Above photo: Engineer Brendon Becker makes a presentation on the Shad Point housing plan in Cobleskill at the March 2 Schoharie County Planning Commission meeting. Photo by Chris English.

SCHOHARIE COUNTY — A proposal that would bring a lot more housing of various types to the Town of Cobleskill has gotten an incomplete from the Schoharie County Planning Commission.

At its Monday, March 2 meeting, the SCPC unanimously approved a motion from member Ron Ketelsen that a proposal for 76 residential units on Shad Point Road near the intersection of Routes 7 and 145 is incomplete at this point because Commission members feel it needs to provide more concrete information on issues like traffic, water runoff, water and sewer hookups, plant screenings and others.

The county Planning Commission is an advisory board that issues recommendations on projects for the various town or village planning boards or other agencies that refer proposals to the county commission. At the March 2 county Planning Commission meeting, Paul Chacho of Chacho & Sons Holdings, his son Alex and Engineer Brendon Becker attended to present the Shad Point plan and answer questions.

The proposal is for a mixed-use residential development on 33 acres owned by Chacho & Sons on Shad Point Road. There would be eight single-family houses, 18 duplexes (36 duplex units), and 32 apartments in four two-story buildings of eight apartments each. Also planned are 40 storage units in at least two buildings for use only by residents of the new development,

All the residential units would be rentals. There would be no subdivision, with Chacho & Sons retaining ownership of the entire 33 acres and also ownership of the roads and other infrastructure within the development.

Becker made a presentation with maps and drawings and there were questions and concerns from Planning Commission members and some of the 20 residents in attendance throughout the Shad Point part of the meeting. One of them regarded the project's two proposed accesses on Shad Point Road. Commission members and many at the meeting would like to see if possible an access from Route 7, but Becker said it would be hard getting approval for that from the New York Department of Transportation.

"One of the major concerns we had is they're talking about a 300 percent increase in traffic on Shad Point Road from what it is now," said Joe Stahl, who lives in Delanson but owns a property on Shad Point Road and said he'd been asked by a group of Shad Point Road residents to be their spokesman.

Stahl expressed several other concerns shared by others including water runoff, how the new development would affect water pressure for others in the area and several others.

"I'm not against the development, we just want it done the right way," Stahl said near the end of the meeting.

Becker said near the start of his presentation that water and sewer service for the new development would come from hooking into lines along Route 7.

One county Planning Commission member asked about the estimated five to 10-year estimate to complete the project contained in documents submitted as part of the proposal.

"We would certainly like to complete it in five years but it will depend on the economy and some other things," Paul Chacho said.

Former Village of Cobleskill Mayor Becky Stanton-Terk wondered about impacts from the nearby project in the Town on the village.

"Mr. Chacho has the right to develop his property, but there are a lot of things that need to be touched on here," she said. 

Becker said the general idea is to get buy-in from the county Planning Commission and other agencies on the concept before spending a lot of money on fully engineered plans that more fully address issues like Storm water management and others. However, county Planning Commission members said they weren't comfortable issuing a recommendation one way or the other on the Shad Point proposal without seeing quite a bit more detail on various aspects of the plan.

"We don't have enough information to make a recommendation," Ketelsen said. "We need more info before we can make an informed decision."

In some brief comments made to this newspaper after the meeting, he added "I support the project, it's a good project, but there are just too many unanswered questions at this point."

Becker said he and others involved in the development would try to get answers to the questions and concerns and come back.

In a brief telephone conversation after the meeting, he explained that state and other agencies require matters like stormwater management and others to be addressed before projects can be built and permits granted and lead agencies normally grant approval contingent on those matters being addressed according to all requirements.

"Some of the concerns were legitimate," Becker said of the March 2 county PC meeting. "We'll have to address those concerns sooner than normal."