On July 22 the Plattekill Zoning Board will hear an appeal from residents to a determination that was made by the Town of Plattekill’s Code Enforcement Officer Scott F. Mandoske concerning a drag strip that has been proposed for 153 Freetown Rd. in Plattekill by Anthony Dirago and Tina Bucci. The couple are seeking to have races and other activities on the site from April through November on Thursdays through Saturdays from 8 a.m. until 10 p.m. with Sundays reserved as a rain date. Specifically, the appeal by the residents is that drag strips are not allowed in a BD 60 zone.

Mandoske issued his determination on March 18, 2021 writing that, “the proposed project appears to meet the [code] definition of Outdoor Recreation and Amusement as defined in Section 110-6. Any and all outdoor amusement and recreation uses, parks, and playgrounds and associated facilities and structures, when all or a substantial portion of such activity is outside of a building or structure and is intended and shall include uses employing modification of the natural terrain such as the construction of slopes, slides, runs, paths, courses or other improvements to assist in the activity, as well as uses, which leaves the land in a passive or undisturbed state, excluding commercial operation of off-road and motor vehicle uses in all residential zoning districts, including HR-1, RS-1, RR-1.5, AG-1.5and M-3.”

Mandoske noted that outdoor recreation and amusement is by a special use permit in the BD 60 zone and is regulated by Section 110-45. He pointed out that at the Planning Board’s July 28, 2020 meeting, a list of Technical Review Comments were discussed. Item #3 on this list stated that, “The Planning Board should request an interpretation from the Code Enforcement Officer whether the proposed use, as described, meets the definition of outdoor recreation and amusement.” Mandoske noted, however, that he makes determinations not interpretations and if an interpretation is required, it would need to be reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Mandoske closed his determination by stating that Dirago’s application would be forwarded to the Planning Board for further review.

Kenneth and Emily Rodriguez’s home borders the proposed drag strip property and they, along with other concerned residents, brought a legal challenge against Mandoske’s determination. Rodriguez said the drag strip project was discussed at the Planning Board meeting of March 12, 2019, but Rodriguez said that Dirago had started some groundwork a few months before that on his property.

“My wife and I were outside talking and wondered who is doing that and what is going on there that is so weird,” he recalled. “In April 2019 when they posted the meeting minutes we found out it was our neighbor trying to put a drag strip in. He started doing work before he had any permit or approval.”

Rodriguez said Dirago went to the Code Enforcement Officer [Mandoske], “and he told them they needed a variance for boundaries and he sent them to the ZBA for a variance.” Rodriguez said determining the required setbacks, however, is the responsibility of the Planning Board and not of the Code Enforcement Officer.

Rodriguez said the use of commercial motorized vehicles is only allowed in a BD 80 zone and the property where Dirago is proposing his drag strip in zoned BD 60. He said the BD 60 zone allows for a mix of residential and light, low impact businesses and the BD 80 zone is for heavy impacts and does not permit residential properties within it. He noted that although there are other homes with children nearby, his home is the only one that is in the BD 60 zone with Dirago.

“It will impact my daily life. If there’s a drag strip 400 feet from where my kids play, the question is can we still live here or not,” said Rodriguez, adding that if this project is approved, “it will devalue a lot of properties in the surrounding area; who is going to want to live next to a drag strip even if you are a supporter of it? It’s not meant for residential areas.”

Rodriguez said a sound study they commissioned shows that he will experience 94 decibels in his yard during races and the town has a limit of 65 decibels.

Rodriguez pointed out that the Code Enforcement Officer wrote Dirago up in June 2019 for not having a storm water permit but because he failed to follow up, Dirago continued working on his property for nearly two more years. Because nothing was being done at the local level, residents alerted the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation about this matter, resulting in the agency issuing a Notice of Violation and a Cease and Desist Directive to Dirago in May 2021.

Dirago’s attorney Ken Stenger said at a later date his client may wish to offer his side of the story to the Southern Ulster Times.