HURLEYVILLE – Nearly 400 people packed into the large ballroom of the Hurleyville Performing Arts Centre on March 4 night for a public hearing on the proposed zoning changes in the Town of Fallsburg. The town board had to relocate the meeting to this bigger venue after the previous hearing at Town Hall reached capacity, leaving many residents unable to attend.

With every seat taken along with standing room in the back of the grand ballroom, tensions ran high as residents voiced their opinions on the zoning amendments. 

Fallsburg Town Supervisor Michael Bensimon addressed the packed room, explaining the town’s reasoning behind the proposed changes. “These changes are about ensuring our zoning code aligns with federal law while also meeting the needs of our growing community,” he stated. 

Proposed Zoning Changes

The zoning amendments introduce modifications to Fallsburg’s land use laws, addressing religious uses, nonconforming properties, and site plan regulations. The amendments also expand the definition of religious institutions, explicitly defining religious retreat centers and religious schools. These updates aim to prevent legal conflicts under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), but they have raised concerns about increased development in rural areas.

Additionally, the law introduces new flexibility for nonconforming properties. Under the changes, nonconforming commercial and multifamily buildings may expand up to 50 percent with site plan approval, and bungalow colonies can replace existing structures without reducing density. Existing sleepaway and day camps may also be converted into religious retreat centers without needing a full variance.

Site plan reviews have also been updated, requiring stricter adherence to the New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code. Permit approvals, which previously expired after 18 months, will now be valid for 24 months with the option for two six-month extensions.

Setback and lot coverage requirements have been adjusted to better accommodate development while preserving the architectural character of hamlet and historic areas. Addressing concerns about fairness in setback requirements, Supervisor Bensimon explained, “To be clear, houses of worship in an agricultural district are currently allowed in our zoning code even without these proposed changes and are also included in the current comprehensive plan. A house of worship and an agricultural farming operation both require at least 10 acres of land to operate. However, a farm requires a front yard setback of 75 feet, while the house of worship is more restrictive, requiring it to be 100 feet from the road. Under our RLUIPA obligations, we cannot create conditions that are more burdensome on religious uses than other allowable uses in the same district. Therefore, we are reducing the front yard setback from 100 feet to 75 feet in order to be in compliance with RLUIPA.”

These changes, according to the town board, are intended to modernize Fallsburg’s zoning laws while ensuring compliance with federal and state regulations.

A deep divide

Moses Friedman, a seasonal resident, voiced concerns that the zoning law amendments do not go far enough to prevent future litigation. ‘I’m opposing the law because I think the law isn’t enough and it still may bring in fact some other litigations. He urged the town to ensure that any new zoning law avoids repeated legal challenges.

Annie Mauer, a resident of South Fallsburg for 11 years, expressed deep concern over contradictions in the proposed zoning amendments. ‘The proposed amendments create ambiguities and inconsistencies in the zoning code,’ she said. ‘The county’s 239 review states that a complete rewrite of the definitions section would allow the town to reduce the amount of potentially conflicting definitions that result in arbitrary permitting.’ Mauer urged the town to take a more careful and transparent approach, suggesting a roundtable discussion that includes multiple perspectives to redraft the amendments.

Gabriela Nolan, a 25-year Fallsburg resident with a background in geological sciences and environmental policy, criticized the procedural issues in the zoning process. ‘You missed some parts to correctly evaluate the environmental impacts that may occur with these amendments,’ she said. ‘Environmental impacts not only affect the way that we live, but the wildlife around us.’ Nolan called for a more thorough review of the town’s infrastructure and resources before approving any zoning changes.

Resident James Car raised concerns over the town’s water supply, stating that increased density without proper studies could be disastrous. ‘Where there is no water, there is no people, there is no life,’ he said. Car urged the town to reject the amendments until a full hydrological study is conducted.

Stan Wagner voiced strong concerns over the impact the amendments would have on the town’s planning and legal standing. ‘The proposed code allows for broad interpretation, which would permit or restrict certain uses in ways that contradict the town’s comprehensive plan. It also lacks clear density guidelines,’ Wagner said. He further warned that the language of the proposal could expose the town to legal challenges and does not adequately assess the environmental impacts as required under state law.

Attorney William Demarest, speaking on behalf of Fallsburg Citizens for Sustainability, and a vocal opponent of the zoning changes, spoke strongly against the proposal. “At present, our critical infrastructure will be over capacity at the pre-planned buildout of new homes. That infrastructure is also near obsolescence stage and is beginning to fail. The aquifer under us that provides the water we so critically need is also at full capacity of use. And oftentimes there is no water left in the summer months to draw from, causing existing residents’ wells to run dry.”

This is part one of a two part series – the second of which will appear in the next edition of the Sullivan County Democrat.