the benefit of a small handful of landowners and pathological developers, you should expect to see these four (4) lingering negatives come your way:

• 1.  Apartment glut

Pathological developers, in my mind, are those who would build a hotel in the middle of the Sahara Desert -if they could get the financing.  At some point it morphs into the embryo of a slum.

There will likely be high vacancy rates (if there isn't already) among the many apartment complexes within a five (5) mile radius of Ballston Center -leading to some of them falling into disrepair, becoming unsightly properties and/or being foreclosed upon.

It's a downward spiral.  The various properties race toward the bottom as they compete with continually lower rents.  The lower rents attract a different demographic that you may not want to live next door to.

The above scenario would be accelerated if the Malta chip plant gets placed in mothballs -which some feel isn't that much of a stretch. 

[SIDEBAR]  How about this idea?  ** A moratorium on apartment complexes for 3-5 years to let the dust settle.**

• 2.  More Schools Needed

Bond issues will be floated to pay for more schools and expand existing schools and facilities.  All those apartments bring in lots of young families with kids.  Translation: higher taxes.

• 3. Sewer and Water Districts

More bonds will need to be issued for developing water and sewer systems up and down our roads. Whether you want/need them or not, you'll share the cost in the form of higher taxes.

• 4. Wider Roads and more traffic signals

Think Clifton Park.

A four-lane Rt. 50 or a four-lane Middleline Rd. is not much of a stretch of the imagination.

Also, developers like to deed roads to towns after they are developed.  I can see an increase in the expense of road maintenance and snowplowing.  More trucks, personnel, equipment, salt, sand.  Translation: higher taxes.

Our elected officials are feeling the heat from all sides.

They are not 'all-knowing' and do not always make the right decisions regardless of who they are.

A case in point:

Approximately 45 Years ago, the same type of good people serving on the council in Schenectady, NY thought it was a great idea to demolish the old historically relevant train station (which in my eyes looked like a mini Grand Central Station).

Yes, it was in disrepair but could have been fixed.  It was torn down in the spirit of the then current wisdom of 'urban development' and replaced with a plain vanilla glass and steel structure that was, itself, replaced recently with a new building -looking strikingly like the old historic original.

You would be hard-pressed to find someone who was around at the time that thinks it was a good idea to demolish the old train station.

So, what's the point? [Parts 1, 2, 3]

Elected officials are under pressure.

They do not always make the right decision.

The people of the town will be living with the consequences of their decision long after their names are forgotten.

• A Better Way

The possible exception to that thought could be this:  if they dig in their heels (to a lot of fanfare) and seek to improve the town zoning in ways meant to preserve -and, enhance the town's character.

Those types of changes more often lead to remembrances and celebrations of those who usher in such policy.

Instead of floating bonds to build schools and water/sewer districts -how about floating bonds to buy up and preserve open space?

There are ways to do this.  A particularly robust example of this is on the island of Nantucket, Mass. 

https://www.nantucketlandbank.org/about/

There is a tax levied (a point or 2 of the purchase price) on every exchange of real estate, the proceeds of which go into the Land Bank for just that -to buy up and preserve open space.  That land bank has been a huge success out there, by any measure.

I trust the elected officials will do their homework and be fully aware of which side of history they would prefer to be remembered.

This letter was submitted to the Town of Ballston as a written statement for the public hearing on proposed zoning.

Dave has lived on Charlton Road in Ballston since 2003