G. Lake: It seems like we did talk about it in some manner.

R. Winglovitz: It did come up in a conversation. I could check with them and discuss.

T. Hamilton: You don't have a rendering of what that back is going to look like, the building itself?

R. Winglovitz: It's actually in here, the back.

T. Hamilton: The building itself?

R. Winglovitz: The building itself is going to remain the same architecture, the white block at the bottom and the darker band around the top consistent to what the front is.

T. Hamilton: How many bay doors?

R. Winglovitz: I can give you an idea. These are the bay areas here and here. That's why we cut these sections here because these bays are set back pretty far so you won't be able to see the parked vehicles or the bays. They will be screened even in the winter time by the fact that they are below this wall kind of like if you are driving along Route 84 will the Galleria.

G. Lake: Does anybody else have anything?

T. Hamilton: Dick, I've asked this before and now I'm going to ask. Does this kick that traffic light in?

D. McGoey: They are required to contribute, I forget the dollar amount, $19,000 or $14,000.

T. Hamilton: Where do we stand with the light?

D. McGoey: I don't know how much we have. I think we've got three properties there.

R. Winglovitz: Chromolloy, Site 8 and the Bank. This will be the fourth Frassetto property.

G. Lake: Let's find out where the money is at this time.

D. McGoey: I have one additional concern of Dan Patanaude. He would like to have an analysis done of the pavement.

R. Winglovitz: I did talk to Dan a couple of different times.

D. McGoey: On Turner Drive, he was concerned whether the pavement as constructed is capable of handling the truck traffic.

G. Lake: You're going to do that?

R. Winglovitz: I talked to Dan and I had a conversation with my client.

V. Werany: I don't see any roof units on the plan. Are they there or are they just not depicted?

R. Winglovitz: I'm sure there is roof units there.

V. Werany: I'm curious why they wouldn't include them? It's not a very fair rendering when they don't include extraneous materials.

R. Winglovitz: I can talk to them about updating that for the Public Hearing so that we can show if there are any roof units. This is a view that not so many people are going to see because there is a building here and Chromolloy is here.

G. Lake: Tom, do you have something else?

T. Hamilton: Dick, was that problem with Turner Drive ever straightened out?

D. McGoey: It went to the County and now back to the Town.

P. Owen: I can't remember. What was the square footage on that?

R. Winglovitz: 153,000 square feet.

G. Luenzmann: What are you using is for?

R. Winglovitz: It's a speculation warehouse building.

G. Luenzmann: Is it for manufacturing or just warehousing?

R Winglovitz: Warehousing.

G. Lake: Do you have Dick's comments?

R. Winglovitz: I do.

G. Lake: We will get those squared away between now and the Public Hearing. Dick, do you need another work session?

D. McGoey: Yes.

MOTION to schedule a PUBLIC HEARING for March 6, 2002 made by G. Luenzmann and seconded by P. Owen.

VOTING AYE: G. Lake, A. Dulgarian, T. Hamilton, G. Luenzmann, P. Owen, V. Werany

MOTION CARRIED.

7. DIIORIO APARTMENTS - SITE PLAN/SPECIAL USE PERMIT - Schutt Road (73-1-4) #003-002

R. Smith: This is a project that went through the approval process in the early 1990's, I believe 1992. It never got developed or built. The approvals have lapsed and what we're seeking now is to resurrect the project, reinstate the approvals and move forward as originally planned. The site is located on Schutt Road. It is immediately adjacent to or just north of Canterbury Knolls. There are several homes as you come in Schutt Road from East Main Street. There is a vacant parcel and then Canterbury Knolls. This is that entire vacant site between the homes and Canterbury Knolls. It consists of twenty two acres. The blueprints and everything were completed ready for construction but timing among other reasons, it never got built. It was designed for one hundred thirty units. It is a mix of ninety eight one bedroom units, thirty-two two bedroom units designed as a rental project. We've had a couple of work sessions. We have confirmed that the zoning hasn't changed, the plans are still in conformity with the current zoning. It's in the water and sewer district. The services are to the site. Basically the purpose of tonight's meeting is to receive input from the Board. We would like to move things along such that some time early in the summer we could be in a position to start constructing the project.

L. Wolinsky: What we want to do is to build the project as it was previously approved. However, we do recognize that the approvals have lapsed. We have to bring it through the process again. Even though the zoning is not changed, there are certain State regulations that have changed particularly with regard to drainage. We are going to have to make sure that we bring it up to speed to comply with the current ASPEDES@ discharge requirements. We just want to make sure tonight that the Board doesn't have any major issues with respect to the design of the project. It was originally approved. This has all been engineered and we don't want to have to re-invent the wheel, obviously.

R. Smith: One other point of interest as a background, the firm of Mark Sarna has contracted to purchase this site. Mark is not new to the Town of Wallkill. He built Kensington Manor. He also owns Knox Village in New Windsor. They are building single family homes in the Town of Montgomery right now and in the Town of New Windsor right now. They own numerous complexes such as this throughout New York and the east coast.

G. Lake: Are you still owner of Kensington Manor?

M. Sarna: No. My partner and I split up and I am no longer involved but I built it.

G. Lake: Let me go through the Board to see what comments they have.

V. Werany: You said strictly rental. It's not going to be purchasing at all?

M. Sarna: Our intent now is for rental. I think our attorney tells us that we have a right to do condominiums but I don't think there is a market for them. Our preference is to rent and hold on to it.

V. Werany: Is this aimed at senior citizens?

M. Sarna: Anybody but at market rate, not low income.

V. Werany: You are not looking for any tax breaks or anything like that?

M. Sarna: No.

A. Dulgarian: There's a market for ninety eight one bedrooms?

M. Sarna: My understanding is that when it was originally approved when reading the files, they called the one bedroom and a den, and the two bedrooms are two bedrooms.

A. Dulgarian: Is there going to be any sort of restrictions on to how many people can live in a one bedroom apartment?

L. Wolinsky: What ever the existing building codes would apply.

M. Sarna: Obviously our intent, I would prefer two bedrooms and three bedrooms because I think the market lends itself towards that. I'm not looking to change the plans because it will then take another two years.

L. Wolinsky: One thing we might consider is not altering the total bedroom count but creating more two bedrooms and eliminating some of the one bedrooms.

A. Dulgarian: When are we going to know?

G. Lake: Because that would change the counts.

L. Wolinsky: It's not going to change the footprint at all.

T. Hamilton: No, but it will change the parking calculations.

L. Wolinsky: Yes, it would change all that. When we come back in we would come back in with a set of plans with our application that would reflect that.

G. Lake: I think the Board right now though especially. I remember how much work was put in this back when it first came.

L. Wolinsky: Yes.

G. Lake: When Mr. Holtzman was involved but Tom would remember but I'm sure if anybody else was here at that time.

L. Wolinsky: If it creates a problem we will go with the one bedrooms.

G. Lake: I would prefer telling the guys right now what you are going to do or come back when you have your plans.

M. Sarna: You are one hundred percent right. The way that the plans were approved is what we are prepared to go along with. We wouldn't change a thing including the size of the units.

L. Wolinsky: I was just trying to respond to the comment about the number of units.

R. Smith: I do know this is heavily loaded with one bedrooms.

M. Sarna: The Chairman is correct. There won't be any changes.

G. Lake: You can change it. I'm not telling you not to do so.

M. Sarna: I understand.

A. Dulgarian: I have nothing.

P. Owen: Not right now.

G. Luenzmann: I just want to pick up a little bit on the Kensington project. It is very well maintained.

M. Sarna: I'm very proud of it.

G. Luenzmann: Is this going to be like Kensington or a couple of steps lower?

M. Sarna: We would like to make it on the same standard as Kensington. We didn't design the site obviously because it had been done prior to us. We liked it because it's in the location of Town that we are familiar with, but I liked the circular entrance of it. I think with landscaping I think the units are very nice. The one bedroom with den is a nice sized unit.

R. Smith: It is.

M. Sarna: I think it has eight hundred fifty square feet or something like that. The two bedroom could have been a little bigger but it's a nice unit also. The ones at Kensington I pushed out and I made them bigger than previously approved. It took a while to get it because of that change. These can't be as big and we don't want to tamper with it. The timing is now.

G. Luenzmann: Dick, if they wanted to change the plan from one to two bedroom to increase the number of two bedroom units, would that be a major process where it would cause a lot of delays?

D. McGoey: I don't think it would cause a lot of delays. They would have to change the number of parking spaces.

T. Hamilton: But the applicant just said he wasn't going to.

G. Luenzmann: He doesn't want any delays. He wants to move on this very quickly.

M. Sarna: We would keep it within the same footprint. I don't want you to think I'm pushing you to do it.

G. Luenzmann: I understand what you are saying.

M. Sarna: We would have been willing to but it may take a longer time. If you can live with the one bedroom and den and the two bedrooms, I can as well.

G. Luenzmann: I know that the configuration for the one bedroom and den is very large.. There is a lot of room there. The Chairman had a point and that is if you want for purposes of marketing, if you want to put a change in, now is the time to do it.

M. Sarna: If you gave us the green light that you liked the layout, we would look into it. It terms of the aesthetics and the landscaping it will look as good as we can make it.

G. Luenzmann: I like the layout.

T. Hamilton: Dick, there were no changes to road specifications or anything since this was approved?

D. McGoey: Yes. They have to update the water and sewer specifications. There are a lot of details that they have to meet.

T. Hamilton: Roadways?

D. McGoey: They have to meet with Dan.

R. Smith: It's all private roads.

T. Hamilton: One other item I looked at and I didn't remember what we had done previously is where the tennis court and the basketball courts are. How close are they to the back of the Canterbury Knolls homes right there?

M. Sarna: We can show those. It's probably one hundred and some odd feet.

T. Hamilton: I would want a little more screening there because of the courts backing up to the homes that are there.

M. Sarna: It's probably a good idea. I would eliminate the basketball court if the Town doesn't mind. I don't think it really adds to the development. I would prefer putting in more landscaping or maybe even a second tennis court.

G. Lake: I think the recreation as long as you provide it is up to you what you put in.

A. Dulgarian: I'm concerned about the type of construction. You're talking horizontal, that doesn't mean vinyl siding does it?

M. Sarna: Probably not.

A. Dulgarian: I would like to see what the construction would look like.

M. Sarna: We will give you a rendering when we come in for the Public Hearing.

L. Wolinsky: We have to re-submit an application and we have to update the engineering and then we will submit all that and hopefully we will be able to turn that around. When we re-submit that we will try to get a more definitive rendering what exactly we are doing there.

TABLED for further action.