Dear Editor,

In an unfortunate and precedent setting decision, the BOT on August 18 arbitrarily discarded conditions placed on the approval of the Peakview Summit Minor Subdivision (90 Peakview) in 2004 by the BOT and  Planning Commission and signed a “Development Improvements Agreement” with the owners, prepared by the owners’ lawyer, to relieve owners of the obligation to prove all “lots” were accessible.

With a paragraph buried in the Agreement, the developer was also exempted from Town Ordinance 17-5 (e), which requires subdivisions to have access to the municipal sewer system, passed in 2003 out of concern for groundwater quality and population density. If this subdivision qualifies for an exemption, it should be considered through the proper legal process, not in this backdoor way. Essentially, the BOT gave final approval to a subdivision that had not previously been fully approved and authorized the owner to bypass restrictions designed to more carefully scrutinize subdivisions.

The Board didn’t seriously consider the option of calling for a review under Sec. 17-94,  although this subdivision met all the requirements: “no subdivision agreement has been executed, no construction of required improvements initiated [and]… no building permits issued within twelve (12) months after final approval of the subdivision plat…”  A review seems particularly appropriate, because no neighbors were notified in 2004 and so were deprived of their right to comment. My husband and I own land immediately adjacent but didn’t learn of this subdivision until this summer. 

The Agreement wasn’t discussed before it appeared on the August 18 Agenda. The Town lawyer prepared a memo that gave arguments only in favor, did not discuss the Town’s broader interests, and left out important facts, including the owners’ failure to meet any conditions placed on the approval. 

In justifying their decision to disregard Town laws and Planners’ recommendations, Trustees denigrated the 2004 Board, called the restriction on sale “stupid,’ and claimed the owner had done all “due diligence” despite having failed to meet any conditions. This poorly considered decision rewards an irresponsible subdivider and places the consequences of the subdivider’s failures on subsequent buyers. 

I hope that residents who want to see land-use decisions made in conformance with Planners’ recommendations and Town ordinances will tell the BOT (bot@nederlandco.org) and Mayor Larsen (kristopherl@nederlandco.org) to revoke the Development Improvements Agreement and hold a new hearing for full public consideration of this questionable subdivision. 

Sincerely,

Susan Wagner
Nederland