Putnam Valley is justified in passing
another moratorium
A moratorium by its very nature
will always spark controversy because it takes away certain rights
of individuals.
But that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.
Developers and their attorneys, of course, will argue otherwise, but
there is usually little they can do to stop a building ban if a municipality
follows the proper procedures and demonstrates a reasonable need to
take a timeout.
The Town of Putnam Valley is in the midst of possibly imposing a third
building moratorium in the last four years.
The proposed ban, currently in its third draft, would prohibit development
for 12 months on any subdivision of at least five lots, as well as
building of any kind in the Wildlife Habitat and Biodiversity Protection
Area.
The protection area is a proposed environmental overlay district in
sensitive locations.
On the surface, it would seem that three moratoriums in four years
would be excessive, but that's not the case in Putnam Valley.
A new supervisor and his two running mates were swept into office
last November with a platform of protecting the environment and protecting
the town from being overbuilt.
That alone is enough to justify a moratorium since the new administration,
led by Supervisor Sam Davis, needs ample time to review existing planning
and zoning laws to get a handle on what potentially could be built.
Putnam Valley is much different than neighboring municipalities and
its infrastructure cannot sustain the type of development that has
taken place in Cortlandt, Yorktown and Peekskill.
The Town Board is also grappling with the Comprehensive Plan, which
other municipalities have always used as a reason in the past to pass
a moratorium.
It appears Putnam Valley officials are following all the proper steps
and should not be dissuaded by any threats of litigation.
Sometimes people just have to be patient, especially developers, when
the future of a town could be at stake.
