Hyde Park ZBA approves five variances for NRI/One and Only project; fence setback wins 4–1

The Hyde Park Zoning Board of Appeals on Jan. 28 approved five area variances requested by NRI High Park LLC for an amended lodging and resort project at the Culinary Institute area, including variances for stream-corridor grading, a perimeter security fence, parking landscaping, a retaining wall and an event‑barn deck.

Attorney Michael Xarn, land‑use counsel for the applicant, told the board the project faces a seasonal restriction that prevents tree cutting after March 31 and argued that limited, hand‑felling of approximately 1.9 acres of trees is necessary this winter to avoid losing a year of work. “We have an Indiana bat window... That back window prevents us from cutting any trees after March 31st,” Xarn said, urging the board to act in the near term so the planning board and town board can complete permits and the tree work can proceed within the biological window.

The board considered the variances item by item and recorded roll-call votes. Variance 1 (stream‑corridor grading/retaining-wall setback to 73 ft where 100 ft is required) passed unanimously. Variance 2, which allows portions of an aluminum/chain‑link security fence to sit as close as 10 ft to the right‑of‑way (where 150 ft is required in places), passed 4–1 after Vice Chair Perkins objected, saying he did not want the fence to be visible from Route 9: “I don't want to look at the fence,” Perkins said. Variances 3–5 (parking landscaping reduction/elimination of planting islands, a 12‑ft retaining‑wall setback and an 85‑ft event‑barn deck setback) were approved by unanimous votes.

Applicants said the fence will follow a ridge line and be largely screened by vegetation; where visible, the plan calls for an aluminum picket fence segment and black chain‑link in screened areas. Engineers said the routing minimized slope disturbance and allowed installation without heavy machines in steep areas. The team also reiterated commitments to trail upgrades, preservation of conservation easement areas and coordination with federal and state agencies on wetlands and archaeological constraints.

Board members asked for a site visit to inspect flagged fence lines that applicants had marked with six‑foot-high fluorescent flags in October. Members also pressed applicants for details about construction staging, the likely duration of tree stockpiling on site (applicants estimated several weeks to a couple of months will be the likely period), and the condition that stumps be left above grade as required by the planning board.

The board’s resolution (Res. 25‑17Z) cites Town Law section 267‑p and Hyde Park Zoning Law section 108‑33.6B2 in making standard area‑variance findings and includes SEQRA references and conditions. Votes were recorded by roll call, with the security‑fence variance the only split vote: Gregory Campus — yes; Miss Dailyaly — yes; Mr. Travis — yes; Vice Chair Perkins — no (on variance 2); Chair Bowen — yes.

What happens next: NRI must satisfy conditions set by the board and by the planning board for final site-plan signoffs; tree‑felling under the seasonal window remains conditioned on planning‑board permits, erosion‑control measures and any required SWPPP and health‑department approvals.