Red Hook WatchIndependent Community Resource

GML §239-l/m Review – North Broadway Corridor Land Use and Zoning Study

↑Meetings/Document history/chain_2535
1 versions2026-03-12working document

Versions

  1. 12026-03-12
    GML §239-l/m Review – North Broadway Corridor Land Use and Zoning Study
    working documentmeeting · 2026-03-12

Document

Open original PDFView version history →Meeting on 2026-03-12 →

Sue Serino County Executive

Eoin Wrafter, AICP Commissioner

Dutchess County Government

Department of Planning & Development

March 12, 2025

To: Village Board, Village of Red Hook

Re: ZR26-032 – North Broadway Corridor Land Use and Zoning Study (Amendment to Comp Plan)

The Dutchess County Department of Planning & Development has reviewed the subject referral within the framework of General Municipal Law (Article 12B, §239-l/m).

ACTION

The Village seeks to adopt a land use study that analyzes current conditions within the North Broadway corridor. The proposed land use study is intended to serve as an addendum to the Village’s comprehensive plan and will provide the foundation for future zoning amendments.

GENERAL COMMENTS - The department supports the intent behind the subject land use study as it will allow the Village to begin the process of amending the zoning within the study area in a way that would allow for smart growth development to occur within this currently underutilized area. The Village has long been committed to pursuing smart growth principles in order to guide future development within their existing center with the goal of preserving existing greenspaces and agricultural lands that surround it, making it an exemplary model of a Hudson River Valley Greenway Compact community. We look forward to reviewing the forthcoming zoning amendments should this land use study be adopted by the Board and as always, we encourage the Village to reach out to us early in the process for a preliminary review prior to our formal GML-239 review.

Demographics and Housing Data - Certain tables within this section compare 2024 ACS 5-year estimates with earlier decennial census counts. The Board should consider adding a footnote to explain the differences in methodology of these two data sources, as decennial census counts are meant to provide a precise count, while ACS 5-year estimates represent a period estimate averaged over 60 months and contain a margin of error. For instance, the 2024 ACS 5-year estimates for the population within the Village of Red Hook has a margin of error of ± 336. This is important to note given that table 1 indicates that from 2020 to 2024 the Village had seen the highest rate of population change in recent history, which may be affected by the margin of error attributed to this data point.

Table 2 shows data for household size only for the year 2024. It may be more compelling to provide the data on household sizes from previous years, to show the trend of average household sizes shrinking over time. This would mean that even if the Villages population were to remain relatively stable over time, they would still need to produce more housing units to house the same number of people today.

RECOMMENDATION

The Department recommends that the Board rely upon its own study of the facts in the case with due consideration of the above comments.

Eoin Wrafter, AICP, Commissioner By Clayton Gurnett, Planner

85 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 107, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 | (845) 486-3600 | Fax:(845) 486-3610 dutchessny.gov

To Date #pgs Dutchess County Department of Co./Dept. Pe From Planning and Development eeee Fax # PO Phone # eee 239 Planning/Zoning Referral - Exemption Communities

Municipality: Village of Red Hook

Referring Agency: Municipal Board

Tax Parcel Numbers(s): #Error

Project Name: North Broadway Corridor Land Use and Zoning Study - Amendment to Comp Plan

Applicant: Village Board of Trustees Address of Property: Northeast quadrant of Village Exempt Actions: Actions Requiring 239 Review Parcels within 500 feet of: 239 Review is NOT Required* Comprehensive/Master Plans State Road: Route 9, Route 199 Administrative Amendments (fees, Zoning Amendments (standards, uses, procedures, penalties, etc.) definitions, district regulations, etc.) County Road: Special Permits for residential uses [| | (accessory apts, home occupations, etc.) Other Local Laws associated with zoning (wetlands, historic preservation, affordable housing, architectural review, etc.) State Property (with recreation area or public building) Use Variances for residential uses Rezonings involving all map changes County Property (with recreation ] area or public building) Area Variances for residential uses | Architectural Review Municipal Boundary Renewals/Extension of Site Plans or Special Permits that have no changes Site Plans (all) Farm operation in an Agricultural from previous approvals District Special Permits for all non-residential uses No Authority to review these Actions Use Variances for all non-residential uses Subdivisions / Lot Line Adjustments Interpretations Area Variances for all non-residential uses =||| Exempt Action submitted for informal Other (Describe): review aOO Date Response Requested: 3/6/2026 Entered By: Cavanaugh, Jennifer These actions are only exempt in municipalities that signed an intermunicipal agreemment with Dutchess County to that effect.

For County Office Use Only

Response From Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development

No Comments: Comments Attached: Matter of Local Concern Local Concern with Comments No Jurisdiction Conditional [] No Authority Denial L Withdrawn L_| Incomplete with Comments- municipality must resubmit to County Incomplete - municipality must resubmit to County LJ| Informal Comments Only (Action Exempt from 239 Review) Exempt from 239 Review None

Date Submitted: 2/12/2026 Notes: [| Major Project Date Received: 2/12/2026 Referral #: ZR26-032 Date Requested: 3/6/2026 Date Required: 3/13/2026 Also mailed Reviewer: Date Transmitted: 3/12/2026 hard copy . iz

Date Printed: 3/12/2026

Changes between versions

2026-05-11→2026-05-11
substantive change+53 −7

The document has been completely replaced, shifting from a Deputy Mayor's monthly report to a focus on the Community Preservation Fund (CPF) and proposed intermunicipal agreements.

  • Title changed from 'Deputy Mayor Melkorka Kjarval’s Monthly Reports' to 'Community Engagement and CPF Plan Update'
  • Removed all content regarding Red Hook Together, the Transitional Housing discussion group, and the Town of Red Hook Comprehensive Plan
  • Added detailed financial breakdown of the Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund totaling $3,778,363.12 as of 3/10/2026
  • Added section regarding a proposed amendment to the CPF plan to include parcels owned by Town Water District No. 1
  • Added list of current CPF Advisory Committee members including Chair Mary Ann Johnson
  • Added proposal for an Intermunicipal Agreement/MOU to ensure Villages receive a minimum 10% allocation of CPF funds each
  • Added 'Village of Red Hook Communications' section regarding a public survey with 68 responses
Show red-line diff
Deputy Mayor Melkorka Kjarval’s Monthly Reports **May, 11th, 2026** **Red Hook Together** meets every first Thursday of the month. The group met virtually on May 7th at noon. The Rotary’s Apple Blossom festival slated for May 9th has secured a RHCSD shuttle bus that will transport riders from an accessory parking lot to the festival as well as stopping north of the Village. Legislator Kris Munn shared that he is proposing a law to regulate use of A.I in County Government. Cicely Wilson from Bard CCE reminded the group about their summer intern program. Tivoli Library announced their REV 250 event in coordination with the Town on Flag Day. Panda shared they are looking for board members to fill their “Village of Red Hook” board seat. The next meeting of Red Hook Together will be at 4pm on June 4th to launch this year's slate of Art Box exhibits. As reported in previous reports, the Transitional Housing discussion group, which met on January 21st with Christa Hines from HRH and met again virtually Tuesday, April 28th. In attendance were Town Supervisor Mckeon, Community CenterEngagement Director Sara Ugolini, Nevill Smythe, and Erin Canan Vice President for Civic Engagementhttps://www. Discussion covered what the goals of the group should be, if this group was the correct venue for the discussion, and possible next stepsredhookny. The issue of lack of access to social service support and interventions for individuals with housinggov/ mental health or addiction crises in Red Hook was discussed in depth. Sara Ugolini proposed we invite DCFS Commissioner Sabrina Marzouka to speak to the group - coordination of that is ongoing. Town Supervisor Mckeon has proposed finding a location for a Hudson River Housing (Empire State Supportive Housing Initiative (ESSHI)) funded project - which would cover rental fees for 6 bedrooms in a property. Eligibility for this specific project (as defined by ESSHI criteria) would be 3 slots for un-housed persons with serious mental illness and 3 slots for unhoused individuals that are part of the Reentry Population. We have yet to hear if such a project were sited in RH; whether RH would be eligible for satellite access to County supportive social services (currently located in Poughkeepsie) andDocumentCenter/or would priority be given to RH community members known to be in need of housing support services. A reminder that the emergency overnight warming shelter previously held in St.Christopher’s basement during the winter of ‘25View/’26; has been unable to find a location although funding and staffing are available.4931/ ## **Town of Red Hook ComprehensiveCommunity PlanPreservation Fund:** |**Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund:**|**Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund:**|| |---|---|---| |||**Balance**| |M&T Consolidated Account|Cm C’munity Pres 0102|217,181.53| |NYclass Master Account|Cm Community Pres. 0203|1,593,856.83| ||Green CPF 0204.100 Investment|1,856,208.19| ||Greene (CPF Funds) 0204|111,116.57| |Town of Red Hook CPF Total Balance as of 3/10/2026||**3,778,363.12**| |Source: Town Board Packet:https://www.redhookny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/1146?fleID=21757||| There is another public hearing on May 12, 2026, for another amendment to the CPF plan. “ _**The proposed amendment incorporates certain additional parcels currently owned on behalf of the Town Water District No. 1. The Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Plan, in accordance with Section 64-h of the Town Law and Chapter 57 of the Red Hook Town Code, establishes a plan for the preservation of community character; to acquire interests or rights in real property for the preservation of community character within the Town including Villages in accordance with such Plan and in cooperation with willing sellers; and to provide a management and stewardship program for such interests and rights. The Town Board will meet to consider such amendment and hear all persons interested in the subject thereof and concerning the same.**_ ” I have also been doing some preliminary work to understand better how the CPF Advisory Committee works. Currently the Advisory committee meets monthlyafter fromthey 7:30pmare sent projects to 9pmreview. onThey have not met yet during the fourthyear Tuesday2026. atThey Towndo Hallnot produce minutes, and instead use their advisory opinions as record. The Aprilcurrent 28thappointment list (as set at the Feb 10th, 2026 Town Council meeting is as follows: source: https://www.redhookny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_02102026-2065 ## Chair- **Mary Ann Johnson** 2026 - **Chris Klose** 2026 - **Emily Majer** 2026 - **R. Pete Hubbell** 2024 (land appraiser) - **John Hardeman** 2024 (farmer) - Vacant 2028 (farmer) - **Mary Ann Johnson** 2028 (planner) - **Charlie Laing** 2025 (architect) - Liaison: **Ken Migliorelli** Also for the Village boards consideration, The CPF plan contains the following recommendation: _**Therefore, the CPF Advisory Board continues to recommend that the Town and the villages enter into an Intermunicipal Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding to assure that highly ranked parcels in the Villages are eligible for a minimum ten percent (10%) of the CPF each for a total of twenty percent (20%) annually dedicated to use in the villages. Projects receiving funding under the initial 10% Village allocation are not limited to projects located within the Village boundaries but may include projects that benefit the Village, such as protection of water supply, enhancement of gateway areas, and other projects described under “Village of Red Hook Rankings” and “Village of Tivoli Rankings.” Strategies for when and how to allocate this portion of the Fund to the villages should include the power of each municipality to veto allocation of its funds to a project not directly benefitting the villages. It should also include a mechanism for the villages to relinquish the use of the 20 percent annual allocation, to be used elsewhere in the Town or for all of the 20 percent allocation to be used in one of the two villages, if suitable projects are not available for funding in any given year. Each party to the Agreement/Memorandum should be designated an active participant in the decisionmaking process.**_ Source (Page 2.6) No such Intermunicipal Agreement or MOU has ever existed during the 10 years that this fund has been in operation. The 2nd WorkshopTown is entitledapproaching “Visionthe State To extend the town of Red Hook's preservation funds and tax on real estate transfers in the town until 2051. I propose we as a board should request that the Town commit to Actionundertaking an agreement with the Villages as was recommended by the CPF Advisory Board before they vote to amend their law. Our constituents deserve to have taxes collected from Village properties represented and Village interests part of the recommendation process, and if the Town is planning to amend the law to “ _**to acquire interests or rights in real property for the preservation of community character within the Town including Villages in accordance with such Plan and in cooperation with willing sellers; and to provide a management and stewardship program for such interests and rights”**_ Village interests, Village Character and Village representation and participation in what ‘management and stewardship’ should constitute should be considered. I hereby request that the Village board agree to send a letter to the Town Council requesting that before they amend the law, and/or renew the tax they enter into an agreement with the Villages. ## **Village of Red Hook Communications:** - The Survey redhookvillage.gov/survey will be heldshared on Sunday, May 17 Noon - 4pm at Rose Hill Farm. This will be the first opportunity for the community to see what goals were gleaned from public engagement,with the public isat invitedApple Blossom Day and then depending on responses closed so that we can analyze responses. Thank you to everyone who has taken time to give us feedback, on68 theseresponses ‘visions’at inthe antime interactiveof expothis stylefinalizing eventthis report. ## **Village and Zoning Review:** No other updates to date. Comp**Planning/Zoning Plan& SiteBuilding Department:** redhookny.gov/578/Town-of-Red-Hook-Comprehensive-PlanSee Whatattached is a Comp Plan? redhookny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4933/Reports
2026-05-11→2026-05-11
substantive change+14 −0

The document title and scope changed from a specific CPF update to a comprehensive monthly report from the Deputy Mayor.

  • Title changed from 'Community Engagement and CPF Plan Update' to 'Deputy Mayor Melkorka Kjarval's Monthly Reports — May 2026'
  • Added extensive new sections regarding 'Red Hook Together' meetings, 'Transitional Housing' discussions, and the 'Town of Red Hook Comprehensive Plan'
  • Added details on ESSHI-funded housing project eligibility (3 slots for un-housed with serious mental illness and 3 slots for Reentry Population)
  • Added information regarding the 'Vision to Action' Comprehensive Plan workshop scheduled for May 17th
Show red-line diff
Deputy Mayor Melkorka Kjarval’s Monthly Reports **May, 11th, 2026** **Red Hook Together** meets every first Thursday of the month. The group met virtually on May 7th at noon. The Rotary’s Apple Blossom festival slated for May 9th has secured a RHCSD shuttle bus that will transport riders from an accessory parking lot to the festival as well as stopping north of the Village. Legislator Kris Munn shared that he is proposing a law to regulate use of A.I in County Government. Cicely Wilson from Bard CCE reminded the group about their summer intern program. Tivoli Library announced their REV 250 event in coordination with the Town on Flag Day. Panda shared they are looking for board members to fill their “Village of Red Hook” board seat. The next meeting of Red Hook Together will be at 4pm on June 4th to launch this year's slate of Art Box exhibits. As reported in previous reports, the Transitional Housing discussion group, which met on January 21st with Christa Hines from HRH and met again virtually Tuesday, April 28th. In attendance were Town Supervisor Mckeon, Community Center Director Sara Ugolini, Nevill Smythe, and Erin Canan Vice President for Civic Engagement. Discussion covered what the goals of the group should be, if this group was the correct venue for the discussion, and possible next steps. The issue of lack of access to social service support and interventions for individuals with housing/ mental health or addiction crises in Red Hook was discussed in depth. Sara Ugolini proposed we invite DCFS Commissioner Sabrina Marzouka to speak to the group - coordination of that is ongoing. Town Supervisor Mckeon has proposed finding a location for a Hudson River Housing (Empire State Supportive Housing Initiative (ESSHI)) funded project - which would cover rental fees for 6 bedrooms in a property. Eligibility for this specific project (as defined by ESSHI criteria) would be 3 slots for un-housed persons with serious mental illness and 3 slots for unhoused individuals that are part of the Reentry Population. We have yet to hear if such a project were sited in RH; whether RH would be eligible for satellite access to County supportive social services (currently located in Poughkeepsie) and/or would priority be given to RH community members known to be in need of housing support services. A reminder that the emergency overnight warming shelter previously held in St.Christopher’s basement during the winter of ‘25/’26; has been unable to find a location although funding and staffing are available. ## **Town of Red Hook Comprehensive Plan:** The Town committee meets monthly from 7:30pm to 9pm on the fourth Tuesday at Town Hall. The April 28th. The 2nd Workshop is entitled “Vision to Action” will be held on Sunday, May 17 Noon - 4pm at Rose Hill Farm. This will be the first opportunity for the community to see what goals were gleaned from public engagement, the public is invited to give feedback on these ‘visions’ in an interactive expo style event. Comp Plan Site: redhookny.gov/578/Town-of-Red-Hook-Comprehensive-Plan What is a Comp Plan? redhookny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4933/ Community Engagement https://www.redhookny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4931/ ## **Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund:** |**Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund:**|**Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Fund:**|| |---|---|---| |||**Balance**| |M&T Consolidated Account|Cm C’munity Pres 0102|217,181.53| |NYclass Master Account|Cm Community Pres. 0203|1,593,856.83| ||Green CPF 0204.100 Investment|1,856,208.19| ||Greene (CPF Funds) 0204|111,116.57| |Town of Red Hook CPF Total Balance as of 3/10/2026||**3,778,363.12**| |Source: Town Board Packet:https://www.redhookny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/1146?fleID=21757||| There is another public hearing on May 12, 2026, for another amendment to the CPF plan. “ _**The proposed amendment incorporates certain additional parcels currently owned on behalf of the Town Water District No. 1. The Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Plan, in accordance with Section 64-h of the Town Law and Chapter 57 of the Red Hook Town Code, establishes a plan for the preservation of community character; to acquire interests or rights in real property for the preservation of community character within the Town including Villages in accordance with such Plan and in cooperation with willing sellers; and to provide a management and stewardship program for such interests and rights. The Town Board will meet to consider such amendment and hear all persons interested in the subject thereof and concerning the same.**_ ” I have also been doing some preliminary work to understand better how the CPF Advisory Committee works. Currently the Advisory committee meets after they are sent projects to review. They have not met yet during the year 2026. They do not produce minutes, and instead use their advisory opinions as record. The current appointment list (as set at the Feb 10th, 2026 Town Council meeting is as follows: source: https://www.redhookny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_02102026-2065 ## Chair- **Mary Ann Johnson** 2026 - **Chris Klose** 2026 - **Emily Majer** 2026 - **R. Pete Hubbell** 2024 (land appraiser) - **John Hardeman** 2024 (farmer) - Vacant 2028 (farmer) - **Mary Ann Johnson** 2028 (planner) - **Charlie Laing** 2025 (architect) - Liaison: **Ken Migliorelli** Also for the Village boards consideration, The CPF plan contains the following recommendation: _**Therefore, the CPF Advisory Board continues to recommend that the Town and the villages enter into an Intermunicipal Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding to assure that highly ranked parcels in the Villages are eligible for a minimum ten percent (10%) of the CPF each for a total of twenty percent (20%) annually dedicated to use in the villages. Projects receiving funding under the initial 10% Village allocation are not limited to projects located within the Village boundaries but may include projects that benefit the Village, such as protection of water supply, enhancement of gateway areas, and other projects described under “Village of Red Hook Rankings” and “Village of Tivoli Rankings.” Strategies for when and how to allocate this portion of the Fund to the villages should include the power of each municipality to veto allocation of its funds to a project not directly benefitting the villages. It should also include a mechanism for the villages to relinquish the use of the 20 percent annual allocation, to be used elsewhere in the Town or for all of the 20 percent allocation to be used in one of the two villages, if suitable projects are not available for funding in any given year. Each party to the Agreement/Memorandum should be designated an active participant in the decisionmaking process.**_ Source (Page 2.6) No such Intermunicipal Agreement or MOU has ever existed during the 10 years that this fund has been in operation. The Town is approaching the State To extend the town of Red Hook's preservation funds and tax on real estate transfers in the town until 2051. I propose we as a board should request that the Town commit to undertaking an agreement with the Villages as was recommended by the CPF Advisory Board before they vote to amend their law. Our constituents deserve to have taxes collected from Village properties represented and Village interests part of the recommendation process, and if the Town is planning to amend the law to “ _**to acquire interests or rights in real property for the preservation of community character within the Town including Villages in accordance with such Plan and in cooperation with willing sellers; and to provide a management and stewardship program for such interests and rights”**_ Village interests, Village Character and Village representation and participation in what ‘management and stewardship’ should constitute should be considered. I hereby request that the Village board agree to send a letter to the Town Council requesting that before they amend the law, and/or renew the tax they enter into an agreement with the Villages. ## **Village of Red Hook Communications:** - The Survey redhookvillage.gov/survey will be shared with the public at Apple Blossom Day and then depending on responses closed so that we can analyze responses. Thank you to everyone who has taken time to give us feedback, 68 responses at the time of this finalizing this report. ## **Village and Zoning Review:** No other updates to date. **Planning/Zoning & Building Department:** See attached Reports

References

This document cites or incorporates the following separate documents:

Referenced by

These other documents cite or incorporate this one: