Current, future Woodstock supervisors agree on Zena Homes traffic review
- Stop Zena Development
- Nov 23
- 3 min read
McKenna, Courtis say it should be based on maximum number of units that could be built
PUBLISHED: November 14, 2025 at 5:12 PM EST
WOODSTOCK, N.Y. — Zena Homes’ request for an extension to Eastwoods Drive should be evaluated based on the maximum number of units that could be built rather than a promise that a proposed 30-lot subdivision would be limited to single-family homes, town Supervisor Bill McKenna and Supervisor-elect Anula Courtis said.
Their stance comes as the town Planning Board gears up for a review of an extension of more than 1,000 feet that goes to the town of Ulster line for access to the project. Woodstock is responsible for reviews of the road extension, while the Ulster town Planning Board has authority over the landlocked project, which relies on having access to a public street.
“If they were willing to put a deed restriction in that says each lot will have only one dwelling unit, then I would say (review) with the 30 and there’s a legal document in place to enforce that,” McKenna said. “If they are not willing to do that, then you have to assume the worst-case scenario. The whole idea is to build a road that’s going to be sufficient to meet the demand.”
Under a review by town of Ulster consultant LaBella, the project could have duplex buildings on 22 lots with eight single-family lots, which would result in 52 units if completely built out.
But the developer’s consultant, Cuddy Feder, disputed the town of Ulster’s zoning assessment and contended that only six lots could accommodate a two-family dwelling. That would limit the buildout to 36 units.
In an email sent Friday, Nov. 14, Zena Development LLC co-developer Eddie Greenberg declined to say whether he or partner Evan Kleinberg would be willing to put deed restrictions on the 30 lots. However, he was insistent that none of the parcels would be multi-family dwellings, adding that officials “never suggested to us” that deeds should reflect that if the project were to be approved.
“We are subdividing 30 lots,” he wrote, “and while six of those lots could technically support a two-family home, we have no intention of building any.”
The controversial proposal has drawn packed meetings in both Ulster and Woodstock. The majority of audience members were from Woodstock and had concerns that there were environmental issues with both the extension request and the proposed 106.6-acre housing project. Courtis, who will become town supervisor on Jan. 1, 2026, also hopes the town Planning Board reviews are based on the maximum amount of traffic that would use Eastwoods Drive if the project is built.
“Of course, residents are afraid that (developers) can build more,” she said. “Without a commitment … it should be a question that’s raised. The facts should be known about what could go in there. What could they be upset about by that?”
In the application to the Ulster town Planning Board, Feder wrote in a July 30, 2024, letter that the Eastwoods Drive extension would be “approximately 1,400 feet.” However, the developers have recently taken issue with recent news reports using that figure and instead have put the length at the same 1,200 feet used when the state Department of Environmental Conservation recently reviewed an unsuccessful Woodstock Planning Board request to be declared the lead agency for the entire project.
