TOWN OF WALLKILL PLANNING BOARD

MEETING

FEBRUARY 5, 2003

MEMBERS PRESENT: G. Lake, R. Carr, A. Dulgarian, T. Hamilton, G. Luenzmann, G. Monaco, P. Owen

MEMBERS ABSENT: None

OTHERS PRESENT: G. Barone, D. McGoey

1. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING - LIBERTY COMMONS - ZONE CHANGE REQUEST - RMB to R1 (44-1-49.2)

Informational Public Hearing started at 7:35 P.M.

A. Fusco: I am an Engineer for Middletown, New York and also representing this project is Sal Silverman. He’s the Architect on the project. Basically we have requested the zoning change from RMB to R1 and the reason that we’re requesting the zone change is that the developer of the property would like to build townhouses in this area with a Home Owners Association. Currently under the RMB zone it’s allowed for medium income bonus density. We could have sixty to seventy units depending upon the bedroom count of apartments in the RMB zone however, the developer wishes to put in thirty five townhouse units under the R1 zone. Currently under RMB he would have to go with the apartments, medium income apartments and subsequently since he would like to go with townhouses with a Home Owners Association we have requested in the Town Board that the zoning be changed to R1 to allow us to accommodate that. As you can see we’ve had some handouts and you can see some of the sketches. This project had previously been approved with forty to forty four units at one point under RMB for apartments in this area. That was back several years ago. Obviously those approvals have expired. We are again in the process of trying to get a zoning change from the Town Board and we respectfully request that you give us a positive recommendation back in that regard. As you can see this is a typical layout. You had asked for that the last time as well to show the type of structures that we were looking to do. The project, we think, is a viable project and we respectfully request your speedy process.

G. Lake: Dick, do you have anything to add?

D. McGoey: I think the bottom line is the RMB allows higher density and in return for the

Town Board established the RMB wanted to provided some affordable housing and in terms of that they allowed a higher density. The applicant now wants to go back to conventional building so the R1 zone would allow less.

G. Lake: Is this contiguous to R1?

A. Fusco: Yes it is. It’s almost completely surrounded by R1.

G. Lake: Le me go through the Board.

A. Dulgarian: After the Public Hearing.

P. Owen: I will wait.

R. Carr: After the Public Hearing.

G. Luenzmann: Just exactly on Goshen Turnpike, where is this?

A. Fusco: Near Pinto Road.

G. Luenzmann: I’m familiar with Goshen Turnpike but not Pinto Road.

G. Lake: It’s about a quarter of mile on the right hand side.

A. Fusco: Heading towards Circleville on the right hand side.

G. Luenzmann: I will wait for the Public.

G. Monaco: I will wait until after the Public.

T. Hamilton: After the Public.

P. Owen: I just want a location on it. I didn’t understand.

G. Lake: Where it is, is on Goshen Turnpike if you go down to the red light on Goshen Turnpike from Route 211, you would make a left hand turn and go past Hillside, Inwood Hills and then there is a piece up there that is being worked on right now and it’s right about

in there. It’s only about maybe a half mile up from Route 211. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this application?

MOTION to close this INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING at 7:40 P.M. made by P. Owen and seconded by G. Monaco.

A. Dulgarian: Aye

P. Owen: Aye

R. Carr: Aye

T. Hamilton: Aye

G. Monaco: Aye

G. Luenzmann: Aye

G. Lake: Aye

MOTION CARRIED. 7 AYES

G. Lake: I will go back to the Board.

A. Dulgarian: I would like to talk about Dick’s comments. I’m not sure that I totally understand. It’s currently RMB. He wants to go to R1. Now you are saying all the surrounding properties are R1?

A. Fusco: Basically they are, yes.

G. Lake: No. Is it touching R1?

A. Fusco: Yes.

A. Dulgarian: All three sides?

A. Fusco: Yes.

T. Hamilton: Can we have something that shows where those lines are?

A. Fusco: Absolutely.

G. Lake: Mr. Dulgarian, do you have anything else?

A. Dulgarian: I just want to make sure I was thinking in the right direction here. I believe that the zone change that the applicant is requesting will have less of an impact on the Town as a whole and what ever he’s proposing should he get the change has to come back to us any way. Because I believe it would have less of an impact I don’t see a problem with it.

P. Owen: I don’t have a problem with it.

R. Carr: I have no problem.

G. Luenzmann: I think it is a much better project for the Town. I’m in favor of it.

G. Monaco: I go along with the rest of the Board. I think it is a better project with the R1.

T. Hamilton: Yes, changing that zone down to less of a density I believe is fine but we’re not in any way approving any of these Site Plans that we have.

G. Lake: At this point it’s strictly going back for the zone change.

A. Fusco: We will come back to you for that.

G. Lake: Once you get the zone change.

T. Hamilton: I just want you to think that because we looked at what is before us now that we’re saying yes to that also.

A. Fusco: We understand completely.

MOTION to recommend to TOWN BOARD to approve zone change from RMB to R1 made by G. Luenzmann and seconded by G. Monaco.

A. Dulgarian: Aye

P. Owen: Aye

R. Carr: Aye

T. Hamilton: Aye

G. Monaco: Aye

G. Luenzmann: Aye

G. Lake: Aye

MOTION CARRIED. 7 AYES

2. PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. - THE MEADOWS AT WALLKILL - 6 LOT SUBDIVISION - Goshen Turnpike/Brown Road/Shawangunk Road (7-1-75.2) #077-002

G. Lake: Public Hearing started at 7:43 P.M. C. Kelly read the Public Hearing notice.

C. Kelly: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a PUBLIC HEARING of the Planning Board of the Town of Wallkill, Orange County, New York, will be held at the Town Hall at 600 Route 211 East, in said Town, on the 5th day of February, 2003 at 7:30 P.M. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard that day on the application of Threejack Development, L.L.C. for approval of The Meadows at Wallkill, a six lot residential subdivision, located at the intersection of Brown and Shawangunk Roads with Goshen Turnpike under the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Wallkill. All parties of interest will be heard at said time and place. S/Gary Lake, Chairman

G. Lake: Could you give us a brief description and explain what you want to do?

S. Strauss: We’re here tonight to discuss a six lot residential subdivision called The Meadows at Wallkill. This property is 33.4 acres located in the RA zone located on the southerly side of Goshen Turnpike between Brown Road and Shawangunk Road. The project is to design in a manner that utilizes the existing fields and preserves the stone walls as much as possible. You can see that on the color rendering. The project includes a fairly extensive wetlands throughout the middle of the site. The way we have laid this out, we’re proposing no disturbance at all to the wetlands or to the one hundred foot buffer. The minimum lot size that’s proposed is 1.97 acres and the largest lot is 11.92 acres. As you said it has been before the Board several times.

G. Lake: Just for the public convenience, run your fingers along the driveways and what road each one is coming out on please.

S. Strauss: This is Goshen Turnpike running relative to North-South. On Goshen Turnpike we have two driveways proposed. This is Shawangunk Road. We’re proposing one long driveway. This is Brown Road. We’re proposing three driveways there.

G. Lake: Let me go through the Board.

A. Dulgarian: I will wait.

P. Owen: Excuses himself from this application.

R. Carr: I will wait.

G. Luenzmann: Nothing at this time.

G. Monaco: Nothing at this time.

T. Hamilton: After the Public.

G. Lake: I will now go to the Public.

P. Owen: The first thing is Brown Road. Brown Road is a beautiful road. When people ask for directions I never send them through Circleville, I make sure they go Brown Road because to me it is one of the most beautiful roads we have around here as far as country and scenery. First of all, there’s an ugly house already being put up there that does not fit in with the neighborhood but to put three more ugly houses in is just out of the question. First of all, they aught set way back, not near the road. If you’ve ever gone down Route 302 past Circleville School, there are a couple of beautiful houses but they look like they were just put there from mars as far as I’m concerned because there is no yard. They are too close to the wetlands over here. I don’t think we have enough area. Those wetlands, I don’t know how many people on the Board know, but we have beaver dams, or we did have before these guys maybe came and knocked them down when they were doing things and other animals but it’s a beautiful area. I don’t think we should build there for the simple reason that we’re running out of beautiful spots in Wallkill. To me, most of Wallkill is ugly because we’ve over developed it. It’s that simple. Another problem with Brown Road besides the frontage and the wetlands. That happens with the three driveways. We will be having three driveways merging on to Brown Road where we have so much traffic now from people taking that as a short cut. You would not believe the traffic we have off of Goshen Turnpike. There is a lot of traffic. They’re all using these roads as short cuts. People say on Brown Road they cannot walk on Brown Road. You can’t walk on Goshen Turnpike. Shawangunk Road, we have a problem again it’s a country road. People will be traveling fast past there and you have a driveway where they cannot see to get out of their road to get on to Shawangunk Road. You’re going to have a lot of accidents there. You’re going to have a lot of accidents from Brown Road. You can’t have three driveways. You shouldn’t even have one. It should be wetlands, that whole area. Anyone who wants to do this for money it’s just sheer greed.
They’re not thinking of beauty. They’re not thinking of nature. They’re thinking of money. We all need money but I can’t believe we would do that. We have a problem here with the water over here. There’s going to be two houses there near the water and we also have down further. They are pretty darn close. Now we’re going to have problems with the water. Who’s going to maintain the water? It’s just beautiful the way it is now. Who’s going to maintain that? What are we going to do with this building and everything else when the water flows over the road? When we subdivide which hopefully we come to our brains and we don’t do anything on Brown Road at all, we have to put in this which ever way you go that none of these places can ever be subdivided again and that the lot sizes stay, nothing smaller. I would advise against those three houses on Brown Road, very definitely. Remember the wetlands and the beauty of Circleville because it’s going to be all gone if you go through with this.

S. Feld: I’m here opposing the project one hundred percent. I live on Goshen Turnpike right across the street from Shawangunk Road. We moved there because it’s country living and it’s nice and quiet. I’m afraid that it’s just going to bring in noise pollution and air pollution and it’s probably going to have ecological repercussions. Basically I’m opposing this.

S. Helmke: I live on Brown Road. My question is with regard to the septic being so close to the wetlands and whether any environmental studies have been done on that. We all have wells on Brown Road and I’m kind of concerned that my well would get contaminated. I have to agree to not wanting it at all but I’m a little more practical in that people have a right to do things with their properties but I just want to be able to live and drink the water.

P. Thompson: I don’t like the name Meadows. We already have a Meadows.
M. Minok: I live at 252 Brown Road which is about directly across from this subdivision within site distance. I notice it’s a six lot subdivision. I want to be assured of what type of houses are going to go on these lots. Right now they don’t know what they’re going to put up on the property. I want to be assured that it’s only going to be six houses for single residential.

G. Lake: For sure it’s a six lot subdivision and no matter what they can’t do another thing with it unless they came back.

M. Minok: And then we would be notified again?

T. Hamilton: If they change from the six houses.

G. Lake: That’s what I’m saying. What we’re doing tonight is what you see.

M. Minok: I agree with everything that Mrs. Owen said. This property down there, was there an environmental study done on this? That area, there are so many animals in those ponds, in those swamps. You would have to come out there. You would have to walk that street and see what’s down in there. Something like this will affect it. As to the water, two of the ponds down there are intermittent. I’ve been out there like forty years. I’ve never seen them dry up. They’ve always been wet. I think because we’re in a drought right now, if you went down there now you would see that they’re full and they always have been. Take that into consideration. It is quite a big parcel of wetlands.

G. Karp: I think I’m the one that’s mostly affected by this project. I live here. If you look at that it shows the wetlands set way back. Where those houses are you could throw a rock into any one of those ponds and I live there and every nice I see what goes on at those ponds. Nature, wildlife, of every sort that you can imagine comes to those ponds for a drink at night. It’s a beautiful thing. These guys bought this property for one hundred sixty thousand dollars. Now they want to come up here and put these houses right across the street from me. I’ve lived here my whole life. I know this area like the back of my hand. I’ve been back there with my ATV. I know what’s going on back there. It’s a regulation wildlife sanctuary back there and if any one of the members would just spend one evening there for two hours you will see wildlife you only see on television. These houses are going to be a stones throw from my driveway. I could hit them with a stone from my front door. They’re going to block the whole view of Brown Road and ever since Tarbell Road was closed and the bridge overpass was filled in the traffic has increased on Brown Road phenomenally. It’s a dangerous road to start with. It’s winding and narrow and I really don’t believe Brown Road could handle any more traffic like that. There are a lot of environmental issues here I think everybody has missed. This drawing does not do justice. You have to come out and look at this area to believe how beautiful it truly is. Once this wetland is gone, that’s it. These animals aren’t coming back. There are no other ponds or wetlands within miles around that doesn’t have people living on that property. They’re going to destroy the beauty of the area. There are serious environmental questions here to be answered. My water table level is going to go down. The aquifer, can it handle six more houses. There has been no kind of studies done.

P. Owen: This is what we’re talking about, the wetlands. Has any study been made how the animals there would be affected by this? This is the kind of study we need. I don’t know the correct name for it but I’m sure you can get it because we need a study on these wetlands and the animals there before we do anything. Like I said, you’re killing the beauty of Wallkill. This is one of the last spots that are real country. It’s lovely. The gentleman before me, he talked about water. I have that and I forgot to mention it. Every single time another home goes on that Turnpike we have trouble with our water. We had it go dry, we had rust and all kinds of things. My daughter lives down from me, she has sulfur water came up. We can’t put more homes in. That’s all there is to it. I think we need a lot more study and I think we have to think about the conservation. That’s really what it’s all about.

MOTION to close the PUBLIC HEARING at 8:03 P.M. made by T. Hamilton and seconded by G. Monaco.

A. Dulgarian: Aye

P. Owen: Excused himself from application.

R. Carr: Aye

T. Hamilton: Aye

G. Monaco: Aye

G. Luenzmann: Aye

G. Lake: Aye

MOTION CARRIED. 6 AYES, 1 EXCUSED.
G. Lake: Do you want to go through some of these comments the people have? First of all, it’s very important for everyone to know, none of these houses are within the wetland and there is a buffer to the wetlands that he will not be in whatsoever.

S. Strauss: What we have proposed, the wetlands will not be touched. There is a one hundred foot buffer around the wetlands that will not be touched. The wetlands are regulated by the State and we specifically designed it not to disturb that wetland area. There was talk about will the project be further subdivided. We are willing to include language to eliminate any further subdivision on this property.

G. Lake: We would normally ask you to put a note on the plans any way.

S. Strauss: We’re willing to do that. There will never be more than six houses on this property. There was some discussion about septic systems in relation to the wetlands. The project will be reviewed by the Town Engineer and consultant Eustance & Horowitz. There are regulations regarding the setback of the septic systems from the wetlands. As I said earlier, everything. There’s no disturbance within one hundred feet of the wetlands. The septic systems are further still from the wetlands. The soils have been tested. The soils are good and it’s subject to approval by the Town’s Engineering Consultant. There were a couple comments about the pond. I can say personally I was out there this summer. It was during the drought and the area that I show was intermittent. It wasn’t dry to the bone but it wasn’t standing water in that area. That was at the beginning of the summer during the drought. We can easily correct that on the map. That’s in an area, again it’s in the wetlands and it’s not to be disturbed. There was a comment about the wells. The wells are subject to approval.

G. Lake: Does the Board of Health has to test the wells or not?

D. McGoey: This will not go to the Board of Health.

S. Strauss: There was some mention about the traffic that wasn’t very specific. I’m not sure how to address that. Mr. McGoey had some comments about the driveways and site distance so maybe it’s appropriate to tie that in if you want to discuss that further.

G. Lake: Let me go through the Board.

A. Dulgarian: This is beautiful property up through here. It would be nice to see it left pristine but as a property owner he has a right to do something with it within the laws of the Town. Having said that, I do have some problems with it. The pond is split by two different property owners. What happens if one guy chooses to do something and the other guy opposes it? There are several things that could happen there?

G. Lake: What’s that, the pond?

A. Dulgarian: Yes, the big pond in the front.

G. Lake: Mr. Barone, they would have to get a Department of Environmental Conservation Permit before touching that, wouldn’t they?

G. Barone: There are different regulations for different things. Generally it is not desirable to have the lot line going down the middle.

A. Dulgarian: That’s one problem. Mr. McGoey’s comment #6 which is about the setbacks and also some of the speakers mentioned that. On Brown Road it’s a shame to have property this big and have the houses right on the road. I do believe that will change the characteristic of the neighborhood and also have a negative impact and that’s not what we’re looking for on large lot homes. I do have a problem with those three. Department of Public Works had a comment #4 on lot #6. If the Highway Superintendent is telling us that the site distance is insufficient and must be approved or otherwise this location must be avoided then I think we need to look at that very strongly. Lastly, I would like to ask Mr. McGoey on the water, the septic and also environmental questions that would be specific to this property that may not apply to other properties that we’ve had to look at in the past. Is there anything that this comes under? Is it too small for any kind of SEQRA?

Continue