• HOME
• VILLAGE GOVERNMENT

  • Board of Trustees
  • Planning Board
  • Board of Architectural Review
  • Board of Zoning Appeals
• VILLAGE SERVICES

  • Village Police Department
  • Department of Public Works
  • Tuxedo Park Fire Department
  • Tuxedo Volunteer Ambulance Corps
• TOWN OF TUXEDO

  • Town Board
  • Tuxedo Union Free School District
  • Town Planning Board
  • Subdivisions and Development
• TUXEDO RESERVE
• COMMUNITY

  • Clubs and Associations
  • Institutions
  • Neighborhood News
  • Local Contractors and Professional Services

• LOCAL PRESS
• EDITORIALS
• FEATURES
• CALENDAR
• QUIPS & QUOTES
• ARCHIVE POSTS
• ABOUT US
• CONTACT

TOWN OF TUXEDO

Recent Town News
Town Council (Town Board)
Tuxedo Union Free School District
Town Planning Board
Town Zoning Board of Appeals
Subdivisions and Development

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 2, 2024

Click here to view the agenda

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, March 5 at 7pm.  Board members Bill Lemanski and Susan Boyle were absent.

David & Rachel Erfurt – 12 Fawn Hill Rd. – Detached Storage Garage in Front Yard:
The applicant would like to construct a detached storage garage in their front yard at 12 Fawn Hill Road.  Plans, complete with pictures of the prefab design were presented and reviewed.  Due to the slope of the property, the front yard is the most feasible place for the structure.  Front Yard setback regulations will require the applicant to secure a variance from the ZBA.  There was some discussion centered around the proposed use of the structure and whether or not it should be classified as a garage or a storage shed.  Town consultants advised the Board that the ZBA had already opined on this issue in conjunction with a similar case that came before them in 2023 and granted permission for a similar structure to be classified as a detached garage.  The application can be classified as Type 2 under SEQR.  The Board was in agreement that the structure as presented looked nice and should not pose any issue for neighbors.  They further agreed that given the grade of the property, the front yard was the most practical place to construct it.  A public hearing will not be required.  The Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorney to prepare a resolution of approval.  The applicant will go before the ZBA as soon as possible and then, provided they receive the variance, will return to the Planning Board for final project approval.

Tuxedo Reserve – The Commons – ARB Review:
The applicant was granted site plan approval for The Commons area of the development back in January.  Before they can apply for a building permit, they must receive Architectural Review Board approval.  To this end, they presented the Board with architectural design plans for 4 buildings located in The Commons. 
Before commencing the presentation, they provided a brief project update.  They have applied to the Orange County Department of Health for subdivision approval for the West Terrace and Quail Rd/Commons areas of the development as required.  They have also applied to the Rockland County Drainage Agency, which pertains to their efforts to commence construction on the section of Quail Road that is located in Sloatsburg.  They have appeared before the Sloatsburg Planning Board and received the necessary approvals and have also applied to the Department of Transportation for roadway improvements at the North and South entrances on Route 17.  This application also includes two traffic signals as required.  Tree clearing in Upland Park has been completed.  Engineering work is underway for the Northridge, Upland Park and Mountain Lake neighborhoods.  Northridge will have 72 Town Homes while Mountain Lake will have 24 single-family homes and Upland Park a mix of approximately 236 Town Homes and other multi-family homes.  They are hopeful to be presenting the plans for Northridge and Upland Park at the April meeting, with Mountain Lake to follow at the May meeting.   Additionally, they are working with their architects on designs for the recreational amenities to be located in the Commons (Clubhouse, Events Building, small cabana buildings) and hope to bring these before the ARB for review in either April or May.  They remain in contact with the School District.  They cannot convey the 40 acre school lot until it has been officially created, which will occur with the Department of Health approvals.
Board member Neg Kugal inquired about the applicant’s appearance before the Sloatsburg Planning Board, specifically what questions and concerns had been raised there.
The applicant reported that the majority of their concerns were related to drainage onto Route 17.
The architectural presentation followed.  Designs, materials and color pallets for the four buildings, which will house a combination of retail and residential apartments, were reviewed and discussed.  The buildings were designed to be generally consistent in appearance yet individually unique in their specific designs.  To this extend a mixture of materials and colors are dispersed throughout.  13 small changes have been made to the Commons since the Planning Board last reviewed the plan, although the overall layout including the location of the buildings, the parking, grading, drainage and utilities remains unchanged.  These were briefly reviewed.  The consultants requested some further details regarding ceiling heights, lighting, landscaping, and it was agreed that these would be taken into account with the next submission.  Town Engineer Sean Hoffman advised the Board that as per the Special Permit they had the right to bring on an architectural consultant if they wanted.  He further suggested that if they were going to do this, they should begin the process as soon as possible.  Questions for the Board centered around snow brakes and retention on the slanted roofs, installation, overall visibility and mapping of utilities on the roofscape and parking.  Additionally, the Board would like to see physical material samples.  Board Chair John Banyo inquired about the applicant’s progress with O&R and was informed that although they have received a verbal commitment for gas and electric supply, the Utility Company is currently focused on plan design and has not yet issued a “Will-Serve” letter.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorney to draft a resolution of ARB approval for their next meeting.  In the meantime, the applicant will put together their next submission, taking all Board and consultant comments and concerns into account. 

Before closing the meeting, Board Chair John Banyo inquired of the applicant as to when they hoped to begin construction.  The response was that they plan to begin sitework in the spring with vertical construction to commence late summer.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 5, 2024

Click here to view the agenda

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, February 6 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Board Chair John Banyo began the meeting by welcoming newly appointed Planning Board member John Ruel. 

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Consideration of Subdivision/Site Plan/ARB Approval:
Mitch Newman of Lennar presented the Board with a brief overview of the West Terrace neighborhood, which is approximately 18.5 acres and will contain 137 homes.  Of these, 31 will be single family home with rest being a mix of two and three-story townhomes (442 bedrooms in total). The plan has been before the Planning Board for the last several months and has been reviewed and discussed in some detail.  The newest version reflects some subtle changes to reflect both Board and Consultant comments. 
The Board attorney went through the draft resolution of approval, reading into the record 13 specific conditions.  There was a brief discussion regarding the placement of driveways, which had been shuffled slightly based on Board feedback at a previous meeting.  Based on a suggestion she had made at the last meeting, Board member Susan Boyle inquired as to whether or not the applicant had reintroduced a community stairway, which was something she favored for numerous reasons.  The answer was no. 
Both the Town Engineer and the Town Planner indicated that their comments had been addressed within the draft resolution. 
Following some further discussion, the Board voted 6-1 in favor of granting the applicant Preliminary and Final Major Subdivision, Site Plan and Architectural Review Board approval with Susan Boyle voting against.

Sterling Mine USA LLC – Skyview Skylights – Extension Request:
The applicant appeared before the Board seeking an extension for their project, which was previously approved by the Board.  According the Special Use Permit, if construction has not been completed within 18 months and if a building permit has not been issued, an extension is required.  The applicant is moving forward and has been working diligently to obtain the necessary approvals from outside agencies.  Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a 6-month extension to August 6, 2024.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting February 6, 2024

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 2, 2024

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, January 2 at 7pm.  All members were present.
Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by introducing new Town Supervisor Dave McMillan, who was in the audience.  At the Chair’s request, Board Attorney Kelly Naughten briefly explained that although the terms for both Chair Banyo and Board Alternate Justin Jennings had technically expired on December 31, 2023, the law provides for a hold-over period whereby both gentlemen can legally continue to serve in their positions until the newly configured Town Board holds their first meeting and makes appointments to Planning Board.
This is slated to occur next week.  Additionally, as former Planning Board member Chris Kasker has taken his new seat on the Town Board, Alternate Justin Jennings now has fulling Planning Board authority, meaning he can vote on applications.

Public Hearing – West Terrace – Subdivision. Site Plan & ARB:
Chair Banyo asked the Applicant to provide a brief summary.  Greg Gushee of the Related Companies began by announcing that just before the Holidays they had officially changed the name of the project from Tuxedo Farms back to Tuxedo Reserve.  He then turned things over to Mitch Newman of Lennar who provided the  summary as requested. 
West Terrace will be the first neighborhood to be built within the development. It will consist of 137 homes in a mix of three styles: 31 40-foot wide single family homes, 72 3-story Townhomes and 34 2-story Townhomes .  This will allow the builder to enter the market with three different home styles and three different price points, which they hope will help them to get their arms around the community.   The single-family homes will all have 4 bedrooms while the townhomes will all have 3.  They anticipate that the single-family homes will be in $800,000 range while the Townhomes will be in the low $500-600,000 range.  This is all subject to market conditions.  While there is no specific recreation component within this neighborhood, there is a walking and sitting area with benches and a place for people to congregate.  The roads within the neighborhood are private and will be maintained by the homeowner’s association.  The HOA will also assume responsibility for the storm water basins there. 
Supervisor McMillan commented that he loved the project and was looking forward to see it move forward.  Town Board Member Rick Marsh echoed these sentiments.
There were no further comments and so the hearing was closed.
 
Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Conditional Subdivision Approval Extension Request:
An Engineer for the Applicant provided a summary of their progress since receiving their approval for the 7-lot subdivision back in May of 2022.   There are a few additional items that need to be addressed pertaining to obtaining a conservation easement as well as submitting  parking fees for the lots and a performance bond for the site.  They are “right at the finish line: they just need an extension to get these last few things sorted out.  They anticipate starting construction this coming spring.  The biggest design element will be a bridge that crosses Warwick Brook, with a majority of the work being dependent on that. 
Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting two 180-day extensions until their May 7, 2024 meeting. 
Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace:
Consultants for the Board provided a brief overview of their comments.  Board Attorney Kelly Naughton explained that she had issued a lengthy memo to the Board addressing some of their concerns pertaining to the Boards role as both the Architectural Review Board and the Planning Board as set forth in the guideline documents as well as the Special Permit.  From an ARB prospective,  they are quite limited in that their job is essentially  just to check compliance with what has already been approved by the Town Board.   This was discussed.  There have been some minor changes made to the plan, mainly technical in nature, and these were reviewed and discussed.  There have been no lot-line changes or building movement.  The parking has been tweaked a bit and a stretch of sidewalk was removed.  Board member Susan Boyle brought up a set of 80 stairs that run from the sitting area to Quail Road and are meant to facilitate foot traffic to and from the Commons.  The applicant would like to remove these stairs because. they are costly and they feel that they might be a liability for the HOA in terms of seasonal maintenance and safety.  They also do not believe the stairs would get any “reasonable use,” and that while people might travel down them, they would not want to walk up.   Lastly, they have an aesthetic concern and feel that the steps would not look good in combination with the rock wall that will be there.  This was discussed at some length.  Ms. Boyle feels that the steps would be a positive asset and would like to see them remain in the plan.  She referenced several other large, steep flights of stairs in various cities, noting that they all received a ton of foot traffic and further suggested that some residents might prefer the steps and those who are athletic might like to use them for exercise.  Board member Justin Jennings agreed, further pointing out that without the steps, residents traveling on foot to the commons  would have to go all the way around to the back of the neighborhood in order to do so.  He suggested that there might be other ways to construct the steps to mitigate the issues of grade and safety.  The applicant asserted that most people would not want to travel up 70 stairs however Mr. Jennings disagreed, noting that plenty of people enjoyed and even preferred to take stairs. 
The homes themselves were discussed next, with the applicant presenting pictures and pointing out any design changes that had been made based on Board comments.  Garages, driveways and front doors were discussed. Board member Justin Jennings expressed concern with the garages as presenting commenting “I’m concerned about the way these houses function as community and how they will encourage neighbors meeting each other, hanging out together, trick-or-treating, holiday decoration….that kind of stuff.  When I see a house that is all garage in the front, it’s hard for me to envision how that really creates a lively and vibrant community.  It’s kind of a car-focused community.  It doesn’t encourage walkability.  It doesn’t encourage going over to your neighbor’s front door.”  He further commented he appreciated the changes they had made but he really wanted to see houses that build community and character and bring neighbors together.  He also suggested that having the main entrance on the side of some of the homes seemed strange to him.  The applicant responded that they expected that for most people the main entry into their home would be through the garage, but that locating the front door on the side was in their view a “home run” for the buyer, who would favor a private entryway.   While they cannot say exactly how things will operate, they do know that these homes are well received by buyers and will create a wonderful community to live in. 
Mr. Jennings expressed concern with the garage placements and fact that the plan shows all the garages and driveways for the single family homes on the same side of the house.  The applicant responded that the location of the individual driveways would not be finalized until the building permits are requested.  The placement of the driveway and garage will ultimately depend on the grade and there will be variations. 
Board member Bill Friedlich asked the applicant whether they had considered his recommendation for tar and chip seal on the roadways.  The applicant responded that adding this in would increase costs and they were trying to avoid this for the private roads.  As for the public roads, although they will be initially prepared as blacktop roads, the Town will eventually take ownership and once they do, they are free to install whatever they like. 
Mr. Friedlich responded that he felt this was a mistake. 
Following some further discussion, the Board voted 6-1 in favor of having the attorney draft a resolution of approval for their next meeting, with Justin Jennings voting against.

Tuxedo Farms – The Commons/Quail Rd – Site Plan Approval:
Plans for the development of Quail Road and the Commons were presented and reviewed.  Subdivision plans have already been approved.  Site plans showing where the buildings will go have been submitted.  The Architectural design plans for the Commons have not yet been submitted and the applicant is hopeful that these will be ready for review by late winter.   Site plans for the recreational buildings (Clubhouse and Events Building) have not been provided yet, but these along with design plans for both, will be submitted when the applicant submits architectural plans for the Commons.  “We are trying to narrate how all of those buildings will work together,” the applicant added. 
The Board consultants provided their feedback.  At the Chairman’s request, the attorney went through each of the 12 conditions of approval in detail.  There followed a discussion about utilities, specifically gas and electric services, how these could both be offered and balanced in a cost-effective way and the applicant’s initial meeting with Orange & Rockland.  The Board then voted unanimously in favor of granting site plan approval, which will allow for the construction of Quail Road to begin.  

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 2, 2024

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 5, 2023

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, December 5 at 7pm.  Board member Susan Boyle was absent.

Public Hearing – Upland Park – Clearing Filling & Grading Permit:
As previously presented in November, the applicant explained that the limit of disturbance for this neighborhood will be the same as previously approved.  There is a limited window of time during which the applicant is permitted to take down trees and therefore they are trying to facilitate a permit that will allow them to do this work over the upcoming winter months.  
As there were no comments from the public, the hearing was closed.

Regular Meeting:
Board Chair John Banyo opened the regular portion of the meeting by recognizing Board member Chris Kasker, who will be vacating his seat at the end of December to join the Town Board, to which he was elected in November.  Commenting that Mr. Kasker had provided valuable input and service during his time on the Board, Chair Banyo further noted that he would be remiss if he did not acknowledge his years of service to the country.  “He was in the army for 20 years serving at West Point and the Pentagon with  tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan,” he stated, going on to say that he was certain that Mr. Kasker would have the best interest of the Town in mind while serving on the Town Board.  “The Board has been a better Board because of your service and on behalf of the Planning Board we wish all the best,” he concluded. 
Mr. Kasker thanked Chair Banyo for his comments adding that he definitely had the best interest of the Town in mind and that he hoped to continue the great work the Planning Board has been doing while also doing whatever he could to support Lennar and Related to get the Tuxedo Farms project going.

Before moving on to the applications, Board alternate Justin Jennings inquired about process of reviewing Tuxedo Farms materials.  He noted that in past discussions it had been indicated that the Boards authority was restricted to compliance with the SmartCode and the architectural guidelines, but he does not believe this is entirely correct.   Based on the wording in the Special Permit he feels that there is guideline that requires them to check the compliance with these codes but that they also have the authority to review and approve as they would during any normal process.  He feels this needs to be considered moving forward.  “I don’t believe our authority is limited to only technical compliance with the SmartCode,” he reiterated.
Board attorney Kelly Naughton responded that she was working to prepare a detailed memo for the Board which clearly outlines their authority and jurisdiction under the Special Permit.  She has not circulated it yet because she did not want to confuse the Board prior to their meeting that evening, but they  will have the memo before their next meeting.  

Tuxedo Farms – Upland Park – Clearing Filling and Grading Permit:
Board engineer Sean Hoffman provided some brief comments after which Board Attorney Kelly Naughton outlined 3 conditions of approval.  Board member Bill Friedlich inquired as to whether the stumps would be removed as part of the clearing process.  The answer was no.  The applicant is planning to fall the trees and organize them for removal from the site.  Chair Banyo inquired about the removal of Ash Trees as it pertains to restrictions surrounding the Emerald Ash Borer.  He was told that in all likelihood the DEC would manage these restrictions.  Board member Ned Kugel inquired as to when the applicant  would be appearing before the Sloatsburg Planning Board with regard to the removal of trees on their portion of the land.  The answer was December 19.  Following some further discussion, the Board unanimously approved the permit application with the three conditions as previously outlined by their attorney.

Tuxedo Farms – Approval – Amended Subdivision – The Commons/Quail Rd.:
The applicant is looking to further subdivide the parcels within the Commons area of the development in order to allow for the development of buildings on parcels.  Lennar and Related will be working together on this section of the development and this change would allow the individual parcels to be developed and closed on independently.  There are no other changes aside from the reconfiguring of the lots. 
There were no comments from the Board consultants.  Board attorney Kelly Naughton outlined seven proposed conditions of approval, after which the Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the amendment.  Chair Banyo then inquired as to whether the Board would be able to grant site plan approval independent of Architectural Review Board approval and the answer was yes.  He subsequently requested that a resolution for site plan approval be prepared for the next meeting.

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Subdivision/Site Plan/ARB – Schedule Public Hearing:
The applicant presented the Board with new renderings for the various types of proposed homes in the West Terrace section of the development based upon their feedback at the previous meeting.  Building materials and various color combination packages were also presented (stone, siding and shingles).  These things were discussed at some length.  Ultimately, a public hearing was set for January 2.  There will be another detailed presentation for the benefit of the public at that time. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 5, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 7, 2023

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, November 7 at 7pm.  All members were present. 

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – Conditional Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval:
A representative for the applicant provided the public with an overview. Since the initial approval, the plat map has been filled in and there have been some minor modifications to the original layout of the Commons and Quail Road area.  The applicant is seeking an amended approval to accommodate these. 
There were no comments from the public, so the hearing was closed.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Driveway Access Extension Request:
The applicant has experienced some challenges and logistical issues with the Ramapo entrance to their property.  Although the plans have been approved by the Town of Ramapo, they are still working through some of the technical issues that will allow them to commence construction.  Once the work begins, they  anticipate the need for delays and closures along County Road 72 in Ramapo as they work to realign the road as well as install utilities, sewer and water.  Therefore, they are requesting an extension on driveway access to their site via the Tuxedo Entrance with the hope that they will be able to divert some of the construction traffic there and reduce congestion around the Ramapo Entrance.
Current restrictions, including the number of trucks allowed per hour and, turning on and off the site, noise and hours of access were reviewed and discussed as were varying lengths of time for the proposed extension.  The Board wanted to ensure that they would have some recourse should access be abused.  It was agreed that the resolution would be altered so that the applicant would have to reappear before the Planning Board should there be any complaints.   Ultimately, they voted unanimously in favor of granting a 6-month extension to May 30. By that time the applicant should have a better idea of the timeline associated with the road work and infrastructure installation in Ramapo and can determine if an additional extension will be needed.  

Tuxedo Farms – Amended Subdivision and Site Plan – The Commons/Quail Road:
At the previous meeting it was brought to everyone’s attention that a resident had discovered the presence of a known invasive species, Japanese Knotwood, on the property.  The Planning Board subsequently requested that the applicant look into it, which they did.  While they did not find any of the weeds in question, they agreed that they would keep an eye out for it moving forward,  working with both their construction and landscaping contractors to quickly spray or otherwise eradicate anything they might come across. 
Moving on to the Amended Subdivision and site plan, the Board briefly reviewed the plans as presented by the applicant.  Road hierarchy was briefly discussed and it was confirmed that Quail Road will be dedicated to the Town.  Ultimately, the Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorney to draft a resolution for subdivision approval only.  The applicant will have to return to the Board for site plan review and approval. 

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Review – Subdivision/Site Plan/ARB – West Terrace:
A representative from Lennar  provided the Board with an overview of the plan.
As some of the work has already been done by Related in the West Terrace section of the development, Lennar has chosen to begin with that neighborhood.  Infrastructure was installed there and some of the engineering and site work was also started in order to accommodate the installation of a water tower and a couple of wells in the area. This particular neighborhood will also offer a variety of homes, which is good from a Developer’s standpoint.  There will be a total of 137 homes with a mix  of single family as well as two different types of townhouses, thus allowing  the developer to bring a variety of homes to market in a variety of sizes and styles and at a variety of price points.  The neighborhood in total is roughly 18.6 acres, including the water features, and will consist of 31 single-family homes, flanked on both sides by townhomes, 72 of which will be 3-stories, while the other 24 will be 2-stories.  Based on market value, they anticipate the single-family homes will sell in the low $800,000 range, with the two-story town homes in the low 600,000s and the 3-story townhomes in the upper $500,000s.  The bedroom count remains 442.  There will be a small park area with benches and picnic tables.  This was originally designed to provide access to a pathway that would allow for easier walkability to the commons area but in taking a closer look at the height differential, the applicant discovered that creating the path would necessitate adding in 70 stairs and they did not believe this would be practical for a number of reasons.  Therefore, the pathway plans have been removed, but the small recreation area remains and there will also be a walking path around the basin.  The roadways will be owned and maintained by a Homeowners Association, which has yet to be created.  Engineering for the neighborhood remains almost exactly the same as the previous plan, with the main change being the switchover to Lennar buildings.  There are no fundamental engineering changes proposed.  The road grading, configurations and widths are all consistent with the prior plan.  There is a sewer and water system that goes along with the roadway network, which was designed in accordance with the SmartCode.  The stormwater management will be updated, but its basis is the same.  Much of the filling and grading has already been done.  At this point they are only seeking one waiver, which is to add in a sidewalk where the SmartCode indicates it is not necessary.  There will be enough parking along streets to accommodate 95 cars (the code requires 42).  The individual spaces were marked off on the plan to demonstrate that there was room for them however the developer explained that they would prefer not to stripe them in reality.  The roads are  wide enough so that even with cars parked at the curb, two cars will still be able to  pass going opposite directions.  The site has already been cleared however in the time since that work was done, some saplings have come up.  These will need to be removed but that removal is within the confines of the clearing that has already been approved.  There was some question over whether a tree survey should be required, but the applicant is hoping this will not be necessary as the trees in question are limited and quite small. 
Board consultants provided their comments and these were reviewed. 
As part of his remarks, Board Engineer Sean Hoffman provided the Board with an overview of everything they have seen and/or are currently working on pertaining to the development in an effort to keep everyone on the same page, organized and intact.  The list includes: preliminary and final subdivision for The Commons and Quail Road, a site plan for all the buildings in The Commons except for buildings 1 and 4 and ARB approval for The Commons buildings 5, 6 , 15 and 15.  With the addition of the information presented that evening comes site plan approval as well as ARB approval for all the residential structures in West Terrace and a filing and grading permit for Upland Park.
Next, Board members asked questions.
Board member Bill Lemanski inquired as to whether all of the electric utilities would be underground.
The answer was yes.
Board member Chris Kasker inquired as to whether the on-street parking count included spots in front of fire hydrants.  The answer was no.  Additionally, Mr. Kasker asked about the flow coming out of the fire hydrant on the corner closest to the 14 single homes which require a pump for water on a 4-inch main.  This was discussed.  Chair John Banyo inquired as to what would occur with the electric pumps if there were to be a power failure.  He also asked about the timeline for bringing the two wells online.
A couple of the Board members expressed concern over the removal of the 70s steps, suggesting that although everyone would not use them, some people surely would and they would help to keep some foot traffic off the busier roadways and this was also discussed.
General plans for each of the housing types were presented and reviewed.  The applicant has submitted a chart to show everything they have done conforms with every element of the architectural guidelines.  They will build everything on spec. “We are extremely competent that we know the market and we know the homes that the buyers will want.  We’ll build them, outfit them and know that they’ll sell, because that’s our job to know what the buyer wants in new homes,” stated the applicant.  The home styles will be mixed throughout so that identical houses will not be constructed next to each other. 
The Board provided their general feedback to the designs as presented.  Discussion centered around garage doors, vinyl siding, the character of the homes, driveway width, landscaping

Tuxedo Farms – Clearing Filling and Grading – Upland Park:
The limit of disturbance for this neighborhood will be the same as previously approved.  There is a limited window of time during which the applicant is permitted to take down trees and therefore they are trying to facilitate a permit that will allow them to do this work over the upcoming winter months. 
Following some discussion the Board voted unanimously in favor of scheduling a public hearing for their next meeting, which is December 5 at 7pm.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 7, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 3, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Reiew Board met on Tuesday, October 3 at 7pm.  Board member Chris Kasker was absent.

Public Hearing – Michelle & John Calcaterra – Clearing Filling and Grading:
On behalf of the applicant, landscape architect Karen Arent presented the Board with plans for a backyard renovation.  The Calcaterras, unaware that they needed a permit, have already begun filling a portion of the property and are requesting permission to stabilize the slope and complete their project.  Remaining work will include smoothing out what has already been done and adding six inches of good top soil.  They also plan to install erosion control fabric with plantings to stabilize the fill.  On the request of the Town Engineer, a report detailing what type of fill was used has been provided by contractor E DeMarino.    When asked for comment, Michelle Calcaterra reiterated that there had been no ill intent.  “We were just trying to level off our backyard a little bit so our kids could use it and we didn’t realize that we needed a permit for that.”  Further commenting that they had stopped work immediately upon receiving the Stop Work Order from the Town, she noted that everything that was requested had been submitted and now they were just hoping to get the Board’s approval so that they could finish the project.
One of the Calcaterras neighbors was present and inquired as to how close the extra soil had come to a stream that runs behind the Calcaterra home.  The answer was not close at all as the fill is more than 10-feet off the property line and the stream is not on the Calcaterra property.  Town Supervisor Ken English was present and noted that he was surprised that local contractor DeMarino did not know that a permit was required for the work. 
As there were no further comments from the public, the hearing was then closed.

Michelle & John Calcaterra – 59 Maple Brook Rd. - Clearing Filling and Grading:
Board Attorney Kelly Naughton advised the Board that they could take action on the application if they wanted to. She further advised that  the project is a Type Two action under SEQR. 
Board Engineer Sean Hoffman pointed out that there were some items on the plan that were outside of the Planning Board jurisdiction, such as a shed and an outdoor kitchen. The applicant will need to work with the Building Department to obtain a building permit for these structures.  He added that any penalties or fees related to having done work without a permit would be under the purview of the Town Board.  He also noted that although the applicant had provided the requested report regarding the material (fill) that had been used, that this report made no mention whatsoever of the Calcaterra property.  Rather the report focuses on an area in New Jersey from which the fill apparently came, providing detailed information about that site.  There is nothing in the report that links the two sites.  He advised that any approval from the Board should come with the condition that the applicant either demonstrate that the soil placed on their property came solely from that site or, if that is not possible, they should provide additional laboratory testing to ensure that the material is appropriate to be placed in a residential neighborhood. 
In response Board Chair John Banyo commented that he felt that as a condition they should ask the Building Inspector to consider whether or not any type of fine was necessary and to work with the Town Board on that if so.  He further commented that he agreed with Mr. Hoffman regarding the soil and possible need for testing If the source cannot be properly verified.  Lastly, he suggested that the silt fencing be installed as soon as possible. 
Following a review of all conditions, the Board voted unanimously in favor of conditional approval.

Tuxedo Farms - Clearing Filling and Grading Permit:
Representatives from Lennar (project builders) were present and presented the Board with an overview of their plan to grade a two-acre portion of property within the East Terrace section of the development which they plan to use as a staging area/contractor’s yard throughout construction.  These plans were originally presented back in September, at which time there was also a Public Hearing.  As per their directive at the September meeting, Board Attorney Kelly Naughton had put together a resolution of approval and this was reviewed. Several of the Board members had questions, which were addressed by the applicant.  Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the permit.

Tuxedo Farms – Subdivision and Sire Plan for The Commons/Quail Road:
Mitchell Newman of Lennar updated the Board with regard to the project.  Lennar has recently purchased the entire Tuxedo Farms  property from Related.  Their charge at this point in time is to secure the government approvals and proceed with the construction of the various sections of the development, which will include building the homes.  The Commons area of the development will consist mainly of apartment buildings with some mixed use, meaning there will be retail businesses mixed in.  Lennar will not be building these.  Rather, they will do all of the land development work in the Commons but then transfer back those completed areas to Related, who will construct the apartments and mixed use buildings.  “So, in a sense it’s a partnership,” he stated, “but for the moment the partnership is on Lennar’s side of the ledger and we’re going to be the face of Tuxedo Farms for the entirety of the community, except when we transfer the Commons buildings back over to related.  So, they will be responsible for getting the permits for those buildings and with their assistance we’ll come back to you at some point for a site plan approval, including more detailed architecture for ARB review.”
Chair Banyo wondered whether Lennar would own the land under the Commons.
The answer was no, when the buildings are transferred back to Related, the land will go with them.  “What we are eventually doing is subdividing those buildings into lots because it’s easier from a financing perspective to transfer them as lots as opposed to just buildings.”  This will be part of the presentations and approval process moving forward.  Outside of The Commons, Lennar will be responsible for everything from site work and infrastructure to construction of roughly 1,200 homes.  While they are still in the process of obtaining various permits from the State, they are hopeful that a “coming soon” sign will be going up shortly and that construction on the homes will begin in 2024.  Lennar hopes to be back before the Board with the first proposed residential “for sale” plans in November. 
Plans for the land development work along Quail Road and in the commons were then presented and reviewed.  Board consultants provided a number of comments and these were discussed.  Chair Banyo noted that he had recently received a note informing him that the  invasive species Japanese knotweed had been discovered on the property.  This was briefly discussed and the applicant asserted that they will be developing an invasive species management plan to address the issue. 
Several of the Board members had questions and these were addressed by the applicant. 
Before the Board can issue an approval, a public hearing must take place. The hearing was scheduled for Tuesday, November 7 at 7pm.

Metro R Services – Warwick Brook Road Bond Review/Approval:
This 7-lot subdivision, located on Warwick Brook Road, was approved last year, however site plans for the individual lots have not yet been approved. The Board reviewed the performance bond for construction of the central infrastructure, including roads and drainage, etc. with their engineer.  Ultimately, they voted unanimously in favor of accepting the bond resolution in the amount of $2,073,900 for a term of 3-years.   

Other Business:
Board Chair John Banyo provided the Board with a brief update on the progress of the  Watchtower project in Ramapo.  Things are moving along at a decent pace.  In the past few weeks, they have made significant progress on the Ramapo entrance and large trucks appear to be accessing the site that way for tree-removal.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 3, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 5, 2023

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 5 at 7pm.  Board member Bill Lemanski was absent.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – Clearing Filling & Grading:
An engineer representing the applicant explained that they are looking a two-acre portion of property within the East Terrace section of the development which they will use as a staging area/contractor’s yard.  The same area was used for similar purposes when Related was working on the site and has already been cleared and graded, meaning little to no land disturbance will be necessary.  The ultimate goal is to be able to take rocks from the site and process them there for res-use and also to stock pile excess materials for re-use between phases. 
The applicant  is in receipt of comments from the Board’s consulting Engineer.  There are some clean-up items that were suggested for the drawings but nothing that is overly significant from their prospective.   

Board Chair John Banyo asked Consulting engineer Sean Hoffman for his comments, and Mr. Hoffman responded by providing a brief overview of the comments as shared with the applicant.  Mr. Banyo thanked Mr. Hoffman, further noting for the record that the Board would be unable to approve the permit that evening as they were still awaiting a GML response from Orange County.  He then asked each of the Board members for their questions and comments.  There were several questions pertaining to the excess material on the site.  Board members wanted to know how the stockpiles would be maintained and what safeties would be put in place to prevent wash-away in the event of rain.  Further they inquired as to whether the excess material would remain on site or if it would be offered to other contractors for use.  Town Supervisor Ken English also inquired as to whether the height of the stockpiles would be clearly defined.
The applicant responded that they would be obligated to maintain the site under their SWIPP agreement and there would be very specific rules and regulations outlined within.  They further noted that ultimately, they did not believe there would be any excess material as they expected to use anything that might be left over to help stabilize the site. 

There were no additional questions from the public.

Tuxedo Farms – Clearing Filling & Grading Permit:
Representatives of Lennar (project builders) were present.  Chair Banyo asked them to provide a brief summary of where the project was heading, adding that they were hopeful to be able to approve the permit as requested in October and further inquiring as to how that would fit into the scheme of things moving forward.
The applicant responded that they were hopeful to be back with a submission for site work for both Quail Road and the Commons later in the month.  This type of “horizontal work” will be facilitated by the approval of the permit.  They are hopeful that the site work will be approved by the Board later in the fall, coinciding with the issuance of the permit and that they will be able to begin the work in 4th quarter of the year.  In terms of vertical development, it is their intention to present plans for initial West Terrace building in October with the hopes of beginning that construction later in the year.  Introducing himself to the Board, an attorney for Lennar explained to the Board that Lennar was currently under contract to purchase the entire property from Related.  They expect to close by the end of September.  Once the plans for The Commons section of the project have been perfected and approved by the Board, Lennar will convey that portion of the development back to Related.  So, while Lennar will be responsible for all of the site-related work in this section, Related will take on the construction of all rental and retail/commercial properties in The Commons and will be responsible for leasing these spaces out.  Lennar will then proceed with all of the for-sale residential construction (Town Homes, Single Family Homes and other variants thereof in the various neighborhoods)
This was discussed at some length after which the Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorney to draft a resolution of approval for the permit.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Rd. – ARB Review:
Since their last appearance before the Board, the applicant has obtained a new architect. Therefore, new drawings and renderings for the skylight factory to be constructed at 655 Sterling Mine Road were presented and reviewed.  The 50,000 square foot building will boast a façade made of aluminum, glass and wood with a “living wall” in the center that will be covered by plantings.  The color scheme will be variations of slate grey.  Aluminum and glass samples were presented as were color swatches.  Landscaping plans remain unchanged from the previous design.  Questions from both the Board and Town Supervisor surrounding  building elevations, possible uses of the roof, landscaping, the living wall, the parking areas, snow removal and the glass portion of the façade were discussed.  Neighbor Kevin Coppinger noted that despite the applicant’s statement to the contrary, he believed that the building would be visible from his property.  A draft resolution of conditional approval was presented, reviewed and unanimously approved. 

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Rd. – Extension Request for Construction Access:
Representatives of Watchtower explained to the Board that the Ramapo entrance for their project was still in progress but they had encountered a snag having to do with the height of utilities.  The will ultimately need to bring the grade up by 16-feet in that area and are waiting for the utility companies to finish relocating telecom and raise some wires.  Meanwhile, tree clearing on the site is in progress but they do not believe they will be able to meet the September 15 deadline as set forth due to required erosion control measures, which require them to work slower.  They are not permitted to commence work along the County Road until April 15, 2024, at which time they plan to begin extending water lines and sewer mains to reach the site.  They requested extended use of the Tuxedo Entrance indefinitely and provided three main justifications for this request as follows:

1. The Ramapo Entrance has no traffic restrictions placed upon it in terms of the types of vehicles that can access the site there, the times they can access it and the which directions trucks are able to turn when entering and exiting the site.  The Tuxedo entrance does have these restrictions.
2. At times they may need to close the Ramapo entrance for various reasons and will not have any other recourse aside from the Tuxedo Entrance when that occurs.
3. The newly aligned roadway/entrance in Tuxedo is also utilized by their neighbors as this is the only way for them to access their properties.  There have been no restrictions placed upon the neighboring properties in terms of traffic and access.  As Watchtower built the entrance it does not make sense to them that others can use it freely while they must conform to the restrictions.

This was discussed at some length.  Generally speaking, the Board was uncomfortable granting indefinite access without having a more defined idea of what the entrance would ultimately be used for.  An extension was granted through November 30, after which the applicant will return to the Board if they need more time at which point they can provide greater detail and definition as to the ultimate use of that entrance. 

Michelle & John Calcaterra – 59 Maple Brook Rd. – Clearing Filling and Grading – Schedule Public Hearing:  The Calcaterras were not present however the Board voted unanimously in favor of scheduling a public hearing for October 3.  

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 5, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 1, 2023

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, August 1 at 7pm.  Board member Susan Boyle was absent.

Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by explaining that the previously scheduled public hearing for Skyview Skylights on the freshwater wetlands had been cancelled as it had been determined by multiple experts on both sides of the application that no permit was necessary.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Rd – Site plan & ARB Review for Conditional Approval:
The applicant provided the Board with a brief update, outlining minor site plan changes and supplemental information that has been submitted as per the request of the Board at their previous meeting.  The applicant has been actively working with the Department of Health regarding the relocation of a proposed well and the subsequent closing of an existing/old one.  They have also been coordinating with the DEC, who have since issued a formal letter stating that there would be no adverse impact to any potential endangered species in the project area.  The DEC has also put forth several recommendations, which the applicant will need to follow. 
Because the applicant did not have renderings of the new, smaller building that has been proposed nor did they have a full bank of material samples, Chair Banyo suggested that the Board would be unable to grant ARB approval since they don’t know what the building will look like.  Board Attorney Kelly Naughton advised that they could, however, take action on both the Special Permit and the site plan, which would allow the applicant to begin working on some of the conditions of their approval.  The applicant indicated that they had recently changed architects, which is why the new drawings were not ready for presentation.  They agreed to table the ARB review.  Consultants’ suggested conditions for approval were then reviewed.  Some of the suggested conditions include the addressing of outstanding comments from the Orange County Department of Health and the Orange County DPW, adhering to conditions  set forth by the DEC as it pertains to threatened or endangered species and treatment of all storm water within the wetland buffer.   In addition to complying with all agency memos (both Town and County) the applicant must also submit a storm water pollution prevention plan to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer, revise the lighting plan to comply with Town standards, provide for the maintenance of the landscaping provide a 10-foot wide “no disturbance/no build” buffer along the eastern property line and place a restrictive covenant on it, revise of plans to include water source tank construction details, obtain Building Inspector approval of the proposed aerial fire apparatus access and provide any fire-lane striping required, perform soil testing and design the onsite waste water disposal system to the satisfaction of the Town engineer.
Following some further discussion regarding noise during construction and lighting plans the Board voted in favor of granting the applicant Conditional Site Plan and Special Use Permit approval.

Tuxedo Farms – Adjournment of Public Hearing for Clearing Filling and Grading Permit until September Planning Board Meeting: The public hearing for the applicant’s clearing filling and grading permit was adjourned to the September 5 meeting. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 1, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting July 11, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday July 11, 2023 at 7pm.  Board member Chris Kasker was absent.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road- Extension Request:
The applicant has been actively working to clear and remove trees from the site as planned.  The current permit for tree-removal is set to expire on August 15, but they do not think they will be done by then.  Noting that they are in full compliance with all the other conditions of their approval, they requested a 1-month extension on their temporary construction access until September 15 in order to  complete the tree removal.
Board Chair John Banyo asked the applicant whether the Ramapo entrance to the site would be operational by September 15.
The applicant responded that they had a permit for a temporary entrance in Ramapo but in order to construct it they need to raise the grade of the property there and Orange and Rockland will need to raise several electricity poles.  If this work has not been completed by September 15 it is likely that the applicant will return to the Tuxedo Planning Board for another extension.     
Noting that he lived at 633 Sterling Mine Road, a member of the public inquired as to whether the tree removal would in fact be complete by September 15 and further, once the Ramapo entrance is operational, whether or not tractor trailers exiting the site would be permitted to turn left onto Sterling Mine Road towards Ringwood.
Chair Banyo reminded the public that the Tuxedo Planning Board had no jurisdiction over the Ramapo entrance and the Applicant concurred, stating that they would be deferring to Rockland for direction as to use of the property in their right-of-way.   They added that they did expect to be finished removing trees by September 15.
Town Engineer Sean Hoffman then briefly outlined the process for granting the extension, which was a bit different because the August deadline had been set as a condition of the original approval.  Therefore, the Board needed to revise the original approval to reflect the new date.  This was done and the Board voted unanimously in favor of adopting the amended resolution thus granting the extension as requested. 

Public Hearing/Site Plan Review – Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road:
Chair Banyo began by outlining the process for the hearing.  He asked that the applicant give a brief overview of the project for the benefit of the public and that this be followed by consultants’ comments after which he would open things up to the Public.  
The applicant then provided a brief update/overview of the project as requested.  Following their presentation to the Planning Board back in January, the applicant appeared before the Zoning Board where they received some but not all of the variances needed to proceed with the project as originally planned.  Based on this as well as general feedback they had received from both the Planning Board and the Public, the applicant chose to revise their plans. In so doing, they reduced the size of the proposed building and relocated it on the property so that it is further away from both the neighbors and PIPC owned property.  They have also added vegetation/landscaping.   There are still some variances that they will need to obtain.  Additionally, due to recent changes in the Town’s zoning code, the applicant must obtain a Special Permit in order to allow for the proposed use of the building, which is “assembly.”   The property is impacted by wetlands, and they are uncertain as to whether or not they will need to obtain a Wetlands permit as well.
Town Engineer Sean Hoffman suggested that it appeared to him as though the plans might encroach on the wetlands buffer and that if they did, the permit would be necessary.  That being said, the usual Town Planning Consultant was not present at the meeting and he advised that they should wait for her feedback on this issue. 
The Applicant was agreeable to this noting that they are also still in need of a GML (General Municipal Law) review  from Orange County.  They also have open issues to address with the DEC, DOH and The County Planning Department. 
The applicant’s Civil Engineer and Landscape Architect each provided the Board with brief presentations outlining their areas of the project. 
This was followed by general feedback from both the Town Planning Consultant and Engineer.
The floor was then opened up to the public.  Chair Banyo noted that the Board was in receipt of a letter from Conor Eckert of  Orange County Partnership. Mr. Eckert was present at the meeting and spoke in favor of the project as did Orange County Director of Economic Development, Steve Gross.   Kevin Coppinger asked a number of questions and expressed some concern over various issues including demolition, hours of operation, traffic, setback of a retaining wall and location of the well.  These things were discussed. 
Next the Board members offered their comments.  The need for updated/enhanced drawings was identified and discussed as were several other items including landscaping, endangered species and lighting.
Regarding the wetlands issue, since it was advised that the applicant would most likely need to secure a permit, a public hearing for this was set for August 1. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting July 11, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 6, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, June 6 at 7pm.

Tuxedo Farms – The Commons – Subdivision, Site Plan & Preliminary ARB Review:
The Board began by setting a Special Meeting for June 29 at which there will be a Public Hearing for both the subdivision as well as the site plan for the Commons.  A time line for submissions was then outlined and discussed.  The applicant will also need to return to the Town Board in order to amend the Special Permit.  There will be two amendments.  The first will adjust the sequencing of approvals so that the Planning Board will be able to issue their site plan approval before the ARB issues theirs, although that approval would be conditional upon the applicants return to the ARB to complete the process.  The reason for this is that the applicant is seeking site plan approval for the entire commons including the footprints of all buildings, but they are only seeking ARB approval for the initial 4 buildings.  The way the Special Permit is currently written, they would not be able to do this.  The second change is to adjust the road hierarchy plans to allow  new road classifications that would facilitate additional parking in the Commons area.  It is their hope that this item will be added to the June 12 Town Board agenda.  The Deputy Supervisor was present and commented that he felt it would it make it onto the agenda and that they would be able to set a public hearing on the proposed amendments for the June 26 meeting.  The proposed amendments were discussed for several minutes. 
Next, the applicant and their consultants provided a presentation primarily focused on some of the architecture, landscaping and civil site engineer design.  This was followed by comments and questions  from the Town consultants. 
Next steps include the Public Hearing on the site plan as submitted, which will take place on June 29.  Revised plans will be submitted to the Planning Board no later than July 21 so that they can be added to the agenda for their August 1 meeting.

Skyview Skylights – Adjournment of Public Hearing to July Planning Board:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of adjourning this hearing until the July 11 Planning Board meeting.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 6, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 4, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, April 4 at 7pm.  Board member Bill Friedlich was absent.

Karlyn Industries – 212 Route 17 – ARB Review:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of designating the application as Type 2 under SEQR. 
Next, they voted unanimously in favor of granting conditional approval.

Tuxedo Historical Society – 241 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Updated plans were presented and reviewed.  Paint colors, lighting, excavation, drainage and parking details have all been added.  Because neither the Planner nor the Engineer received the plans in the form of a new submission, they were not prepared to make formal comments.  It was agreed that the Board was in a position to grant conditional approval, but that the drawings would not be signed off on until the applicant had complied with forthcoming comments to the satisfaction of both  Planner and the Engineer.  The applicant cannot move forward until that sign-off occurs.  The need for a public hearing was waived.  Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of a Type 2 action under SEQR as well as granting the applicant conditional approval as outlined during their discussion. 

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
The applicant provided the Board with a brief update.  They are still awaiting approval from Rockland County for the temporary construction access off of Sterling Mine Road.  While the plans have been approved, they cannot install the entrance until their Swift permit   has been finalized and filed with the DEC.  This is still pending but they are hopeful that it will be done in the next few months. Additionally, they are still actively before the Town of Ramapo for final Site Plan Approval.  They have also filed  an application for the permanent entrance with Rockland County, but this is on hold until the  final site plan approval has been granted.  They anticipate receiving this sometime before the end of the calendar year.    In the meantime, they are seeking approval to use the Tuxedo entrance as a permanent access for residents.  This was discussed.  Ultimately the Board determined that they would be ok with allowing access to residents of the new community permit access there, but that this should be restricted to those parties who were living on that particular property and not the entirety of the population living at the World Headquarters down the road.     Board Chair, John Banyo, inquired as to the timeline, specifically wondering when residents might inhabit the site.  The answer was roughly two years from this coming summer. (Mid 2025)  Because work has been somewhat delayed while the applicant sorts out the Swift permit and subsequently obtains approval from Rockland for their temporary construction access, they will be unable to remove all of the dead tress via the Tuxedo Entrance by May 15 as originally planned.  Therefore, they are also seeking an extension on that approval. 
Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the extension as requested until August 15.

Tuxedo Farms – Review of Site Plan – The Commons:
The applicant provided a presentation detailing their “town & country” landscaping vision for Quail Road as it runs from entrance to entrance through The Commons area of the development.  At both entrances the roadway will be about the native landscape and their vision entails a windy road that rises and falls through the forested hillside.  As it gets closer to The Commons area, the road will become less windy and more “town-like” with regimented street and landscaping plans.  Once in The Commons, Quail Road becomes the main thorough-faire through  the “center of Town” with a mix of  buildings lining both sides of the street, a Town Square and connectivity to the other neighborhoods within the development. Additionally, there have been some proposed changes to the previously approved parking in the form of additional spaces.  They will need to return to the Town Board for approval of the newly proposed road hierarchy as it relates to those changes.

Following the presentation, Planning Board consultants indicated that a majority of their initial comments pertain to inconsistencies they are seeing between/within the landscaping and engineering plans.  Additionally, there is some information that is still needed before they can really do the deep dive needed for this review.  The landscaping plan contains several elements that are missing from the site plan and visa-versa. Town Engineer, Sean Hoffman also outlined a handful of issues pertaining to plan inconsistencies as well as lot acreage, turning analysis and parking.
This was followed by a somewhat lengthy discussion between the Board members and the Applicant.  Items touched upon included parking and the possibility of a two-story structure for that purpose, neighborhood connectivity and community walkability and the on-going efforts to revitalize the Hamlet area and how these might play into plans for the development. 
The applicant thanked the Planning Board for their feedback, further indicating that they are hopeful to begin their process with the Town Board in either May or June.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 4, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 7, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, March 7 via Zoom.

Chair Banyo opened the meeting by explaining that upon advice from their attorney, he would be recusing himself from both the Karlyn Industries and Tuxedo Historical Society applications as both applicants are actively seeking grants from the LDC and he serves on the LDC Board.  In order to accommodate this, the order of the agenda was altered so that Chair Banyo would only have to physically step away one time.  He further indicated that there were two members of the Board who were absent and might be calling in to the meeting however they would be unable to participate in the discussions. 

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – Open and Adjourn Public Hearing:
As the applicant is still before the Zoning Board seeking several variances, the Planning Board cannot take any action on this application.   The public hearing was opened.  Town Supervisor Ken English commented that he had been following the application for some time and he supports it. He hopes the Board will seriously consider the proposed changes as he feels that the Town will benefit from the business. 
Chair Banyo reiterated that the Planning Board could not take any action until the ZBA had ruled on the variances, which they anticipate will happen in the month of April. 
As there were no further public comments, the hearing was adjourned until the May meeting. 

Jason Bramett – 922 Route 17 – Site Plan/ARB Approval – Change of Use:
The applicant provided a brief overview of the project, which has been before the Board for several months.  Essentially, they are looking to create an office space, while utilizing the existing garage bay for vehicle storage.  There will no external storage of vehicles on the site.   The Board’s consultants provided some brief feedback.  Board engineer Sean Hoffman noted that the applicant had included some plans detailing standards that fall under the purview of the New York Department of Transportation and not the Planning Board.  Suggesting that it would be inappropriate for the Planning Board to approve those items, he recommended that those two sheets of the submission be removed.  It was agreed that this would be done.  Following some further discussion, centered around a few minor items that need to be noted on the plan, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a conditional approval. 

Karlyn Industries – 212 Route 17 – ARB Review:
The applicant presented plans to beautify the building at 212 Route 17.  Plans include replacement of shingles on the roof, the opening of bricked-up windows and on the façade and subsequent installation of glass, repainting of the structure and installation of a new door.  Material samples were presented.  Treatment of the brick prior to painting was briefly discussed.  Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of designating the application Type 2 under SEQR.  Next, they voted unanimously in favor of waiving the requirement for a public hearing.  As the Town is still waiting on a GML referral from Orange County the Board was not in a position to take any further action.  The applicant will return to the next meeting seeking a final approval. 
   
Tuxedo Historical Society – 241 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Board member Bill Lemanski recused himself, citing his former involvement with the Historical Society as the reason he did not feel comfortable formally reviewing the application.
The applicant presented plans for renovations to the building at 241 Route 17, otherwise known as the old Chase Bank.  Plans include installation of new entryway where the ATM machine use to be which will become the primary entrance.  A patio with outdoor seating will be constructed outside the current entrance way and a pollination meadow planted between the proposed seating area and Route 17.  The building will also be striped of much of the bright lighting that has been installed on it and thoroughly cleaned.
Parking, lighting, zoning, signage, landscaping and usage of the space were discussed.  
As the Board did not have a quorum of members present for this application and are still awaiting GML referral from the County,  they were unable to take any formal action. The applicant will return to the next meeting.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
Since their last appearance before the Board, the applicant has begun tree-cutting on the site.  They are about 60 acres into this process and expect to be finished by the end of the month.  Following some back-and-forth with the DEC, they have decided to leave the cut trees in place for now, thus eliminating quite a bit of site disturbance. There have been some procedural delays, which they are working to resolve.  In the meantime, they have made some revisions to the plans for the 7-acres of the project that are located in Tuxedo as dictated by consultants at the previous meeting and are looking for confirmation that the open issues have been resolved. The timeline for the previously granted approval was reviewed and the possibility of installing no-right-turn signage as discussed at the previous meeting was also touched upon. It turns out that the Planning Board does not have the authority to require this and the County must be approached to install any desired road-signage.  Following some further discussion, the Board voted in favor of having their attorney draft a resolution of approval, to be modified based on information received over the course of the upcoming month, and presented next month’s meeting.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 7, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting February 7, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, February 7 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Public Hearing – Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Tree Cutting:
At Chair Banyo’s request, the applicant provided the Board with a brief overview of the project and what they are looking to do.  The applicant’s engineer explained that the 7-lot subdivision, located off Warwick Brook Road, already has conditional site plan approval.  They are currently waiting on a few things that are needed in order to satisfy the conditions.  In the meantime, they would like to begin clearing trees for the initial phase of the project, which is construction of the main access road.  The DEC annually restricts tree cutting of this nature to a specific window of time, that being November 1 – March 31.  The applicant is seeking a permit to begin cutting the trees, leaving them where they lay temporarily.  No heavy equipment will be used.  The anticipate being able to satisfy the conditions laid forth in the approval within the next few months, at which point they plan to remove the fallen trees, properly clear the land and officially launch phase one of the project.

There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed.

Metro R Services – Warwick Brook Road – Tree Cutting:
The Board consultants provided updates on the project, most of which focused on the applicants’ status in fulfilling the conditions set forth in the approval.  There is a section of the Town Code that requires applicants who are removing trees which are 8 inches or greater in diameter to provide a survey of said trees.  The Board was advised that unfortunately, they could not waive this requirement.  This was discussed at some length.  The applicant asserted that if they had to prepare such a survey, they would surely miss the DEC window for tree cutting.  Ultimately it was agreed that the applicant could move forward with the cutting but would still need to provide the survey as required.  As they do not intend to remove the stumps initially, the Board, in conjunction with their attorney, agreed that they could use these after the fact to provide the necessary information in order to satisfy the requirement.  
The Board voted unanimously in favor of re-affirming the project’s negative declaration under SEQR.  Next, they voted unanimously in favor of granting the clearing  filling & grading permit as requested for tree cutting, conditional upon 4 items, which were read into the record as part of the resolution by their attorney. 

Jason Bramlett – 922 Route 17 – Site Plan/ARB Approval – Change of Use:
Michael Sandour, attorney for the applicant, provided the Board with a brief overview and history of the project.  922 Route 17 is the old Tuxedo Autobody, which is located just south of the old Red Apple Rest.  The previous owner passed away.  The new owners would like to clean up the space and use it as an office.  Memos from the Board consultants were reviewed in some detail.  Access from Route 17, setback regulations, wells and finding the location there-of, septic, excess pavement, use and management of the outdoor storage space, fencing,  and use of the garage bays were all discussed.  The Board voted unanimously in favor of awarding the project a type 2 designation under SEQR and waived the requirement for a public hearing.  Following a somewhat lengthy discussion, they unanimously approved the Architectural Review portion of the application with conditions.  The applicant will return to the Board in March for site plan approval.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – Revised Site Plan Review:
The applicants’ attorney presented the Board with revised plans for the project to be located at 655 Sterling Mine Road.  Revisions include a significant reduction in the size of the building, which has also been moved forward on the lot.  These changes will reduce the number of variances still needed.  The applicant is in receipt of comments from the consultants and commented that they would happily address those at a future meeting.  They were looking for a reaffirmation of the Negative Declaration under SEQR, which would allow them to return to the Zoning Board for another review as the application still requires variances for height and development coverage.  Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of the reaffirmation.  The applicant can now appear before the ZBA on February 28.  A public hearing, conditional upon the ZBA approval, was set for March 7.

Tuxedo Farms – Site Plan Review:
The Applicant presented the Board with conceptual plans for the first part of the project, designed primarily  to show site layout and configuration.  They are well aware that further detail is required with subsequent submissions and further noted that responses to the consultant comments would be folded into their next submission.  All the same, the consultants went through some of their comments, the crux of which centered around the fact that further detail is needed. Board member Ned Kugel requested that as they begin bringing utilities onto the site, the applicant consider installing hook-ups that would make it easy for the School to come online once they begin utilizing their land and the applicant agreed that, although each utility was unique, they would work with the school to accomplish this. 
The Board is in receipt of a letter from the Tuxedo Union Free School District, who would like to appear before them to make a presentation regarding the status of negotiations as it relates to the subdivision of lands within Tuxedo Farms.  Their attorney advised them that the School District is not an applicant and that the referenced subdivision of lands had nothing to do with the application that was currently before them and therefore, such a presentation would be inappropriate.  Representatives of the School District are welcome to attend the meetings as members of the public.  It was agreed that a letter of response would be drafted and sent. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting February 7, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 3, 2023

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, January 3 at 7pm.

Public Hearing – Watchtower – Sterling Mine Rd. –  Site Plan Amendment:

Watchtower is preparing to commence a 250 acre expansion project located off of Sterling Mine Road  in the Town of Ramapo.  A small portion of the land (7 acres) is located in the Town of Tuxedo across from Eagle Valley Road.   The applicant was previously before the Planning Board in 2021 and 2022 seeking permission to combine a new entrance to their property with Sterlington Drive (the existing entrance to the Sisters Servants of Mary) and then align that road with Eagle Valley Road across the street.  Although it was acknowledged that eventually the applicant hoped to use the newly aligned entryway for preliminary construction, the larger expansion project was at that time still under review in the Town of Ramapo and therefore the alignment was approved for a different use, which had to do with the ability to access, repair and restore a bridge located elsewhere on their property.   In October of 2022 the SEQRA process for the project in the Town of Ramapo was completed.  The Ramapo Town Board granted the applicant a Special Permit and in November the Ramapo Planning Board issued an approval that allows for tree removal within the area of disturbance of the site plan for the greater project. Although they intend to construct a primary entrance to the development further East on Sterling Mine Road across from Old Eagle Valley Rd., the window of opportunity for tree removal, which is regulated by the New York State DEC,  closes at the end of March and the applicant is eager to complete the work while they can.  Therefore, they are before the Tuxedo Planning Board for two reasons.  The first is to move forward with plans for the seven acres that are located within the Town of Tuxedo and the second is to ask for permission to temporarily utilize the Sterlington Road entrance as an access point to the Ramapo property so that they can commence with tree removal.
The Applicant’s Planning Consultant gave a brief presentation, outlining the specifics of the proposed project as it exists on the 7 acres that are within the Town of Tuxedo.  These essentially include a gated entrance/driveway for residents off of Sterlington Road, some foot paths and landscaping.  Additionally, two trails have been proposed; one public running along Sterling Mine Road and the other private and fenced off within the site.  The limits of disturbance within the Town of Tuxedo will be only 2 acres as opposed to 111 in the Town of Ramapo.  Impervious surface in Tuxedo will be limited to .364 acres.  Once the project is completed, the bulk of the traffic will enter the site via the main entrance in the Town of Ramapo.  The Tuxedo entrance will be limited to residents only and will be gated.  They anticipate that during peak AM traffic hours it will be used by approximately 54 vehicles and during peak PM hours approximately 130.  They anticipate that phase one of construction will last approximately 2 months and that during that time period an estimated 30 trucks will access the site on a daily basis.  They are proposing to limit the number of trucks during peak AM and PM hours to 5 each.  Phase two of the project, which will involve the major earth work and blasting in the Town of Ramapo, is estimated to last approximately 18 months.  During this phase, until the main entrance has been constructed, there will also be approximately 30 trucks per day accessing the site via the Tuxedo entrance.  Stage 3, which includes build-out of the site and major landscaping, is estimated to take roughly 36 months and during that period the main access will be in the Town of Ramapo with an estimated 50 trucks per day.
Prior to opening the floor to the Public, Board Chair John Banyo asked the Planning Board consultants for their comments.  These comments centered around road dimensions as they relate to NYS Fire Code, wetlands, landscaping, emergency access, truck access during non-peak hours, Orange County DPW approval, updated sight distances, lighting, stormwater and updated site plans. 
John Canning, lighting consultant to the Planning Board, expressed some concern over traffic to and from the sight during the construction phase.  He noted that Sterling Mine Road is extremely busy during peak AM and PM hours and that currently it can be very difficult to turn out of Eagle Valley Road during that time due to the fairly constant stream of traffic. “Construction vehicles are very disruptive at intersections because they are not as quick and efficient as private cars when they turn onto and off of a highway,” he stated, further noting that he applauded the applicant for offering to restrict truck activity during peak times but he still felt the proposed number was a little high.  He recommended that they limit the number of trucks to 5 (in or out) during both time periods, which is about half of what they are requesting.  He also suggested that a temporary video camera be installed for the purpose of ensuring that the applicant complied with this regulation.  He further suggested that trucks be prohibited to make lefthand turns out of the site or right hand turns into the site during construction so that all trucks would be approaching from the East on Sterling Mine Road.
Laurie Guggino, a resident of Juniper Terace, noted that the volume of traffic had definitely increased on Sterling Mine Road and that at certain times of day it was also difficult to turn out of that neighborhood.  She further inquired as to why the entryway for the project had been moved from Ramapo into Tuxedo.
Chair Banyo explained that the approval granted to the Applicant by the Town of Tuxedo in January of 2022 had been for the alignment of Sterlington and Eagle Valley Roads for the specific purpose of allowing Watchtower to repair a bridge, located on their property in the Town of Ramapo. Those repairs have now been completed.  A restriction had been put on the approval dictating that when and if Watchtower wanted to use the road for any other purpose, they would have to come back before the Planning Board, which was what they were doing now.  The main entrance to the project will ultimately be in the Town of Ramapo, across from Old Eagle Valley Road in Sloatsburg.
Secondly, Ms. Guggino wanted to know where she could go to learn how many, if any, 5G cell towers would be installed on the site.  The answer was that no towers will be installed.
Michele Lindsay expressed concern about construction trucks accessing the site from the East, noting that traffic comes quickly over the hill there and that they might not have time to slow down for a large truck making a turn into the site. 
The public hearing was then closed.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Amendment:  
Chair Banyo opened the discussion by echoing Mrs. Lindsay’s concerns about traffic.  He noted that Sterling Mine Road running east over the hill just before the Tuxedo entrance narrowed  and was poorly signed.  Many drivers speed up when the road begins to narrow in order to get ahead and speed limit is an issue there.  He further suggested that when the application for road alignment was originally before the Planning Board, there had been no mention of utilizing the Tuxedo entrance for construction vehicles.  He feels that the parameters that the applicant has provided to constitute rush hour (7:30-8:30am and 5:30-6:30pm) are too narrow and that there is no data to support them.  He also thinks that the length of time for which the Applicant is proposing to utilize the Tuxedo entrance for construction purposes (into early 2024)  is too great and that they should be aggressive pursuing construction of the main entrance in Ramapo.
Board Member Bill Lemanski inquired as to whether the Planning Board had the authority to require any sort of traffic control at the entrance….and more specifically if they could require the installation of a No Left Turn sign as suggested by the traffic engineer.  The answer was yes.  He further inquired about the imbalance between the estimated number of vehicles entering and exiting the site during peak hours, wondering why they estimated a greater number of exits than entrances.  The answer was that trip generation had been modeled after some of the other Watchtower facilities in the region.  The full traffic report is contained within the projects’ FEIS and is available on the Town of Ramapo website.  In brief, many of the estimated exits will come from people who live there.
Board Member Chris Kasker also inquired about traffic to and from the site during peak hours both during the construction phase as well as after the project had been completed and this in conjunction with the traffic study was discussed at some length.
Traffic Consultant John Canning expressed concern over the peak hours as indicated in the traffic study, commenting that based on the numbers presented he feared that the impact on Eagle Valley Road could be much greater than originally anticipated.  He suggested that they re-explore the idea of a traffic signal.  While the level of traffic is not currently great enough on the side streets to warrant a signal, he feels that based on the projections for the realigned Sterlington Road they should look into it via a signal warrant analysis. 
Board member Susan Boyle agreed with Chair Banyo that two years was too long to use the Tuxedo entrance for construction purposes.  Commenting that things were already tough at the intersection of Eagle Valley Road, she suggested that 6-9 months might be more appropriate and further reiterated that the Applicant should explore more aggressively constructing their main entrance. 
Board member Ned Kugel agreed with all of the traffic concerns, furthering commenting that his main interest was looking out for everyone’s safety at the intersection with Sterling Mine Road.  He reiterated the suggestion that the applicant should more aggressively pursue their main entrance in Ramapo.
Board member Bill Friedlich agreed with the concerns raised by the traffic consultant and commented that he felt the proposed turning restrictions might really improve the waiting time for turning out of Eagle Valley Road.  He suggested that limiting construction access to 9am-4pm combined with restricting the number of construction vehicles might also serve to reduce waiting times and that perhaps they should set it up like this for a finite amount of time and observe for the purpose of collecting some actual data.
Board alternate Justin Jennings inquired as to the condition at the main entrance, specifically wondering whether a traffic signal would be installed. The answer was no.  He pointed out that even with pushing the construction access down the Road to another entrance, the traffic issues would still exist on the road just in a different location. 
The applicant responded that one of the reasons utilizing the Tuxedo entrance during construction was an attractive option was that there already existed a left turn pocket there.  It will be quite some time before a left turn pocket will be installed near the entrance in the Town of Ramapo. 
“This is a little road and it’s not really friendly to the big trucks turning into the site,” responded Mr. Jennings further referencing the speed limit issues and the narrowing roadway.  “That would be my concern….if there is something unsafe about this condition that would be safer at the final entrance.  Traffic wise, we are going to wind up with the same number of trucks at one entrance as the other.”
The Applicant responded that restricting left hand turns in and out of their site for trucks was definitely something they could do.  They respect the Town’s desire to shorten the amount of time needed for construction access at the Tuxedo entrance.  One of the things that will shorten the duration and impacts for everyone is their ability to access the site to remove the trees within the allotted window of time.  Tree clearing can only occur during the winter months when the long-eared bat is hibernating.  If they do not complete the work by March 31, they will have to wait until next November to clear the trees. 
Bill Lemanski inquired as to what specifically the Board would need to do to allow the applicant to complete this work.
The answer was that they would need to adopt the SEQR finding statement and amend the restriction on the existing approval, which prohibits using the Tuxedo entrance to access the property for tree clearing purposes. 
Board member Susan Reif wondered if there would be any lane closures during the construction phase similar to what occurred during the alignment and if so, how long they would last.
The answer was that they do not anticipate any further lane closures in Tuxedo.  There likely will be lane closures further down the road when construction in Ramapo begins.
Ms. Reif then asked for clarification that all the Applicant was seeking at this time was permission to use the entrance to access the site for tree clearing purposes and that the other proposed work could and would be reviewed and approved over a longer period of time.
The answer was yes.
The idea of correcting the existing signage on Sterling Mine Road to create a safer condition coming down the hill was discussed.  In order to initiate this, the Planning Board would need to petition the Town Board to contact the County and initiate the process.  This would likely be a lengthy process.
Chris Kasker asked the applicant whether the access for the proposed tree clearing if granted would be more or less disruptive than the work that has already taken place there.
The Applicant responded that they felt it would be less disruptive as there would be no lane closures or flagmen involved.  It would just be vehicles entering and exiting.
There followed a discussion about the tree cutting, stump removal and removal of the trees once they had been cut.  Chair Banyo wondered how many trees in total would be cut down.  The answer was over 8,000 in total.  They are all on the Ramapo property.   The Applicant is currently seeking a variance that will allow them to clear 25 acres at a time as opposed to the 5 acres normally allowed by the DEC.  Cutting will take place 6 days a week. 
Chair Banyo proposed that the Planning Board restrict the applicants access to 9am-3pm, thus avoiding peak hours altogether.  He further suggested that they limit the number of trucks bringing cut trees off the site to a certain number per hour(5) and prohibit them altogether on weekends and Holidays.  Further he suggested that they petition the Town Board to reach out to the County as discussed to make changes to the signage on Sterling Mine Road.  Lastly, he suggested that this be allowed only until March 31, at which point the situation would be revisited.
The Applicant agreed that they felt that would be able to comply with this and still get the work done by March 31. 
There followed a discussion with regard to requiring an additional traffic survey/signal warrant, after which the Board voted unanimously in favor of adopting the Finding Statement subject to modifications per their discussions that evening.    
Further they voted in favor of adopting a resolution of conditional approval for the amended site plan  regarding  construction access per their discussion that evening. 

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Rd – Clearing, Filling & Grading – Schedule Public Hearing:
The applicant is looking to obtain a clearing, filling and grading permit so that they can start clearing trees for the main access road and the bridge.  About 2 and ¼ acres of clearing will be required for phase 1.  This will require a public hearing.   Following minimal discussion, the Board voted in favor of scheduling a public hearing for February 7.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval Extension/Findings Statement:
The applicant gave a brief presentation which provided a general overview of the project.  The Town Board approved the amended  special permit and preliminary plan for the project in November.  The Applicant must now come before the Planning Board with individual site plans for each phase/neighborhood within the development.  The Planning Board will ensure that the site plans comply with the overarching regulating plan and Smart Code, which essentially dictates the zoning for the project.  They will also be reviewing engineering standards as well as ensuring that everything complies with design and architectural guidelines.   Phase 1, the plans for which will be submitted by the end of January for Planning Board consideration in February,  contains 4 neighborhoods: The Commons, West Terrace, Upland Park and East Terrace.  A general timeline for the process ahead was discussed. 
The Board voted unanimously in favor of approving a motion to extend the Preliminary Subdivision Approval until June 16.
Following a brief discussion and some clarification, they then voted unanimously in favor of approving the Finding Statement, which brings the SEQR process for the project to a close. 

Jason Bramlett – 922 Route 17 – Site Plan/ARB Approval:
922 Route 17 is the former Tuxedo Autobody in Southfields.  The applicant is seeking a change of use to from autobody to businesses/professional office space.  They are not proposing too many improvements to the site however they are looking to eliminate some of the impervious surface (concrete) and add striping for parking.  They also intend to plant additional trees and bushes.  The site currently has two active entrances and they will be closing up the Southernmost entrance. 
The Town Planner advised that the applicant needed to revise and resubmit their site plan in accordance with what is required.  She proceeded to outline the specifics in terms of what was missing and what was needed.  The Town Engineer agreed, further commenting that the applicant would also need to provide a project narrative outlining what would be occurring at the site.  There are a number of existing nonconforming conditions and the engineer further advised the applicant to submit a letter to the Building Inspector as these things are within his jurisdiction.   Variances may be required for the concrete removal/impervious surface and that area of the application/plan must be fleshed out a bit.  The closure of one of the parking lot entrances will go to the DOT.  Access via the Northern entrance is obtained via an easement and the  Engineer noted that he would hate to see the applicant close up the southern entrance only to learn that they did not have legal access to the entrance they were intending to use.  Water, sewer, landscaping and screening were also briefly addressed.  Additionally, the EAF that was submitted was dated July 21, 2021 and must be updated.  Some of the requirements for the ARB approval were also touched upon.  It was agreed that the applicant would work to gather the necessary data and revise the plans so that he could return to the Board in the near future. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 3, 2023

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 1, 2022

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 1, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 4, 2022

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 4 at 7pm.  Board members Kristy Apostolides, Susan Boyle, Bill Friedlich and Justin Jennings were absent.

Public Hearing – Michael Adams – 16 Lilac Lane – Lot Line Change:
A surveyor representing the applicant gave a brief overview of the proposed project, which consists of a lot line change in order to more even distribute property between two neighbors on Lilac Lane.  There were no comments from the public and so the hearing was closed.

Michael Adams – 16 Lilac Lane – Lot Line Change:
Town Engineer Sean Hoffman expressed some concern with regard to the utilities.  Specifically, there is one well that serves both properties but there does not appear to be any formal agreement delineating how the utility will be shared.  Should the electric services be terminated on the property with the well, how would the other property ensure that water service would continue?  In terms of the septic system, the plans have been revised to show septic tanks, but there is no absorption system shown.  Mr. Hoffman is unable to tell whether or not the applicant has proper separation distances from the well as required by the Department of Health.  Therefore, he is recommending that the Boards’ resolution of approval be conditional upon the applicant doing some testing in order to ensure that there is no contamination from the existing well to the septic system.  He pointed out that by making one of the parcels smaller, there was less area for the installation of a replacement system if needed. 
Following a walk-through of the resolution with their attorney, the Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the application conditional upon well testing and inspection as recommended by Mr. Hoffman. 

Discussion with Town Consultants Regarding Tuxedo Farms:
Board Chair John Banyo asked the consultants to provide the Board with update/summary as to where the Tuxedo Farms project currently stands and what the role of their Board will be in terms of what they are expected to review and approve.
Board Attorney Kelly Naughton explained that the project was still undergoing the SEQR process, for which the Town Board is the Lead Agency.  It is expected that this process will conclude mid-to late October and that the amended Special Permit  will be approved shortly thereafter.  As they are listed as an Interested Agency in the SEQR process, the Planning Board will have to adopt a Findings Statement.  Attorneys for the Town and Planning Boards will work together in order to ensure that the Statements coming from both Boards are cohesive.   Once these things have taken place, the applicant will come before the Planning Board and it will then their job to review the subdivision site plans for the various neighborhoods within the development, making sure everything is in compliance with the Town Code, the Smart Code and the Special Permit from both planning and architectural review prospective.  They cannot take any action however until the Town Board has completed SEQR and approved the Special Permit. 
Typically, with larger subdivisions such as this one, the application would come to the Planning Board in bits in pieces, allowing them to review each neighborhood one at a time.  However, the applicant has already submitted plans for the entirety of the first phase (4 neighborhoods in total) to Planning Board as well as to their Engineer.  This was discussed.  Engineer Sean Hoffman recommended that the Board have a discussion with the applicant in order to determine what their expectation was in terms of a time line for moving things forward.  To review 4 neighborhoods thoroughly at once could take the better part of a year (8 or 9 months) while it might only take 3 months per neighborhood were they to be reviewed one at a time.  Further, Mr. Hoffman asked for some direction in terms of the degree to which he should engage in off-line conversations with the applicant in terms of working through various technical aspects of the plans.  They have already requested his comments but he feels it would be premature to begin the review at this time. 
Town Supervisor Ken English agreed.  He commented that they wanted to ensure that there was an escrow account established in order to cover the associated  consulting fees.  “In our review (Town Board/Special Permit ) we did set up an escrow and it was properly funded and there were no problems with that.  They’ve paid the tab on all of that and I want every tax payer to know that,” he noted.  They are now looking to establish a second account for the Building Department.
When asked, the attorney advised the Planning Board that it would be premature to invite the applicant to come before their Board and provide an update.

Other Business:
Board Chair John Banyo expressed concern over the frequency with which Planning Board members were absent from meetings, wondering whether there were any consequences that could be put into place for these situations.  Supervisor English recommended that they take a look to see if there was a policy in place and further advised that in the meantime, Chair Banyo should have upfront conversations about this with his Board members.  In his view, if these individuals are unable to serve, they should probably step down.  Should that become the case, he said that he would certainly help to recruit new members for the Board.
There was also a discussion with regard to mandatory Board trainings and the various methods by which Board members might be able to fulfill these requirements.   

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 4, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 6, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, September 6 at 7pm via WebEx. 

Gary Hseih – 80 Juniper Terrace – ARB Approval:
The applicant appeared before the Board seeking ARB approval for a new, two story home to be located at 80 Juniper Terrace.  Drawings were presented as were renderings of homes with similar design elements and materials to what the applicant has proposed.  The home will have white vinyl siding, black windows and a grey, asphalt roof.  The Board’s consultants provided their feedback and, as required by the code,  the Board discussed the overall design of the home and how it would fit in with the character of the neighborhood, specifically those houses on either side of it.  Following these discussions, the Board voted unanimously in favor of designating the application as a Type 2 Action under SEQR after which they voted unanimously in favor of approving the application as presented.

Michael Adams – 16 Lilac Lane – Lot Line Change:
The applicant is seeking a lot line change between the homes located at 12 and 16 Lilac Lane.  The two homes are located at the end of a Private Access roadway and for reasons unknown to the applicant, they were constructed directly adjacent to the property line. The way things are currently configured, one of them owns a shed that is actually located directly behind their neighbor’s house.  They are hoping to reconfigure the line in a way that will provide both property owners with more usable property. 
Board Consultant Valerie Monastra pointed out that the application was incomplete and that the Board would need to see some of the missing info, namely the zoning tables, in order to determine whether or not what had been proposed was in compliance with zoning or if variances would be required.  She further pointed out that only one of the two property owners had submitted the necessary paperwork.  Mr. Adams assured her that the necessary paperwork from the owners of  12 Lilac Lane was being processed and had been held up over the Holiday Weekend. 
Topography was discussed.  The Board’s engineering consultant, Sean Hoffman, noted that a utility plan would be needed.  Board Attorney, Kelly Naughton, pointed out that due the proximity of the properties to Harriman State Park, GML review would be required and a Public Hearing would also be necessary.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of designating the application as a Type 2 Action under SEQR and a public hearing was set for October 4.  Additionally, they voted in favor of authorizing their attorney to prepare a resolution of approval so as to be prepared to move things forward conditional upon the outcome of the Public Hearing.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – SEQR Review:
The Applicant and the Board went through the part three of the Environmental Assessment Form in detail.  Some of the Items discussed included impacts on surface water, the Department of Health’s requirements for a well on site, traffic, parking and noise.   Various mitigations for associated issues were proposed and reviewed. The applicant must go before the BZA for a large number of variances.  There was a somewhat lengthy discussion between the Board and their consultants with regard to the overall process.  The Board then  voted 4-1 in favor of awarding the application a Negative Declaration under SEQR, with Board member Chris Kasker voting NO. The application will next be before the Board on November 1, at which time there will also be a Public Hearing. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 6, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 2, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met at 7pm on Tuesday, August 2 via WebEx.  Board member Bill Friedlich was absent.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
Since their last appearance before the Planning Board, the Applicant appeared before the Zoning Board, where there was a public hearing as well as general review of the required variances.  The Zoning Board was unable to take action as the application has not yet been through the SEQR process.  Planning Board Chair John Banyo began the discussion by announcing that the Planning Board would focus a majority of their time that evening on an in depth review of parts one and two of the EAF (Environmental Assessment Form)
Before beginning that review, the applicant provided the Board with a brief overview of  some of the changes that have been made to the plan since their last appearance.  These include: relocation of the water tank, updated specs for the water tower, which will bring it into compliance and eliminate the need for the variance, regrading on the East side in order to reduce the size of a retaining wall, reduction of proposed pavement behind the building in order to eliminate the need for a variance, the addition of detailed design for both the storm water management and septic systems and lastly the addition of “land bank” parking. 
The Board then reviewed part one of the EAF in some detail.  This was followed by questions and comments from the Town Consultants.  Questions and comments pertaining to discrepancies between the EAF and the plans, the use of fuel oil vs propane, the disposal of paint and how this might affect the water supply, the number of proposed parking spaces, the  possible use of reusable energy/solar panels, and the hours of operation were raised by the Board members and discussed.
Next, Board Attorney Kelly Naughton lead the Board and the Applicant through part 2 of the EAF, which more closely examines the level of impact that various aspects of the project will have on the immediate environment.  Board alternate Justin Jennings expressed some concern with what he perceives to be an inconsistency with community character and community plans, pointing out the large number of variances that would be required.  Board member Chris Kasker wondered whether or not the building could be constructed for its’ original use (shopping center/business area) if the applicant wanted that.  The answer, from a land-use perspective, was yes.  He then asked for an overlay of the plans showing the changes highlighted earlier over what had originally been submitted.  This was provided.  Susan Boyle noted that while she did have some concerns over the number of variances required, she also had concerns about the abandoned building currently located on the site and what it looks like.  Kristy Apostolides expressed some concern over comments that were made by PIPC (Palisades Interstate Park Commission) relating to the precedent that the project might set as well as how the overall project might impact the surrounding hiking trails. 
Ms. Naughton then briefly reviewed the various ways that Board might proceed from this point.  After adopting the EAF part 2, there are two avenues forward for the Applicant and the Board.  First, the Board could opt to request that responses and additional studies be provided by the Applicant in the form of an Expanded Part 3, in an effort to bring things to an overall Negative Declaration under SEQR.  The other option would be to move forward with a Partial Scope DEIS (Draft Environmental Impact Statement.). This would require a Positive declaration followed by a public scoping session culminating in the submission of an EIS.  There are no time-frames involved with the Extended Part 3, while there are mandatory timelines built into the EIS process.  There is a third potential path, but it is not recommended.  This would be a Conditions Negative Declaration.  This can only be used for Unlisted Actions (which this is) but it’s really reserved for those types of actions where there is a limited number of potentially significant environmental impacts and where there are readily apparent, discrete mitigation measures that are going resolve those potential impacts and there are more stringent timeline requirements. 
Following some discussion, it was agreed that the Board would move forward with the Extended Part 3.  It was confirmed that the Board must wait until the SEQR process is complete before scheduling a Public Hearing.  The applicant will return to the next meeting to continue the SEQR process. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 2, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 7, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, June 7 at 7pm via WebEx.

Vishal Taneja (Tuxedo Gulf Property) 191 Route 17 – Site plan Approval Extension:
Due to supply chain delays with a lot of the equipment, the applicant has not been able to move forward with the project as expeditiously as hoped.  Additionally, the Town Board recently made some changes to the Zoning Code, which has impacted the project’s approval.  The applicant must apply for a building permit, but they do not wish to do so until they have a better idea of what the timeline will be in terms of receipt of the equipment.  They anticipate breaking ground at some point this summer.  Following a brief discussion, the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a 6-month extension on the site plan approval until January 3, 2023.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval – 6 Month Extension Request:
This is the 10th 6-month extension on the preliminary subdivision approval for the project, which was originally granted back in May of 2015. The applicant was not present.   Several of the Board members had questions pertaining to reasoning for the extension and the “normalcy” of 10 extensions on a project.  Their attorney advised them that so long as the Applicant has not abandoned the project, 10 extensions is indeed normal practice in some situations.  Following some further discussion, the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of granting an extension through December 6, 2022.

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
Revised plans for the project were presented and reviewed.  The most significant change to the plan is a reduction in the length of the proposed building by 30-feet allowing for more space on the east side for the construction of retaining walls and grading.  This will limit the amount of land disturbance necessary and reduce the size of the proposed retaining walls.  A full grading plan, utilities, an erosion control plan and profile views have also been added to the plan and the bulk table has been updated.   The Applicant also met with the fire inspector and has incorporated his comments into the plan. 
The Applicant will require variances for rear yard setback, development coverage, building height, side yard, front yard, parking, retaining walls and possibly pavement as well.  They may also require a variance for accessory structure for the proposed water tower, but they believe they might be able to design one that will comply. 
Board consultants provided feedback.  The requested variances are critical.  More details are needed on the landscaping plan in terms of the number of trees that will be planted and their locations as well as tree removal.  The adjacent wetlands and the potential impacts of runoff from the parking lot as well as other areas on the wetland buffer area was discussed.  It was recommended that water quality be considered as part of the Board’s review, especially in terms of what is identified for storm water.  More information is needed before the Board can begin considering the architectural aspects. More information is also needed with regard to traffic circulation.  As the site is accessed from a County road, the County DPW will need to get involved.  Water, waste water and storm water were discussed as was use of the existing well vs. installation of a new one or possible relocation.  The applicant will need to confer with the DEC regarding the Oak/Hickory forest as well as endangered species.  They are hoping to have this consultation before the end of the month.  Before the ZBA can take any action on the variances, the Planning Board must take action on SEQR.  The Board voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency and instructed their attorney to draft a Part 2 EAF for review and approval at their next meeting.  In the meantime, the applicant hopes to appear before the BZA later this month to present the variances for their initial consideration.  

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 7, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting May 3, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, May 3 at 7pm via WebEx.  Board members Susan Boyle, Kristy Apostolides and Bill Friedlich were absent.

Public Hearing – Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Cluster Development:
This application was originally approved in March of 2021 however, because of the recent zoning code amendments the zoning on the parcels question has changed.  There are a number of options available to the applicant to bring the property in compliance.  One of these is to reclassify the project  as a cluster development.  This is a somewhat misleading terms as it suggests that many homes will be clustered together.  That is not the case with this project.  No changes to the planned development or its site plan are required with this reclassification.  The development consists of 7 homes on large lots accessed by one central road to be constructed off Warwick Brook Road.
As part of the process, the Planning Board is in receipt of a GML 239 Report from the County Planning Department which suggests that the project should be redesigned with the lot size reduced so as to preserve the surrounding wilderness.  The Planning Board does not agree with this recommendation.  It is not uncommon for Planning Boards to be at odds with the County over recommendations like this.  With a super-majority vote, the Planning Board can override the recommendation and the project can proceed.
JoAnn Hanson inquired as to where along Warwick Brook Road the entrance to the development would be constructed.  This information was provided.  Ms. Hanson then stated that she had been curious to see the project redesign, she believed the current plans were better than the previous ones and aside from wanting a sense of the location, she had no further comments.
Mr. Garino wondered whether the homes would be single family dwellings and further whether they would remain on the tax map and generate income for the Town.  The answer to both questions was yes.
As there were no further comments from the public, the hearing was closed.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Consideration of Cluster Development:
The Board was in agreement that they should override the recommendation of the County, however they were unable to do so because they did not have a super majority present.  It was agreed that they would set a special meeting for some time the following week so that they could properly vote on this, bringing the project into compliance with the new zoning and allowing it to move forward. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting May 3, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 12, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 8, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, March 8, 2022.
Newly appointed Board member Susan Boyle was absent.

Chair Banyo opened the meeting by welcoming both newly appointed Board member Susan Boyle, who replaced Diedre Murphey after she was elected to the Town Board, and newly appointed Board Alternate Justin Jennings.  As an alternate, Justin will attend meetings and have the opportunity to ask questions and render opinions, however he will not have the ability to vote unless the Board does not otherwise have a quorum present. 

Skyview Skylights – 655 Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
The Skyview Team, including their Attorney, Architect, Engineer and Project Manager as well as the business owner himself presented the Planning Board with a conceptual plan for the construction of a new Showroom/Assembly & Distribution Center to be located at 655 Sterling Mine Road.  The plan also includes the demolition of a partially completed building that was constructed by the properties’ previous owners back in 2007.  The proposed new building will require a number of variances including those for front, rear and side setback as well as building height and overall lot development coverage.  Additional variances may also be required for the proposed retaining walls and paved surface setback.  Currently, the property does not have water, sewer or gas hookups.  Therefore, the applicant is proposing construction of a septic system and a well.  Because the property is on a slope, with a designated wetland below it, the project will require filing and grading.
Both the Town Planner and the Town Engineer have issued their initial memos and these were briefly reviewed and discussed.  The Board was also provided with an opportunity to ask questions.  Several Board members expressed interest in a site visit.
Following the discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency for SEQR purposes and listing the project as a Type One Action.
The applicant will next proceed to the BZA for the required variances.

Other Business:
The new town zoning does not allow for the increase in capacity required for the new owners of the Tuxedo Gulf Station to install their new tank.  The Town Board has proposed a new law, which alters/eliminates one sentence within the zoning that will allow for the project to move forward.  This was briefly discussed after which the Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorney to draft a letter expressing their support for the proposed amendment. 

It was decided that beginning in month of May Board meetings will be moved to the first Tuesday of each month.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 8, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 11, 2022

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, January 11 at 7pm via WebEx.  All members were present.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval  - 6 month Extension Request:
This is the 9th extension request since preliminary approval was granted.  Board Chair John Banyo asked the applicant for a project update and was informed that the Town Board would be meeting with representatives from Related to receive an update on Thursday, January 13.  There was some discussion with regard to the Sewage Treatment Plant, which has not yet been brought on line.  Specifically, members of the Board wanted to know how many homes the plant would service.  There was no clear cut answer to this line of questioning as service numbers are determined by bedroom count as opposed to the number of units.
Ultimately, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the applicant a 6-month extension until June 14, 2022.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
Since their last appearance before the Board, the applicant has satisfied all of the consultants’ comments.  They have yet to file for their SPDES permit with the DEC.  This was discussed.  A conditional draft resolution of approval was reviewed in detail.  Following some discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the project conditional approval as outlined in the draft resolution. The timeline for tree removal was discussed.  Ultimately, the applicant must wait to hear from the DEC on a couple of items before they can actively proceed.Agda for Town Plannning/Architectural Review Board Meeting January 11, 2022 |

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting January 11, 2022

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 14, 2021

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, December 14 at 7pm.

Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by announcing that this would be Board member Deidre Murphey’s last meeting as she will begin her service on the Town Board in January.  He thanked her for all of her time and effort on the Planning Board.  This was met by a round of applause.

Vishal Teneja – Tuxedo Gulf Project – 191 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Changes to the plans, including the trim color (black) and adjustments to the curb cuts at both entranceways as per the DOT were presented and briefly reviewed. Board Attorney Rick Golden then read through a draft resolution of conditional approval, outlining a total of 10 conditions.  These were briefly discussed with the applicant after which the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the application conditional approval. 

Brad Ewing – Reggie Bar – 14 Store Road – Site Plan Review:
The applicant provided the Board with an overview of the proposed project, which is to create a small restaurant/ beer, wine and cider bar in the ground floor space on the south side of 14 store road.  There will be no changes to the exterior of the building.  Mr. Ewing has been working to renovate the inside of the space and is hopeful to open on New Year’s Eve however ultimately the business will be open on weekends only (Thurs-Saturday) with evening hours on Thursday and Fridays and more of a full day on Saturdays.  They will be serving cold items from Dottie Audrey’s (sandwiches etc.)  along with cheeses, olives and some appetizers which will be paired with wines that are being curated by a local businessman.  Mr. Ewing used to run an art gallery in Chelsea and will be displaying art on a rotating basis in the space.  His wife is the owner and operator of Cheymore Gallery, which is located next door in Tuxedo Square,  and the two will likely do some programming together whereby pieces associated with shows in the Gallery may also be on display in the bar.  The space will also be available for receptions and private events.  “It’s hard to say where exactly it will go,” he commented, adding that he hoped it would be successful. 
Comments from the Board consultants centered around details that need to be included on the site plan.  Back in 2018 the site was approved for a retail shop, but the shop never came to fruition.  The applicant is before the Planning Board primarily for a change of use under the Zoning Code, which requires site plan approval from the Planning Board. Parking, lighting and garbage disposal were touched upon.  Board Attorney Rick Golden advised that the project would be classified as Type 2 under SEQR and further that no EAF (Environmental Assessment Form) would be necessary.  It was agreed that a public hearing was not needed and the Board voted unanimously in favor of labeling the application as Type 2 under SEQR. Following some further review and discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the application conditional approval.  In order for the bar to open on New Year’s Eve, the applicant will need to submit revised site plans and file a deed.  He will also need to procure the required permits from outside agencies.  He already has a temporary 90-day liquor license and remains optimistic that he will be able to open as planned. 

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Rd. – Site Plan Review:
Plan updates were presented and discussed.  The applicant has been working with the building inspector on a number of items and the plans have been adjusted to reflect this.  Notably, the driveway width has been increased from 20 to 26 feet. Additionally, they made a mistake when completing the paperwork with regard to area development coverage and are seeking a couple of extra days to update and re-submit the use regulation table.  Orange County has indicated that they would prefer that the road alignment, driveway opening and proposed turning lane all be consolidated under one review, approval and permit.  Plans have been submitted to them for review.  The applicant has provided a great deal of information over the course of the last month which satisfies many of the consultants’ initial comments.  All documentation concerning the threatened/endangered species as well as required archaeology studies has been submitted.  The consultants are comfortable in that all of the environmental issues have been addressed.  A landscape ecologist has reviewed the plans as requested by the Board and made comments pertaining to the plant choices as well as various notes on the plan.  It was recommended that the applicant revise the landscaping plan to reflect these things.  Access agreements have been provided as requested and now the Planning Board attorney will review them and determine whether they suffice in terms of maintenance and snow removal.  With regard to the emergency access, the consultants support the widening of the roadway. 
Engineer Sean Hoffman shared a letter from the Orange County DPW indicating that a traffic circle would not be required, the possibility of which was discussed at some length at the November Planning Board meeting.  Regarding storm water and tree removal, the applicant has reached out to the DEC and indicated how they would like to permit the process.  They currently have two projects going on and have requested two permits accordingly.   The DEC typically likes to issue one permit for all of the soil disturbance.  Should the DEC issue an unfavorable determination, the road realignment will have to wait until SEQR has been concluded with the Town of Ramapo, at which point one permit can be issued. 
The applicant indicated they were not asking for two consecutive permits but were rather hoping to complete the project in Tuxedo in its entirety before requesting the permit in Ramapo. 
Mr. Hoffman responded that he understood what the applicant was hoping to do but that the determination would ultimately be up to the DEC and if they should decide that only one permit will be issued, the application can still proceed but they will have to wait before they can move forward with the work. 
Mr. Golden then lead the Board through part two of the EAF (Environmental Assessment Form). Following the review and subsequent discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of adopting the conclusions in the EAF Part 2.  Next, the voted unanimously in favor of assigning the project a negative declaration under SEQR.
There was a brief discussion about bats relative to tree removal followed by an update on the traffic study.  The applicant will return to the next meeting at which point they should be poised to receive project approval.   

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 14, 2021

Click here to view the agenda

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 15, 2021

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Monday, November 15 at 7pm.  Board members Ned Kugel and William Friedlich were absent.

Public Hearing – Watchtower – Sterling Mine Rd. – Site Plan Review:
After opening the public hearing, Planning Board Chair John Banyo reminded everyone that comments made were to pertain to the limited scope of the specific project at hand, which is the alignment of an entrance to the Watchtower property and Eagle Valley Road.  The greater Watchtower project is within the Town of Ramapo and working its way through the review process there.  Once Ramapo has completed their evaluation, Tuxedo will have an opportunity to evaluate the potential impacts of the entire project. 
The applicant then provided a brief overview of the project, which aims to combine a new entrance way to their property with the existing entrance to the  Sisters Servants of Mary and the Science of the Soul properties and then align this with Eagle Valley Road.  A history explaining why the existing entry was constructed on angle was provided.  Watchtower has begun the mitigation process of improving an old bridge on their property, but the County has deemed the access road they are currently using as unsafe and it will be decommissioned come February.  The newly proposed entryway will allow them to complete the bridge repair and restoration project.   For the time being it will remain largely a gravel road.  Down the line, once the bridge work has been completed, they would like to pave over the road and create a secondary, gated access point to the greater residential project they have proposed in the Town of Ramapo but they will need to come before the again with a new application before that can occur.   In reviewing the plans, the County has suggested that the applicant consider a number of things to mitigate safety concerns including the construction of either a traffic circle or a left-hand turning lane.   A traffic circle would also need to be approved by the County DPW. Although a traffic light is not deemed necessary at this time, the intersection will be closely monitored for 6 months after construction in case one is needed in the future.
John Canning of Kimley-Horn traffic consultants expressed concern over the safety of the proposed intersection.  Currently, the volume of traffic on Sterling Mine Road is so high that when drivers want to make a left turn from Eagle Valley Road they have to wait for approximately 1 minute.   Intersections are rated at level of service A-F and this one is an F, which is the worst possible rating.  Intersections of this rating can be quite dangerous because drivers become impatient and tend take chances with the amount of gap time between vehicles.  While what is currently being proposed will likely not impact the intersection, in the future as the properties serviced by the road are developed, there will be more traffic from the north-bound approach.  In order to qualify for a traffic light, there would need to be at least 75 cars an hour for 8 hours of the day passing through the intersection from Eagle Valley Road.  That is not happening.  Rather, as development comes to the area, the increase in traffic will be from the North side and this additional traffic will make the intersection worse.  While a traffic signal would be ideal, there is no certainty that the intersection would qualify.  Mr. Canning  laid out three potential choices for the Planning Board to consider: 1. Kick he can down the road and figure this all out when the applicant returns for approval of the entranceway, 2. Ask the applicant to appeal to the County DPW to find out whether or not they would be willing to construct a traffic circle at this location, which could then be analyzed by the Board. If the DPW is unwilling to construct the traffic circle, there would be option 3., to see if the applicant can reserve the right-of-way that would allow the Town to construct a traffic circle at some point in the future if the DPW were to change their mind and push for a traffic circle at a later date.  The way the right-of-way currently exists, the traffic circle could not be constructed. 
As there were no further public comments, the hearing was then closed. 

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Site Plan Review:
The application was reviewed in greater detail, with Board consultants weighing in.  Landscaping, stormwater, signage, DEC permitting, environmental and archeological concerns and the idea of the traffic circle were all discussed.  Ultimately it was agreed that the Board would like to make a site visit.  They then voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency under SEQR.  Planning Board attorney Rick Golden then lead them through the Environmental Assessment Form  (EAF).  There remain a few items outstanding and the applicant will have to return to the Board.  Mr. Golden informed the Board that by law once the public hearing had been closed they had 90 days to make a determination or else the application would be approved by default.  He recommended that they ask the applicant to waive that 90-day default approval clause.  The applicant suggested that they should wait a little longer before waiving the clause, but that he was certain they would be agreeable to working with the Board on this.  Mr. Golden responded that there was another option by which the applicant could waive the clause temporarily, although not completely so that if at any point in the future they wanted to reinstate it, they could advise the Board that the waiver was coming to end, and the 90-day clock would start from that point.  The applicant was agreeable to this.  Chair Banyo noted that he was hopeful that by the next meeting on December 14 all of the issues would be resolved so that the Board could take some positive action.    

MacFarlane/Singh-Wilkes – Woods Road – Lot Line Change:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the application conditional upon the following:

1. Prior to the signing of the plat, the applicant shall confirm all bearings, distances and areas listed on the play to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.
2. The Applicant shall comply with the October 26 decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals

Vishal Taneja – Tuxedo Gulf Project – 191 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
The applicant began by reporting that they had received all the necessary variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals along with the Special Use Permit.  Updated site plans were presented and reviewed along with renderings and material samples for ARB review.  Board planning and engineering consultants provided their comments and feedback to the revised plans.  Lighting and traffic were discussed.  A response from the Department of Transportation pertaining to their review of the site plan has not yet been received, however they did issue a letter back in July noting that the two proposed 35-foot wide, one-way driveway openings exceeded the normal allowance for one-way openings.  This is a significant comment and the applicant is working to with them to reach a resolution. The current openings are actually larger than 35 feet, but the proposed 35-foot openings will safely accommodate fire, fuel and delivery trucks. 
 Engineering consultant Sean Hoffman advised the Board that if they approved the plan as presented, the applicant might have to return to them for an amended approval should the DOT not allow for the sizing as shown on the plan as this could well impact the functionality of the site.  Board attorney Rick Golden advised that the need for a public hearing would be discretionary.   It was agreed that because a public hearing had been held at the ZBA with minimal attendance, the Planning Board would waive their public hearing.  It was further agreed that they would wait until the applicant had reached an understanding with the DOT on the size of the driveway openings before issuing site plan approval.  The proposed sign, particularly its’ size and location, was discussed.
Renderings were also presented and reviewed and materials were discussed.  The Planning Board would like to see pictures that include the buildings surrounding the property, particularly the ones across the street,  so that they can consider how the proposed design will fit in with what currently exists.  A timeline for the project was discussed as it may take a while for the applicant to receive building materials.  The applicant is hoping  to receive their final approvals by the end of the year which would allow them to submit all of the necessary paperwork to the Building Inspector with the goal of breaking ground in March of 2022.  They will need to close the facility down entirely during the construction phase, which is expected to last anywhere from 6 months to 1 year.   Ultimately it was agreed that the applicant would return to the next meeting with the photos as requested. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 15, 2021

Click here to view the agenda

Click here to view the notice of public hearing

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 12, 2021

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, October 12 at 7pm.  All members were present.  The Town planning consultants were absent.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Rd. – Subdivision Approval Extension:
A representative for the applicant updated the Board with regard to the project, which is on-going.  Soil testing and some of the tree-removal has been completed.  They are currently in the process of coordinating geotechnical testing.  They are in receipt of the Engineer’s comments, Which they plan to address.  A phasing plan has yet to be developed and there are a few other loose ends that need to be tied up as well, including pump service to one of the lots.  Following some discussion, the Board voted in favor of authorizing an extension through March 8, 2022.

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Rd. – Site Plan Review:
Representatives of Watchtower presented the Board with plans to  combine an entrance with the Sisters Servants of Mary and align that road with Old Eagle Valley Road.  The entryway essentially straddles the County line and the proposed project is directly related to Watchtowers’ much larger expansion project, which is currently under review in the Town of Ramapo. The review by the Tuxedo Planning Board is limited to the re-alignment only. 
Acknowledging their limited scope, Board Chair John Banyo inquired as to what the ultimate purpose of the new entrance would be.
The Applicant responded that initially the road would be used to allow for preliminary construction however, the main entrance to the expansion will be further south along County Rd. 72 and aligned with Eagle Valley Road in Rockland County.  Ultimately, once construction is complete, the road will serve as something of a back entrance to the new living area. 
A number of items were discussed including traffic, parking, landscaping, various environmental issues (rattlesnakes, bats, oak hickory forest, wetlands) and the involvement of the Fire Department.  As per the Boards’ request, Traffic Consultant Adam Gibson was present and provided feedback, ultimately suggesting that while the plan makes sense conceptually, more data analysis is necessary.  Truck maneuvering was discussed at some length.  Mr. Gibson suggested that the Board should limit the time frames within which large trucks can access the site via this entrance based on the increased traffic flows in that area at certain times of the day.  Chair Banyo noted that the traffic studies submitted by the applicant had been completed during the spring of 2020, when traffic flows were depleted due to Covid. 
Board member Chris Kasker inquired as to whether or not the applicant had been in contact with Tuxedo Farms, who has recently proposed a significant increase in the number of units within their development.  He further suggested that this would surely have an impact on the traffic as that development is slated to have an access point in Eagle Valley.  He wondered what the process was for ensuring that there would be a coordinated review of these projects.
Board attorney Rick Golden suggested that it would be up to the Lead Agency for each project to conduct these reviews and Ramapo is the Lead Agency for the Watchtower Project.  He proposed that he draft a letter from the Town Planning Board to the Ramapo Board making them aware of the Tuxedo Farms project and requesting a coordinated review.  It was agreed that this would be done. 
Chair Banyo suggested that ultimately, another traffic study would likely need to be conducted before final approval was granted.
The applicant will require a permit from the DEC for land disturbance.  SHPO review is also necessary and the application will have to be referred to the County for GML Review.  Once the SQRA process has been initiated, interested agencies have 30 days to respond.  It was agreed that the Board’s next meeting would be postponed until Monday, November 15 in order to allow for the 30 days between meetings.  It was also agreed that a Public Hearing would take place at the November 15 meeting. The Board then voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency for the project under SQRA, typing it as unlisted. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 12, 2021

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 14, 2021

The Village Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 7pm.
Board member Kristy Apostolides was absent.

Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by welcoming the Board’s newest member, Bill Lemanski, who was recently appointed.  He also extended a warm welcome to Board member Ned Kugal, who was in-person for the first time since Covid hit.

Public Hearing – MacFarlane/Singh-Wilkes – Woods Road – Lot Line Change:
Ms. McFarlane provided a brief overview of the application.  Essentially, it was discovered via a survey that the lines between the MacFarlane and Singh-Wilkes property are something of a tangled mess.  When Ms. McFarlane’s home was originally built, the driveway was installed in such a way that encroaches on the neighboring property.  In order to compensate for this, the original owner conducted a land-swap with their neighbor, taking full ownership of the driveway in exchange for a large piece of the home’s backyard.  A recent survey shows that Ms. McFarlane owns nearly ½ of her neighbor’s backyard while her neighbor owns 1/3 of hers.  In an effort to correct this, the homeowners are proposing a lot line change that will create two side-by-side, relatively squared off lots.  Both parties are amenable to the change. 
There were no comments from the public, so the hearing was closed. 

MacFarlane/Singh-Wilkes – Woods Road – Lot Line Change:
Before the Planning Board can approve the application, it must go before the Zoning Board for a variance.  SEQR has been completed as has the GML review by the County.  The timeline for the application process was discussed.  As per Rick Golden, the Board’s attorney, following closure of the public hearing the Board has 62 days to issue an approval or else the applicant will receive approval by default.  Because the application has not yet been added to the Zoning Board’s schedule, there was some doubt as to whether or not the process could be completed before the default approval.  Mr. Golden advised that the applicant had the right to waive the 62 day requirement and Ms. McFarlane was agreeable.  The application will now proceed to the Zoning Board for the necessary variance prior to returning to the Planning Board for approval. 

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval:
Representatives of Tuxedo Farms were not present, although Mr. Golden  advised that the extension could be granted  anyhow.  Chair Banyo provided a brief update, noting that the applicant had been actively working to bring the new sewer plant online by the end of the year.  There are several parties who are interested constructing on the property and there have been a number of presentations made to the Town Board.  The driveway for the project has been reconfigured to some extent and the applicant has been working to acquire the necessary  easements along Route 17.
Audience member Meg Vaught inquired as to how many extensions of this nature the applicant was entitled to under the law.
Mr. Golden responded that there is no limit to the number of extensions they can receive. 
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of extending the approval until January 11, 2022.   

Vishal Taneja – Tuxedo Gulf Service Station:
The applicant appeared before the Board with hopes of both closing out the SEQR process and receiving a referral to the Zoning Board for required variances.  There have been no changes to the plan since its latest submission in July.  Proposed location for the transformer, the second floor office space, fire truck accessibility, water supply, size of parking spots and relative distance between spots and gas pumps, soil sampling, traffic studies, storm water management, tree removal and the proposed canopy were all discussed.  The Board then reviewed the EAF in detail with their consultants, resulting in a Negative Declaration. The applicant will now proceed to the Zoning Board for the necessary variances before returning the Planning Board for site plan review. 

Watchtower – Sterling Mine RD. – Clearing Filling & Grading Permit/Schedule Public Hearing:
A representative of Watchtower explained the genesis of the application.  The current entrance to the Watchtower property is no longer recognized by the County.  Back in 2009 they were granted  permission to use the entrance for 1 year after which they petitioned the County for continued use.  The County granted them a temporary permit, however it was recommended that they work with their neighbors, Sisters Servants of Mary and the Science of the Soul to combine entry ways and align them with Eagle Valley Road.  The temporary permit will expire in February.  Given the time constraints, the applicant would like to withdraw their previous application to create an entirely new access road and instead move forward with the County’s suggestion to combine their entry with the Sisters and align with Eagle Valley Road. 
Chair Banyo inquired about the previously proposed turning lane to be located on Sterling Mine Road.
The applicant responded that they were hoping to get approval for combined entries only at this time so that they could meet the deadline set forth by the County.  They wondered if they could separate this out from the rest of the project.
Rick Golden explained that they could not.  The Watchtower project as a whole is subject to segmented review by a number of Boards as the property spans several different municipalities.  While the realignment is permitted, it is separate from the main project and the applicant will not be able to connect the realigned entry way to an access road as the environmental review for that portion of the project has not yet been completed and it is done, it will be under the jurisdiction of a different Board.  This type of segmented review is not the norm and it complicates things.  Mr. Golden recommended that instead of a clearing, filling & grading permit, the applicant should submit a site plan, which the Planning Board could review and approve.  A public hearing will not be required.  This plan can then be amended at a later date to reflect the entirety of the project.  Following some further discussion it was agreed that the applicant would take Mr. Golden’s advice and submit a site plan, to be reviewed at the next meeting. 

Chris Dollbaum – Juniper Terrace -Architectural Review:
Mr. Dollbaum was present  and looking for the Architectural Review Board’s approval for a new single family home in Juniper Terrace.  Materials  as presented were approved.  

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting September 14, 2021

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 10, 2021

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, August 10 at 7pm.  Board member Kristy Apostolides was absent.

Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by announcing that this would be Dan Gould’s last meeting as a member of the Planning Board as he and his wife are retiring and moving south.  Chair Banyo thanked him for his service, wishing him a happy, healthy and long retirement. 

Tuxedo Auto Body -Conditional Site Plan Approval:
Following a brief discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor granting site plan approval conditional upon the following

• All Vehicles must be removed from the property
• Light levels at the property line must be kept to 0.1 foot candles
• Proper snow removal and storage management will be implemented
• Any associate signage will require an additional permit

MacFarlane/Singh-Wilks – Woods Road – Lot Line Change – Schedule Public Hearing:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of designating the application as Type Two under SEQR.
Mrs. MacFarlane is seeking a lot line change as the property line currently cuts directly through through her driveway. Her neighbor in the back has agreed to the change in exchange for a small portion of Mrs. MacFarlane’s land.  The history of the two properties was provided and briefly discussed.  The applicant will need a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals before the application can proceed.   A public hearing was scheduled for September 14 at 7pm.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 10, 2021

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting July 13, 2021

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 8, 2021

The Town planning/Architectural review Board met on Tuesday, June 8 2021 at 7pm via WebEx.

Public Hearing – Itzy’s Collision – 1027 Route 17 – Site Plan Amendment:
The meeting began with a public hearing on the site plan amendments for Itzy’s Collision, located at 1027 Route 17 S in Southfields.  The applicant briefly reviewed changes to the site plan most of which were minor adjustments in response to comments from the Town’s planning and engineering consultants.  The applicant was before the Zoning Board on May 25 for variances, however that Board has requested more information and consequently, the Planning Board will not be able to approve the application yet.  
Board Chair John Banyo commented that he had visited the property the week prior and that the shop manager had suggested that perhaps they could install fencing to shield the old body part area to the left of the building by the dumpster.  He had also recommended that a stucco finish be added to the building and noted that he had been discussing this idea with the owner. Chair Banyo suggested that if stucco was going to be part of the overall renovations that the applicant might want to consider building it into the current application so that they could get everything approved at one time, rather than having to return to the Board at a later date.  Detailed landscaping plans are also needed. 
The applicant was agreeable to all of these suggestions.
There was a brief discussion regarding a note on the plan calling for the Building Inspector to perform regular checks in order to ensure that drip pans were not leaking.
As there were no comments from the public, the hearing was then closed.

Itzy’s Collison – 1027 Route 17 – Site Plan Amendment:
Each of the Board members were polled for their comments on the application.  Items discussed included a condition prohibiting the sale of vehicles on site or in association with the property, the installation of bollards  or large boulders instead of picnic tables to create a more permanent barrier around the septic area and storm water pollution prevention.  There was a somewhat lengthy discussion regarding a facility maintenance plan and enforcement thereof.
The applicant will be back before the Zoning Board on June 22 after which they can return to the Planning Board, who’s next regularly scheduled meeting will be July 13

Watchtower – Sterling Mine Road – Update to the Board:
Board Chair John Banyo provided the Board with an update on the Watchtower project, noting that he would not be entertaining any comments from the Board members as it was not an official action and representatives of Watchtower were not present.  The Board is in receipt of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Chair Banyo encouraged them to review it, particularly the section pertaining to traffic, and to send him their questions.  The Board attorney will formulate a formal response to be submitted to Ramapo on Monday, June 21, which is when comments are due from all the involved agencies.  Watchtower has reached an agreement with the Orange County DPW to align their new southerly entrance/exit with Eagle Valley Road.  This will create a classic cross intersection in that area.  The OC DPW will also be granting Watchtower a 6-month extension on the existing driveway, which will allow them to access and repair a bridge.
The Board attorney gave a brief overview of the process moving forward. 
The only active application before the Town of Tuxedo for this project will be for filling, grading and clearing.  The rest of the project takes place in the Town of Ramapo. 

Training – Implications of Marijuana Legalization on Local Land Use Regulations:
The Board underwent a 30 minute training regarding planning and land-use issues associated with the recent Marijuana Legalization in New York State.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 8, 2021

This meeting will be held via Webex.

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 9, 2021

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, March 8 2021 via WebEx.  All members were present.

Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by introducing and welcoming newly appointed Planning Board members Kristy Apostolides and Ned Kugal.

Tuxedo Farms – Extension of Preliminary Subdivision Approval:
Representing Tuxedo Farms Henry Haefner reported that things were moving forward with the project.  Andrew Dance has been meeting with Town Supervisor Ken English with some regularity and has also been in conversations with Toll Brothers and Mr. Haefner believes they will be moving forward with the builder.  He further noted that he is no longer a full time employee of Related and has been working for them as a consultant only, helping to process paperwork and move things forward administratively.  For this reason, his knowledge is somewhat limited and he advised that Mr. Dance would be the appropriate person to provide project updates.
Board Chair John Banyo noted that there was an active filling and grading permit on the property and he wondered how that work was going.
Mr. Heafner responded that due to the wintery weather, not much had been happening on the property but as the weather seemed to be breaking work was likely to begin again soon.
Chair Banyo inquired as to when the filling and grading work might be completed and Mr. Haefner advised that it would not be until after the spring as the soil will need to dry out.
Board member Chris Kasker asked for a brief overview of the project in its current state in order to provide further clarity as to exactly what they would be voting on.
Mr. Haefner obliged, utilizing shared overhead photos of the site to show the clearing and grading that has been done thus far as well as the areas where infrastructure has been laid.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted in favor of approving the 180-day extension, which will expire on August 10, 2021.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Major Subdivision – Review Draft Resolutions:
Nothing has changed since the applicant was last before the Board.  New Board member Ned Kugal had a number of questions about the project and these were reviewed.  Discussion focused mainly on the proposed hammerhead style turnaround, guardrails, wetland disturbance and drainage. 
The Board then turned to the resolution of preliminary approval as drawn up by their attorney.  The resolution calls for approval of the overall subdivision plan, but  has no impact on the individual the site-plans or development of each individual lot.  As the homes are built, each will warrant an individual application that will need to come before the Planning /Architectural Review Board for approval. 
After a brief discussion, the Board voted in favor of approving the resolution.

Augusta Properties – ARB Review – Façade Change:
The applicant presented the Board with proposed changes to the project at the old Orange Top Property. Three changes to the previously approved plan were proposed as follows.  

1. A material change on the 82 square-foot vestibule to be installed on the front of the old Orange Top Building.  The original plans called for a combination of brick and cedar siding. The applicant is now proposing to construct it entirely out of brick.
2. The Brick on both of the existing buildings is starting to show some wear and tear.  The applicant would like to preserve the brick by painting it white.
3. In keeping with the proposed change of building color, the applicant would like to change the window trim to black.

Renderings depicting the proposed changes were presented and discussed at some length.  Town Planner/Board Consultant Valerie Monastra expressed concern with painting the brick.  She suggested that repairing the brick and leaving it in its natural state would be ideal, but if the applicant is set on changing the color for aesthetic purposes, she recommended seaming the brick as an alternative to painting it as painting could cause a number of issues down the road.
She further highlighted that the proposed changes reflect both a major change in the color pallet for the project as well as the proposed materials and that the Board should consider these things as part of the ARB review.  
The applicant responded that the whole plan for the two buildings was to create a harmonistic nature between the two of them because they are so close together, while also accentuating the architectural significance of Tuxedo’s History.  The Tutor style building sets the nucleus.  That entire structure is brick and as they are unable to change this, they feel the next best thing is to paint the brick.  They have done extensive research in finding a painter that has experience in preparing the brick appropriately.  The material used on the brick will be one that is breathable.  The paint must have the ability to flex as the brick expands and contracts.  Research has been done in order ensure that the finish both maintains and holds. 
Board member Deirdre Murphy inquired about the new building on the property, specifically wondering whether there were any proposed changes to this structure.  The answer was no.
Board member Ned Kugal expressed concern with the idea of painting the brick.  He does not feel it is a good idea.  He believes that maintaining it will be problematic.  He suggested that whitewashing might be a better option.
Board member Don Gould commented that he understood the desire to join the two buildings and he supported it.  He pointed out that the mercantile building to the north of the property had some brick that had been painted and was now peeling and that this looked pretty bad.  He implored the applicant to do their research in order to ensure that something like this did not happen.
The applicant replied that the white section of the mercantile building had likely not been maintained in over 30 years as it was visibly deteriorating.  This is a good example of poor brick maintenance.  He reiterated that extensive research had been done to ensure that the appropriate materials would be used and that he would not allow his buildings to flake in that way because this would prevent him from attracting and keeping a good tenant.  “One of the goals here is to essentially transform these buildings into something new along with the businesses inside,” he stated.  “I will do the maintenance to maintain it.  I have done the research the ensure that it is not going to peel off and that it will hold up.”
Board member Bill Friedlich had commented that he was ok with the idea of the buildings being the same color although he was not sure that white was the correct choice for maintenance purposes as well as in terms of fitting in with the rest of the aesthetic in Town.  He suggested that the white color was “a little harsh” and that the applicant might consider warming it up a bit. 
After asking some general questions about the project materials, Kristy Apolostolides agreed that the change in materials to all brick for the vestibule provided a more cohesive aesthetic in her view however, she suggested that the “ultra modern” look of the white buildings with the black trim would likely be outdated in a few years and that she did not feel that it was in keeping with the character of the Town, which is a bit concerning to her.
The Board then voted in favor of declaring the application a Type 2 Action under SEQR after which they voted 5-2 in favor of approving he changes with Bill Friedlich voting no and Kristy Apostolides abstaining. 

The Board then adjourned into an executive session for an attorney/client meeting regarding the Open Meetings Law.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 9, 2021

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting February 9, 2021

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, February 9 at 7pm via WebEx.

Board Chair John Banyo opened the meeting by announcing that at the Town Board meeting on the night previous, Ned Kugal had been appointed to fill the seat vacated by Mike Reardon in January.  He has not yet been sworn in, but will join the Board once that has taken place.
On a different note, he expressed concern with the recent pattern of late submissions from applicants, noting that they had only just received some paperwork pertinent to that evening’s meeting last Thursday.  While the situation with Covid has caused some understandable delays over the course of the past year, it is important that submissions be received with enough time for the Board and their consultants to carefully review them prior meetings with the applicant.  It is not fair to either the consultants or the Board to expect a quick turnaround on such reviews.
This was briefly discussed, with the Board in agreement that a firm guideline must be established and adhered to.  The Board’s clerk noted that as per the current guideline, applicants are supposed to have their submission in 10 days prior to the meeting. It was agreed that moving forward this would be enforced.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Rd – Major Subdivision:
Revised plans for the project were presented and reviewed.  Among other things, changes include alterations to the driveways for lots 1 & 2 as per the Highway Superintendent.  Town Planner Valerie Monastra provided an overview of her memo, listing several suggested conditions for preliminary approval including the acquisition of all necessary permits from the D.E.C., as well as planned endangered/threatened species mitigation, acquisition of any necessary Federal wetlands permitting as well as complete mitigation measures as required by the Army Corps and any documentation and permits required by SHPO.  Additionally, the Board must discuss and come to a decision with regard to whether or not the subdivision will be required to provide parkland or pay fee in lieu there-of.  Any such fee should be made a condition of approval.
Board Engineer Sean Hoffman went through his comments, which primarily centered around the planting of street trees, soil testing and brush clearing in an effort to increase sight distance.  The applicant requested a waiver from the Highway Superintendent regarding the slopes coming off of the roadway and as a part of that process the Highway Superintendent indicated that he would prefer at least 5 feet of shoulder area for snow storage.  Subsequently the applicant has indicated that they have not provided street trees in order to increase the area for snow storage however, Mr. Hoffman does not believe that the Highway Superintendent has the authority to remove the subdivision requirement for street trees nor does he suspect that this removal was his intent when requesting snow storage space. 
The applicant indicated that it seemed as though the Highway Superintendent had indicated that he did not want to see street trees along the shoulder of the road however the applicant did not have any issue with providing them.  He suggested that perhaps they could be planted in another area such as behind the guiderail.
The Board then discussed both the issue of street trees and the requirement for parkland or a fee in-lieu of.  It was agreed that relocating the trees as suggested by the applicant would make the most sense.  Further, the Board favors the idea of a fee in lieu of Parkland.  The Town Board is responsible for determining the amount of said fee although it was indicated that it would likely be $1,500 per lot.
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of authorizing their attorneys to draw up a resolution of preliminary approval.  Chair Banyo reminded everyone that as the project moved forward, each of the individual homes would need to come before their Board for approval. 

SOS Fuels – Tuxedo Gulf Service Station – Site Plan Review:
Prior to opening the discussion, Board Chair John Banyo disclosed that he was a customer of SOS and inquired of the attorney whether or not that would pose an issue with his review of the application.
The answer from the Board attorney was no.
Representing SOS, Adam Speigel presented the Board with an overview of plans for redesign and expansion at what is currently the Tuxedo Gulf Service Station with the help of his civil engineer and architect.   The applicant is proposing to remove the existing canopy and build a new one with 4 gas pumps where there are currently 2.  They would then expand the existing the building by 427 square feet on the right hand side, creating two distinct retail spaces with a common vestibule space in between and converting the existing repair bays into a convenience store.  The intent is to attract a second tenant for the other side of the building.  22 parking spaces will be installed to service both businesses.  The applicant will respect the vegetative, residential buffer.  Because of the narrow nature of the lot, they are proposing a one-way circulation flow of traffic.  There will be a new, free standing sign.  Preliminary drawings depicting the front elevation only were presented.  Zoning variances are required before the application can proceed.
In reviewing her memo, Town Planner Valerie Monastra noted that the applicant would need to request a waiver from the current moratorium.  Additionally, GML (WHAT IS THAT?) review will be required as well as possible approvals from other outside agencies.  She believes the application would be classified as a Type 2 action under SEQR.  She expressed some concern with the narrowness of the site as it pertains to the proposed parking spaces and one-way circulation, noting that the spaces would be tight and that clear, visible signage would be necessary. She recommended that the Fire Department review the proposed plan and further advised that a traffic study should be done in order to determine whether or not what has been proposed would actually work in the space.   Complete plans, detailing the other three elevations will be needed as will lighting and landscaping plans in addition to information regarding building materials and colors.
Noting that he understood that more detailed plans would be coming in the future, Engineer Sean Hoffman focused his comments on compliance with the Town zoning code.   The applicant has indicated that the property use would be changing from a gas station with repair shop to just a gas station with retail.  Retail is a permitted use but would require BZA approval.  A permit from the Department of Transportation (DOT) will be necessary and concerns regarding site circulation, fire truck access, and space for fuel delivery trucks must be considered and addressed.  Finally, Mr. Hoffman wondered whether a lot merger should be considered as the gulf station currently sits on two contiguous lots.
Chair Banyo wondered whether the addition of more gas pumps would require the installation of another fuel tank.  The answer was yes.  The Chairmen then asked if they were intending to sell diesel fuel and again, the answer was yes.  Chair Banyo expressed some mild concern that diesel fuel sales might encourage 18-wheelers to stop for fuel, which could be problematic given the narrow nature of the property.
The applicant responded that canopy height would be designed for passenger cars and not large trucks, which would deter them from stopping there.  Additionally, he suggested that signage could be installed indicating that the fuel was for passenger cars only.
Chair Banyo wondered whether soil analysis around the tanks would need to be done prior to approval. 
Mr. Hoffman responded that this would definitely need to be done.
Chair Banyo wondered whether the applicant had any specific ideas as to what type of retail would go in opposite the convenient store. 
Mr. Speigel responded that they some ideas but were not committed to any one thing at the moment.  They feel that the town is in need of a grocery store/market but are not entirely sure as to what the actual demand for this is.  The proposed design allows for possible expansion to create a larger market place however, they believe that the 2 sided model with separate businesses would be in keeping with Tuxedo’s small town charm. Various other potential uses were briefly discussed.
Board member Bill Friedlich commented that the Orange Top Diner, located directly across the Gulf Station,  would be closing at the end of the month.  Given that the Planning Board approved plans for renovations and expansion to the Orange Top property back in 2020 and that with the diner leaving these renovations would likely begin soon, he wondered whether or not it might make sense to share the plans that have been proposed by SOS with the owners of the Orange Top property in an effort to ensure that the design, materials and colors of the newly renovated buildings flow together well. 
Board member Don Gould agreed that the architecture and design of the new building would be important and suggested that, personally speaking, he would like to see architecture that was in keeping with the old IGA building.
Board member Deirdre Murphy expressed some concern with the potential for increased noise.  Referencing some of the stations located in Ramsey, she suggested that some gas/convenient store combo stations were lit up 25 hours a day like “a Hess station” with constant traffic moving through and that this would not be in keeping with the small town feel of Tuxedo.  She wondered if there were any code restrictions that would allow them to exercise some control over this.
With regard to the building use, Board Attorney Kelly Naughton noted that several ideas had been brought forth during the course of the discussion and that it would be important for the applicant to make a decision and then include as much detail as possible on the plan in order to ensure that the correct variances were put in place.
Board member Chris Kasker questioned the applicant with regard to project timeline.  If all goes according to plan, once the project has been given a green light, the applicant expects it will take 4-6 months to complete.
Mr. Kasker wished the applicant good luck, further commenting that in his view the project would be good for the Town as it would surely generate business and bring in money.
After receiving clarification on the number of proposed parking spaces (22) Ms. Murphy inquired as to which of the two operations, gas or retail, would be the dominant business. 
The applicant responded that they believed the two would go hand-in-hand.  Both businesses were likely to appeal to “pass by” traffic, with customers looking to gas up their vehicles and grab some coffee and/or other convenience items quickly at the same time.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of categorizing the application as a Type 2 under SEQR.  The applicant must now seek the necessary variances from the BZA.

Itzy’s Collision – 1027 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
The applicant’s engineer explained that they were seeking a site plan amendment for the property located at 1027 Route 17 in Southfields.  The original site plan, which dates back to 1996, contains certain requirements, which must be brought up to code.  One of these has to do with the number of parking spaces needed and the applicant intends to apply to the BZA for relief from previous requirement as they are looking to add more spots.  Additionally they are hoping to improve the parking layout so that it flows better.    They have received relief from the moratorium and following initial feedback from the Planning Board will proceed to the BZA to obtain approval for the additional parking. 
Speaking to the required zoning variances, Planner Valerie Monastra commented that the way she read the document it was referring more to the total number of vehicles on the premise that were associated with vehicle repair.  The information presented by the applicant seemed to refer more to the parking spaces for customers and employees as opposed to the space for for vehicles in need of repair.   This needs to be clarified by the Building Inspector so that there can be confirmation as to exactly what variances are needed.   Additionally, there is no information pertaining to the topography and it is unknown as to whether filling and grading will be required.  She questioned the vehicle repair area, noting that applicant had indicated there would be space for 25 cars.  She advised that these must be shown on the site plan in addition to any proposed boulders and bollards near the utilities.  The manor in which the parking and the removability of vehicles from the repair area is going to exist must be detailed.  Information with regard to the ground surface materials is also required.  There is minimal screening currently on the site and Ms. Monastra advised that a landscaping plan should be developed and submitted.  Additional information regarding the proposed fencing is also required.  Lastly, she advised that the original site plan and the current one should be coordinated and that either a new plan should be developed or, if the applicant chooses to pursue the amendment instead, everything from the original site plan that will remain the same must be included on the plans so that it is clear as to what is being amended and what will remain the same.
Speaking to the grading and topography the applicant responded that there would be no grading and that the impervious areas would remain the same.  The plan is to restripe.  The impoundment area has been relocated to the north side of the property and the old area will be paved to allow for some of the proposed parking.
Engineer Sean Hoffman noted that it was unclear from looking at the plan whether or not the paving was within 15 feet from the street line. If it is, this would become a  pre-existing, non-conforming item as per the code and would need to be approved by the building inspector.  Speaking to the proposed drainage, he pointed out that the plans showed water flowing into an existing catch basin at the base of the driveway near the roadway.   He cautioned that this might not be the best practice for a number of reasons and suggested that the applicant be required to get confirmation from the DOT that it would be acceptable.  Alternatively the applicant could consider directing the water elsewhere.  The well location and septic system must be clearly defined on the plans.  Further details are needed with regard to the proposed fencing in terms of materials and dimensions.  Finally he noted that the Board should discuss and determine whether or not the application would trigger ARB approval.
Chair Banyo expressed some concern regarding the proposed fencing, echoing the need for more details and commenting that he wanted to see an opaque fence.  Details are needed on the landscaping, construction materials and colors.  “We don’t want to see any cars,” he commented.  “Because right now I think it is an unsightly situation up there.”   He further stated that once submitted he felt that they would want to approve the landscaping plan from an ARB prospective as well.  The number of cars in the impound area must be clarified. 
Bill Friedlich reiterated the need for proper fencing.
Don Gould stated that he had serious concerns about the potential environmental hazards associated with the wrecked cars stored in the impoundment area and the possible fluids that could be leaking into the ground there.  He inquired about the air handling machines and the various types of paint that would be on the site.  He also feels that fencing is necessary as people should not have to look at the stored vehicles but cautioned that the intersection of Route 17 and Old Orange Tpke was already somewhat dangerous and that the introduction of a fence there could make things more hazardous. 
Deirdre Murphy agreed with Mr. Gould further commenting that the number of cars stored on the site has doubled in recent months and the idea of those vehicles possibly dripping fluids into the surrounding wetlands was very disturbing.  A fence will provide a nice aesthetic buffer but there are real environmental concerns that must be taken into account.
Chris Kasker agreed with everyone’s concerns, stating that he believed his colleagues had identified the important issues and that he had nothing more to add.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting February 9, 2021

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

January 12, 2021 Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting Cancelled

Click here to view the cancellation notice

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 8, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, December 8 at 7pm via WebEx.  All members were present.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Major Subdivision – SEQRA Discussion and Public Hearing:
Property Owner and developer Paul Moore provided a brief overview of the project, which will consist of a 7 home subdivision off of Warwick Brook Road.  Moore has been a fan of the Town of Tuxedo for many years, believing it to be a sanctuary of sorts within close proximity to New York City, where he works as a contractor building facades.  His property is both secluded and close to downtown, which he likes.  He plans to build one home for himself there, and six others to sell.  The location of the 4-5 bedroom contemporary homes will be dictated by “the lay of the land” as Moore is looking to have a minimal impact on the Environment.  Existing topography, waterways and wetlands will be retained and respected and there will be little to no clear cutting involved.  The homes will not stand out, but will rather be located some distance back from Warwick Brook Road.  Existing bridal trails will be utilized and widened to create some of the driveways as well as the access the road, which will be a bit wider than Warwick Brook to allow for ample fire access.  Once building has been completed the access road will be serviced by the Town.  The homes will not have giant, flat, green lawns, rather a landscape architect has been retained to help maintain the natural environment.  
Board member Bill Freidlich inquired about the timeline for the project, specifically wondering whether the homes would be constructed one at a time or all at once. Mr. Moore responded that it was his intention to build the homes one at time and that he anticipates the impacts of the construction should be minimal on the community.
Board member Darren Maynard wondered whether or not there might be any issues with water quality stemming from the mulch pile. 
Board Engineer Sean Hoffman pointed out that the proposed project is actually located in a different watershed, further north and that he did not believe there would be any water quality issues.
Project engineer Scott Sicina added that the homes would be serviced by wells, which would help to mitigate any issues that might exist.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of awarding the project a Negative Declaration under SEQRA.
The Public hearing was then opened.
Richard Garino, a resident of Warwick Brook Road, asked for an overview of the project and was given one.  He then wanted to know whether the land would remain residentially zoned.
Board attorney Rick Golden responded that it would remain residential land unless and until the owner approached the ZBA for a zoning change at a later date. 
Board member Mike Reardon assured Mr. Garino that the Planning Board shared his concerns and they also wanted to se it remain residentially zoned. 
As there were no further comments or questions from the public, the hearing was then closed.
Mr. Golden informed that Board that as per regulations, following the closure of the public hearing, they had 62 days to make a decision on the application otherwise it would be approved by default.  The only way around this is to ask the applicant to agree to extend the approval period.  Mr. Moore readily agreed to the extension.
There followed a brief discussion with regard to the timeline for approvals as a ZBA approval will be needed before the Special Permit can be granted.

Other Business:
Board member Mike Reardon commented that as a part of  their 2021 budget, the Town Board had proposed 2% raises for all municipal Board members.  He stated that if this provision had in fact been included in the budget as adopted that he would like to forego his raise as he did not believe this was a fair burden to place on taxpayers.  Several other Planning Board members echoed these sentiments.  Board member Chris Kasker indicated that he did not want to comment on anything that he had not been formally instructed on yet.  Planning Board Chair John Banyo suggested that he would get more information on this so that they could discuss it at their January meeting.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting December 8, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 10, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, November 10 at 7pm via WebEx. 

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Rd. – Major Subdivision:
An engineer representing the applicant reported that there had been no changes to the plan since the previous meeting.  The applicant is looking to proceed with the project and was hoping the Board might have Part 2 of the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) ready so that they could move forward with a Negative Declaration under SEQR.
Fire Commissioners Gardiner Hempel and Ed Brennan were present and the Board invited them to bring forth any comments, questions, suggestions or observations they might have with regard to the proposed project.
The commissioners raised four main concerns relating to a proposed traffic bridge and it’s ability to withstand the weight of their trucks, proposed water sources given the lack of hydrants on Warwick Brook Road, the new roadways (their ownership, and width) and the individual driveways as proposed, some of which are extremely long and narrow.
These things were discussed at great length. 
Town consultants presented their comments as they pertain to the EAF.
Tree removal is a concern. 
The applicant has submitted all of the necessary information required to proceed with SEQR.  A draft EAF Part 2 has been prepared and circulated to the Board.  Together with their attorney, the Board conducted a review of the document.
The environmental impacts from the proposed project are not great.  The attorney advised that it would be appropriate for the Board to move forward and authorize a negative declaration for their next meeting.  The applicant will need to go before the Zoning Board for a variance, but they cannot do this until the SEQR process has been initiated.
Tree removal and the possible need for a tree survey were discussed.  There is a requirement under the zoning code that the Board take a conscious look at trees and which ones can be preserved per lot.  The attorney has recommended that the Board grant a modification from this requirement but require as a condition of any approval that each lot be subject to both ARB and site plan review.  Then, if shifting a driveway by 2 feet in order to save a large tree is feasible, this can be taken into consideration on a lot-by-lot basis.  This will allow the project to move forward.  Following a number of questions and clarifications, the Board agreed to this.  A motion reflecting this decision was worded by the Attorney and unanimously approved by the Board. 
Next, a motion authorizing the attorneys to draft a Negative Declaration under SEQR was made and unanimously passed.  A public hearing was scheduled for December 8, 2020.

Introductory Local Law – Sign Code Amendments:
The Board reviewed and discussed proposed amendments to the Town’s sign code as presented to them by the Town Board for comment.  The Planning Board had a number of questions about the proposed amendments ranging from the motivation behind them and lack of background/context to enforcement.  The issue of temporary signage was touched on, particularly political signs, which most Board members feel should be subject to strict time constraints.  Ultimately it was agreed that the Board’s attorney would draft a report to the Town Board indicating that the Planning Board felt there needed to be “more teeth” in the law when it came to enforcement.  Further they recommend that all political signs must be removed no later than 48 hours post election. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting November 10, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 13, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 13 2020 at 7pm via WebEx.  All members were present.

Continuation of Public Hearing – Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead – Bridge Replacement and New Dam:
The applicant’s engineer began by announcing that there had been no changes to the plan since the last hearing.  As requested they met with the Fire Commissioner in order to ensure there was adequate access to the site and that everything was in order.  The Commissioner had no issues with the plan.
Board Chair John Banyo noted that this information had been communicated to them directly from the Fire Commissioner as well. 
Neither the Town Planner nor the Board’s engineer had any comments to make.
Planning Board Attorney Rick Golden noted that he had prepared a draft resolution of approval.  Two additional conditions pertaining to the addition of a dry hydrant and confirmation that the structure could withhold the weight of a fire truck were discussed and it was agreed that these would be added to the resolution.
Board member Don Gould inquired as to the specific purpose of the dam.
The applicant responded that the purpose was to allow for the restoration of the lake in that area which, as the only body of water in the area, will provide fire protection for the residents who live there.  The lake also has historical significance to Clove Furnace.
Mr. Gould wanted to know how many homes were in the area.
The answer was at least 4, maybe more.
Next Mr. Gould inquired as to the identity of the applicant and specifically who was funding the project.
He was informed that the applicant was Arden Homestead Association, a group comprised of the property owners.
Mr. Gould wondered how many members there were.
The Applicant’s engineer did not know the answer to this query.
Chair Banyo suggested that although this information would not hold up the project, the applicant should still submit these details to the Board.
Mr. Gould commented that at the previous hearing the applicant had suggested that time was a factor in terms of curing concrete.  He noted that it had been 9 years since the previous dam had washed away and wondered why there was now a sense of urgency to get the work done before the winter.
The applicant responded that it was possible to pour concrete year round but if they did it during the winter months, there were extra steps that would be necessary due to the cold weather and that these would have some financial burden.
Mr. Gould wondered who would be responsible for maintaining the dam moving forward.
The answer was The Arden Homestead Association.
There followed a discussion with regard to the schedule of inspections.  The DEC requires an annual inspection with additional engineering inspections every 5 years. The applicant plans to inspect the dam with more regularity than is required by the DEC.
The hearing was then opened to the public.
Evelyn David expressed general dismay with the proposed project, noting that when the previous dam failed during Hurricane Irene, the water level rose by 50 feet in roughly 10 minutes.  She stressed the need for a strong, clear Emergency Action Plan, further commenting that she understood that the Association would be responsible for the dam, but she wanted to know specifically the names of the individuals making up the Association and had been unable to obtain this information.  She believes all liability for the dam should be taken away from the Town.  She does not think it makes sense to build a 16 acre lake for the sole purpose of providing a fire hydrant for 4 homes.  She would like to see a release schedule and she further suggested that releases should be scheduled 5 days prior to a big storm, utilizing the European Weather Model as a predictor.  In her view, the construction of the dam is putting everyone below it at risk. 
Chair Banyo responded that the DEC required an Emergency Action Plan and that this plan already exists. 
The applicant concurred noting that the plan outlined specific emergency protocols and procedures as well providing the necessary contact names and numbers.
Agreeing that brining water lines to protect the houses would be next to impossible without water mains, William Smith suggested that they did not need to create a huge lake to provide fire protection.  There are fire engines and tanker trucks and they would be able to draw from the Ramapo River if necessary.  The houses in the community in question are relatively small.  He does not see the point in constructing the lake when the river has been fine for the last 9 years and there have not been any problems.  The threat of a repeat of what happened during Hurricane Irene is frightening to the residents of the East Village. 
There were no more comments from the public so the hearing was then closed.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms Clearing Filling & Grading Permit Extension:
On behalf of the applicant, Henry Heffner stated that they were looking for an extension on their permit in order to complete the necessary filling operations in the East Terrace section of the development.  Following receipt of their extension last year, they were unable to complete the work before winter arrived and once Covid-19 hit, they were unable to do any work at all. 
Noting that he understood that it would be impossible to predict exactly how long things would take, Chair Banyo inquired as to whether or not Mr. Heffner had a feel for when the work might be completed.  Mr. Heffner responded that he was hoping to finish it before the winter but that certainly by mid-summer 2021 fill operations should be completed. 
Board member Bill Friedlich inquired as to whether or not the proposed would have any effect on traffic on Route 17.  The answer was no.
Board member Chris Kasker wondered what would be next after the grading & filling was complete and more specifically whether or not this work was holding up further work.  Mr. Heffner responded that it was not holding up other work.  The filling and grading is the only phase of the project that is currently open.  Completing it will enable them to work in other locations once the time comes. 

Noting that he was not overly familiar with the project as whole, Mr. Kasker commented that he had not seen a lot of progress and wondered when they could expect to see some houses built. 
Mr. Heffner said that this was a question that needed to be addressed with Andrew Dance and he did not feel that it was one that he could answer at this point in time for a grading and filling permit for a specific small section of property. 
A neighbor identified as Joe wondered when building would begin.
Mr. Heffner responded that they were in constant contact with builders in trying to make an equitable sale for the property so that building could begin.  They are in negotiations with several builders right now.
As there were no further comments from the public, the hearing was closed.

Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead – Site Plan Review:

Board engineer Sean Hoffman noted that the DEC had reviewed the applicants’ rainy day analysis and that agency had awarded the Dam a low hazard classification.
Attorney Golden then walked the Board through the draft resolution, including various conditions, which were reviewed and discussed.  Ultimately the Board voted 6-1 in favor of approving the conditional plans with Don Gould voting against. 

Tuxedo Farms – Clearing Filling and Grading Permit Extension:
Attorney Rick Golden led the Board through the draft resolution including conditions.  Following minimal discussion the resolution was unanimously approved, allowing the applicant an extension through 9/14/21.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval Extension Request:
Chair Banyo began by explaining that the approval had originally been granted in May of 2015.  There have been multiple extensions since that time.
Mr. Heffner reiterated that they were in conversations with multiple builders trying to get the project back up and running.  The talks have been “promising” and they have been making more headway recently, but he stated that he was not at liberty to provide too much information as this time as it was not his job to do so.  “A lot of people want to get out of the city and there is right now a shortage of homes available for sale and that is helping the situation,” he stated.
The applicant has received approval from the Attorney General on all the property takings and easements that will go hand-in-hand with the widening of Route 17.  There are a couple of loose ends to be tied up in the next week or so and then everything will be in place for the Department of Transportation (DOT) permit.  
Engineer Sean Hoffman provided the Board with a brief overview of the preliminary approval, which is for phase 1A of the project…a sub-phase within phase 1 of the project consisting of 3 sections: Upland Park, The Commons and West Terrace.  The special permit was originally issued in 2004 and them amended in 2007, 2008 and then again in 2010.  The application before them was originally submitted in 2014 and public hearings were held with a resolution of approval being granted in the spring of 2015.  There are 15 conditions attached to the approval.  These were listed. 
The Board debated whether or not they should extend the permit for 90 or 180 days.  Three of the Board members preferred the 90 day extension as this would require the applicant to return and provide them with a project update however, the remaining four Board members preferred the 180 day extension.  Ultimately the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a 180 day extension through 3/9/21.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Rd – Major Subdivision:
The applicant’s engineer provided the Board with a brief summary of the changes that occurred since their last meeting.  An application has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow for the residential use of the property, which is currently zoned for light industrial.  The ZBA has sent the applicant back to the Planning Board to pursue their approval first prior to issuance of the Special Use permit.
The 7-lot sketch subdivision plan that was previously presented has been converted to preliminary subdivision plan in accordance with the Town code.  A storm water pollution prevention plan has also been provided.   Because the project includes a drainage structure for Warwick Brook, the applicant has also provided a flood plain analysis, which has been submitted to the consultants for review.
Sean Hoffman and Town Planner Valerie Monastra went through their comments in detail.  Clearing and land disturbance, drainage, wetlands, endangered species, storm water management, sight distances and driveway engineering were all discussed among other items.  Ultimately the Board agreed that they were not prepared to issue a Negative Declaration under SEQRA and that they needed some more time for review.  The applicant was invited to attend an upcoming TAC meeting.  No action was taken.

back to top

Notice of Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting October 13, 2020

*This meeting will be held via WebEx. The link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting & Notice of Public Heating September 8, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met via WebEx at 7pm on Tuesday, September 8.

Public Hearing – Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead – Bridge Replacement and New Dam:
The hearing began with Board Attorney Rick Golden noting that before the Board could take any action on the application, two things still needed to occur.  First, the applicant must receive relief from the building moratorium granted by the Town Board.  Secondly, the County Planning Department must be given a full 30-days to issue any comments they might have, and this time period has not yet elapsed.  Mr. Golden advised the Board that they should listen to the public and then adjourn the hearing to a later date, at which point they would hopefully be able to take action.
Next, an engineer for the applicant provided a brief overview of the project, which consists of the reconstruction/realignment of a dam and bridge that were washed away during Hurricane Irene.  While the old dam was earthen, the new one will be constructed of concrete.  The plan is both DEC approved and in compliance with all design standards.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson and Board Engineer Sean Hoffman offered their comments.  Mr. Hoffman requested that the applicant provide more detail regarding the proposed grading and overall the levels of disturbance.
Next Board members had an opportunity to ask questions.  Discussion centered around the timeline for the project as it pertains to the applicants’ ability to move forward during the winter months, fire district access to the site and the level of water increase once the project has been completed.
The public was then given the opportunity to comment.  East Village resident Evelyn David expressed her displeasure with the project, suggesting it was “horrifying to people who live on the Ramapo River” and should not be allowed to progress.  She recounted the horror of Hurricane Irene when the dam breached, noting that while she was able to salvage her home, there were others on her street who had not been so lucky.  She referenced several conversations with DEC officials, noting that it was her understanding that unauthorized work had begun at the site.  She further suggested that the applicant needed to coordinate with the appropriate authorities and schedule timed water releases moving forward in order to avoid the swells of water that have been experienced downriver…even without storms!
Board Chair John Banyo assured Ms. David that if there was unpermitted work taking place on the site that it would be stopped by the building inspector.
William Smith noted that he also lived on the Ramapo in the East Village.  As the dam has not been in place since 2011, he wondered what the point of replacing it now was., cautioning that if replaced it could break again.  He agreed that regulated releases should be considered as a way to control stream flow.
The applicants’ engineer responded that the reason for constructing the dam was to replace the lake that was once there.  He further suggested that Hurricane Irene had been an unprecedented event and that the streams and rivers had been flooded before the dam breached.  He does not believe the situation with the dam is what caused the surge of water in the East Village.
This was somewhat hotly debated for a few minutes.
Ultimately, Mr. Golden pointed out that the current hearing was focused on the Planning Board’s authority to issue site plan approval for the project and further that it was not up to either the Planning Board or the Town of Tuxedo to decide whether or not the dam should be built or to coordinate upstream releases.
Following some further discussion, the hearing was continued to October 13, at 7pm.
Following approval of minutes, the meeting was adjourned.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting & Notice of Public Heating September 8, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda/notice.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 11, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, August 11 at 7pm via WebEx.

Orange County Historical Society Bridge Replacement/Arden Homestead Associates New Dam – Site Plan Review:
An engineer for the applicants explained that the dam and the bridge are   interrelated  and will be built together.  The reason for the bridge is to allow for an open channel flow into the culvert  This was unfortunately not the case when Hurricane Irene occurred and thus there was massive flooding in the East Village.   The 80 feet dam/bridge spans the entire creek with a 15 foot buffer area between the buffers and the property embankment.  They will not be doing any stream related work.  They have taken the approach of leveling things out from the bridge up to where the level line meets the existing road.  This serves as a berm, which DEC Dam Safety required in order to prevent any sort of flood occurrences on the Thruway.  The new dam will be solid concrete grounded in bedrock and will be 30 feet wider in order to allow the open span within the flood zone.  Everything else will be largely the same.
Following some clarifying discussion between the Board’s engineer and the Applicant’s engineer the Board voted 3-2 in favor of scheduling a Public Hearing for September 8, 2020.   They then voted unanimously in favor of having their attorney draft a resolution  of approval for that same meeting.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting August 11, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. The meeting link can be found on the Town website

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting July 14, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, July 14 at 7pm via WebEx.

Metro R. Services – Warwick Brook Road – Major Subdivision:
The Applicant and his engineer appeared before the Board to discuss revised plans for the project, which is now slated to become a 7 home subdivision.  The Applicant, Paul Moore, indicated that he had first looked at the project roughly two and a half years ago but didn’t act on it until more recently.  He has developed an affection for Tuxedo and noted that he believes it is an underappreciated gem, just fifty minutes outside of Manhattan, filled with wonderful architecture and abundant access to the great outdoors.  Further noting that he had a real love for contemporary architecture and green building, Mr. Moore stated that he wanted to construct beautiful homes that would blend into the landscape.  Referencing Frank Lloyd Wright as an inspiration, he suggested that he was looking for minimal land disturbance.  He is planning for 7, 4 bedroom, 5,000 square foot, relatively simplistic homes to be constructed one-by-one over an extended period of time.
The plans for this project were last before the Board in October of 2019 and a fair amount of progress has been made in that time.  The applicant’s engineer detailed the plan improvements, noting that both sediment control and storm water management plans were still needed.  None of the proposed homes meet the 5,000 square foot clearing requirement in the code and the applicant is seeking a waiver from this provision.
This was discussed at some length with the Board’s consultants and their attorney.  A SEQRA determination and revised Environmental Assessment Form are also needed.  Since October of 2019, both the County and the DEC have provided communication that could have an impact on the process.  The Board must examine the environmental impacts of the project and how these may affect the placement of the homes and the level of clearing on each lot.  Flood and Wetland regulations must also be examined.  It is important to finalize the placement of the houses so that they can determine the level of disturbance and thus move ahead with procuring the necessary waivers. 
Placement of the septic fields, and access roads (width and ownership) were discussed.
Board Attorney Rick Golden advised that in order to grant the code modification the applicant was seeking, the Board must determine that there was “either an unusual hardship or extraordinary difficulties because of exceptional and unique conditions of topography, access, location, shape, size, drainage or other physical features of the site.”
He suggested that the Board needed to understand how much clearing was being proposed and then decide whether they believed that because of exceptionally unique conditions of topography on the site that there was either unusual hardship or extraordinary difficulties that would enable them to consider the modification.  He further suggested that they might want to take some time to explore and consider all of this.
Board Chair John Banyo noted that there was still quite a lot to be done.  The SEQRA process must be initiated and a public hearing scheduled.  A revised EAF must be developed.  The ZBA will also need to schedule a public hearing.  He wondered whether or not the Board could add a not to exceed number as a condition to the waiver when and if they decided to grant it.
The answer was yes.  Again, Mr. Golden cautioned that the Board really needed to understand the limits of disturbance and the exact calculations for disturbance on each lot.  Then they could look at the code and determine whether the requested waiver would apply to all the lots or only some of them. 
Following some further discussion, the Board voted in favor of declaring themselves as Lead Agency for the SEQRA process.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting July 14, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. Dial-In istructions are included on the agenda.

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 9, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met on Tuesday, June 9 at 7pm via WebEx.

Tuxedo Hudson Co. - Removal of Previously Imposed Conditions:
The Town of Tuxedo has recently passed an amendment to their zoning code which allows for businesses within the Hamlet to apply for waivers from parking regulations.  As a result, the applicant applied for and received such a waiver.   The amount of operational retail space permitted is directly tied to the amount of parking.  Prior to the zoning amendment and their subsequent waiver, the applicant had requested permission to add parking on the old Junction property, which would in turn allow them to open more space in the IGA building.  Now that they have the waiver, these additional spots are not necessary and they can, in fact, open more retail space in the building.  The applicant presented the Board with a revised site plan reflecting these changes.
There was some discussion with regard to landscaping and the number of proposed plantings.  The need for a public hearing was waived after which the Board voted in favor of approving the proposed amendments, subject to the applicable conditions that went along with the initial approval.  Citing serious concerns with regard to public safety, Board member Mike Reardon voted against the approval. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting June 9, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. Dial-In istructions are included on the agenda.

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting May 12, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, May 12 via WebEx.  All members were present.

Public Hearing – Augusta Properties – 192 Route 17 – Site Plan/Architectural Review:

As there were no comments from the public, the hearing was closed.

Augusta Properties – 192-194 Route 17 - Site Plan/Architectural Review:

Board Chair John Banyo announced that the Board was in receipt of a letter from the Building Inspector granting a waiver for the pre-existing shed/storage structure on the property as discussed that the previous meeting.   The application has also received relief from the current moratorium. 

An architectural review of the application commenced with discussion centering around material and paint colors.  The Board voted unanimously in favor granting the application architectural approval.   The applicant will now proceed to the Zoning Board of Appeals to seek the necessary variances before returning the Planning Board for sire plan review.  

The Planning Board then voted unanimously in favor of  having the attorney draft a resolution of approval as well as scheduling a special meeting on Tuesday, May 26 at 8pm (following the ZBA meeting) for final review.

Following a brief discussion with regard to the newly adopted parking regulations in the Hamlet, the meeting was adjourned.  

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting May 12, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. Dial-In istructions are included on the agenda.

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 14, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board met virtually on Tuesday, April 14 2020.   All members were present.

Public Hearing – Augusta Properties – 192 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
At the request of Board Chair John Banyo, Scott Lesko provided the public with a brief overview of the proposed project.  Mr. Lesko’s family has owned the two buildings located at 192 Route 17 as well as the Tuxedo Mercantile building since 1968.  Since 1999, Mr. Lesko has been working diligently to make upgrades and improvements to the properties, starting with the Mercantile Building and now moving on to the Orange Top.  Noting that there had not been a plethora of changes made to the diner since it had been originally converted from a walk-up style burger stand in the late 60s, Mr. Lesko outlined the 5 significant changes that are now proposed as follows:

1. A small addition will be added off the back of the smaller building to the left of the diner in order to make it a more useful space for the community.  No changes will be made to the front façade of the building and the architecture will remain entirely intact there.
2. Small elevation changes will be made to the front of the diner to allow for the addition of an entry vestibule.
3. The color of the roof on the diner will be changed from orange to black, which will give the buildings a more harmonious appearance.
4. A walk-in cooler will be installed off the back of the diner, which will provide more space and allow the business to expand/upgrade their menu if they so desire. 
5. A patio with outdoor seating will be constructed between the two buildings, which will allow for outdoor seating during the warmer months.

Chair Banyo next called upon Town Planner Valerie Monastra for comments. 
Ms. Monastra noted that a zoning variance would be required.  She further noted that the applicant would have to specify how many seats there would be in the outdoor dining area and that this would have to be integrated into the parking configuration.  She recommended that the applicant communicate with the railroad as soon as possible suggesting that the walk-in freezer might encroach on their property.  The applicant must show the number and types of proposed plantings clearly on the plan and must also confirm that the proposed fence complies with code requirements.  Finally, specific details pertaining to some of the project materials must be provided.
Town Engineer Sean Hoffman reported that the applicant had recently come before the TAC and that during that meeting there was a discussion regarding an outdoor storage area located on the south side of the property.  As per the applicant the area provides for outdoor storage of construction equipment and it was a part of the property when it was originally purchased back in 1968.  The engineers have since done some research and discovered that the Town Zoning Code, which was adopted in 1975, allowed property owners a 3-year grace period after which such outdoor storage spaces were to be terminated.  Therefore, lacking an amendment to the Town Code, a variance or a determination from the Building Inspector, Mr. Hoffman stated that he did not believe it is a legally pre-existing non-conforming use as originally proposed.  With regard to parking and circulation, the applicant has submitted two plans, the first of which shows a pavement encroachment on the railroads’ property.  The engineer suggested that the applicant create a second, backup plan in the event that the railroad would not allow for the encroachment.  The Planning Board will be asked to consider both plans for approval.  Additionally, the applicant has indicated that the existing diner has 70 seats, but the graphic that was submitted as part of the plan shows 24 additional seats for a total of 94.  The calculations utilized in the table indicate 90 seats and the plan is acceptable for this number. 
Mr. Lesko responded that the seating represented on the plan was more of a visual and that there would be parking for 90 seats.  He further expressed concern regarding the zoning issue with the outdoor storage space, indicating that this could be “a huge problem” with the project and could cause the withdrawal of the application if the space could not continue to be used as it had been since the late 60s.  He suggested that he would be contacting his attorney to discuss it.
This issue was then discussed at some length.  Many of the Board members commented that while they supported the project and felt the upgrades were wonderful, they had some concern with the idea of knowingly allowing non-compliance to continue and felt it should be worked out.   Although not on the call, Building Inspector Dave Maikisch weighed in via text, stating that he had looked at the space in question and subsequently issued a letter indicating that he believed it to be a legally pre-existing non-conforming use and that it should be allowed to continue.
Both the Building Clerk Deborah Villanueva and the Board Attorney Kelly Naughton commented that Mr. Maikisch’s letter no longer applied as the area in question was in the zone they thought it was when was written.   Ms. Villaneuva indicated that she would obtain another letter specifically addressing the storage area.
The public was then asked for comment.
Town Board member Michele Lindsay indicated that on the previous evening the Town Board had adopted a change to the zoning code, which exempts all existing commercial properties in the Hamlet from the formulas imposed upon them for the number of parking spaces required. 
This news was met with some frustration from several members of the Planning Board who indicated that at the request of the Town Board they had publicly discussed the proposed changes at their previous meeting and subsequently voiced multiple concerns with it in the form of a letter from their attorney.  They wanted to know if this letter had been received and considered by the Town Board. 
Mrs. Lindsay indicated that it had.
Several Planning Board members wanted to know why some of their questions/concerns had not been taken into consideration, suggesting that the time and effort they had put in was essentially meaningless.  Planning Board Member Mike Reardon demanded to know how many of the Planning Board’s suggestions had been incorporated into the law.  “What about the balance of the Town?” inquired Board member Darren Maynard. 
“We absolutely considered everything that you sent,” stated Mrs. Lindsay.
“How many did you put into the law?” inquired Mr. Reardon.
“I don’t recall at the moment….no I don’t recall,” responded Mrs. Lindsay.
“Why aren’t the businesses to the north included in this?  Why is it limited to the Hamlet District?” asked Mr. Maynard.
At this point, Board attorney Kelly Naughton stepped in, reminding the Board that they were in the midst of a public hearing for Augusta Properties and they should keep their focus on that application.  She further indicated that she would obtain the final version of the newly adopted law from the Town Attorney and pass it along to the Planning Board so they could review.
Mrs. Lindsay next commented that the Town Board had been focused on removing obstacles in the zoning code that make it difficult for businesses to expand.  To this end, they have scheduled several zoning code review meetings and they would be taking “all these obstacles into consideration…as the comment was made north and south of the Hamlet District….that will be taken care of.”
As there were no further comments from the public, the hearing was then closed and the regular meeting opened.

Augusta Properties - 192 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Ms. Naughton noted that although the application requires a zoning variance, the ZBA would not be able to make a determination or take any final action until the Architectural Review Board had taken action. 
This was followed by a discussion focused on the architectural aspects of the plan.
Ms. Monastra suggested that more information was needed with regard to materials and color choices.
Mr. Lesko responded that he had not been made aware that there would be an ARB that evening, so he was not entirely prepared, but, that being said, he was able to provide some detail with regard to both the proposed materials and color scheme.
Commenting on the front elevation of the diner, Mr. Hoffman noted that the existing dormers were not shown on the plans and wondered if the intent was to remove them.
The answer was yes. The dormers will be removed.
Outdoor seating and landscaping were also discussed.  The Board is looking for more detail with regard to the landscaping.  In general, the Board members were all very supportive of the project, however Ms. Naughton indicated that because the project was submitted as a whole to the County and it had not yet been 30 days, the they were not in a position to approve the ARB portion of the project that evening.  It was agreed that a special meeting would be scheduled for April 28 at 6:30 pm, just ahead of the ZBA meeting, in order to issue the ARB approval.

Following some further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting April 14, 2020

This meeting will be held via Webex. Dial-In istructions are included on the agenda.

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Special Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 24, 2020

The Town Planning/Architectural Review Board held a special, virtual meeting via WebEx on Tuesday March 24, 2020.  All members were present.

Since their last meeting, the membership of this Board has been both changed and revised.  The new make-up is as follows:
John Banyo – Board Chair
William Friedlich
Michael Reardon
Deirdre Murphy 
Darren Maynard
Chris Kasker
Donald Gould

Steve’s Pizza Parking - Approval:
Revised plans for the addition of a parking area at Steve’s Pizza were reviewed and discussed.  Notable changes include landscaping and curbing modifications.  There were some technicalities involved in approving the revised plan due to the timing of its submission.  Ultimately, it was agreed that the approval resolution would include language noting that the revisions as reflected in the new plan would be a condition of the approval. 
The Board then acknowledged resident Mae Shore, who indicated that she had written a letter to the Board suggesting that the addition of 21 parking spaces was quite substantial and that she was opposed to the chopping down of the white pines on the south side of the lot. 
Chair Banyo responded that the Board had taken a look at the trees and that although they were very large, they were not considered specimen trees.  Additionally, the foliage is up quite high and therefore they do not provide screening for anything behind the tracks.  There were no additional comments from the Board or the applicant on this matter.
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of approving the plan, conditional upon the changes noted on the most recently submitted plan. 

Tuxedo Hudson Co. – Revised Site Plan:
Representatives of Tuxedo Hudson Co. indicated that they had forwarded along plans for replacement of doors and windows at 215 Route 17.  Additionally, they are seeking final approval for utilization of parking spaces in the old Junction parking lot, which would allow them to open space on the entirety of the first floor of the building. 
Board Engineer Sean Hoffman clarified that the additional spaces would not allow them to open the entirety of the first floor, but rather 4.800 square feet of it.  There will remain a portion of the floor that will not be opened. 
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of approving a resolution, which allows for both the replacement of windows and doors as well as the addition of parking spaces are requested.

Augusta Properties – 192 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Representing Augusta Properties, president Scott Lesko presented plans for the proposed project at 192 Route 17, at which the Orange Top Diner is located.  The proposal includes two buildings both 192 (Orange Top) and 194 (former real estate office) on the site.  The scope includes a small addition on the real estate office building as well as a small addition to the Orange Top in the form of a vestibule entrance in addition to a walk-in cooler at the back of the building.  Outside seating will also be added between the two structures. 
The Town Consultant inquired as to whether or not the applicant had received a waiver to the moratorium from the Town Board.
The answer was yes.
In terms of housekeeping, she next noted that the application had formerly been before the Board in 2010 and that they would need to make sure that the previous application was withdrawn before they could proceed with this one. 
Finally, she commented that a zoning variance would be required in terms of coverage and that the proposed expansions were encroaching into the rear yard setback.  Although the rear yard setback is currently zero, the proposed buildings would increase the degree of non-compliance with the zoning code. She further advised that she believed it would be advantageous for the applicant to notify the railroad that the proposed project would go right up to the property line. 
ARB review will also be required.
Engineer Sean Hoffman noted that some of the parking indicated on the plan was showing to be on the railroad’s property.  He advised that applicant demonstrate that they would not need this parking in order to satisfy requirements. Further there is a drive aisle indicated on the plan that encroaches onto Railroad property.  This will need to be addressed by the applicant if they plan to maintain it as a drive aisle.
Board Attorney Kelly Naughton noted that the Building Inspector had circulated a letter indicating that the proposed use was not permitted in the current zone but he found that the use could continue and that the application did not represent an expansion of that use.  She further indicated that a public hearing would be at the discretion of the Planning Board.  The application also requires GML referral and it was referred to the County Planning Department the day previous. 
Board member Don Gould inquired as to whether there would be any changes or improvements made to the exterior of the building. 
Mr. Lesko responded that the orange roof would be replaced to match the materials used on the building next door.  They expect to change the windows as well on both buildings.  Additional siding will also be added with the additions.  An updated plan was submitted earlier in the day to include some of these details, but the Board has not yet seen it.
Following some discussion, it was determined that the majority of the Planning Board feels that there should be a public hearing. 
The applicant was also encouraged to attend the next TAC meeting.
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of scheduling a public hearing for April 14 as well as declaring the application a Type 2 action under SEQR.
Board member Bill Friedlich inquired as to whether the nature of the restaurant would be changing.
Mr. Lesko responded that at the current time he had no plans for changing the tenant out and that ultimately it would be the tenants decision as to whether or not they wanted to stay on.  He noted that he had made a recommendation with regard to the name, suggesting that it might be time for a change.  He personally likes “Tuxedo Café,” however any changes related to the business would be up to the tenant. 

New Accessory Parking Law – Review/Report to Town Board:
The Planning Board discussed a recent law proposed by the Town Board pertaining to accessory parking in the Hamlet Business District.  The purpose appears to be that the Town Board wanted the parking stalls that are required in this district to be slightly smaller likely because the properties are smaller and in that type of area more parking can be fit in.
Board Attorney Kelly Naughton suggested that some clarification is needed as the way that it is worded is both unclear and overbroad.  She understands what the Town Board is looking to do but believes it needs to be written clearer.  Currently it is unclear as to whether or not what is written will repeal the current law and it does not indicate which sections of the code will be repealed. 
Chair Banyo added that the proposed law did not remove the reference to exiting a parking lot within 75 feet of an intersection.  He feels this is another thing that should be more explicitly stated in the law.
Bill Friedlich suggested that there were all different sizes of cars and that it might be practical to maintain some of the larger stalls for SUVs and pick-up trucks.
Chris Kasker inquired as to whether or not anyone knew the history as to why the code called for 10 x 20 spaces to begin with.
Sean Hoffman responded that he did not know.  They had spent some time looking at this a year prior as a part of the zoning code amendments and at that time the recommendation of the planning board had been 15x9. 
Board member Darren Maynard noted that the law seemed to be geared mainly towards one property.  He wondered who had instituted the change.    He referenced the preliminary conceptual plan that the Town Board had brought forth earlier in the year for parking around the island behind the IGA building and wondered whether or not the law they were now considering would have any bearing on that.
Bill Friedlich wondered whether or not the Planning Board could punt things back to the Town Board noting that they felt what had been proposed was inconsistent and not well written. 
Mr. Maynard agreed with that, commenting it made a lot of sense to him.  He further commented that if it were an individual property with a business owner who was looking to put a few more clients in there, he was all for it.  If they were going to be changing the parking structure on private streets and taking parking away from the residents that live there however, he could not condone it.
Board member Mike Reardon noted that the proposed law only applied to one zone in the town and in his view selective zoning was a terrible idea for towns.  If they are looking to change the size of parking stalls, a town-wide change should be made.    As written, businesses such as Dottie Audrey’s would not be able to take advantage of the benefits and would have to go through a zoning variance in order to obtain the smaller stalls.  “If you’re going to make it available, make it available for everybody.  That’s the only way you are going to grow the town.”
Following some further discussion it was determined that Ms. Naughton would draft a report to the Town Board representing the Planning Board’s collective thoughts.
A motion was made and unanimously passed authorizing this determination. 

back to top

Agenda For Special Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 24, 2020

*This meeting will be held via WebEx. All interested parties should dial in as follows: 1-650-215-5526 Access Code - 141 003 705

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning / Architectural Review Board Meeting March 10, 2020

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting February 11, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, February 11 at 7pm.  All members were present. 

Steve Germano – Route 17 – Site Plan Approval:
Mr. Germano appeared before the Board with revised plans for the proposed parking lot adjacent to his restaurant, STEVE’S, which is located on Route 17 N. at the south end of Town.  Noting that everything had been removed from the D.O.T. right-of-way, Town Engineer, Sean Hoffman, ran through a number of items including paving & curbing, landscaping, lighting and drainage.  As proposed, the application will require a setback variance from the ZBA to allow for 5 feet of the asphalt, which by code must be 15 feet back from the street line.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson addressed the proposed removal of roughly 9 large trees, including several large white pines, which she described as “the gateway to the Hamlet” when coming into Town from the south.  She recognized that the removal of these trees cannot be avoided in accordance with the plan, but wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of what would be happening as there will likely be questions and possibly some concern from community members when they come down.
Board member Darren Maynard commented that the plan is to put a parking lot there, and so naturally the Board members understood that the trees would be removed.
Board member John Ruel concurred, but added that it was important that Mr. Germano detail exactly what he was planning to do on the project plans so that everyone would be on the same page and they would not need to have any additional meetings down the line.
There followed a brief discussion regarding replacement plantings and landscaping.
Ultimately, it was determined that Mr. Germano would need to make several small changes/updates to the plan as well as obtain a variance from the ZBA before the Planning Board could approve the application.  In anticipation of approval at their March meeting, the Planning Board directed their attorney to prepare a resolution.

Tuxedo Hudson Co. – Revised Site Plan – Parking – 215 Route 17:
The applicant presented the Planning Board with plans to make use of 8 parking spots located on the Junction property to service the antique and bookstore, which recently opened in the old IGA building.  Currently, according to the Town’s zoning code, the amount of usable retail space in a building is directly tied to the number of parking spaces servicing that space.  Based on the 16 existing spots, THC was able to open 3,200 square feet of retail space on the first floor of the building.  The additional 8 spots will increase the usable space by 1,600 square feet, bringing the total to 4,800, and allow them to add a storage area. 
Town Engineer Sean Hoffman indicated three items that must be addressed prior to approval.  The first had to do with the ownership of the two properties, as there are different names on the deeds.  The applicant assured the Planning board that this item could be easily addressed as the properties are, in fact, owned by the same individual. 
The second item had to do with a possible deed restriction in that once the parking spots have been dedicated for a specific purpose, they cannot be repurposed at a later date.  This prompted a very brief discussion with regard to any future plans on the Junction property.  Finally, Mr. Hoffman indicated that the applicant would need to check with the Fire Department regarding their accessibility to the structure located directly behind the lot, which is the Tuxedo Historical Society.
Following this discussion, there was a conversation about proposed lighting for the back of the new store as well as plans for new doors and windows on the front. The doors and windows were apparently part of an earlier plan that was approved and later withdrawn.  Ultimately, It was agreed that the applicant would provide the Planning Board with an electronic rendering of what has been proposed so that they could discus it at their next meeting.  In the meantime, after labeling the action TYPE 2 under SEQR, the Planning Board instructed their attorney to draft a resolution of approval in preparation for their next meeting. 

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting February 11, 2020

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting January 14, 2020

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, January 14 at 7pm.  Board member John Ruel was absent.

Steve Germano – Route 17 – Site Plan Approval:
Mr. Germano presented the Board with revised plans for a parking lot adjacent to his restaurant, STEVE’S, located on Route 17 North at the Southern end of downtown.  As previously presented, Mr. Germano has acquired the neighboring lot to the south and is planning to merge the lots, clear the new section and construct a parking lot.
Revisions to the plan include the removal of a previously proposed garage.
Board Attorney Kelly Naughton noted that the Town Code requires a 15-foot setback from the street line in the front of the property and a 4-foot setback from the property line in the rear.
This was discussed at some length. 
As presented, the plans call for landscaping, specifically installation of both a privet hedge and fence, along Route 17 within the State right-of-way.  Board Engineer Sean Hoffman noted that before the Chairman could sign-off on the plans, Mr. Germano would have to obtain a permit from the D.O.T. for this portion of the work.  He further suggested that it was not likely that the D.O.T. would allow for a fence in that area.  Absent of a permit, the applicant must obtain a letter from the D.O.T. acknowledging the plan and granting permission for the applicant to proceed.
As presented, the plans also include a sidewalk along the landscaped area, but Mr. Germano informed the Board that he has decided not to construct it.  The Board advised him that he would need to revise the plans to reflect this change as well as to bring them into compliance with setback regulations as outlined by Ms. Naughton and resubmit them.
Mr. Germano expressed frustration with the delays he has faced with the project thus far, noting that he had hired a professional and submitted plans as required….and that he had hoped the process would be relatively easy and the project welcomed.
Board member Daren Maynard responded that nobody was actively trying to prevent the project from moving forward.  On the contrary, they would all like to see it take shape, but before that can happen, the plans must be brought into compliance with the code.
It was suggested that Mr. Germano have his designer/architect attend the TAC meeting on January 28, where he could communicate directly with the Town Consultants in order to ensure everything was in order.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency and assigning the application a Negative Declaration under SEQR.

New Business:
Reminding the Board that, by law, they must all complete 4 hours of training each year, Board Chair Mike Reardon announced that there would be a training session in Haverstraw on January 29 from 7-9pm for those who were interested.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting January 14, 2020

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting November 12, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, November 12 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Steve Germano – Route 17 – Site Plan Approval:
Mr. Germano has recently purchased the property directly adjacent to his restaurant on the south side.  He appeared before the Board with plans to expand the current parking lot, adding 13 spaces, and construct a garage to house landscaping equipment.  The conceptual site plan was reviewed and discussed.  Required width of parking stalls, landscaping plans, drainage and relocation of an O & R utility poll were some of the elements touched upon.  Because of the current moratorium on development in the Town, the application requires that the Town Board grant the applicant either relief or an exception before the Planning Board can take any action.  As the Town Board was meeting concurrently, Board Chair Mike Reardon suggested that the Building Inspector accompany the applicant downstairs to that meeting in an attempt to secure one of these options.  While the pair were downstairs, the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of labeling the application an Unlisted Action under SEQR, which means there will need to be a coordinated review at the County level.  They also declared their intent to be Lead Agency.  Not long after Mr. Germano returned to the meeting, announcing that the Town Board had granted him relief from the moratorium.  It was agreed that Mr. Germano would “clean up” and update his preliminary site plan, after which it would be immediately submitted to the County for review.

Other Business:
TE Automotive- Route 17 – Southfields:
The owner of TE Automotive, located just north of the Valero station on Route 17 in Southfields, was present to discuss renting the building to a new tenant.  The previous tenant vacated the property in August of 2018 and for a variety of reasons the Town has not allowed the owner to re-rent it since that time.  The owner explained that she had recently invested in cleaning up the property with landscaping and that she was now hopeful to rent it to a new auto body business. The potential tenants, two gentlemen from Spring Valley, were also present.  One of the gentlemen, identifying himself as Isaac, explained that they had an existing automotive business in Spring Valley, but would like to move the body shop portion of that business to the Southfields location. 
Before anything can be done, the property owner will need to submit an application and pay the associated fees.  There was a somewhat lengthy discussion as to whether a new site plan was required.  The Building Inspector believes that the old plan expired after 18 months and that a new one must be submitted, however Town Planner Bonnie Franson suggested that this might not be the case as no changes were being proposed to the property and the intended use was to be the same.  It was agreed that the Building Inspector would look into this and follow up with the prospective applicant ASAP in order that they might know how to proceed.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting November 12, 2019

Click here to view the agenda.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting October 8, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 8 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Tuxedo Hudson Company – Site Plan Approval:
Representatives for the applicant including their attorney, project engineer and project manager greeted the Board commenting that they were pleased to be there and happy to see things finally moving forward with the old IGA Building. 
Prior to turning things over to the consultants for comments, Chair Reardon noted that the Planning Board was also pleased to see things moving forward, further commenting for the record that they had not been responsible for any delays with the project.
The attorney for the Planning Board then proceeded to read into the record the conditions for project approval, of which there were 8. 
There followed a discussion with regard to the conditions, which requires the applicant to close off access from the front of the building to hospital road.  The applicant will be installing a combination of bollards and planters for this purpose.  The Town code does not allow for driveway access with 75 feet of the Route 17/Hospital Road intersection.  The issue of loading was discussed.  Board member John Ruell suggested that perhaps a swing gate could be installed between the bollards, which would allow patrons to pull up front, load in any large purchases and then easily continue along their way.  Town Engineer Sean Hoffman reported that this issue had been discussed at the TAC meeting and that loading of this nature would take place in the rear of the building.  He further suggested that if at any time in the future the applicant wished to change the traffic flow in front of the building, there were a number of options that could be explored, but any of these would require a new set of plans and subsequent review process.
Next there was a somewhat brief discussion with regard to the placement of a new trash dumpster in the front of the building.  Town Planner Bonnie Franson requested detail regarding the enclosure which would house the dumpster.  Ultimately it was agreed that this information would be provided to Ms. Franson and that her approval of it would become a condition of the overall approval, bringing the number of conditions to 9.
Prior to voting on the application, Mr. Ruell commented that a he had been at Valley Rock for dinner with friends a few weeks prior where he had been the unfortunate recipient of some disparaging comments regarding the Planning Board.  Essentially, it had been inferred that the Planning Board had been holding things up and preventing the project from moving forward.  Making sure to note that he was speaking on behalf of himself and not the Board as a whole, Mr. Ruell stated that he wanted to make it publicly known that he believed that everyone was on the same page in wanting to bring growth to the Town of Tuxedo and that he felt that these comments inferring that that the Planning Board had essentially been a stumbling block in the process were ill placed. 
Board member Darren Maynard added that everyone was working in one direction and that it was the responsibility of their Board to follow the rule of engagement and make sure the projects were completed in the correct way.  Unfortunately, misinformation has been put out into the community and it has been a disservice to the entire process. 
The applicant’s attorney apologized to Mr. Ruell, commenting that they would work to correct the situation and further noting that he had found the Planning Board to be extremely helpful in facilitating the process.
Mr. Ruell thanked the applicant’s attorney.  He then encouraged everyone to visit Valley Rock if they got the chance and “bring a big wallet” along with them, describing is as a beautiful facility.
The Planning Board then voted unanimously in favor of approving the application.

Metro R Services – Warwick Brook Road – Major Subdivision:
The applicant presented the Planning Board with preliminary plans for the project, which includes the construction of 7 homes off of Warwick Brook Road.  The plans detailed preliminary grading as well as the road and driveway layouts.  The applicant was previously before the Planning Board in July, however at that time the new zoning had not taken effect and a subdivision of this nature was not permissible in the area where it has been planned.  Since that time, the new zoning has taken effect and the applicant can now go before the ZBA and receive a Special Permit, which will allow them to move ahead with the project.  
There followed some discussion with regard to the overall project density and the dimensional requirements.  There was also a conversation with regard to the proposed “hammerhead” style turn around within the subdivision.  Water and sewer for this project will not have to go to the state as all of the homes will be on septic systems and can be managed locally. 
Bonnie Franson noted that as the applicant is seeking a Special Permit from the ZBA rather than a variance, they do not need to be officially referred to that Board and therefore can begin the process immediately.  She further noted that it would be important to start the SEQR process as soon as possible as there are many components that will need to be analyzed such as wetlands, timber rattlesnakes and endangered bats. The DEC will need to get involved and they will have to coordinate with the other agencies in order to obtain the necessary feedback.
The applicant had a question pertaining to a code restriction, which limits the amount of clearing to 5,000 square feet.  They are concerned that this might be restrictive.  Mr. Hoffman agreed that this was an unusual restriction and suggested that the Building Inspector should weigh in and clarify. 
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency and classifying the application as an Unlisted Action under SEQR.  This will allow the consultants to begin circulation of the application to the DEC and other agencies.

Chester LeBaron – Clearing Filing and Grading  - Schedule Public Hearing:
The applicant appeared before the Board to discuss a pile of fill located on their property.  The applicant recently inherited the property and does not know where the fill came from or exactly how long it has been there.  This is an unplanned project, however they are willing to do what is necessary to move it forward.  Mr. Hoffman explained that the unauthorized fill had been placed on the property by a former owner and that the Building Inspector had recently issued a violation, giving the current owner until December 10 to have it removed.  There followed a discussion as to whether or not the fill was contaminated and it was agreed that the applicant would need to hire an engineer and move forward with having the fill tested.  This should be done prior to setting a public hearing.  The applicant inquires as to whether or not he could avoid these requirements if he were able to ascertain where the fill had come from and prove that it had been tested and was not contaminated. 
It was agreed that the applicant should hire an engineer and attempt to gather as much information as possible by the next Planning Board meeting on November 12. 
Board member John Banyo suggested that if the applicant was showing an active effort to remediate the issue that the Building Inspector might willingly extend the deadline for removal.
Board Chair Mike Reardon responded that this might be possible, but it was not within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board to say so. 
Board member Chris Kasker wondered what the other options might be, noting that removing the fill would likely be problematic in and of itself. 
Board Clerk Deborah Villaneuva suggested that generally speaking, if progress was being made, the Building Inspector was likely to grant an extension.
It was reiterated that the applicant would return on November 12 to assess their progress with the Board. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting October 8, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting September 10, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 10 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Tuxedo Hudson Company – Site Plan Approval:
Board Chairman Mike Reardon opened the discussion by stating that the Planning Board was happy to receive the application and that, despite local rumors to the contrary, they would love to help the applicant successfully do something with the space. 
Cathy Morris, representative for the applicant, thanked the Chairman.  She further provided a brief overview of the project before them, which entails creating an antique warehouse store on a large portion of the ground floor in the old IGA building.  She further noted that it was their hope to eventually expand to bring in both a market and eatery, but that they would be returning to the Board with those plans in the future.
As the Engineer for Tuxedo Hudson Company was not present, Planning Board consultants reviewed their memos and comments with Ms. Morris.
 The discussion centered largely on the circulation of traffic and parking, specifically ingress and egress from the parking lots as well as the number and size of parking stalls.  Additionally, the applicant will need approval from the ARB for various components of the design.  Board attorney Rick Golden pointed out that the recently adopted code amendment consolidating the duties of the ARB and the Planning Board had not yet been filed with the State and that under the current code, the applicant was required to appear before a Board which no longer exists.  Dealing with this type of scenario can be complicated and he further advised that the best solution would be to file the code amendment soon as possible as it will take effect immediately upon being filed.  Additionally, the application will require GML approval from the County.  This can take up to 30 days.  It was advised that the revised application be submitted ASAP and further that the Planning Board Secretary call the County in an attempt to expedite the process.
The applicant will come back before the Planning Board in hopes of site plan approval on October 8.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting September 10, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting August 13, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, August 13 at 7pm.  Board Chair Michael Reardon was absent.  The meeting was lead by Deputy Chair Darren Maynard.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – East Terrace Clearing Filling & Grading Permit Extension: 
Engineer Sean Hoffman briefly recapped the original approval, which was granted in September of 2018, allowing the applicant to relocate their grading operations to the East Terrace section of the development.  Representing the Applicant, Contractor Henry Heffner explained that they had gotten a late start last fall and that only 42K yards of the unrestricted, residential fill had been brought in to date.  They are currently working with 4 or 5 vendors to bring in the rest of the fill.   Fill Analysis are available upon request.
There were no comments from the public and so the hearing was promptly closed.

Tuxedo Farms – East Terrace Filling & Grading Permit Extension:
Following a somewhat brief discussion, centering around the areas from which the fill was being brought in and the truck routes through the development, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the requesting extension, which is valid through September, 2020.

Echo Lake Dam/Arden Bridge – Lead Agency Determination:
Eric Holt, design engineer for the Applicant, provided the Board with an overview of the project, which consists of rebuilding the Echo Lake dam, which failed during Hurricane Irene in 2011, as well as replacing the Arden Bridge.  The new dam will be a 100% concrete, gravity dam constructed in the exact same spot as the old one.  It has been through the DEC design process.  The new bridge will replace the existing one, which proved to be problematic after the dam failed in 2011 because debris got backed up there, causing detrimental flooding on the Throughway.  It will be five feet higher than the old one was.  Once approved, constructed is expected to take roughly 3 months after which they anticipate that it will take 5 months for the lake to refill. 
Board member John Ruel inquired about the level of flow to the brook bellow the dam, further commenting that he enjoyed trout fishing in that area and that both flow levels and water temps would be important to ensuring the existence of trout in that area.  He was assured that the levels of flow would be maintained both during and after construction. 
Noting that there had been a great deal of damage in both Tuxedo and Sloatsburg as a result of the dam failure, Mr. Maynard wondered about flood mitigation plans and more specifically what would be done to ensure that the dam did not fail again.  Mr. Holt responded that the damage in both Tuxedo and Sloatsburg had been caused by issues with the Ramapo River and not by the failure of the dam.  This took the Board by some surprise. 
Following some further discussion, it was determined that the Planning Board would defer to the DEC as Lead Agency for this project.  As part of the process, the Board will be asked to identify any concerns that they might have with the project as proposed and it was further agreed that the potential trout issues as addressed by Mr. Ruel would be mentioned.  Additionally, the Planning Board would like for the Thruway Authority to be involved as an interested Agency.
Board Attorney Rick Golden then provided a brief timeline for the project as follows:
The application will go through the SEQR process after which they will seek the necessary permits from outside agencies.  A site plan will be brought before the Planning Board for their approval and after this has been granted, the Building Inspector will determine what, if any, permits will be required.

Other Business:
Representing the School Board, Meg Vaught formally introduced the Board to Tim Bohlke, the newly appointed Superintendent of Schools/High School Principal.  Mr. Bohlke commented that he was thrilled to be in Tuxedo and enthusiastic about all the changes that would be coming down the pike for the school.  He further informed the Board that he had already spoken to Henry Heffner of Tuxedo Farms and arranged a meeting.  Mr. Bohlke has a background in both construction and residential real estate and feels that the school and the developer can work together to bring success to the Town of Tuxedo.  Commenting that he felt the school district and the Planning Board should work together, he informed the Board that the District was in the process of applying for a Universal Pre-K grant which, if awarded, will allow them to create a full day Pre-K program as early as January of 2020.  Mr. Bohlke believes that such a program will be a selling point for young families looking to move to Tuxedo.  He further commented that while he understood the demands of the current market, he was hopeful that the Planning Board would look to approve move 2 and 3 bedroom homes as opposed to 1 bed-room apartments and age-restricted Senior housing as these kinds of development will not help the school to grow.  Finally, he informed that Board that he would soon be a resident of Tuxedo himself, and was expecting to close on a home in the Woodlands in the very near future.
Mr. Maynard responded that nothing would make him happier than to see the school rebound from the tough times it has been facing over the past several years and thrive again.  He further commented that the school has been a divisive issue in the community and that most folks have strong opinions about it.  While the road ahead will likely not be an easy one, he said he felt he spoke for many of the individuals in the room and on the Board when he said that he wished the school a lot of success and he believed that as things started to change, they would find a great deal of support in the community and he sincerely hopes that more people will get behind the movement rather than in front of it. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting August 13, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting July 9, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at  7pm.  Board member Darren Maynard was absent. 

New Business:
Board Chair Mike Reardon suggested that moving forward, he believed that the ARB should review every new home built in Town.
The Board attorney agreed to research this and provide the necessary information as to how to move forward.
Next, Chair Reardon requested information as to how municipalities in the surrounding area handle as-built permits.  This information can then be passed on to the Building Inspector, who can relay it to the Town Board.   Recently there has been some discussion of these permits at the Town Board level as there have been a number of instances where during pre-sale home inspections, completed unpermitted work has been discovered.  Mr. Reardon feels it might be helpful to explore what other municipalities are doing to combat this as they determine how to move forward in Tuxedo.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson agreed to check with Monroe to see how they are handling these situations, while Engineer Sean Hoffman commented that he would also check with clients.  Again, the attorney agreed to look into it and provide any pertinent legal information to the Board.
Chair Reardon then asked Ms. Franson for an update on the proposed zoning updates.
He was informed that the draft is complete and the maps are done.  There is some ongoing discussion with the Supervisor pertaining to food trucks, which must be settled.  Additionally, a proposal for updated cell tower regulations has been submitted and Ms. Franson is working with the Supervisor and the Town Board to get these in place so that they can complete the updates to the zoning code.
Board member John Ruell inquired about the project that is taking place in the IGA parking lot, noting that the Planning Board had neither seen a site plan nor granted approval for the changes.  Large chunks of pavement have been removed, dirt brought in and both a mature tree and a row of bushes have been planted in the middle of what was once a parking lot.  In his view, this connotes more than a simple landscaping change.  Because the project is located right along route 17 and is highly visible, he is concerned with the idea that it could set precedent and wondered how the Planning Board should proceed. 
Mr. Hoffman explained that it would be up to the code enforcement officer/Building Inspector to review the site and determine whether or not unpermitted work was occurring there.  Ultimately, zoning enforcement is at the Building Inspector’s discretion.   Whether or not site plan approval is required ultimately depends on the scope of the project and how it effects elements such as drainage etc..
Board clerk Deborah Villanova confirmed that the property owner had received landscaping permits.
Mr. Ruell asserted that the work that was taking place on the site was much more than basic landscaping as large chunks of pavement had been removed and soil brought in.  The line of sight has been changed.  He further expressed concern that parking, or lack there of, had been an ongoing issue with this particular property and now several spaces have been eliminated to allow for the landscaping changes, which he referred to as “a tree park.”  He reiterated his concern about precedent, suggesting that what is allowed for one person must be allowed for everyone and he questioned whether or not the Town would be comfortable with any or all of the other businesses along Route 17 initiating projects of this nature.
After some further discussion it was agreed that Mr. Hoffman would reach out to the Building Inspector and collect some more information.  The information would then be shared with Board via email. 

Homeland Towers/T-Mobil:
The applicant’s attorney presented the Board with a project update.  Since the previous meeting, the applicant met with Orange and Rockland and it was determined that a variance would be necessary in order to use the existing utility polls.  Therefore, the applicant has revised their plan to bring all the utilities underground.  As requested by the Town’s Cell Tower Consultant, HDR, they have also filed with FAA and expect a decision no later than July 1.  They have responded in full to the consultant’s memo.  Specs for the generator will be provided as requested.  Typically, space is reserved on the top of the Tower for the Town’s emergency services, and that is what is being proposed with this application as well.  What remains to be decided is whether or not the Town would like to go with a moda pole or tree design.  This was discussed at some length.  Ultimately the Board decided upon the moda pole design.  Next, possible coloration of the pole was discussed.  It was agreed that a galvanized metal would be best for a variety of reasons.  There followed a somewhat lengthy discussion regarding the location of the tower as it pertains to possible use of chairlifts on the property in the future.  As proposed, the moda pole design does not interfere with the existing lifts however, some of the utilities will be located in the lift’s pathway.  It was agreed that the applicant would ask the property owner to indicate in writing that they have no intention of reactivating the chairlift in question.   
Part two of the Environmental Assessment Form was reviewed.  Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of authorizing the attorney to draft a negative declaration under SEQRA and preparing a draft resolution of approval for their July 9 meeting. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting May 14, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, May 14 at 7pm.

Joint Public Hearing Before The Planning Board & Town Board – Homeland Towers/T-Mobile – Site Plan Review – Proposed Cell Tower:
A lawyer representing the applicant explained that the reason for the joint hearing was that approval was needed from both Boards in the form of a special Permit from the Town Board and site plan approval from the Planning Board, who are acting as Lead Agency on the project.  The applicant has already appeared before the Planning Board on two occasions and has also been before the Town Board looking for a waiver from the moratorium.  What has been proposed is a wireless telecommunications facility at the Renaissance Faire property to include a 150-foot tower with a compound at the base.  As required by the Town Code, although the Tower will be built for T-Mobile, there will be room to support other carriers. 
The Planning Board has engaged a cell tower consultant, who also provided a brief report and following this there was some discussion pertaining to various aspects of the project. 
There were no questions from the public.
There were a number of questions from various members of the Boards.  There was discussion surrounding the location of the proposed Tower, who would and would not benefit from the service, the possibility of other carriers aside from T-Mobile and the process of getting them on the Tower, what the tower would look like in terms of the general aesthetics and balloon testing.
The process of moving forward was reviewed and discussed in terms of the environmental review and the approvals necessary from each Board.
There was discussion as to whether or not a variance from ZBA would be required.  There was some disagreement on this between the applicant and the Planning Board attorney and it was agreed that it would be clarified ASAP.
The public hearing was then closed.

Homeland Towers/T-Mobile – Site Plan Review – Proposed Cell Tower:
Town Planner Bonnie Franson commented that the Boards were going to decide whether they wanted a “plain old vanilla” cell tower facility or whether they preferred something that incorporated stealth.  If the plan does incorporate stealth, (to look like a pine tree) the “devil will be in the details” and the Planning Board will need to know the manufacturer, the design, the branching pattern, etc.  Once the decision has been made, the site plan will need to be updated to incorporate these details. 
Board member John Ruel commented that he felt there were a lot of really ugly, fake tree -looking towers out there and that often times the plain pole towers were less noticeable in his view.  If they do choose to go with stealth, he would like to see some proposed designs.
The applicant responded that if they went this route, photographs and renderings would be submitted for review.  Various design options were discussed at some length. 
Engineer Sean Hoffman outlined a few issues, including the possible need of a SPDES permit from the DEC and referral of plans to the Fire Department.
Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval Extension Request:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the Extension, which will run through November 12, 2019.  They also voted in favor of extending the phase one approval retroactively from November 2018 to November 12, 2019.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting May 14, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting April 9, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, April 9 at 7pm.  All members were present. 

Board Chairman Mike Reardon began the meeting by introducing new Planning Board members Kris Kasker and John Banyo.

Public Hearing – Mortimer/Open Space Institute – Proposed Boundary Line Change:
Representing the Open Space Institute, attorney Mike Donnelly briefly summarized what has been proposed, which is a boundary line change on 152 acres of undeveloped land off of Bailey Town Road.  The plan calls for 88 of the acres to be given to the Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC) while the remaining 64 will be retained by the Open Space Institute and ultimately turned over to the Arden Homestead Corp. and folded into the Arden property.   All of the land will remain undeveloped. 
There were no comments from the public, so the hearing was closed.

Mortimer/Open Space Institute – Proposed Boundary Line Change:
The Board’s attorney presented them with a part 2 of a draft EAF (environmental assessment) along with a draft resolution for approval.  Following a brief discussion, the application was approved unanimously.

New Business:
Sign Guidelines - Chair Reardon raised the issue of sign guidelines and the inherent need for them.  It was agreed that the Boards’ consultants would work together to put together a sampling of guidelines from other municipalities for the Planning Board to review.

Application of ARB Guidelines - Moving on to possible code revision, Chair Reardon pointed out the currently the Code states that ARB Guidelines apply only once there is a minor subdivision of 3 houses or more.  He believes that the guidelines should apply to every new home that is built.  While ultimately, this may be a Town Board decision, it was agreed that the Planning Board attorneys would take a look at this so that they could in turn advise their Board on making a formal recommendation.

As-Built Permits – Currently there is no penalty or fee-structure in place for home owners who complete unpermitted work on their homes that is discovered after-the-fact (often times many years later) when attempting to sell the home.  Not only is this unfair to those residents who abide the process and acquire the necessary permits at the time of work, but it also results in possibly safety issues with the work itself as well as under-assessed properties throughout town.  Chair Reardon suggested that a penalty fee be implemented and his initial recommendation was $2,500.  This was discussed amongst the Board members and their consultants.  Ultimately it was agreed that while something like this might be out of the Planning Board’s jurisdiction, they would examine it further and attempt to put something together, which could in turn be submitted to the Town Board for consideration. 
Digital Signs – Town Planner Bonnie Franson brought up the issue of digital signs in town, noting that these had been discussed at the Zoning workshop the night prior.  Currently the Fire Department owns and operates the only digital sign in town.  There exist no regulations.  Moving forward, the Planning Board may be asked to consider creating standards.  The sign at the Fire Department was discussed.  Many of the Planning Board members feel the sign is of inferior quality and that it should not set the precedent for any additional such signs in Town.  It was agreed that standards should be considered to allow for better control over what is installed. 

Training – As part of their required annual training, the Planning Board agreed to schedule a 2-hour training session with Attorney Rick Golden on Wednesday, May 29 from 7-9pm. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting April 9, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting March 12, 2019

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, March 12, 2019.  All members were present.

Mortimer/Open Space Institute – Proposed Boundary Line Change:
An attorney and engineer for the applicant presented the Board with plans for a bulk land transfer and boundary line change on 120 acres of land.  The plan calls for 88 of the acres to be given to the Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC) while the remaining 64 will be retained by the Open Space Institute and ultimately turned over to the Arden Homestead Corp. and folded into the Arden property.  There are a few existing structures on the 88 acres that will be going to PIPC, and as per the pending agreement OSI will demolish these buildings before the boundary line change goes into effect.  Development has not been proposed for either parcel nor is there any planned.  An preliminary Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared.
Board Chairman Mike Reardon inquired as to whether or not OSI would be able to sell the property and how they would go about doing so.
The lawyer for the applicant explained that State approval would be necessary before the property could be sold, however as per existing contracts, the land will be folded into the Arden Estate.
Further conversation centered around bulk requirements, lot widths, and a handful of waivers being sought by the applicant.  Ultimately, the Board voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves Lead Agency as per SEQR and a public hearing was set for April 9 at 7pm.

Homeland Towers/T-Mobile – Proposed Cell Tower:
Plans for a proposed cell tower to be located above the Renaissance Fair Grounds up by one of the old, unused ski center chair lifts were presented and discussed.  The applicant is in the process of putting together an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) while also putting together comprehensive responses to questions from Town consultants.   As per the Town Code, the Town Board will be the entity responsible for issuing a Special Permit for the project, while site plan approval will come from the Planning Board.  The Process for obtaining these approvals concurrently and in a timely fashion was reviewed.  The Town Board is required to hold a public hearing but the Planning Board can waive this requirement if they so choose.  Discussion centered around fire department access to the site, storm water management, possible poll replacement, collocating of services, and area of service.  There will be room on the tower for all 4 of the major carriers in this area.  The Town has engaged a cell tower consultant, who was present.  Aesthetics were briefly discussed and the consultant mentioned that sightline tests would be conducted in order to determine whether or not the tower will have a faux-tree looking topper or not.  The Board declared their intent to become Lead Agency, assigning the application a Type 1 Action under SEQR. A public hearing was set for May 14 at 7pm.  It was agreed that Chair Reardon would attempt to coordinate with the Town Board in an effort to consolidate the Public Hearings and keep things moving forward in a timely manner. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting March 12, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting February 12, 2019

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

January Town Planning Board Meeting Cancelled

Click here to view the cancellation notice

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Agenda for Special Town Planning Board Meeting November 28, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting November 13, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, November 13 at 7pm.  Board Chair Mike Reardon was absent.

Public Hearing:  Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Boundary Line Change:
An attorney representing the applicant provided a brief overview of the change, explaining that there is a small piece of property that historically contained a swimming pool and used to belong to the Manor but was subdivided and given to the neighboring property many years ago.  The pool was subsequently filled in and as the property is no longer in use by its current owner, Tuxedo Farms, they have offered to return it to the Manor, which would create a straighter and more fluid property line.  The property amounts to 6,800 square feet.   Maps were distributed.
Engineer Sean Hoffman commented that there appeared to be two surveys on file with a difference of 200 square feet between them.  He requested that this be rectified and the applicant agreed to do so. 
There were no public comments, so the hearing was closed.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Boundary Line Change:
Following some brief discussion, it was agreed that the applicant would appear before the Board at their special meeting on November 28, at which time the attorney will have prepared a resolution of approval.

Town Board Referral – Proposed Changes to Architectural Review Board:
The Board Attorney briefly reviewed the proposed legislation, which would in effect dissolve the current Architectural Review Board and transfer their duties over to the existing Planning Board of five members.  Some minor language tweeks were suggested and briefly discussed.  This was followed by an open discussion between the Board members as to what has been proposed.  Board member John Ruel stated that he was in favor of creating one board.  He feels that the Planning Board already has a lot of input when it comes to matters of architectural review.  As there is not currently a “huge lift” of applicants coming before the ARB, he believes it does not make sense, fiduciary or otherwise, to maintain both Boards.  Between them, the currently Planning Board members have plenty of relevant professional experience and in fact, three of them served on the ARB previously.  When the ARB was first created, the Town was faced with both Tuxedo Farms and the possibility of a Casino, however there are not currently any projects of this magnitude before them. 
While he believes that there should be a provision that would allow them to expand again if necessary, he fully supports condensing now.  This being said, he indicated that he would be open to any compelling arguments suggesting otherwise.
Board member Ray Ferri agreed with Mr. Ruel.  He noted that when the Casino was before the Town the Planning Board had expanded to 7 members so that they could better address the application, but once it was determined that the project would not move forward, they had downsized again.  He also believes that collectively the current Planning Board has the professional background to handle anything that might come their way.
Darren Maynard agreed, commenting that he felt the new combined Board would be in a position to do more than the current ARB as they would have both consultants and a legal team at their disposal with every application.    He noted that he had been a member of the ARB as had Board member Rich Rigoli and Board Chair Mike Reardon.    He believes that they will be able to successfully act as both the Planning Board and the ARB collectively and they do not need to increase the size of the Board.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson pointed out that if they ever felt the need, they could always retain an architect to help them.
Mr. Ferri added that he felt having one combined Board would help to streamline the process as well.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of recommending that the Town reorganize and merge the Boards in such a way as to transfer the duties of the ARB over to the sitting planning Board.

Town Board Referral – Continued Review of proposed Zoning Amendments:
The Planning Board continued their review of proposed zoning amendments.  Sections pertaining to Signs, Wireless, Environmental and Solar were reviewed and discussed.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting November 13, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Agenda for Special Town Planning Board Meeting October 24, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting October 9, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 9 at 7pm.  Board member Ray Ferri was absent. 

Public Hearing – Michael Garcia – Driveway Relocation:
Board attorney Sean Hoffman provided a brief overview of the application.  The existing driveway at the Applicant’s home is extremely steep and precarious.  Because of this, it is essentially unusable.  Trucks cannot navigate it and in the wintertime it becomes entirely covered with ice and cannot be easily plowed.  Because of this, the Applicant is looking to install a new driveway, which would require an easement across the neighboring property, where it would tie into the neighbor’s existing driveway thus creating a new, shared driveway and safer access to the applicant’s home. 
Mr. Garcia reported that he had fulfilled all the requirements laid out at the previous meeting and was now only awaiting the “meets & bounds” as requested by the engineer. 
Several neighbors were present, including Mr. Kwon,  the neighbor with whom Mr. Garcia will be sharing a driveway, and the majority of them spoke in strong support of the application.  Another neighbor commented that he was not opposed what had been proposed but further expressed his concern that Mr. Garcia had already completed the work for which he was seeking approval.  He noted that the current driveway had been blocked off with boulders and that a portion of the ground had been filled in and seeded and that the new driveway had already been connected on the neighboring property.
There followed a discussion during which it was determined that Mr. Garcia had misunderstood the directive following the previous meeting and had been under the impression that he could proceed with some of the work in an effort to ensure it was completed prior to the winter months.  Ultimately it was determined that this was a enforcement issue with the Building Department and not a factor for the Planning Board to consider as a part of the application before them.
A letter from an Attorney representing neighbor Eleanor Harris was read into the record.  The letter noted that there was a history of drainage issues on this property and the one next door dating back their construction and suggested that the steeper driveway had been constructed in 2002 in an effort to help alleviate these issues.  Citing a history of property damage, the letter expressed concern that if approved, the new driveway would retrigger the historical drainage issues and possibly create new ones.
This was discussed.   It became apparent that there have been various drainage issues in the neighborhood for a number of years.  Board Engineer Sean Hoffman suggested that not paving the new driveway might help to prevent the old issues from reoccurring and also new ones from cropping up. 
Following some further discussion, the public hearing was closed.

Michael Garcia – Driveway Relocation:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the application conditional approval based on the following 4 conditions:

• The Maintenance Agreement must be modified to reflect their discussions and filed.
• A Plan detailing the construction, access easement and meets & bounds as discussed must be submitted and signed by the Board Engineer.
• The Applicant must obtain a new street address with both 911 and USPS. (*It was further noted that the Town would take of 911 on the Applicant’s behalf)
• A quantitative analysis of the drainage proving that there will be no discernable impact from runoff must be completed.

Tuxedo Manor – Boundary Line Change:
There is a small chunk of property that historically contained a swimming pool and used to belong to the Manor but was subdivided and given to the neighboring property many years ago.  As it is no longer in use by its current owner, Tuxedo Farms, they have offered to return it to the Manor, which would create a straighter and more fluid property line.  The property amounts to 6,800 square feet. 
There was a brief discussion, during which it was determined that giving the land to the Manor would not affect the open space requirement for Tuxedo Farms.  A public hearing was then set for November 13th at 7pm. 

Tuxedo Manor – Site Plan Amendment:
An Engineer representing Tuxedo Manor briefly explained during the initial construction phase for the project, a lot of shallow bedrock had been uncovered in the building area.  As a result, the applicant would like to shift both buildings forward 4 feet.  The side setbacks would remain the same, while the rear setback would be increased. 
There was a somewhat lengthy discussion with regard to emergency access, specifically fire trucks.   It was determined that the new plan would allow for enough space.  Location of a fire hydrant was also discussed.  The applicant is anxious to move ahead but will require GML approval from the County.  The County has 30 days to grant this approval, but has been known to approve small changes such as this in less time.  The Planning Board agreed to set a special meeting on October 24 at 7pm at which they will conduct a public hearing and provided that the County has issued an approval, will move forward with the application.

Town Board Referral – Proposed Changes to Fence Law:
The Town Board has asked the Planning Board to weigh in on proposed changes to the Fence Law, specifically the regulations surrounding private pool fences.  Currently the code requires that these fences be 5 ft. high, but the State of NY requires that they be 4ft.  The proposed change would bring the Town Code into compliance with the State.    The Planning Board was supportive of the change and requested that their attorney issue a favorable report to be submitted to the Town Board. 

Town Board Referral – Proposed Changes to Zoning Law:
The Planning Board received their hard copies of the proposed changes to the Zoning Code on October 1.  Because the document is quite extensive at almost 200 pages, and because what is being proposed is just short of a complete overhaul, it was agreed that they would request more time to review the material before issuing a report to the Town Board.  It was agreed that the Board consultants would begin putting together questions, comments and suggestions and that some of these would be discussed at the Special Meeting on October 24. 

Town Board Referral – Proposed Changes to Architectural Review Board:
The Town Board is considering reorganizing the Boards and disbanding the ARB.  If this occurs, the duties of the ARB, which pertain mainly to architectural integrity design, color schemes etc., would be transferred over to the Planning Board.  The Board attorney explained that this was not an unusual practice and that many municipalities operated with one board in this way. 
Board Chairman Mike Reardon inquired if this would require the Planning Board to bring on another consultant in the form of a certified architect. 
The answer was no as the current Planner, Bonnie Franson, would be able to advise the Board in this area.  Ms. Franson pointed out that each municipality was different and that in making this decision the Planning Board members should consider whether they had the people available to populate the Boards, whether they wanted the process to become “one-stop-shopping” whereby applicants would only need to appear before one Board rather than two and finally whether they as Planning Board members would be comfortable assuming the new responsibilities.
Board member Darren Maynard pointed out that three of the current Planning Board members had served on the ARB.
Board member Rich Rigoli noted that he had been one of these and that he felt combining the Boards would speed things up and allow for a more streamlined process.
All 4 Board members then agreed that they were in favor of the change.
Audience member Nan Klein noted that eliminating the ARB while simultaneously reducing the number of Planning Board members to 5 from 7 would limit the number of experienced individuals who were reviewing each application.  She feels it would be more beneficial to have a greater level of expertise involved in the decision making processes.  She further noted that it was her understanding that it had been the legislative intent when creating 3 Boards (Town, Planning and Architectural Review) to establish a system of checks and balances and avoid consolidating too much power in one small group of people.
Chairman Reardon responded that this was not the case and that the ARB had originally been formed to review the Tuxedo Farms Project and that their involvement with that project was done.
Ms. Klein wanted to know what would happen if the Farms or any future buyers/applicants in that area wanted to make changes to what had already been approved by the ARB.  What if new builders sought approval for new ideas?
Chairman Reardon replied that he did not have an answer for this and if that were to occur, perhaps the Town Board would create a new ARB.
Ms. Klein suggested that she believed it was unwise to dissolve the ARB before the property had been developed.  She wondered whether any of the Planning Board members were architects, further noting that the ARB aimed to have at least 2 architects serving as members. 
None of the Planning Board members are Architects.
Ms. Klein stated that she was uncomfortable with the idea of reducing the number of experienced people reviewing each application down from 12 to 5.
David DuPont wondered if the Board might suggest that the Town establish a minimum of 7 members for the Planning Board moving forward.  He further suggested that a larger Planning Board, consisting of 7 or even 9 members, could include an architect.  He believes that giving 5 individuals all of the concentrated authority over development projects would not be helpful to the community. 
He was advised that this was an issue for the Town Board.
Commenting that he understood it was ultimately a Town Board issue, Mr. duPont again suggested that were the Planning Board to recommend a 7-member minimum with one architect, this might influence the Town Board’s decision.
Chairman Reardon responded that it was “extremely hard” to get an architect to actually apply to serve on the Boards.  “It’s nice to say, but we just haven’t had one that’s…”
Mr. DuPont suggested that were the Planning Board to make it clear that they were looking for an architect, he felt there were several talented architects living in the community and it was likely that more than 1 would apply. 
“Again, that is an issue for the Town Board,” Chairman Reardon replied.
“But it would be interesting if you would even consider suggesting to the Town that not only you operate at full strength with at least 7 people, but 1 of those 7 be an architect.  Not a requirement….just a request.”
There was no response.
Town Board member Michele Lindsay commented that back in February the Town Board had decided unanimously to advertise for architects.
“Is this a question or is this a statement?” inquired Chair Reardon.
Mrs. Lindsay responded that it was a comment she was making in response to the Chairman’s prior suggestion that the Board had not received any applications from architects who wanted to serve.  In fact, a certified architect had applied and an interview was scheduled, but had been subsequently cancelled when these changes had originally been proposed.
“So, did you interview an architect?” inquired the Chairman.
“We did not because…” began Mrs. Lindsay.
“If you are going to make statements, I’ll make statements,” interrupted the Chairman.  “You’re a Town Board member who is coming here.  The Town Board has referred this to us.  You have already weighed in on your opinion with the Town Board, correct?” 
Mrs. Lindsay suggested that she would reword her comment as resident.  She further commented that she was aware that the Town had had 9 applicants to fill a total of 3 open positions (2 on the Planning Board and 1 on the ARB) and that the scheduled interview with the architect, who applied for a position on the ARB had been cancelled because of these proposed changes.   Therefore, Chair Reardon was not correct when he suggested that there had not been any interest from Architects to serve on the Boards.  She further commented that there were a lot of projects that would be coming before the Town.  “It’s not just Tuxedo Farms.  There’s Ren Faire.  There’s Warwick Brook.  There’s Science of Souls.  There’s Arden.  There’s lots of things coming.”
Chairman Reardon asked Mrs. Lindsay whether or not, to the best of her knowledge, any certified architects had served on the ARB in the past.
She responded that she was not sure whether they had or not.
“So maybe this move is being done so that we can get the ARB in more compliance then they have been,” stated the Chairman. 
Mrs. Lindsay wondered how this would be accomplished.
“According to everybody here we have 2 more spots to fill.  So if we filled those with 2 certified architects, wouldn’t that be better?”
Mrs. Lindsay replied that it was her personal opinion, as a citizen, that the more eyes on a project the better and felt that streamlining was not enough of a reason to dissolve the ARB.
“I respectfully disagree,” responded the Chairman.
Board member John Ruel commented that he felt there were times when the Boards did have a bit of a tough time moving along with projects.   He feels that streamlining and getting people to work together harmoniously would be good for the process and for the Town.  “If I’m not mistaken, Tuxedo Farms has been around since the Red Apple Rest was doing pretty well and there were lunches to discuss that project.  Tuxedo Farms is not doing so well right now either, so time can be a bit of an enemy for somebody who is trying to do something as well.  I think a little bit more harmony between Boards and with situations here might be the best path instead of trying to bolster up and make it huge, lets get some harmony and workmanship together.  That would be the best way.  That is my opinion.”
“Are you suggesting that the reason that Tuxedo Farms has not come to fruition is that the application process was too complicated?” inquired Ms. Klein.
At this point, the Board Attorney suggested that things were going off-topic and that they should return their focus to the question before them.
Following some further discussion it was agreed that the attorney would prepare a draft report and that the Planning Board would review this and revisit the conversation at their next regularly scheduled meeting, which will be on November 13.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting October 9, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting September 17, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Monday, September 17 at 7:30pm.  All members were present.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – Lot Line Change:
On behalf of Tuxedo Farms, Henry Heffner presented the Board with plans for a lot line change to the plot of land that will be donated to the school district.  Similar to the presentation he gave in August, Using a large, Mr. Heffner used a highlighted to identify the lot, pointing out where the current lines were and where the new lines would be.  In brief, the northerly border of the lot is being moved several feet in order to bring the lot into alignment with the road, while a chunk of the parcel on the south west corner of the lot is being removed and a new chunk added on to the south east. 
Board Chairman Mike Reardon inquired as to whether the school had voiced any objections since the previous meeting.  The answer was no.
There were no questions from the public.
The hearing was closed.

Tuxedo Farms – Lot Line Change:
Board engineer Sean Hoffman indicated that they would like to see a bulk table added to the plan and that any plan submitted to the Building Department needed to be signed and sealed by the engineer.
Board Attorney Kelly Naughten noted that under SEQRA, the application did not meet the definition of an action and therefore, none was needed.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson noted that there were a few cleanup items within a previous memo that needed to be completed and that the map would need to be revised in order to illustrate the boundary line change.
Ms. Naughton advised that approval be granted based on the following 3 conditions:

1. The addition of a bulk table to the plan
2. All references to the minor subdivision of the property shall be removed
3. Prior to the signing of the plan the applicant shall revise the plan in accordance with the comments included in the Town Planners memo dated 6/11.

The Board then voted unanimously in favor of granting conditional, preliminary and final approval to the application.
Board member John Ruel thanked Mr. Heffner for hydro-seeding the area near the front entrance of the property, noting that it looked great and that they were appreciative of the speed with which it was done.

Michael Garcia – Site Plan Amendment – Driveway Location:
The applicant presented the Board with revised plans for the driveway at his home.  The plans include sharing a portion of the driveway with a neighbor.  The neighbor was present and indicated that they were agreeable and had no issues with what was being proposed.  Following some discussion with regard to whether or not a common driveway was allowable by local law as well as potential issues related to emergency services and mail delivery a public hearing was set for October 9 at 7pm.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting September 17, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting August 14, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, August 14 at 7pm.  Board member Ray Ferri was absent.

Tuxedo Farms – Lot Line Change:
On behalf of Tuxedo Farms, Henry Heffner presented the Board with plans for a lot line change to the plot of land that will be donated to the school district. Using a large, highlighted map, Mr. Heffner identified the lot, pointing out where the current lines were and where the new lines would be.  In brief, the northerly border of the lot is being moved several feet in order to bring the lot into alignment with the road, while a chunk of the parcel on the south west corner of the lot is being removed and a new chunk added on to the south east.  Mr. Heffner further explained that these changes had been applied for and approved back in September of 2014 however, the applicant did not file the plans and therefore, the approval never came to fruition.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson commented that the application was in line with the Special use permit.  There remain some details that need to be worked out with regard to the dedication of the roadway there.
Board Attorney Kelly Laughton reiterated that the original approval for this change had been granted back in 2014 however the paperwork was never filed.  She added that the applicant had then requested an amendment in 2015, which was also granted but again, paperwork was never filed.  That approval has timed out, so the applicant will need to start from square one and public hearings will be required.
With regard to the applicant’s previous application for a subdivision, Board Engineer Sean Hoffman stated that the applicant is no longer seeking to subdivide the portion of their property that contains a capped, historic landfill.  Rather they will be seeking a declaration of restrictive covenant for the meets and bounds of this lot.  This will put any potential purchaser of the property on notice of the issue.
Following some brief discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of setting a public hearing for the application for Tuesday, September 11 at 7pm.

Tuxedo Farms – Bond Reduction:
Engineer Sean Hoffman explained that back in 2015 the applicant had been required to put forth a $265,000 bond for costs associated with erosion control on the site.  Three years later, with much of the work completed, they are asking for a reduction.  The process requires the Planning Board to issue a recommendation to the Town Board.  Mr. Hoffman then went through many of the items that were initially covered by the bond, identifying ones which he advised the Board to retain some money for.  These included silt fencing, temporary seeding, asphalt at the entrances and clean-up and the basins & channels in addition to 10% contingency.
Mr. Heffner added that once some of the money had been released, the applicant would use it to fund escrow for the waste-water treatment plant. 
Board member John Ruel commented that he felt the developer had done a nice job of beautifying the entrance to the site adding that it would be nice to see some green there.
Mr. Heffner responded that they still had a little bit of earth to move on the site, after which they were intending to “loosen everything up a bit” as all the recent rains have compacted the earth.  Once that has been done, they will be hydro-seeding (hopefully in early September) and they anticipate good germination.
Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of recommending that the Town Board retain $32,700 and return the rest of the money to the applicant.

Public Comment:
Andy Berish stated that he had received an email informing him that tonight’s meeting would focus on Tuxedo Farms pulling out of the project and an amusement park being built in place of the development.
He was assured that, as per the agenda, this had never been the intent of the meeting and that no such email had been sent out by the Town.
Board Chair Mike Reardon asked Mr. Berish if he had any questions about this, to which Mr. Berish responded that he did not want to see it happen.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting August 14, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting July 10, 2018

The Town Board met on Tuesday, July10 at 7pm.  Board member Darren Maynard was absent.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – Lot Line Change/Minor Subdivision Approval:
After providing a brief history of the application, Planning Board Attorney Rick Golden explained that it had been determined by the Town Board attorney that the application was subject to the current building moratorium and as such, will require a waiver before It can proceed.  Therefore, the public hearing was cancelled, the application was removed from the agenda and the Applicant was not present.  Once a waiver has been issued, the applicant can return to the Planning Board and a new hearing will be set.
Noting that there were several members of the public present, Board Chairman Mike Reardon asked if there were any questions the Board might be able to answer with regard to the application.
An attorney representing the Tuxedo Union Free School District inquired as why the lot line change to the school parcel had been proposed.
Mr. Golden responded that he could not answer that question.  The focus of the application was the subdivision, however the lot line change had also been proposed. 
Chair Reardon pointed out that at the previous meeting, the attorney from the Farms had exchanged information with two school Board members and suggested that the Applicant and the School meet so that what was being proposed could be explained in full.  He wondered whether or not this meeting had taken place.
Superintendent of Schools Nancy Teed responded that this was the first she was hearing of a proposed meeting.
School Board members Dorothy Ziegelbauer and Meg Vaught objected to this statement, commenting that they had passed the information along to Ms. Teed at their June meeting.
Chair Reardon then asked Ms. Teed to clarify whether this was indeed the first she was hearing of a meeting with the Farms.
Ms. Teed responded that Mrs. Ziegelbauer and Mrs. Vaught had passed the information along and that the school’s attorney had contacted the Farms, however this was the first time she had heard that a meeting was supposed to have taken place.
Chair Reardon suggested that the school obtain the contact information for Farms’ attorney from the Board clerk and attempt communication.
The School’s attorney responded that this would be done.
Patrick Burke inquired as to the intended use of the subdivided land.
Mr. Golden explained that the parcel to be subdivided contained a capped landfill and that the applicant was hoping to isolate this landfill on its own, subdivided lot in order to make it easier for them to sell the land.  They were then proposing to designate the lot containing the landfill as open space.
Michele Lindsay wondered whether the proposed lot line change to the school’s parcel would be decreasing or increasing the amount of land they received.
There was some debate over this and a solid answer was not provided.
The School’s attorney asserted that in changing the lot lines, the applicant would be in effect taking away buildable land and replacing it with cliffs.
Chair Reardon replied that he did not want to speak for the applicant and suggested that this conversation would be better suited for a time when they were present.
Mrs. Lindsay next wanted to know who would own the subdivided parcel after Related company left the project.
Mr. Golden responded that this was unknown.  The applicant had mentioned donating the land to the development’s HOA, however this entity does not yet exist.
Mrs. Lindsay inquired about landscaping and signage at the entrance to the property along Route 17, noting that at the previous meeting she thought these things had both been made a condition of the approval, however the resolution called for either landscaping or signage.
Reading from his notes, Mr. Golden noted that the condition had contained the either/or provision and that any landscaping plans would need to meet the Town Planner’s approval.
Board member John Ruel commented that the applicant had been very responsive to this request and had already begun cleaning up the property.
Mrs. Lindsay wondered whether there were any plantings currently planned, further noting that the area currently looked terrible.
Chair Reardon reiterated that a cleanup had already begun.  The applicant has received dirt and mulch from the Town and has begun to remove cumbersome boulders from the area.   He further advised that it was important to remember that the area was still a construction entrance and it was not likely that a large number of plantings would survive.  That being said, the Town Planner has yet to review the plan and therefore the Planning Board cannot really comment on what is being proposed.  He added that in his view there were a lot of things that looked terrible around town, including the large number of vacant buildings that currently exist and that these things need to be addressed as well.
Dorothy Ziegelbauer inquired as to whether or not the installation of silt fencing on the Farms property would be necessary.
The answer was no.
There followed a brief discussion about the amount of fill that will be brought onto the site and the number of anticipated trucks needed.
Mike Arone wondered whether there was a specific time line for the beautification efforts of the entrance.
The answer was no, a deadline has not been set, however the landscaping will be tied to the approval so if it is not done, enforcement action can be taken.
Changing the subject entirely, Jerry Mottola asked about the Take-a-Break property and what specifically was happening there.
Chair Reardon informed him that a new restaurant would be built on the site.
Mr. Burke inquired as to the name of the entity and was informed that it would be called STEVE’S PIZZA.  Chair Reardon added that the owner sells high-end pizza ovens and that the new establishment will double as a showroom for that.
Mr. Burke then wanted to know about parking and whether there would be enough spaces to service the restaurant.
Chair Reardon responded that seating at the restaurant would be limited and that the parking was sufficient.  The applicant has already passed through the approval process and the necessary parking requirements have been met.
John Ruel noted that new building will be basically the same size as the previous one, although it will stretch all the way out to the curb.
When asked about the timeline for the project, Chair Reardon noted that it was “full steam ahead” and that the applicant had aggressive goals of being open in the fall of 2018.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting July 10, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, June 12, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 7pm.  Board member Darren Maynard was absent.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – East Terrace – Clearing Filling & Grading Permit:
Representing Tuxedo Farms, Henry Heffner explained that the applicant is looking to clear and grade a portion of the East Terrace neighborhood so that they can bring in the majority of the material needed to fill and grade that area prior to beginning construction in The Commons.  Additionally, they are planning to relocate several piles of existing material currently located elsewhere on the site to the newly cleared area in an effort to clean things up a bit and consolidate.  The Town of Tuxedo will also be relocating some material from the Mulch Pile to this area of the site.  In total, 300,000 yards of fill will be needed for East Terrace.  Mr. Heffner reiterated that it made the most sense to move the bulk of this in prior to beginning construction in the other neighborhoods as trucking it in after construction has commenced would be both destructive and disruptive.   All material entering the site will be documented. 
Commenting that she understood why it made sense to bring the fill through the Commons area prior to beginning construction there, Meg Vaught inquired whether the developer planned to begin building once the fill was in. 
Mr. Heffner responded that once they had made a sale, they would start building.
Nancy Hays wondered why the developer continued to move forward and destroy more land when there seemed to be no hope of making sales/building any time soon.  She further commented that the current cut visible from Route 17 was barbaric and looked horrible in her view.
Mr. Heffner responded that there was indeed hope of making sales and building in the near future.
Jim Hays commented that historically Andrew Dance had publicly blamed the small high school for the delay in building and he wondered if this were still the reason that things were not progressing.
Mr. Heffner replied that he could not speak for Mr. Dance.
Ned Kugal inquired about storm water run-off from the site and whether the appropriate precautions were in place.
The answer was yes.  The issue has been mitigated and silt fencing will be in place among other things.
As it is currently unclear as to when construction on the site will actually begin, Michele Lindsay wondered if the applicant could be required to beautify the existing, visible site as a condition of this approval.  She further noted that the undeveloped site is ugly and casts a bad impression on the Town.  She suggested that perhaps the developer could put up a sign depicting what would be coming soon and/or do some moderate landscaping to make things look better.
Mr. Heffner responded that landscaping would take place as the development progressed and utility lines were brought across Route 17, which will be widened.
Dorothy Ziegelbauer wondered if there were a timeline for this.
Mr. Heffner reiterated that as soon as they made a sale, building would begin and the project would progress.
Mrs. Lindsay suggested that if they could not do the landscaping, perhaps they might still be required to install a sign.
Mr. Heffner stated that he would bring this back to “the powers that be” for discussion.
Nancy Hays noted that the silt fence along Route 17 seemed to be down.
Mr. Heffner replied that it was not, however he noted that this particular silt fence was somewhat pointless as there is no silt leaving the site in that location due to a giant berm above, which stops everything. 
Board member John Ruel added that early on in the construction he had raised concerns about the silt fencing, presenting photographs of compromised fencing in that particular area and that his concerns had been immediately and responsibly addressed by the applicant.
Meg Vaught commented that while she understood the reasons behind why the filling and grading was being proposed, she questioned the logic of continuing to destroy the land when the developer had already demolished so much and there was no guarantee that they were going to sell or develop it any time soon.
An engineer for the applicant responded that one of the intents behind clearing this land was so they could relocate unsightly piles of material from elsewhere on the property in an effort to clean it up, which they believe will help them to make the sales.
Following some further discussion between the Board and their consultants, the public hearing was closed.

Tuxedo Farms – East Terrace - Clearing Filling & Grading Permits:
Town Planner Bonnie Franson inquired as to whether the applicant had received a response from the DEC with regard to the presence of northern long-eared bats on the site.
The applicant responded that they had held conversations with representatives of the DEC, who did not believe the bats were going to pose a problem.  Paperwork has been filed, however the process will likely be somewhat lengthy and they are hoping that it does not need to hold up the project.  Further, the applicant noted that the DEC has already granted the necessary permits back in 2015.
It was noted that the northern-long eared bat had been listed as endangered after the 2015 permits had been issued and therefore, the DEC would again need to confirm in writing that everything was in the clear.
There followed a lengthy discussion/debate with the applicant suggesting that there were no northern-long eared bats on the site and the Ms. Franson arguing that there was documentation of the bats in a previous report. 
Both town Engineer Sean Hoffman and Board Attorney Rick Golden advised the Board that a permit could not be issued until all of the necessary permits and approvals from outside agencies had been received.  Written confirmation/communication from the DEC will be necessary.
Moving on, Mr. Hoffman pointed out that one of the piles of fill that applicant is planning to move is actually located in the Town of Sloatsburg.  He advised that any approval that the Town of Tuxedo might grant will not supersede the need for the applicant to obtain the necessary permits from the Town of Sloatsburg.
The Board then voted unanimously in favor of naming themselves Lead Agency under SEQRA and further of assigning the application a Negative Declaration.
Conditions for approval were then outlined in a draft resolution as follows:

1. Prior to issuance of a permit the applicant must provide the names and addresses of all contiguous property owners.
2. The erosion sediment plan must be revised to the Town engineer’s satisfaction.
3. Copies of all contracts for work to be performed must be submitted to the Board in order that they can ensure code compliance.
4. The Building Inspector must be provided with sign-off from the DEC.
5. The plan must comply with the Town Engineer’s recent memo.
6. The plan must also comply with the Town Planner’s recent memo.
7. The limits/boundaries of the disturbance area must be clearly marked on the site.
8. Work can only take place between the hours of 8am-5pm.
9. Sediment calculations must be revised to show that the planned traps will work.
10. The Applicant must file proof of insurance, indemnifying the Town for any issues/accidents that might occur.
11.  SWIP certification is needed.
12. SWIP must be revised to include previously outlined details.
13. The project will be subject to surveillance by the Town.
14. The applicant must post escrow in an amount to be determined by the Town.
15. The proposed fill must be approved by the Town engineer.
16. The title must be revised to show who created the plan.
17. The applicant must submit a plan for landscaping signage.
18. No permit will be issued until the DEC has signed off on the northern long-eared bat.

The Board voted unanimously in favor of approving this draft resolution.

Tuxedo Farms – Lot Line Change/Minor Subdivision Approval:
On behalf of the applicant, attorney Jay Myrow explained that in accordance with prior approvals a pre-existing landfill in the Northridge section of the development had been capped and sealed.  The developer feels that the condition of this part of property will encumber its sale and therefore they would like to change the lot-lines and subdivide so that only the section of land where the landfill exists is encumbered rather than the entire lot.  Doing this will require some reconfiguring of the parcel that has been designated for donation to the school.   Once the parcels have been reconfigured, the parcel containing the landfill will be donated to the HOA with the intention that it never be developed. 
Board Attorney Rick Golden cautioned that he knew of no other municipality that would approve the creation of an encumbered lot, the fear being that because nothing can be done with it, it will have no value and whoever owns it could well decide to stop paying taxes on it.  Furthermore, as the proposed lot does not have existing street access, a subdivision is not permissible.  The application will require GML approval and a public hearing.  Moreover, the current moratorium on all subdivision applications is an issue and the applicant will need a waiver.
Mr. Myrow argued that the entire project was governed by the Special Permit, in which there are control mechanisms to prevent the property from becoming abandoned.  He added that if the lines were not changed, there could be significant title issues with the parcel because of the landfill.
Following further discussion between Mr. Myrow and Mr. Golden, it was agreed that the application would be tabled and that the two lawyers would continue discuss the issue amongst themselves.  A public hearing was set for July 10 at 7pm.
On behalf of the School Board, Meg Vaught and Dorothy Ziegelbauer inquired as to where they might obtain copies of the proposed changes to the school lot. Mr. Myrow assured them that a map with overlay outlining the changes would be filed with the Town. He further invited them to contact him directly with any questions or concerns they might have.

bak to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting June 12, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, May 8, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on May 8, 2018 at 6:40pm.  All members were present.

Chair Mike Reardon opened the meeting by announcing that they would have to conclude no later than 7:25pm regardless of where they stood with their agenda.
Secondly, with regard to Tuxedo Dairy, he noted they had added to the agenda an amended resolution as the condition of the deed restriction had been removed following a determination by the Building Inspector that for the purpose of parking regulations, the parcels are considered to be single lot, as addressed in the Town Code.  The Board subsequently voted unanimously in favor of approving the amended resolution.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval – 6-Month Extension:
Representing Tuxedo Farms, contractor Henry Heffner requested a permit extension of  “ at least another 6 months”, noting that they were still working on finalizing things with the Department of Transportation. 
Chair Reardon inquired as to whether this was the last issue that needed to be resolved.
Mr. Heffner responded that for the most part, it was.  “Once the civil end of it is done, the titles and the mapping go through the D.O.T. and once they accept it, they all go to the Attorney General’s office, which generally takes 6 months.  It’s a long time.”
The Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the 6-month approval through November 13, 2018.

Tuxedo Farms – East Terrace – Clearing Filling & Grading Permit:
Chair Reardon noted that there would need to be a public hearing with regard to this permit.
Engineer Sean Hoffman added that due to a change in the DEC’s policy as it pertains to bats, there now may be a prohibition on clearing land within 5 miles of a hibernation site and the Town of Tuxedo has been listed as a potential site.  This means that if the applicant wants to clear between April 1 and October 31 they will require a separate permit from the DEC. Before the Planning Board can issue the permit, the applicant is required to satisfy all requirements and receive necessary permits with and from the DEC.  Therefore, while the planning Board can review the application and possibly even issue a conditional approval, a permit cannot be issued at this time.
Mr. Heffner explained that ultimately they are looking to clear 7 acres in total and relocate some large piles of rock from other areas of the development there in an effort to clean up the site.  They are also looking to bring in the fill that they will eventually need to construct the East Terrace neighborhood and store it on site.  Because a lot of fill will be required, it makes sense to truck it now, before the other areas of the development have been built.
Chair Reardon recommended that the applicant try to meet with the DEC prior to the public hearing.
It was agreed that they would try to do so.
SEQRA requirements were reviewed and discussed.
The planning Board then voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves lead agency. 
The DEC and what their process would be was then discussed in terms of setting a public hearing. Ultimately it was agreed to set the public hearing for the next Planning Board meeting, which will be on June 12.  It was also agreed that the attorney would put together a list of conditions that would be required should they be ready to approve the application on June 12, to include anything that might occur at that meeting as well.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, May 8, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, April 10, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, April 10 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Board Chair Michael Reardon began the meeting by thanking former Planning Board attorney Alyse Terhune for her many years of service.  He then introduced Rick Golden, the new Planning Board Attorney. 

Tuxedo Dairy – Proposed Ice Cream Shop – Site Plan Approval/Change of Use:

Plans for the proposed Ice Cream Shop to be located next to The Castricone Agency on Store Road were reviewed.  Tuxedo Dairy will sell ice cream and desserts, to be produced off site and delivered to the store daily.  The existing space is zoned for office use and therefore a change will be required in order to allow for the new business.  The applicant has already appeared before the BZA and received the necessary variance.  Parking was discussed at some length and the issue of signage was briefly touched upon as well.  The applicant agreed to contact the property owner in an effort to determine whether or not there is a preexisting deed restriction.  

The Board voted unanimously in favor of both declaring the application Type 2 under SEQRA and waiving a public hearing.

Following some further discussion, the application was unanimously approved conditional upon the engineers’ satisfaction with the parking, the bulk table being broken into 2 lots and correct marking of handicapped spaces on the plan.  

Other Business:

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, March 13, 2018

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, March 13 at 7pm.  Board Member Darren Maynard was absent.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Extension Request:

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, March 13, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Click here to view this agenda

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting October 10, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 10 at 7pm.
Board member Linda Phelps was absent.

Public Hearing – Northrop - Bulk Land Transfer:
Representatives for the Applicant were present and provided a brief overview of the application.  In brief, they are looking to transfer 220 acres of a 277 acre lot, located on the municipal line and fronting both Bailey Town and Stevens Roads, to the Open Space Institute for conservation.  The remaining 57 acres will stay with the Applicant, who has no plans to develop it.   All planning and engineering comments have been addressed and the Orange County Planning Department has advised in favor of approval.

Representing both the Arden Homestead and the Orange County Historical Society, Attorney James Sweeny commented that his clients, whose property abuts the parcel in question, have no objection to the application as proposed as it is entirely consistent with Harriman’s plan to preserve this land.  This being said, he pointed out a small technical error on the map where land that is actually owned by the Arden Homestead is noted as be owned by the O.C. Historical Society.   He further stated that this error was made at the County level and not by the applicant however he suggested that it should be corrected before the maps are filed so that the error does not perpetuate as time goes on.

The applicant was in complete agreement with this and stated that they would correct the error.

The public hearing was then closed.

Northrop – Bulk Land Transfer:
There was a brief discussion, during which Town Planner Bonnie Franson pointed out a couple of small technical errors, which the applicant agreed to correct immediately.

The Board then voted unanimously in favor of awarding the application a Negative Declaration under SEQRA before approving it in its’ entirety conditional upon the changes they had just discussed.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Site Plan Review:
The Applicant’s Engineer informed the Board that they had received both the necessary variances from the Zoning Board as well as approval from the Architectural Review Board.  Additionally, a report detailing capacity available at the Waste Water Treatment Plant has been submitted.

With regard to the proposed plantings, Ms. Franson noted that the plan currently calls for Japanese Barberry but this is an invasive species, which has recently been outlawed by New York State.

The Applicant agreed to remove it and substitute with another type of planting.

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune suggested that notes from the ARB were somewhat inconclusive in that they suggested that window samples and molding specs were still required.  The applicant was aware of this issue and it was briefly discussed.  Ultimately it was agreed that the application could be approved conditional upon the submission of these materials as requested.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting Tuesday, October 10, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the September 12, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Northrop - Bulk Land Transfer
   Section 6 Block 1 lot 10.24
4. Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site Plan Review
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 12.2
5. Adjournment

back to top

Tuxedo Farms Town Boards Workshop Meeting October 10, 2017

Immediately following the regular monthly meeting will take place.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting September 12, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 12 at 7pm.  Board member Darren Maynard was absent.

Northrop – Bulk Land Transfer:
Representatives for the applicant presented the Board with a map detailing the 277 acres of land to be included in the bulk transfer.  The parcel has frontage on both Stevens Lane and Bailey Town Road.  Currently, there is no development planned for the parcel, with 220 acres of it to be given to the Open Space Institute for conservation.

Town Engineer Sean Hoffman explained that the application had come before the TAC (Technical Advisory Committee) back in March however at that time it required a waiver from the Town Board in order to proceed.  Since March, the Zoning Code as it pertains to Bulk Land Transfers has been amended and the applications can now move forward without a waiver. 

Town Consultant Bonnie Franson then outlined the basic process for Bulk Land Transfers.  A public hearing is required before the Board can vote on the application.
As there is no development planned for the parcel, Ms. Franson explained that there were a number of requirements that could be waived at the Boards discretion.  She then ran through a list of these so that they could better determine which ones would be necessary moving forward.  Following this, a public hearing was set for October 10 at 7pm. Between now and then the application will be sent to Orange County for General Municipal Law Review.

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Revised Site Plan:
On behalf of Tuxedo Farms, Henry Heffner stated that the applicant had reviewed and addressed all of the issues brought forth by both the Consultants and the Engineer as well as those from the Orange County Planning Department.  The Fire Marshalls have agreed to the road configurations.  A lighting plan is still needed and Mr. Heffner explained that this would be ready within a week as they are waiting to confer with the architects in order to ensure that there is balance in the lighting before submitting for approval.  The applicant is currently before the Town Board awaiting approval for changes to proposed construction materials as well as the housing mix.  A Public Hearing on these changes will occur before that Board on September 25 at 7pm.  The need for a public hearing at the Planning Board level has been waived.  The applicant is seeking conditional approval from the Planning Board on the revised site plan in advance of Town Board approval. 

Mr. Hoffman addressed the issue of parking, explaining that since the last meeting the applicant had presented data from the Institute of Transportation Engineering, which clearly showed that the plan either met or exceeded the amount of spaces needed for what has been proposed, utilizing comparisons from both the United States and Canada.  In looking at the location and spacing of the spaces however, Mr. Hoffman noted that when at capacity it is possible that some residents would need to walk a distance of 1,100 feet from where they are parked to their residence.  Through research he was able to determine that studies show that people are generally willing to walk ¼ mile between their car and their residence (1,300 feet) although this is admittedly not ideal, especially in certain circumstances.  He recommended that the developer add loading zones closer to the apartment structures where residents could drop off people and or parcels when necessary.

The Developer agreed that this could be done with relative ease as there were already striped out no-parking areas on the plan that could be converted into loading zones.
Ms. Franson brought up the issue of wetlands and more specifically, silt fencing around some vernal pools, commenting that she had suggested in her memo that the fencing be such that it allowed movement however the developer had responded that since this was regulated by the Army Corps they did not need to comply.  Ms. Franson suggested that this was not a satisfactory answer and the Developer agreed, commenting that the change in silt fencing could be made.

An issue regarding faux balconies on the front façade of the buildings was also briefly discussed.

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune advised the Board that it would not be appropriate for them to issue a conditional approval as requested before the Town Board had made a determination with regard to the changes.  The reason for this is that the plan as currently before the Planning Board (reflecting changes) is not inline with the previously approved Preliminary Plan and therefore does not comply with the Special Permit.

Following some further discussion it was determined that the applicant should return to the Planning Board on October 10, after the Town Board has made a determination with regard to the proposed changes.  Ms. Terhune cautioned that they will also need to receive approval from the Architectural Review Board (ARB) before the Planning Board can issue an approval.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting September 12, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Revised Site Plan
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Northrop - Bulk Land Transfer
   Section 6 Block 1 lot 10.24
5. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting August 8, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Appr oval of the July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Revised Site Plan
   Sectio n 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Northrop - Bulk Land Transfer
   Section 6 Block 1 lot 10.24
5. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting July 11, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, July 11 at 7pm.  Board members John Ruel and Darren Maynard were absent.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Site Plan Review:
An engineer for the applicant presented the Board with revised plans for the project, commenting that their intent was to resolve/move forward with SEQR that evening so that the project could effectively move on to the Zoning Board and the Architectural Review Board respectively.

Board consultant Bonnie Franson noted that one of the project maps showed 16 1-bedroom units per building while another sheet suggested that there were 2-bedroom units.  She asked for clarification on this.

The applicant responded that there would be two buildings, each with 16 1-bedroom units.  It was agreed that the maps would be revised to reflect this.

Ms. Franson then lead the Board through a somewhat detailed review of part 2 of the Draft Environmental Assessment Form as well as the Draft Negative Declaration.

Following some minimal discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of giving the project a Negative Declaration under SEQR.  The applicant will now proceed to the Zoning Board of Appeals and then the Architectural Review Board, before returning to the Planning Board for final approval.

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Revised Site Plan:
On behalf of Tuxedo Farms, Andrew Dance and project engineers presented the Board with revised plans for the North Ridge section of the development, with revisions based on discussions from the previous Board meeting as well as a meeting of the TAC (Technical Advisory Commmittee) and a memo from Town Consultants, H2M.   The Applicant has met with the Joint Fire Commission as requested to discuss various issues in connection with the amended layout and a letter of approval from them is apparently forthcoming.  In response to concerns, an additional natural parking lot (grass) has been added to the plan, containing 40 additional spots.  Commenting that this should help with both parking overflow and snow removal issues, the applicant reported that with the addition of the lot, the plan now provides for 1.8 parking spaces per unit, which is more than what is required by the Smartcode. (The Smartcode is the previously approved zoning code by which the development will be regulated.)

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune reported that she had communicated with the Town Attorney regarding the revisions, and more specifically the road hierarchy as specified in the Special Permit.  With this revision, the applicant is looking to alter the road classification, providing for street parking along a driveway type roadway that will run in a loop through this particular neighborhood.  According to the Town Attorney, what has been proposed is technically not considered a roadway and therefore is not subject to the established rules and regulations governing roadways.  It will be up to the Planning Board to determine whether what is being proposed is sufficient.

Board Engineer Sean Hoffman concurred with these findings as they relate to the road hierarchy, reminding the Board that they had previously voiced concerns with regard to parking, snow removal/storage and municipal collection services (garbage, mail, etc)  They now must determine whether or not the newly proposed parking lot will alleviate any of these potential issues.

The applicant added that the Fire Department has requested that 4 spots along the road be removed in order to provide for truck access and also that a hydrant be added. 

Mr. Hoffman reminded the Board that since the proposed roadway is not a part of the road hierarchy, it will not be regulated by the Special Permit.
Mr. Dance responded that regardless, the parking was regulated.

Mr. Hoffman argued that since the road was not regulated by the smartcode, the parking along it was not regulated either.  He further commented that there was no existing standard for common driveway parking.  The Planning Board can determine whether the number of proposed spots will be adequate

There followed a bit of a disagreement between Ms. Franson and Mr. Dance with regard to the previously established number of spots, with Mr. Dance asserting that 1.5 spaces per unit was the agreed upon number and Ms. Franson arguing that 1.5 was the minimum allotment and this number was not set in stone.

Ms. Terhune wondered if visitor parking had been accounted for and how many spaces there would be altogether.

The answer was yes and 323.

Ms. Terhune then inquired about the use of the newly proposed lot as it relates to snow removal, wondering if they were planning to relocate cars there or use it for snow storage.

The Applicant responded that this decision would ultimately be up to the HOA.  They added that they had made the revisions to the plan as requested and were now hoping for some sort of decision from the Planning Board so that they could move forward with the project. 

Again, Mr. Dance suggested that 1.5 spaces per unit was the agreed to requirement and further commented that if this were to be challenged it would open up a “bigger slew of issues.”  He added that he felt it was both ridiculous and unbelievable that this would be identified as an issue.

Both Ms. Terhune and Ms. Franson responded, pointing out that the Special Permit had anticipated on-street parking in the Commons Area of the development only and that the individual neighborhoods had previously been designed with off-street driveway and/or garage style parking.  Therefore, what is now being proposed constitutes a fairly major change, especially as there are no established standards to regulate it.

Mr. Dance argued that what had been approved in the Special Permit did not matter and that regardless of type, the agreed upon number of spaces was 1.5 per unit.

Ms. Terhune responded that the decision as to how many spaces would be required was up to the Planning Board and that it should be their decision to make, not the applicants’ or the consultants’.

Mr. Hoffman stated that they had asked the applicant to provide proof that the 1.8 spaces as proposed would be adequate and to date, this had not been done.  They would like to see how it is all going to work.  He added that without the newly proposed lot, there had been valid concerns as to whether or not snow removal along the proposed road would even possible.

Board Chair Mike Reardon inquired as to whether or not the spaces would be reserved or marked.

Mr. Dance replied that they were simply trying to put together a plan that would meet the requirements of prospective builders while remaining in keeping with overall design of the Development.  He added that what is being proposed is what the building community is asking for.  The developer has no intention of bringing in unseasoned builders.  If those builders want to put numbers on the spaces, then they will do it, but if they feel they can get along without them, then they will leave them off.  He then commented “We had a deal with the Town that says 1.5 spaces per unit.  We don’t need to be throwing more money into this just because some people might not think that is enough.”

Ms. Franson reiterated that the difference between what was approved in the special permit and what is being proposed now is that the previous plan called for primarily off-street parking, with visitors only parking on the street.

Again, Mr. Dance argued that this didn’t matter and that regardless of type, as long as they provided 1.5 spaces per unit, they were in compliance.  The count remains the same.  He does not believe they ever agreed to excess spaces for visitors.

This was debated and ultimately, Ms. Franson indicated that she would review the Regulating Plan to find the answer.

Board Chair Mike Reardon wondered what would happen at Thanksgiving and Christmas time, when there might be an influx of traffic due to family celebrations.
Mr. Dance indicated that as the proposed apartments were primarily 1 bedroom, he did not foresee this as being an issue.

Board member Ray Ferri then wondered whether what was being proposed was essentially another Tuxedo Manor type of community, noting the focus on 1-bedroom apartments.  He inquired as to the square footage of the apartments, further wondering what the average income of the prospective renters might be and in general, what the new community would look like.

Mr. Dance replied curtly that this type of review was not under the purview of the Planning Board.  He reiterated his belief that the developer had a contractual agreement with the Town specifying 1.5 bedrooms per unit.

Ms. Franson countered that the bedroom mix was indeed an issue, pointing out that there had been a reduction in the number of proposed 2 and 3 bedroom units.  This, however, is a Special Permit issue and must be considered by the Town Board and not the Planning Board.

Bringing the discussion back around to the parking, Mr. Hoffman advised the Board that the site in question was a tricky one and he was not sure that it would be possible for the developer to go back in and add additional parking should the amount proposed not be adequate. 

There followed a brief discussion/comparison between the number of spots allotted per unit with the Tuxedo Manor project as compared to what has been proposed by the Farms.  Ultimately it was determined that 1.5 spaces per unit was less than what will be provided at Tuxedo Manor and 1.8 is roughly the equivalent.

Board member Linda Phelps inquired about garbage storage and collection.
She was informed that garbage would be stored in common bins.  There will not be dumpsters.  Collection will be via a mechanical system.

Discussion then turned to an access road linking the Development to the Hamlet as required by the Orange County Planning Department.  Originally, this road was supposed to link up with Mountain Road, however feedback received during a public hearing brought to light that residents living in that area do not want a trail there.

Subsequently, a trail leading directly down to Route 17 has been added to the plan, however there is universal doubt as to the safety of this.  “We are going to build it, put in a gate and install a sign that reads ‘This path was built by the Town Planner.  If your kids die, blame her,” commented Mr. Dance, noting that the developer had every intention of constructing the path in order to meet their obligation with Orange County.

Ms. Franson responded that the Orange County had required the path be installed to run along the sewer line.

Mr. Dance alleged that this had been a request and not a stipulation.

There followed a brief discussion about the need for some sort of walking path between the development and the Hamlet.  Everyone was in agreement that a trail should exist.
Ms. Terhune pointed out that clearly everyone agreed that a path leading directly down to Route 17 was not safe, however, the comment from the County was a binding part of the most recently revised Special Permit.

Mr. Hoffman agreed with this, further noting that the issue at hand was figuring out how to best address this situation.

Mr. Dance suggested that somebody place a call to the County.

Mr. Hoffman responded that he had been under the impression that this was going to be done following the TAC meeting.

Discussion then returned to the issue of parking.

Ms. Terhune reiterated that it would be up to the Board to ultimately determine whether or not the number of spaces as proposed would be sufficient but in the mean time suggested that the plan was in good enough shape to forward to the County for GML review.

Mr. Hoffman added that it was his belief that the applicant was asking for something new and that he would be willing to put together a memo with recommendations for the Board.  He also offered to look around at other similar developments and put together a comparison document for Board review.

It was agreed that both things would be done.

Ms. Franson indicated that she would also like to revisit the previously approved layout in order to determine whether or not the on-street parking spaces had been included in the total space-count. 

Mr. Dance was then asked to provide the number of 1-bedroom vs 2-bedroom apartments that are now being proposed.

The answer was 108 1-bedroom and 72 2-bedroom/bedroom & den.  He added that they are looking at a predominantly 1-bedroom market.

Ms. Franson suggested that the regulating plan set forth the number of units by bedroom count.

Mr. Dance wondered whether or not the applicant would need to return to the Town Board over the change in bedroom count.

Ms. Terhune responded that she would check into this.

Mr. Dance then wondered whether or not a public hearing would be required at the Planning Board level for the revisions as proposed, suggesting that a hearing had been conducted previously.

Following some minimal discussion, it was agreed that there would not be a public hearing.

Mr. Hoffman reiterated that he would prepare an analysis incorporating all of the comments as well as his recommendations for the Board and present this to them at least 1 week prior to their next meeting, which would give them enough time to review the findings and prepare to vote on the revision.

Mr. Reardon asked Mr. Dance whether or not he had a specific builder in mind and if so, if they might be able to provide the Board with examples of other similar projects to look at.

Mr. Dance responded that the builders would build the project to code.

r. Reardon acknowledged that they were in a bit of a sticky situation, further noting that they wanted to build something that people will like so that they can attract residents.

Mr. Dance agreed, but expressed displeasure with the idea that the number of parking spaces and change in bedroom count were causing delay, commenting “this is ridiculous.”

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting July 11, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the June 13, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site Plan Review
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 12.2
4. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Revised Site Plan
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
5. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting June 13, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, June 13 at 7pm.  All members were present.

Public Hearing – Steve Dougherty – Lot Line Change:
In completing a recent survey of their property, the applicant discovered that a small, triangular section of land, directly adjacent to their own, was actually owned by the Town.  They subsequently approached the Town and offered to buy the land and the Town agreed.  They are now requesting a lot line change, which would ultimately fold the triangular portion into their property.

The public hearing was opened.  There were no comments from the public and therefore the hearing was closed.

Steve Dougherty – Lot Line Change:
Following some very brief discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of assigning the application a Negative Declaration under SEQRA.  They then voted unanimously in favor of approving the application.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Site Plan Review:
Revised plans were presented and reviewed.  The applicant has been progressing steadily with both the site plans and the architectural plans for the construction of two additional buildings at the Tuxedo Manor Apartments, to be located behind the existing ones.  They are looking to move forward with the SEQRA process, which would allow them to go to applicable outside agencies in order to obtain the necessary permits and/or approvals so that they can move forward with the project.

Board Attorney, Alyse Terhune confirmed that the Board could move forward with declaring themselves as Lead Agency for the project as the notice of intent had been circulated to the other Boards and there were no objections.  Further she advised that the Board could type the application as an Unlisted Action however, they were not quite ready to give the Negative Declaration as requested.

Board Engineer Sean Hoffman added that while there were no engineering related SEQRA issues, Consultant Bonnie Franson, who was not present, had indicated that a wetlands report was still needed along with an ecological survey and a closer look at endangered species/cultural resources. 

The applicant responded that since there would be less than 1/10 of an acre of wetlands disturbance, they did not feel that a report was necessary.  There followed some discussion, during which Mr. Hoffman explained to the Board that the applicant would need to contain the area of disturbance to 1 acre or less, or else they would have to re-engineer/design the entire project because there would be additional drainage requirements.  The applicant is very much aware of this and committed to keeping within the 1-acre limits.  The applicant also informed that Board that the endangered species had already been looked at and it had been determined that there would not be an issue, particularly with timber rattlesnakes which have been known to nest in that area.  He further commented that they would be able to pull together anything else that was needed for the Negative Declaration in a timely manner and requested that  the coordinate so that this could happen at the next meeting.

Ms. Terhune advised that the applicant would  need a variance from the ZBA in order to progress, but they would not be able to go before that Board until the SEQRA process had been closed.

There followed some discussion with regard to the flagging of various areas on the site as well as the labeling/identification of the various roadways leading into the complex for the Fire Department.

The Board then voted unanimously in favor of typing the application as an Unlisted Action and it was agreed that a Negative Declaration would be drafted for the next meeting.

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Revised Site Plan/Special Permit Amendment – Review of Building Materials:
Andrew Dance of Related provided the Board with a brief over-view/update before turning things over to his consultants for a presentation of the revised site plan for a portion of North Ridge, which is a part of the first residential phase of the development.

In brief, he explained that Related has submitted an application for an amendment  to the Special Permit, which would allow for a change in the previously approved building materials for the project.  After reviewing this themselves, the Town Board has referred the application to the ARB as well as the County for their comments.  Related is hopeful that they will be able to arrange for a Public Hearing on these proposed changes at the July 10 Town Board meeting.  In the meantime, a mock-up, utilizing some of the proposed material and consisting of windows, a door, siding and a roof, will be constructed near the construction trailer on the Tuxedo Farms Site by the end of the week and Mr. Dance invited the Planning Board members to come by and take a look.

Moving on to the presentation, he explained that there were really two big changes being proposed in Pine Crest (the name that has been assigned to the first neighborhood in the North Ridge phase) and these are the elimination of garages and subsequent move to surface parking, which will allow them to invest more money in the actual living spaces, as well as a condensing in size of the neighborhood and overall reduction in the amount of land disturbance.

A power point presentation featuring the proposed changes was then given.
The developer’s consultants explained that the purpose behind the proposed revisions was to take advantage of the landscape while breaking up the originally proposed, larger apartment complexes into smaller buildings, the design of which would be more in keeping with the architecture that already exists in the Hamlet.   The neighborhood will be constructed in hillside a loop, with the buildings on the uphill portion serviced by a large parking lot and those on the downhill side by street parking on both sides of the roadway.   The proposed Clubhouse and pool will be located right in the center of the loop and both will have “dramatic views” of the landscape.  Rough design renderings were presented.  The “uphill” buildings will be four stories in height and will consist of 12 units each, while the “downhill” buildings will each have 8 units.  Design renderings and floor plan proposals were shown.

Board member Linda Phelps expressed some concern with the street parking, commenting that most multi-person households maintained two cars.  She wondered if there would be enough parking on the street or if residents would have to “jockey for spots.”

Mr. Dance responded that they anticipated 1 & 1/2 cars per unit, commenting that many of the units in this neighborhood had only one bedroom.  He believes that there will be ample parking and that the situation can be easily managed. 

Board member Ray Ferri expressed concern with regard to the street parking and snowfall, wondering whether the cars would be plowed in.

Mr. Dance replied that the area did not receive a ton of snow fall annually….maybe only 1 or 2 big storms and he believed it could be easily managed.  He added that he lived in New York City where there was street parking and snowfall was managed well regularly.  “We don’t have an obligation to provide garage parking,” he stated.

“I am not concerned.”

Mr. Ferri responded that with all due respect to both Mr. Dance and Related, we felt that a garage might be a strong selling point in the Tuxedo area as residents need cars to get around and would want to protect them.   He was surprised to see the garages eliminated from the plan. 

Mr. Dance replied that they were responding to what both he Building Community and the Market were telling them that people wanted.  They feel that what is being proposed is what will be the most appropriate for rental products in this area.

Referencing images from the presentation, Board member John Ruel inquired about the steep access to the uphill units from the roadway.

It was explained that in addition to the steep stairs pictured, the units would also be accessible from a parking lot in the back. 

Mr. Ruel wondered if there were going to be streetlights and where, as there were none indicated in presentation.

The answer was yes.  They have not got around to adding them in yet.

Ms. Tehrune commented that previously the plan was calling for Town House homes and the revision was now calling for all apartment buildings.  She suggested that they would need to look at the square footage and also review both the phasing and the Special Permit in order to make sure that what was being proposed was in line with both.  She wondered whether the applicant would require waivers from the smartcode.

Mr. Dance commented that this neighborhood had always been designated as rental.
Mr. Hoffman stated that things have basically been designed backwards, with the applicant attempting to fit the site to the architecture.  He pointed out that they are proposing a change in the classification of the roadway from LR50-25 (which is what was approved in the Special Permit) to MR6040.  The differences between the two were outlined and discussed.

Mr. Dance suggested that the roadway in question was not actually a roadway but rather a large driveway.

Mr. Hoffman responded that he was not certain that the looped road could be classified as a driveway under the Special Permit.  He is not sure whether the applicant will need a waiver or not.  The Board will need to review and make a decision.  He further suggested that there were several other items that needed to closely reviewed in conjunction with the roadway such as general access, snow removal and storage, emergency service access, mail delivery and trash pick-up.  He reiterated that in his view, things had been designed backwards.

Mrs. Phelps inquired about trash pick-up, specifically where it would occur. 

The response was that the uphill units would have trash enclosures located in the parking lot and that the downhill units would be curbside.

There followed a discussion with regard to where the downhill units would store trashcans, with various options briefly outlined. Mr. Dance feels that this is an issue that the management company will deal with.

Board Chair Mike Reardon wondered why the units were limited in size to only 1 and 2 bedrooms.

Mr. Dance replied that this is what the market currently demands.

Mr. Hoffman suggested that the consultants and the applicant hold a meeting to review the proposed revisions and ultimately determine to what extent they are possible and how to them work.

Ms. Tehrune added that she would further investigate as to whether or not waivers would be required.

Board member Darren Maynard inquired about the general time-line of the project as a whole, noting that it had been his understanding that the developer intended to construct the YMCA, located in the Commons first.

Mr. Dance responded that he while he understood why the question was being asked, he was confused as to how there could be a lack of understanding.  He went on to explain that the situation with the school district has effected the project in such a way that they feel they cannot not invest in the YMCA first, as this is geared towards families with kids.  They are continuing to closely monitor what is going on, but in the meantime feel that they will be more successful with the smaller, less family oriented units.
Chair Reardon wondered how quickly they felt they could move forward once they received approval.

Mr. Dance responded that if the revisions were approved, they hoped to move forward with securing a builder in the fall.

With regard to the timeline, Mr. Hoffman pointed out that filling & grading permits for both the Commons and Quail Road were set to expire on June 23.  These permits are only good for 1 year with a limit of 1 extension on each, and the applicant has utilized all of their extensions.  This means that as of June 23, they must be complete with their work in these areas and will not be able to return to them for further work until they have received final approval on the project.

Mr. Dance responded that he was aware of this and did not anticipate any issues.

He added that they have been working hard to address the concerns of the building community with regard to materials and architecture and design so that they could hopefully be in a position to move forward in the fall.

There followed a somewhat brief discussion with regard to the connection/access way between the Hamlet and Project.  There was some confusion as to whether what has been shown on the plans complies with what was approved and whether the applicant would have to return to the Town Board for review.

Mr. Dance indicated that this would not be necessary and that would comply.

Ultimately, it was agreed that the applicant would meet with the Board engineer and consultants as suggested by Mr. Hoffman in an effort to more clearly determine how these revisions will work, before returning to the Planning Board for further review.  A public hearing on the proposed material changes will be held at the Town Board meeting on July 10.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting June 13, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the May 9, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Steve Dougherty - Lot Line Change
   Section 17 Block 1 Lot 94
4. Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site Plan Review
   Section 14 Block l Lot 12.2
5. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Revised Site Plan
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
6. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting, May 9, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, May 9 at 2017 at 7pm.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval – 6-Month Extension:
The applicant is requesting a 6-month extension on their preliminary subdivision approval as they are still awaiting approval from the Department of Transportation. 

The Board voted unanimously in favor of approving this extension.

The issue of recent traffic backups on Rt. 17 as the result of a flagman was briefly discussed as it had been raised at the Town Board meeting the previous evening.  The applicant agreed that they would look into the situation.

Steve Dougherty – Lot Line Change:
 A survey of the property has revealed a shed encroachment and the right of way on the adjoining road is irregularly shaped there.  The applicant approached the Town Board and inquired as to whether they would be willing to transfer that portion of the property to him to clear up the encroachment.  They have agreed to sell him the land.  Plans were presented and reviewed.   The applicant is hoping to “square up” the property and eventually construct a 2-car garage there. (The garage is not a part of the current application)

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune requested proof that the land had been sold to the applicant by the Town.  Such proof can take many possible forms. 

The applicant agreed to provide this.

Topography was briefly discussed.  Ultimately it was agreed that a topography map would not be necessary.

A public hearing was set for June 13. 

Ribando Minor Subdivision – 90-day extension – Conditional Final Approval:
Board Chair Mike Reardon reported that the applicant is relatively close to completing the project but has asked for the extension in order to ensure that everything is completed.
Following minimal discussion, the Board unanimously approved the extension.

New Business:
Board Engineer Sean Hoffman reported that the Tuxedo Manor project had been flagged out as requested by the Board.  The project surveyor has reached out and would like to know whether the Board has had the opportunity to walk the property.  The answer is yes.  The Board has some questions with regard to the various different colors of marking tape and what they represent.  Additionally, they expressed some concern about the marshy, wetness of the property.  The drainage will have to be reviewed.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting, May 9, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the April 5, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - Preliminary Subdivision Approval - 6 Month Extension
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34_2
4. Steve Dougherty - Lot Line Change
   Section 1 7 Block 1 Lot 94
5. Ribando Minor Subdivision - 90 day extension - Conditional Final Approval
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
6. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting April 5, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Wednesday April 5, 2017 at 7pm.  Board Chair Mike Reardon was absent.  Board member Darren Maynard ran the meeting in his absence.

Robert Guggisberg – Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Site Plan Approval:
An attorney and engineer representing the applicant presented the Board with revised plans for the project, which was last before them in November of 2016.  Since that time, the applicant has met with the Fire Marshall and as a result, some changes have been made to the plan.  These include the installation of a water main, and this will need to be approved by the Board of Health.  The Fire Department has also indicated that the buildings must be serviced by sprinklers and is requesting the installation of new hydrant.  Additional changes include the shifting of the proposed buildings by roughly two feet, which bring them into alignment with the existing buildings and allow for more appropriate space between the structures.  The area between the two buildings will be striped off as per the Fire Commissioner and they will also be striping off an area at one end of the parking lot to allow for turn-around.  The parking spots have been widened slightly.  Additionally, a wetland specialist has visited the property and prepared a memo in response to some questions posed by Town Planner Bonnie Franson.  The applicant is also awaiting the results of a Phase 1 Archeological Study.

The shifting of the buildings will create an encroachment on the side yard setback and therefore, a variance from the ZBA is needed.  The land in question belongs to Tuxedo Farms and the applicant is hopeful that the developer will re-convey this portion of land over to them.  This was discussed.

Although the Applicant was hoping that the Planning Board would declare themselves as Lead Agency thus initiating the SEQRA process, it was agreed that before that can happen, the Department of Health must sign off on the proposed water main and hydrant.

Drainage, lighting and landscaping plans are still to come.

Tree Mapping requirements were discussed, with the Applicant hoping that these could be waived since they would ultimately be clear-cutting much of the property.

It was agreed that while it might be possible to waive these requirements for the area that is to be clear-cut, the edge of the site was a different story as there may be significant trees there that will be affected.  Board Attorney Alyse Tehrune suggested that the Board schedule a site visit for the purpose of viewing this first hand as it would be hard to waive a requirement without taking a first hand look at the affected area.  The Board was in agreement that this would be helpful.

C & E Autobody – 1027 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
An Engineer representing the applicant presented the Board with general plans for revisions to the C & E Autobody site, located on the corner of Route 17 and Old Orange Turnpike.  In summary, the property is leased by the owners of C & E, who have built a successful business there over the last several years. The current use however differs in some places from the property owner’s original intent when the building was constructed and therefore, there are some violations that C & E would like to address through renovation and amended plans.  There have also been some complaints with regard to the aesthetics specifically as they pertain to numerous cars stored on the property.  As C & E is on the Town’s tow list, they need a locked area in which to store vehicles.

Ultimately, they would like to move vehicle storage from the south end of the property to the north and install privacy fencing around it.  They have not yet filed an application with the Planning Board however, as they need to obtain an affidavit from the property owner before doing so.  They do not anticipate any problems with this. 

Ms. Terhune reported that the Town Building Inspector has made an initial report but has indicated that he has an issue with regard to the proposed impound lot as the code does not address lots of this nature.  He is currently out of town, but would like the opportunity to discuss this with the Police Department. Ms. Terhune suggested that she would discuss this with him when he returned, further noting that if they could not come up with a workable interpretation of the code, a variance from the BZA would be required.

There was a brief discussion with regard to the proposed privacy fencing.  Ultimately, this falls under the purview of the Architectural Review Board.

It was determined that no action would be taken by the Planning Board until a formal application has been filed. 

Other/New Business:
An Engineer representing Tuxedo Hudson Company provided the Board with a brief update as to the progress of the project.  The applicant is working on revisions, including more specific determination of uses for the various spaces.  They have also been working to resolve issues with proposed bussing and believe they may have found a solution in using slightly smaller busses.  They are busily compiling a master list of variances they will need to obtain from the Board of Zoning Appeals and also looking to move forward with any necessary approvals from the Town Board.

Board member Linda Phelps inquired about the proposed lodging, noting that one plan called for a hotel while a revised draft referred to a motel.  She wondered if there was any difference between the two.

The applicant responded that neither were accurate descriptions and what was being proposed would actually be referred to as “guest lodging.”

This was briefly discussed.  The applicant is looking to provide 11 rooms in total.  The next submission will include floor plans, which will provide the details of what is being requesting.

Mrs. Phelps wondered how many guests would be staying in each room.

Board engineer Sean Hoffman commented that the code does have a provision for this, restricting the number of adults to 3 per room.  9 of the proposed rooms currently comply with these restrictions and 2 will need variances. 

An Attorney for the applicant raised the issue of the County Grant from the Industrial Development Agency.  The application for this essentially mirrors the one that has been submitted to the Planning Board.  Part of the Grant process requires that the Town declare themselves as lead agency as part of the SEQRA process.  This is problematic as the Planning Board is already looking to declare themselves as lead agency.

Ultimately, 2 EAFs (Environmental Assessment Forms) will be required; the first as part of the Planning Board approval process and the second in accordance with the Grant.  The actions differ slightly as the Planning Board is reviewing the site plan only and the IDA will be looking at the entire plan.

Following some discussion with regard to the funding, it was agreed that Ms. Terhune would speak to the Town Attorney in an effort to provide some direction as to how they should move forward with this.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting April 5, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the February 14, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Robert Guggisberg - Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site plan approval - Section 14 - Block 1 - Lot 12.2
4. C & E Autobody - 1027 Route 17 - Site plan review - Setion 5 - Block 4 - Lot 9
5. Adjournment

back to top

Joint Town Board, Planning Board and Architectural Review Board Tuxedo Farms Workshop March 6, 2017

The Town held a workshop meeting for members of the Town Board, Planning Board and Architectural Board of Review on Monday, March 6, 2017 at 6 pm.  The purpose of the workshop was to review the changes being proposed by Related Companies for the Tuxedo Farms project. 

Andrew Dance of Related stated that a letter had been sent to the Town Board in December asking for several amendments to the Special Permit.  In brief, they are requesting the use of vinyl siding for some structures, a reduction in roof pitch on some structures and  assurance that if a building meets the design guidelines as outlined in the Permit, it will be approved by the Architectural Review Board. Additionally, Related has engaged the architectural firm of Torti Gallas a firm, which deals with designs of master planned communities. 

Councilperson Loncar asked Mr. Dance to give an update as to where they stand with the project. 

Mr. Dance responded that they are continuing to work on “earthwork,” moving down Quail Road to Route 17. They will also be moving forward with work on the Southern Entrances (near Jessie’s Bagels) and will be doing some stonework going down to Route 17 near the old Applewood Kennels working on the entrance as well as storm water drainage.  Mr. Dance remarked that they feel they have had a very successful earthwork campaign thus far, with little to no interference with neighboring houses and no water supply issues.  They are also working with Orange and Rockland on the gas and electric service to the project and that work will likely continue through the summer.  Finally, the new sewer plant is coming along nicely, however in order to turn it on, they need effluent from the project as the Town doesn’t generate enough for the plant to run properly. 

Brian O’Looney and Mark ­­­­­Bombaugh from Torti Gallas then gave a presentation on the proposed changes to the design guidelines.  To view a copy of this presentation, click here. 

In summation, Torti Gallas’s goal is to retain the standards that are already in the Special Permit while  at the same time making the project buildable for builders in ways that are not visible to the general public.  They repeatedly emphasized that they would like to
make sure that the vision presented in the Special Permit is actually achieved.

Specifically, they recommend that some vinyl siding (but not ALL brands) be approved for use in certain neighborhoods within the development, although not on all the buildings, and that more relaxed roof pitches and slopes be allowed.  They also suggested that  some pc and urethane and vinyl window products be permitted.    They aim to come up with a list of approved products that will help the buildings in the development both to look better and retain those looks over a longer period of time.  

Councilperson Loncar said that he had been working in construction for over 20 years and didn’t really have a great opinion of vinyl siding.  He feels that it is not the quality, which was promised in the Smart Code.  He asked if they were talking about seamed or seamless siding.  The architects responded that they have done work with both.

Referencing some comments made during the presentation Councilperson Lindsay expressed some concern over the fact that the vinyl siding would “take work to get it right.” She wondered if this meant that there would be more oversight needed on the project than was previously proposed?

Andrew Dance responded that the builders they are talking to are largely from New Jersey and they are all working almost exclusively with the materials which are being proposed. He feels that “practice makes perfect,” and that these builders have had a lot od practice so an extraordinary amount of oversight would not be required.  

Since the presentation suggested that these new materials would work better with some of the proposed home styles (Adirondack, Hudson River Dutch, Hudson River Gothic and Greek Revival) and not others Councilperson Loncar wondered if there would be a specific ratio of which styles of houses would be allowed. 

Mr. Dance responded that the Special Permit requires that there be a certain amount of variety but that it does not get any more specific than that. 

Mark Bombaugh added that by specifying that the materials were allowed on 4 different styles, they should end up with a variety of housing. 

Councilperson Reardon asked how the change in materials would affect the pricing of the houses. 

Andrew Dance replied that at $1.5 Million this region, what is being proposed is the predominant kind of construction that is being built.  

Mrs. Reardon countered that she felt the reason that more builders were using the materials in question was because they were able to build houses at a reduced cost.

Mr. Dance remarked that there were regions in the country where it was actually cheaper to use hardy board and that this was because in those areas, the labor force was more skilled in using those materials. This is not the case in the North East region. 

Planning Board Member John Ruel asked if vinyl siding was allowed, on what percentage of the houses would it be used? 

Mr. Dance replied that they had no way of knowing but added that he did not see clapboard in use anywhere in this region.  When questioned by Councilperson Reardon, he stated that the inability to use vinyl was a “non starter” for the builders in this region. 
Councilperson Loncar stated that it had taken 20 years to plan this community and the design standards that they ended up with were ones that everyone wanted.  Now he fears that if they move ahead with what is being proposed, the Town would be getting an inferior product, which will not look anything like what everyone envisioned.  

He was reminded that the Town has an Architectural Review Board who can simply say no. 

Brian O’Looney suggested that by specifying high end products, he felt they could circumvent this problem.  The goal is to create a bridge between the feedback from prospective builders and the Town’s standards. 

George McCathern, member of the Architectural Review Board. expressed his concern about allowing cheaper products.  He wondered who would control how the vinyl siding was being installed. Additionally, Mr. McCathern stated that he wasn’t against using some of the new products that had been proposed and that he isn’t afraid of change, but he has seen a lot of bad looking vinyl siding.    Should they see siding going up that they felt didn’t look good, he noted that they would not have the power to make the builders take it down.  Who will control the builders who have signed on to the project because they can build cheaper products?  Who will make sure that the vinyl siding goes up properly?  He added that he has seen some vinyl siding in New Jersey that looks “horrible.” 

Councilperson Mcmillen said he would like to know how the Town would be able to enforce the quality of construction. 

Mr. Dance then stated that the design guidelines in the Special Permit were written in 2004 and haven’t been changed since.  He believes, these guidelines are just not what builders are doing today.  He went on to state that no one wanted to build cheap houses.   Vinyl is the product that builders are using now he feels that it looks very nice.  He suggested that the Board members take a few field trips and look at some examples of what he was referring to.

Given that Mr. Dance had suggested that not being able to use vinyl siding was a “non-starter” for many builders, Councilperson Lindsay wondered whether the French Country, English Country, English Arts and Crafts or Shingle styles homes would be eliminated altogether as certain styles in the Design Guidelines have been determined to not work well with the siding. Mr. Dance replied that they were starting with areas of the development, which were determined by lot size.  They feel it’s important to get “critical mass” into the development at the beginning of the project in order to generate success. All the houses proposed for these areas are ones designed to be below a million dollars in price.   However, as they move on to the other areas of the development, he feels that the styles Mrs. Lindsay has mentioned will then be appropriate. 

Mr. McCathern wondered how they would be able to make the builders use the higher priced materials. 

He was told that the later parts of the project would have higher priced, bigger homes and that people who wanted those, typically want the higher priced materials.  Which materials are used will depend on the buyers, what they want and what they are willing to pay for. 

Councilperson Loncar asked if Related would be agreeable to making the front of the houses as specified in the Special Permit and then allowing the sides and back of the houses to be built with vinyl siding. 

Mr. Dance responded that while that sounded very reasonable to him, it was not what builders were doing or asking for. 

Brian O’Looney suggested that Mr. Loncar might not be happy with that combination as it didn’t always work well. 

Planning Board Chair Mike Reardon wondered what would happen if the vinyl siding was tied to Related’s staying involved with the project so that if Related were to walk away from the project, then the vinyl siding would go as well? 

Mr. Dance responded that he didn’t know how this could be done.

Councilperson Mcmillen then asked for clarification as to what exactly was being asked for.  Specifically, he wondered if it was just an adjustment of roof pitch and vinyl siding.

Several people called out that there were changes to the windows as well and that was confirmed.  Brian O’Looney mentioned that there were other changes..

Town Attorney Don Nichol then stated that the Town wanted a redlined version of the proposal so they could see more accurately and quickly what was being asked for.  He was told that this would be submitted.

It was agreed that in order to move forward the Special Permit would need to be amended so that it could include approved products and materials.  Mr. Nichol stated he thought the Boards would need time to think about this and discuss it based on the presentation they had just viewed. 

George McCathern stated that what was upsetting him was that a lot of the things that were being asked for now were things that had been rejected when putting together the guidelines that are in the existing permit. 

He was told that some of the pictures he was referring to were not being recommended, and that the point of the pictures was to showcase the builders and what they were producing. 

Mr. Dance was then asked to put together a list of communities with houses showcasing what was being asked for that members of the Board could easily go visit in order tosee first hand what was being discussed. 

Mr. Dance responded that his letter from December provided such a list. 

Mark Bombaugh stated that Tuxedo has a really great code in the Special Permit and that Related is only looking to amend small parts of it. 

Supervisor Rost commented that his opinion was that it didn’t matter if the material was vinyl or hardy pine. The Town will need to “hold the builders’ feet to the fire” and that no matter what the material is, “it has to go up right.”  He further stated that he thought they needed to take a look at the Town’s ARB to make sure they have everything they need in order to enforce the code. 

It was agreed that Related would submit a redlined copy of the proposal with a list of the materials that are being proposed. 

Councilperson Reardon reiterated that the Boards had spent more than 20 years working on this project and now when the end is so close, she feels an obligation to work together with the developer to make sure that what the Town ends up with is everything that they want and everything that they know it can be. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting March 14, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the February 14, 2017 Meeting Minutes
3. Robert Guggisberg - Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site plan approval - Section 14 - Block 1 - Lot 12.2
4. C & E Autobody - 1027 Route 17 - Site plan review - Setion 5 - Block 4 - Lot 9
5. Adjournment

back to top

Joint Town Board, Planning Board and Architectural Review Board Public Workshop Regarding Tuxedo Farms March 6

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Town Board of the Town of Tuxedo will hold, a public joint workshop involving the Town Board, Planning Board and ARB with Related Co. to review the progress and to review proposed changes of the Tuxedo Farms project.  Community Room, One Temple Drive, Tuxedo, New York, on Monday, March 6, 2017 at 6:00 p.m.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting February 14, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 7pm.  Board member Ray Ferri was absent.

Joseph & Nancy Ribando – 90-Day Extension – Conditional Final Approval:
On behalf of the applicant, Engineer Mike Sandour provided the Board with a brief update.  Some minor changes as requested by the Town Engineer were submitted just prior to the meeting.  There was a brief discussion with regard to required easements as well as bonding.  It was determined that the Planning Board and not the Town Board will be responsible for approving the Bond and the process for moving forward in that regard was outlined.

The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a 90-day extension through May of 2017. 

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Clearing Filling  & Grading – Historic Landfill:
Representatives for Tuxedo Farms were not present., however following a brief recap/update from Town Engineer Sean Hoffman, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the applicant an amendment to their permit which will allow for the closing of a historic landfill as well as the construction of an emergency access road.

Tuxedo Hudson Company – 215 Route 17 – Site Plan Review:
Revised plans for the project were presented and discussed.  The Applicant has been before the TAC and has also made a preliminary presentation to the Architectural Review Board.  They will also need to appear before the Zoning Board for a number of variances.    The Board attorney advised that the applicant pin all of these down along with their bulk table.

The Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of declaring themselves as Lead Agency under SEQRA, with a designation of unlisted action, thus initiating that process.   Involved agencies will now have a 30 day window to comment.  Board Attorney Alyse Terhune advised that the SEQRA process should be closed before either the ARB or the ZBA render any decisions.

Some details of the application were then discussed.  Parking continues to be one of the biggest issues.  The applicant intends to demolish the Junction building and create parking there, but even with those spaces added in, there exist roughly 42 spaces and 130 are needed.   

Board Engineer Sean Hoffman asked the Applicant to provide a brief overview of the various proposed uses in the different spaces.

Mr. Bruno then outlined his plan as follows:

The Junction will be demolished with that space to be converted into a parking lot.  The IGA Building will house a market and bar/restaurant on the main floor, with another possible restaurant in the basement.  The second floor will have a motel and a rooftop bar is being considered as well.

The existing space on Store Road will be converted into retail with residential housing on the second floor and the building to be constructed next door will also house commercial/retail business on the ground floor with office space above it.

Mr. Hoffman advised that bars are not currently listed in the permitted uses and that they should check with the Building Inspector on this in order to determine the best way to proceed.  He further noted that the motel would require a special use permit from the BZA.  He went on the caution that with regard to the commercial/retail mixed-use space, the applicant was running a bit of a risk by generically labeling these spaces and not nailing down the precise types of business in that he may ultimately need to repeat the process should any of these require different permitting once the final decisions have been made.

Board member John Ruel inquired as to whether or not the applicant could split the application in order to move forward with some parts of the project while waiting to firm up others.

Mr. Hoffman responded that this could be done and it was decision that would ultimately be up to the applicant.

Ms. Terhune advised that doing this could result in the need to go through SEQRA multiple times.

Board member Darren Maynard suggested that defining the uses sooner would alleviate this.

Mr. Bruno commented that it was nice to know that this was an option.

Parking was then discussed at some length. 

It was suggested that staggering the timing of business/events in some of the spaces might help, however Mr. Bruno rejected this idea, further commenting that although he did not anticipate that all of the spaces would be full at the same time, he did not want to limit himself in anyway.  He went on to explain that he saw the different spaces as separate venues.  The IGA building as one venue does not work in his view.  In order for the project to work, he will need to bus in people.  It would not make sense to make the project for the locals only as the numbers are horrible.  For him, it is about promoting Tuxedo by making use of the surrounding Parks and things like Woodbury Commons.  He freely admits that parking is a big challenge, but feels that they all need to keep challenging themselves to come up with a solution.  He expects that they might have to make multiple parking deals/arrangements.

Routing of busses was then discussed with emphasis on how the busses would be turning on and off of Route 17 and, more specifically, whether or not there was enough space for them to navigate the proposed route without encroaching on oncoming traffic.

A few different scenarios were proposed and briefly discussed.

Ultimately it was determined that the applicant would return to the Planning Board in March, by which time they should be able to move forward with the SEQRA process.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting February 14, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the January 10, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Joseph & Nancy Ribando - 90 Day Extension - Conditional Final Approval
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
4. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Clearing Filling and Grading - Historic Landfill Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
5. Tuxedo Hudson Company - 215 Route 17 - Site Plan Review
   Section 11 Block 5 Lot 5.2
6. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting January 10, 2017

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, January 10 at 7pm.
Board member Darren Maynard was absent.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Clearing, Filling & Grading – Historic Landfill:

Before opening the hearing, Board Chair Mike Reardon called on Town Engineer Sean Hoffman to provide some prospective as to what the hearing was about. Mr. Hoffman explained that the applicant was hoping to amend the previous filling & grading permit granted for the sanitary sewer lines to include some landfill closure work (also previously approved as part of a landfill closure plan) on roughly 1.15 acres of a landfill adjacent to where will be working. The work is required by the DEC. A public hearing had been set for 1/10 conditional upon the submission of an erosion control plan. The Town is in receipt of this plan as of December 20.

Chair Reardon added that to date, there has been no response from the County on this issue therefore the Planning Board would not able to take action that evening.

On behalf of the Related Companies, Henry Heffner added that they were also hoping to discuss the emergency access road and the clearing & grading for this, however it was his understanding that they were awaiting a response from the County on that as well.

He wondered whether or not the Planning Board could issue an approval contingent upon County approval.

Board attorney Alyse Terhune advised him that they could not act until either 30 days had passed or they had a response from the County.

Mr. Hoffman asked Mr. Hefner if he could provide the Board with more information concerning the emergency access road, specifically how and why it had been added.

Mr. Heffner complied, explaining that it made sense for them to construct the road while they were already working area. The level of disturbance will be quite small with only .25 acres being affected.

The hearing was then opened.

There were no questions or comments from the public.

With regard to the emergency access road, Town Planner Bonnie Franson asked the applicant whether the road would be used solely for emergency access and not for construction vehicles.

The answer was yes.

She wondered whether or not there was a gate planned and further suggested that if there were not, they should make sure to place one there.

Mr. Heffner responded that they could do this, but he felt such a gate would be easily circumvented. He suggested that they could place large boulders along the edge instead, which would make it more difficult for a vehicle to get through.

Ms. Franson agreed that they could do this, but further stated that down the line, there would need to be a gate there.

There followed some further discussion regarding the landfill closure work and also bonding.

The public hearing was then closed.

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Clearing, Filling & Grading – Historic Landfill:

Chair Reardon reiterated that the Planning Board could not approve the application at this time as they have not had the necessary response from the County.

It was agreed that Ms. Terhune would draft a resolution for approval at their February 14meeting.

Tuxedo Hudson Company – 215 Route 17 – Informal Site Plan Review:

On behalf of Tuxedo Hudson Company, Michael Bruno commented that they were very excited to get going with the project. They have hired a team of architects as well as a design crew, all of whom are “ready to go” once the necessary approvals have been obtained. He then presented the Board with some drawings, commenting that they were still in progress and only 80% finished at this time. He went on to say that in looking at the property and that of the Junction next door, they had decided that they really wanted to put all of their energy into one building and in so doing create a market, a bar and a restaurant all under the same roof, with a small hotel upstairs. They would then utilize the space where the Junction currently sits for parking. They would like to create a “green belt” across the front of the entire property, constructing a new sidewalk, which will be closer to the building further setback from the Route 17. This would connect to the existing path that leads behind the Church and up towards the High School. They would also like to create a new sidewalk along of the back of the building, continuing past Stevens & Sweet all the way to the library. The hope is that ultimately there will exist a pedestrian walkway leading all the way from the High School to the Train Station.

In looking at all the different opportunities to make the Market building successful, Mr. Bruno commented that he felt everyone knew that they could not wait until Related’s project was finished for an influx of people and therefore they would need to integrate some way that made Tuxedo a destination. Fortunately in Tuxedo there are a lot of different demographics of people to pull from in creating a destination. For example, there are tons of people who travel to Woodbury Commons and to the Watchtower location. What they need to do is to find a way to make it easy for visitors to get to Tuxedo that will still be aesthetically attractive and to this end they have created a path in the back where a bus can stop to load and unload, and possibly park if they are unable to find another spot. Plans for this bus stop were then briefly described including a pedestrian walkway and a covered entryway into the rear of the building with access to the market, bar, restaurant and restrooms. To-go foods will be available from the front of the building.

They would like to remove the brick facing from the building and revert back to stucco, which is what was pre-existing. They have already done this to a portion of the building in the back. In the front of the building they would like to have a covered walkway, similar to what one might see in the Meat Packing District of NYC with a steal and glass roof supported from above. They feel this will be the right look for the building because in a way, it vanishes while remaining classic in design and allowing for a lot of light.

Ms. Franson wondered if they would be stuccoing the brick.

Mr. Bruno responded that they would be removing the brick entirely and that it was, in fact, fake brick. At this point, they do not know what the condition of the stucco underneath the brick will be. They may need to recoat the entire building.

Mr. Bruno went on to say that the real issue was that in order for them to look at the viability of the whole thing and to create something that begins to feel like a village, they would like 3 Store Road, which is where their offices currently sit behind the building, to feel more like a bustling Village street with the open market entrance and some shops and traffic. To this end they would also like to put in some outdoor seating in that area and also add a new structure in order to allow for some retail. The hope is to create 5 small “boutiquey” type spots, which they could then rent to various businesses (gallery, bookstore, ice cream etc.) Ultimately, the hope is that tour companies etc. will stop here for lunch etc. bringing in even more business. In the basement of the building will be what Mr. Bruno referred to as “the hall of loos” where there would be enough toilets to accommodate a bus full of people. If all of this works, there will be a village center of sorts located behind the building, removed from 17, yet still visible and eye catching.

Chair Reardon wondered whether or not Mr. Bruno had showed any of these drawings to the ARB.

The answer was no.

Mr. Bruno continued on to say that he felt that the historic aspects of the building were mostly being restored. The original building had blacktop in front, however they would rather utilize the Junction space for parking and “green up” the front of the property.
Bussing and parking were then discussed, with Mr. Bruno suggesting the idea of valet parking in the evenings and on weekends utilizing the Town Hall parking lot as well as potentially the lower lot at the High School and the Train Station Parking lot, when it is not being used by permitted commuters. He also suggested that the skate park, known as “the lucky” which is located in the East Village, could possibly be relocated to Powerhouse Park, which would allow for additional parking that would be convenient to the trailheads as well. Visitors could park there and walk across the bridge to the Market. They recently discovered that the railway crossing in this area is an officially designated pedestrian crossing by the DOT, which means it is the DOT’s job to maintain it and keep it safe.

Handicapped accessibility was briefly discussed.

Proposed landscaping for the front of the building was then reviewed, with Mr. Bruno explaining that they would like to remove the “hump” of driveway replacing it with sidewalk, grass and a terrace. The existing retaining wall will be removed.

Chair Reardon then inquired about the upstairs portion of the building.

Mr. Bruno responded that it was designed to be a small inn to attract people who were hiking and using the trail system, but they also expect that it will be used by guests of Tuxedo residents. Additionally, if the restaurant is as good as they hope it will be, they hope to attract people who might want to take the train to Tuxedo, enjoy a hike, have “an amazing meal” and then spend the night (or even skip the hike and spend the night!)
Chair Reardon responded that he had heard the word “hostel” and he did not like the sound of this.

Mr. Bruno responded that they wanted the inn to be appealing to young people who were out hiking on the Appalachian Trail.

Chair Reardon countered that he did not envision anyone who came to Tuxedo for a hike spending the night. He further commented that hikers came into town to use the bathroom and that was it.

Mr. Bruno responded that there were a lot of people who tended to come off the trail for a night or two but if they did not, they could convert the rooms to single occupancy. That being said, he would prefer to remain “young hiker friendly” as this demographic can afford these types of rooms and not the other kind.

There followed a brief discussion about the Tuxedo Motel in Southfields.

Mr. Bruno suggested that there were a lot of studies that showed that putting a small hotel in the center of a town reactivated the area as it promoted openness. It is important to bring new people, strangers, in to the town center.

Ms. Franson suggested that in order to create the guest rooms, they would need to obtain a permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Ms. Terhune suggested that they ought to review the procedure/process for approval, noting that SEQRA and an EAF would be necessary. The consultants will all need hard copies of the plans as well.

Mr. Bruno requested that the plans they were currently reviewing not be distributed to the public as they are not final and they would prefer to have things finalized before receiving any public comment.

Ms. Terhune pointed out that the current plans were subject to FOIL as they had been formally submitted. They are a part of the public record.

Mr. Bruno responded that he understood this but wanted to note that it was still a work in progress.

Chair Reardon stated that in general, he did not like to provide the public with any un-finalized project plans during meetings.

Ms. Terhune continued that as soon as the EAF had been submitted and reviewed, the Planning Board would likely declare Lead Agency status and then circulate the plans.

The ZBA would have to be involved under the current zoning and a waiver from the moratorium will be required. The ARB will also have to review the plans.

Mr. Bruno then reported that he had received a grant from the State for $750,000 for the project that will be spread between Tuxedo and Sloatsburg. He further commented that he didn’t think anyone would be surprised to learn that they would be seeking additional available monies for the town of Tuxedo as ultimately that project could end up being a ten million dollar investment.

Ms. Franson wondered whether or not there had been any conversations with the Department of Transportation with regard to the proposed right of way.

The answer was no, but they will be reaching out to them.

She further suggested that because of the building’s age, the project should also be sent to the State Historic Preservation Office for review.

Mr. Bruno wondered whether this was a suggestion or a requirement and Ms. Franson informed him that it was part of the environmental review process.

Mr. Hoffman noted that once the SEQRA documentation had been provided they would have a better glimpse at what was being proposed and who the interested agencies would be. Moving forward, the process would be hinged on SEQRA.

Chair Reardon also suggested that Mr. Bruno take a sketch to the ARB for review.

Ms. Terhune suggested that the consultants would also need to have some information with regard to the amount of types of traffic that could be expected and how the traffic patterns might flow.

With regard to traffic, Board member John Ruel commented that he liked the idea of having the busses come in behind the building, but expressed some concern with their turn onto the back road, noting that he wanted to make sure there was enough room for them to get around the corner by the Library. He suggested that another possible option would be for the busses to cut through the lot on the side of the building.

Mr. Bruno responded that ultimately, most of the parking in that area would be eliminated. He further stated “Just so it’s clear, if we can’t find a comfortable way to get the busses in and out of this site, I don’t think I can do the project. Just so you know. Because without the ability to attract the extra bodies, the amount we’re investing in this building will never pay and I am better off just to say ‘bye-bye.”

Board member John Ruel responded that he believed that ultimately they would work it out, but that they needed to be aware of the potential concerns in that area.

Mr. Bruno reiterated that the buses were a crucial element to the success of the project.
Chair Reardon pointed out that it was not the Planning Board’s job to provide the requirements for the bus, rather this was Mr. Bruno’s job. “If you can’t find a way to get the bus out, then you make your own decision. It’s not our decision.”

Mr. Bruno agreed commenting he felt that they should all work together to figure it out as this was also part of the Planning Board’s job. He further stated that he was making a big investment with this project and he was not going to do it unless he could guarantee himself that they could do a good job where they could get the necessary bodies in and out….other wise, why bother?

Board member Joe Gartiser suggested that the engineer would look into what had been proposed and make a determination.

Mr. Hoffman responded that he wanted to clarify exactly what his role was in the process. The applicant needs to project to work from a business prospective as well as from a traffic safety and pedestrian circulation prospective. The applicant knows his building and he knows the type of people he would like to bring in. The assumption is that the applicant will review all possible options within the downtown area and then come to Board with their preferred option. The engineer will then review and comment on that, outlining the applicants’ responsibilities under the Code. He did not anticipate that the Board would want their firm to participate in solving any potential traffic issues.

Chair Reardon agreed, noting that ultimately, if the bus companies could not comfortably make the turn there, then ultimately, they probably would not come.

Mr. Bruno responded that business development was difficult in Tuxedo as there was a shortage of places to put cars. The bus is the only way to solve this problem.

Without the ability to bring people in and out this way, he feels they will never have a vibrant business on the site. He further suggested that he knew people who would happily rent the space and open a junk shop there. It doesn’t have to sit vacant forever, but it also doesn’t have to become this wonderful market, restaurant and bar.

Mr. Ruel responded that he could not speak for everyone, but he felt that they were all in agreement that they would like to see positive development on the site. The point of raising the traffic issue is only to bring it to light so that it can be resolved.

The idea of reversing the one-way street behind the building was briefly discussed.

Mr. Bruno responded that he understood, further noting that if he did not spend any of the state money in Tuxedo this year, he would spend it down in Sloatsburg, as it all needed to be spent within a year.

Mr. Gartiser commented that he felt all the feedback was positive and that they were just trying to make sure all the Ts were crossed and the Is were dotted so that Mr. Bruno did not have to keep coming back before the Board. This is another reason why it will be important for the application to go before the ARB early. This should help to fast track things.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting January 10, 2017

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the December 13, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Clearing Filling and Grading - Historic Landfill Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Tuxedo Hudson Company - 215 Route 17 - Informal Site Plan Review Section 11 Block 5 Lot 5.2
5. Adjournment

back to top

Public Hearing For Tuxedo Farms Clearing & Grading Permit - January 10, 2017

Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held before the Planning Board
of the Town of Tuxedo, New York, on the lOth day of January, 2017 at 7:00PM at
the Tuxedo Town Hall, One Temple Drive, Tuxedo, New York to consider site plan
approval on a clearing filling and grading application. The property is identified on
the Town of Tuxedo Tax Map as Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2, situated in the Rl and
R2 zoning districts. The Applicant has submitted an application to amend their
previously submitted clearing filling and grading application to cap the Historic
Landfill as required by the DEC in the North Ridge section of the Tuxedo Farms
development as well as perform addition earthwork for an emergency access road.

A complete copy of the application is available for public review in the Tuxedo
Building Department. Any interested person may attend this Public Hearing or
submit their comments in writing concerning this approval before such meeting.

The Town of Tuxedo will make every effort to ensure that the hearing is accessible
to persons with disabilities. Anyone requiring special assistance and/or reasonable
accommodations should contact the Building Department Secretary.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting December 13, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on December 13, 2016 at 7pm.

Prior to the beginning of the meeting, Board Chair Mike Reardon made the following statement:

“The group that owns the IGA building and The Tuxedo Junction has never come in front of the Tuxedo Planning Board for approvals or to share their plans.  The Tuxedo Planning Board is not holding of any plans that they may have nor are we trying to make it difficult for them.  The Tuxedo Planning Board welcomes all new business and potential projects to come in front of our Board with plans or ideas.”

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Site Plan:

The applicant presented the Board with revised plans for the Northridge subdivision, commenting that they were looking to move forward with completing the design and would like feedback from the Planning Board to aid them in getting the drawings completed.  They have already received comments from Town Engineers H2M as well as the Town Planner Bonnie Franson and they have begun filtering through these.  Ultimately, they are looking to determine what their next step should be in moving towards a final approval.  With the revised plan, the applicant has condensed the subdivision and reduced the area of disturbance.  In so doing, they have eliminated the need for quite a bit of fill as well as several retaining walls.  Ultimately, the applicant believes that reducing their land development footprint from a land development prospective will prove to be more efficient.  The unit index remains exactly the same (no changes there) and the required amount of parking has been provided.

There followed some discussion with regard to the new layout, specifically the relocation of the Clubhouse building and the pool.  Retaining pools and detention basins were also briefly discussed.  

Chair Reardon inquired as to when the applicant anticipated cutting into the roadway to run the sanitation lines over to the newly constructed waste water management facility.

The response was that test pits had actually been dug earlier that very day.  They ran into a bit of interference with some fiber-optic ducts that were not supposed to be there.  Upon further examination it was discovered that these were right in the middle of the pipe course.   The only way to get around them is to either off-set the ducts or go underneath them.  Going underneath is the preferred method.   They cannot pinpoint exactly when they will be ready to start digging, but it should be very soon and once started, should take less than a week to complete.

Bonnie Franson pointed out that on a couple of the maps, the units in the multifamily buildings were referred to as condos.  She inquired as to whether they were all still rental units or owner.  The answer was rental.

In terms of the visual appearance, Ms. Franson commented that she did not know whether or not the buildings in their new location were elevated higher and if they were, whether there was a potential for them to be visible given whatever grading and clearing needs to be done.  She further suggested that they would need to look at a couple of cross sections to see whether that was possible because then landscaping may be more important for those buildings and structures than they were previously.

Board member John Ruel agreed with this assessment, noting that with the last plan, the neighbors had been very concerned with the potential visibility and had been assured that they would not be able to see the structures.  He suggested that they would need to do a little public relations work in order to make sure that residents were aware of what was coming and also to determine what the proper landscaping course should be to account for any visible changes.

It was pointed out that the perimeter was not changing, rather the buildings in the middle were being reconfigured.  It was determined that they will be raised higher than the other buildings. 

The Planning Board requested a topographical map.  The idea of balloon testing was also raised.

Ms. Franson then stated that generally speaking, they would also require the building plans so they could see what it would actually look like because they would ultimately need to be able to relate entrances and driveways and all of these things to the buildings themselves.  This information is “part and parcel” with the site plan.  They will also need to know all of the permits and approvals and that everything is up to date because when there is a decision there may be various conditions added to it and these things would be incorporated into any resolution.  They must be very clear as to the limitations of the North Ridge area.  It is unknown as to whether or not Related plans to sell the subdivision to another developer and therefore, it is important for them to delineate the limits should that area become its own rental community.

The lines of delineation were then briefly reviewed.

Open space was discussed.

Town engineer Sean Hoffman noted for the record that he and Board attorney Alyse Terhune had confirmed that the building moratorium did not have any effect on this application.  He further suggested that the Special Permit had envisioned a mixture of housing and as construction proceeded there were supposed to be both single family homes and apartments.  Deference was given to the fact that it understood that there would be some imbalance in the beginning because of the Commons area, and the benefit that this area provided to both the project and the Town.  Since then it seems that there has been a rephrasing of sorts.  Mr. Hoffman wondered whether an original phasing plan was considered as part of the Special Permit if so, whether this would be considered a re-phasing.  Road width was then discussed as was timing for bringing the sewer plant online. 

Finally, Mr. Hoffman commented that the Special Permit ties a lot of items for the Developer to comply with in terms of the first building permits and Certificates of Occupancy.  They are requesting that the Developer go through the document and compile an extensive list of all of these triggers for the Building Department so they would be able to track them and confirm completion.  

Ms. Franson noted that it seemed as though there would be a lot of fill required in order to bring the clubhouse and the pool to grade.

The applicant responded that they were aware of this issue and they intended to address this in the next generation of the plan.

Ms. Terhune reiterated that as SEQRA has been closed the building moratorium does not have any effect on the application.  She further suggested that according to the Special Permit the Planning Board did have the authority to modify the phasing plan.  She feels that the consultants should get together and discuss whether this was a major or minor change to the phasing and provide a recommendation.  She reminded the applicant that it would be important to get the plans completed so that they could receive any additional comments.  Under the guidelines of the Special Permit, the Planning Board cannot issue an approval until the Architectural Review Board has issued their approval.

She then wondered whether there was a connection between North Ridge and the Hamlet.  The answer was yes, but it was foot path only.  

There followed a discussion as to whether or not there would be hiking trails within the development, who would have access to them and where they would lead.

Following this it was determined that the applicant would work with the various comments and continue to revise the plans as they move forward.

Tuxedo Farms – Clearing, Filling  Grading Permit for completion of historical landfill closure:

The Applicant stated that they were not sure whether or not a public hearing would be required as they believed it was a DEC requirement that they cap the landfill.  Comments from the engineer have been received.

 Ms. Franson inquired as to the general intent.

The applicant responded that it would just be capped.  For the most part, it is an Ash fill from the 20s or 30s.  It is roughly 2ft – 28ft deep.  The cap calls for clearing, grubbing and clearing out the undergrowth.  They really don’t want to disturb the surface area.  After the clearing is done, a barrier is installed to demark the area with 18 inches of common fill on top of it (they have this on site) and then 6 inches of top soil with  seeding.  Erosion control measures will be taken in the steeper areas.  These have yet to be added to the drawings.  Additionally they still need to obtain the DEC application.

Ms. Franson wondered if they were trying to get all of this done in advance of selling the property

The answer was yes.  They have the fill on site, the roads have been developed and now is the time.

There followed a discussion about who would ultimately be responsible for the land, and specifically whether it would be the HOA.

Chair Reardon wondered whether they should schedule a public hearing and Ms. Tehrune advised him that this would be the prudent thing to do.

Board member Joe Gartiser pointed out that ultimately control lay with the DEC and the Planning Board had no say.  He wondered if they really needed to have the public hearing as they would not be able to actively address any of the questions or concerns that might be put forth.

Ms. Terhune responded that she felt it was still the right thing for them to do and again recommended that they set the hearing.

There followed a discussion as to whether it should be handled through an amendment to the North Ridge permit rather than a Public Hearing, with Mr. Hoffman suggesting that having an amendment would be easier in terms of the permitting process.

Ultimately it was determined that most amendments also require a public hearing and therefore, the applicant should file for an amendment and then they could set a public hearing.  This hearing will be conditional upon the applicant’s submission of an erosion and sediment control plan within the next 7 days.  The hearing was then  tentatively set for January 10.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting December 13, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the November 9, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge- Site Plan ReviewSection 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Tuxedo Farms - Clearing Filling & Grading Permit for completion of historic landfill closure Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
5. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting November 9, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on Wednesday, November 9 at 7pm.  Board Chair Mike Reardon was absent and Darren Maynard led the meeting in his absence.

Public Hearing – Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead – Lot Line Change:

Representing both parties, Jim Sweeney provided the Board with a brief history of the property.  The applicants are ultimately seeking a lot line change, which will allow them to move 5 historical homes, once a part of Arden Farms, into the protective custody of the Orange County Historical Society for preservation.  There will be no construction and renovations are not being proposed. 

As there were no comments from the public, the hearing was closed.

Public Hearing: Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Clearing, Filling & Grading Permit Extension:

On behalf of Related Companies, Henry Haefner  explained that the developer is seeking an extension on the clearing, filling & grading permit for the West Terrace area of the project.

Jim Hays commented that he had attended a meeting last spring at which he had been assured that there would be no more tree cutting however, this has not been the case.  To the contrary, since that time there have been massive cuttings along Route 17 and within the property.  This past weekend he took a walk to Mountain Lake and was disturbed to discover that there have been huge changes made to the land there.  He suggested that if they had not done so already, the Planning Board might want to review a map of this area.  He further suggested that before they allowed any more trees to be cut, perhaps the transfer of property should be finalized as per the Special Permit.  He wondered if the pertinent paperwork had been signed/filed and if not, what the status of those agreements was.

Planning Board Attorney Alyse Terhune responded that she believed the necessary Conservation Easements and transfer of property work had been signed by both parties.

Board member John Ruel wondered what the next step was.

Ms. Terhune responded that and that they were waiting to hear from the Town.

Village of Tuxedo Park Mayor, Mary Jo Guinchard, commented that the Village had signed all of the necessary paperwork over a year ago when Andrew Dance of Related Companies had told them that “time was of the essence” for getting everything squared away.  Since that time they have been waiting to close, but Related has been stalling.  The lawyers are in communication, however Related will not move to set a closing date.  In the meantime, they keep requesting extensions from the Town.

Mr. Ruel commented that it sounded to him as if the paperwork was sitting in limbo somewhere and needed to be executed.

Ms. Terhune stated that it was up to the parties involved to set a closing date.  Again, she mentioned having seen signed copies of the agreements.

Mayor Guinchard reiterated that the Village was ready to close and had been attempting to do so. 

Mr. Ruel commented that he did not feel it was fair to hold everything up if the Farms had both indicated that they were ready to close and signed the paperwork.  It seems as though they have done their due diligence.

Again, Mayor Guinchard commented that the Village was ready to move forward with the closing.  It is up to the Farms at this point to set a date.

There followed a brief discussion as to what might be holding the closing up from the Developer’s side.  They are still awaiting various approvals from outside agencies, although it is uncertain as to whether or not these have a direct effect on the closing.

Ms. Terhune interjected that a while back, the Planning Board had made the determination that no new permits would be granted until both parties came to an agreement on the transfer of properties and the conservation easements.  It is the responsibility of the Village and the Farms to take care of this and finalize the agreements.  What is being applied for is not a new permit, but rather an extension to an existing permit. 

Mr. Ruel suggested that this was a discussion that did not belong with the Planning Board.

Board member Darren Maynard stated that he could see that both sides wanted to move forward and he suggested that they converse and simply set a date.  He agreed with Mr. Ruel that this was not a conversation for the Planning Board.

Addressing both parties, Mr. Ruel wondered if they might be able to chat following the meeting in an effort to move things forward with the closing.  He suggested that it would be unfortunate to hold things up because of something like this.

Mr. Haefner responded that he would get in touch with Mr. Dance later that evening and relay the message.

Mayor Guinchard commented that there were other issues in addition to the closing and that developer had promised to pay some of the Village’s legal fees related to all of this, but had not done so to date.  The Village has not heard from Related.  The lawyers are talking, but the developer is not.

Mr. Maynard stated that he felt they were getting off topic and that they should focus on the permit extension at hand.

Town Planner Bonnie Franson commented that as of October 19, she believed all of the documents had been signed and all that is needed is the closing.

Ms. Terhune reiterated that as per their prior determination, no new permits would be issued until the closing had taken place, but what is being applied for currently is not a new permit but rather an extension for an existing permit.

Ms. Franson agreed, adding that according to the Special Permit, the land agreements must be finalized in order fort the applicant to obtain their initial building permit.

Mr. Hays asked for an explanation of specifically what filling and grading  would be done.

Mr. Haefner responded that it would be all of the clearing within the limits of the West Terrace area of the development. 

Mr. Hays responded that he had been misinformed when he was told there would be no more tree cutting.  He then asked for an update on the search for contractors, noting that he understood Mr. Dance might be the one to ask about this.

Mr. Haefner responded that they had not yet found any buyers for the land.

“Yet you are tearing up the countryside,” responded Mr. Hays.

“We are not tearing up the countryside,” stated Mr. Haefner.  Michele Lindsay commented that it was her understanding that the Special Permit required the land agreements to be in place prior to any disturbance of the site.  She wondered if this should not have been done 2 years ago. 

Ms. Terhune responded that Mrs. Lindsay was correct about the wording of the code and that the Planning Board had asked the Town Board for an interpretation of that language and they been told that what was intended by “disturbance of the site” was the issuance of a building permit.  The Planning Board subsequently made the decision that no new permits would be issued until the agreements were in place.

Ms. Franson stated that applicant has not yet met the necessary conditions needed in order to secure final approval.

Ms. Terhune suggested that the Town Board should be made aware of the situation.

Mrs. Lindsay then inquired about the repayment of the bonds on the new sewage treatment plant, noting that the plant was scheduled to be completed in December, but would not be brought online until homes were built in the development.  She wondered who was paying for the reserve funds that were being used.

Mr. Haefner responded that Related was paying. 

Ms. Terhune commented that Mrs. Lindsay’s question was a good one, but that the Planning Board was not the proper Board to address it.

Town Engineer Sean Hoffman pointed out that the extension did not equate to a delay on the project.  This extension could well have been part of the original schedule.

Mr. Haefner stated that The Commons are was the only area within the development that was ready for building at this point.

Mrs. Lindsay wondered if Related might be able to provide a general timeline for how the project will proceed.

Mr. Ruel responded that it was pretty hard to put a timeline on things when they are currently courting builders.

Mr. Hoffman suggested that the timeline was also dependent on reviews from outside agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers and the Orange County Planning Dept.

Mrs. Lindsay wondered how much of an effort Related was really putting into courting builders, but she was told this was irrelevant.

The public hearing was then closed.

Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead – Lot Line Change:

Following some minimal conversation the Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the application conditional upon the applicant’s response to comments made in memos from both the Planner and the Engineer.

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Clearing, Filling & Grading Permit Extension:

The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting Tuxedo Farms a 1-year extension for the clearing, filling & grading permit for West Terrace.

Joseph & Nancy Ribando – 90-Day Extension:

Representing the applicant, Engineer Mike Sandour reported that all of the necessary fees have been paid and a majority of the issues from the May 6 memo have been addressed.  It was agreed that the applicant’s attorney and the attorney for the Town would work together to prepare a resolution of approval.  There was a brief discussion regarding a clarification in the language as it pertains to the sewer hook –up.  The Board then voted unanimously in favor of granting the approval as requested.

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting October 11, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 11 at 7pm.
All members were present. 

Public Hearing – Orange County Historical Society/Arden Homestead:
The attorney for the applicant began by apologizing to everyone present, further commenting that they had not mailed out the necessary letters and therefore they did not believe the public hearing could legally proceed.

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune responded that provided there had been notice in the paper, which there was, she would advise that the Board open the hearing and keep it open until the next meeting, which is currently scheduled for November 8.

This was briefly discussed and unanimously agreed to.

Tuxedo Manor Apartments – Site Plan Approval:
The Town Board has granted  the applicant  the necessary waiver from the moratorium, which will allow them to precede with their site plan application, which details the construction of two new apartment buildings to include 32 additional 1–bedroom apartments.  The applicant is in receipt of comments from the Town Consultants and they will review these and incorporate them into the plan.  They would like to initiate the SEQRA process and address any related concerns, as that process needs to be completed before they can appear before either the Architectural Review Board or the Zoning Board of Appeals and also in order for them to receive the necessary approvals from the Department of Transportation. (DOT) 

The applicant’s engineer then provided the Board with an overview of the project which, as previously noted, consists of the construction of two new buildings with 16 1-bedroom units in each.  These buildings were actually part of the original site plan many years ago.  The new buildings will be generally consistent with the existing buildings in appearance, although they are a little shorter and wider to accommodate for the setbacks of the site.  Additional parking will be added in the rear to augment the existing parking.  The buildings as proposed are compliant with zoning and setback regulations and they will be served by United Water. There is an onsite wastewater treatment plant that can accommodate them.

Board member Linda Phelps inquired as to how many parking spaces would be added.

The answer was 36, which will bring the total of spaces at the complex to 107.
The parking was then reviewed and discussed. 

Board member John Ruel expressed some concern with the increase in traffic, noting that the current entrance/exit area is rather narrow and not very well lit.  He wondered whether there would be some sort of accommodation being made for the increase.

The applicant responded that this was a good point and further noted that Route 17 is a State regulated road, which means that whatever they do there will be regulated by the DOT.  The DOT has indicated to them that they need to move further along with the SEQRA process before they will conduct a full review of the application. The applicant is willing to work with the Board in providing whatever they feel might be necessary there in terms of adequate lighting etc.

Sight distances as noted on the plan were then very briefly discussed in terms of how they might change/relate to future landscaping on the Tuxedo Farms property.

With respect to SEQRA, it was agreed that the Board would draft a letter of intent to be Lead Agency and circulate this to the appropriate agencies, after which there will be a 30-day response period.

The applicant requested that the Board consider waiving the tree mapping requirement within the clearing behind the building, as the disturbance area is extremely small and everything will be cleared. 

This was discussed as were the wetlands in the area and the timber rattlesnakes and the applicant agreed to provide more data with regard to all of these things. 

The New York State Office of Parks & Recreation and Historic Preservation have requested a phase 1A and phase 1B study of the area because they have identified a cemetery, which is 4 miles away, as being archeologically sensitive.  The applicant will be requesting a waiver from this, seeing as their site is already developed, with the mountain behind it under construction as well and area in question is far enough away that there will be any impacts. 

Board consultant Bonnie Franson responded that the reason the studies have been requested is because of the archeological sensitivity of the area.  On the Tuxedo Farms property, just to the north, they found a quarry operation and this is why the project has been flagged as archeologically sensitive.  There is a form that can be completed and submitted by the applicant, which details the overall area of project disturbance as well as the extent to which the area in question may or may nor be disturbed.  Based on this, the requirement could be waived. 

The applicant indicated that they had not been aware that this was an option and they would certainly follow up with it.

Potential blasting was then discussed.  The applicant does not anticipate the need to blast.

Fire access in the rear of the buildings and architectural plans were also briefly discussed.

Tuxedo Farms – Preliminary Subdivision Approval – 6-Month Extension:
On behalf of Tuxedo Farms, Henry Haeffner informed the Board that they are still waiting on DOT approval prior to being able to submit final plans for review.  They are also waiting on a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.  Therefore, they are seeking a 6-month extension. 

Board attorney Alyse Terhune inquired as to when the applicant believed they would be receiving these approvals.

Mr. Haeffner responded that they expected to receive the Army Corps permit very shortly.  As far as the DOT approval, there is one landowner  (Sarkis Oil) who continues to add additional conditions on to the agreement.  The developer has requested a mediator from the DOT at this point as they fear that negotiations could drag on forever without one.   

Following some further discussion, the extension was unanimously approved.

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Clearing Filling and Grading Permit Extension:
The applicant stated that it was their understanding that a public hearing would be required in order to receive this extension ands therefore, they were requesting one. 

The Board voted unanimously in favor of scheduling a public hearing for their next regularly scheduled meeting. 

Ms. Terhune then inquired of the applicant as to how things were proceeding with marketing the project.

“Challenging,” responded the applicant, “but we’ll leave that to Andrew. (Dance)

New Business:
Board Chair Mike Reardon proposed that the next planning Board meeting be scheduled for November 9 instead of November 8, which is Election Day.

The Board voted unanimously in favor of this change.

The Board engineer then provided a brief update along with some recommendations for soil testing regarding the Barba application reviewed at the last meeting.

Mr. Ruel expressed his concern with the Barbas not having been listed on the meeting agenda the month prior, however they came to the meeting and were heard.  He suggested that this set a bad precedent and that moving forward, the correct process should be followed.

The Board was in agreement.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting October 11, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the September 13,2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Orange County Historical Society I Arden Homestead - Lot Line Change
   Section 6 Block 1 Lot 10.1
4. Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site Plan approval
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 12.2
5. Tuxedo Farms - Preliminary Subdivision Approval - 6 Month Extension
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
6. Tuxedo Farms-West Terrace- Clearing Filling and Grading Permit Extension
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
7. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting September 13, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 13 at 7pm.  Board member Richard Rigoli was absent. 

Orange County Historical Society I Arden Homestead - Lot Line Change:
On behalf of the Applicant, attorney Jim Sweeny explained that the intent behind the line lot change (located in and around the old Clove Furnace) is to capture all of the remaining historical structures in that area and bring them together in one envelope, which will then be given over to the Historical Society for ongoing management and preservation.   No construction or alterations are being proposed.  He provided a brief history of the land, dating back to 1886 when it was first purchased by Mr. Harriman, further explaining that the homes affected by the proposed change had originally housed dairy farm workers and their families. 

Some technical issues were reviewed/discussed including the official land use as well as wells and septic on the property.  Board attorney Alyse Terhune stated that she did not believe a use variance for the existing homes would be necessary, but that she would check on this and follow up with the Board.

Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of setting a public hearing on the project for October 11 at 7pm.  The plans will also be sent to the Orange County Planning Department for GML review. 

Other Business:
Board Chair Mike Reardon stated that there had been some Field Change requests from applicants Tuxedo Farms and Sterling Mine Ct..  He asked the Board engineer to further explain these requests and advise them on whether or not he felt they should issue approvals.

Tuxedo Farms is seeking a change with regard to the height of a sanitary sewer line, looking to raise it slightly.  This does not constitute a major change, will not be visible to the naked eye and will not have any visible effects on the rest of the project.   The Board was advised to approve this request and they did so.

Sterling Mine Court is requesting three changes with regard to well location, sign lighting and a retaining wall.  While the well request can easily be granted, the other two are not so simple.  The property has changed hands since the last time the application appeared before the Board and the Board was uncertain as to what, if any, approvals had been previously granted by the Architectural Review Board with regard to the retaining wall and the lighting.  This was discussed at some length.  Additionally, the previous owner was in arrears with payments to the Town and there is an outstanding $1,900 due.   It was agreed that the Board Clerk would search for the previous file and follow up with the Board accordingly.   This way, the Board will be able to ascertain what approvals have already been granted and can then determine whether or not the current requests constitute any major changes.   A representative for the applicant was present and inquired as to what the process would be should the Board be unable to locate the old file.  Board Chair Mike Reardon responded that he felt this was extremely unlikely however, if it turned out that there was no file, the applicant would have to return to the ARB. 

New Business:
The Barba family was present and presented plans for soil testing on their property.  Mr. Barba had previously presented his request to grade a large amount of fill currently located on his property, and the Planning Board subsequently requested that the testing be completed.  Following a relatively brief review, it was agreed that the Board Engineer would review the plans and follow up with Mr. Barba as soon as possible.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting September 13, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the July 12, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Orange County Historical Society I Arden Homestead - Lot Line Change
   Section 6 Block 1 Lot 12.51
4. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board meeting, July 12, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on July 12, 2016 at 7pm.  Board members Linda Phelps and Darren Maynard were absent.

The meeting began with a 50-minute executive session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation concerning a specific matter before the Planning Board.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Filling and Grading Amendment:
Engineer Sean Hoffman explained that the applicant was seeking an amendment to their previous permit, which would allow for construction of the well house, the water storage tank, and the transmission line connecting to the well’s distribution line down to The Commons. 

Technical comments were given.  There were no questions or comments from the Board.

As there were no comments from the public hearing was closed.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – Quail Road & The Commons – Extension - Clearing Filling and Grading:
The Applicant is seeking an extension of this permit.  They are still in the process of obtaining approvals from outside agencies, but they would like to continue construction under the current permit.

There were no technical questions.

Dale Mottola stated that the section, block and note numbers were the same for both areas on the agenda. (West Terrace and Quail Road  & the Commons)  She wondered if they were actually referring to the same area of land.

The applicant responded yes.

As there were no further questions, the public hearing was closed.

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace - Clearing Filling and Grading Amendment:
Board Attorney Alyse Terhune advised the Board that according to the Special Permit, article 13, there was to be no disturbance of ground/construction on the site/building permits issued until all gifts and conservation easements under the Open Space article had been made.  In a recent meeting, an attorney had informed them of this provision, suggesting that their Board had been operating outside of its’ authority.  Following this assertion there was quite a bit of back and forth amongst the various attorneys and as of that afternoon at 4pm, Ms. Terhune received notification from the Town Board Attorney, informing her that the necessary documents had been delivered.  She proceeded to review several options for moving forward with the Planning Board, ultimately suggesting that they could approve the amendment conditional upon receiving confirmation from the Town Board (who holds the Special Permit) that the applicant has conformed with Article 13…in addition to any other conditions as suggested by the Engineer.

Following this, the Board voted unanimously in favor of approving the amendment with the suggested condition as laid out by Ms. Terhune. 

Tuxedo Farms – Quail Road & The Commons – Extension – Clearing Filling and Grading:
This 1-year extension was unanimously approved.

Tuxedo Farms – Smart Code Waiver Requests:
The applicant explained that they are seeking 4 waivers.

1. The Northern Entrance
2. Having to do with the pitch of the road.
3. Having to do with habitat crossings
4. Having to do with Drainage Ditch along Lower Mountain Lake Road

The Board engineer further explained the basis of these requests, reminding the Board that they had previously seen some of them back in October of 2015 and further commenting that some of them would require waivers while others might not.

Following a somewhat technical discussion focused on the pitch/gradient of the roadway and the various curves along the entrance road (width, radius, steepness etc) the Board agreed not to take any further action with regard to these requests.

back to top

Notice of Public Hearing - Tuxedo Farms - CFG - West Terrace - Utilities

Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held before the Planning Board of the Town of Tuxedo, New York, on the 12th day of July, 2016 at 7:00 PM at the Tuxedo Town Hall, One Temple Drive, Tuxedo, New York to consider site plan approval on a clearing filling and grading application. The property is identified on the Town of Tuxedo Tax Map as Section 14 Block 1 Lots 34.2 and is situated in the R1 and R2 zoning districts. The Applicant has submitted an application to perform additional site work to allow for the installation of utilities in the West Terrace neighborhood of the Tuxedo Farms development.

A complete copy of the application is available for public review in the Tuxedo Building Department. Any interested person may attend this Public Hearing or submit their comments in writing concerning this approval before such meeting.

The Town of Tuxedo will make every effort to ensure that the hearing is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone requiring special assistance and/or reasonable accommodations should contact the Building Department Secretary.
Dated: June 16, 2016

Michael Reardon, Chairman
Town of Tuxedo Planning Board

back to top

Notice of Public Hearing - Tuxedo Farms - Extension Clearing Filling and Grading permit Quail Road and The Commons

Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held before the Planning Board of the Town of Tuxedo, New York, on the 12th day of July, 2016 at 7:00 PM at the Tuxedo Town Hall, One Temple Drive, Tuxedo, New York to consider site plan approval on a clearing filling and grading application. The properties are identified on the Town of Tuxedo Tax Map as Section 14 Block 1 Lots 13.11, 14, 34-39 and 42 and are situated in the R1, R2 and R4 zoning districts. The Applicant is requesting an extension of their previously approved Clearing Filling and Grading permit to rough in Quail Road and The Commons section of the Tuxedo Farms development.

A complete copy of the application is available for public review in the Tuxedo Building Department. Any interested person may attend this Public Hearing or submit their comments in writing concerning this approval before such meeting.

The Town of Tuxedo will make every effort to ensure that the hearing is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone requiring special assistance and/or reasonable accommodations should contact the Building Department Secretary.

Dated: July 13, 2016
Michael Reardon, Chairman
Town of Tuxedo Planning Board

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting July 12, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the June 14,2016 Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge · Clearing Filling and Grading Amendment
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Tuxedo Farms - Quail Road & The Commons- Extension - Clearing Filling and Grading - Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
5. Tuxedo Farms - Smart Code Waiver Requests
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
6. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting June 14, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the May 10,2016 Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge · Clearing Filling and Grading Application
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
4. Robert Guggisberg- Tuxedo Manor Apartments - Site Plan approval
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 12.2
5. Barba Property- 441 Sterling Mine Road - Site Plan Review
   Section 17 Block 1 Lots 43
6. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting May 10, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, May 10 at 7pm.
All members were present.

Joseph and Nancy Ribando – 3 Lot Subdivision – Conditional Final Approval:
On behalf of the applicant, Engineer Mike Sandour commented that he had reviewed the draft approval drawn up by the town consultants and that he had a few questions regarding the conditional approval.

Several issues were then discussed including width of drainage pipes, performance bonds, language issues, general liability insurance, sewer hookup, tree removal and storm water. 

Following this discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of recommending the bond amount of $48,800 and this will be passed along to the Town Board for their approval.

Following some further discussion, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting conditional, final approval based on the modifications as discussed earlier in the meeting.

Tuxedo Farms – Extension – Major Subdivision Preliminary Plan Approval:
The Applicant is still awaiting responses several outside agencies.  The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting a 6-month extension:

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Clearing Filling and Grading Application:
The applicant is requesting that the Planning Board schedule a public hearing for a filling and grading application they have filed for an easement that connects the development to the sewer plant on the other side of Route 17.  The easement was included on the Quail Road subdivision plans and has already been reviewed by both the Planning Board and their consultants.  It was not, however, included in the original filing and grading application because at the time the applicant believed that they would have final approval for the project by the time they needed to construct it.

The Applicants Engineer addressed a list comments from the Town Engineer and various issues including the specific area of land to be disturbed, the installation of a culvert, installation of temporary sewer (a gravity sewer will eventually be installed) and eventual hook up to the permanent system, materials to be used and erosion control.

Board member John Ruel commented that at the previous meeting he had raised the issued of run-off from the site onto 17 and within 24 hours the situation had been abated.  He thanked the applicant for their swift mediation, commenting that it was his intent to visit the site regularly to make sure that things were going well.  The applicant also came out and performed seismographic testing based on neighborhood blasting concerns, all of which came back fine and helped to put those concerns to rest.   This kind of quick action is a good thing and Mr. Ruel hopes it continues as the project progresses. 

Following some further discussion the Board voted unanimously in favor of scheduling the requested public hearing for their next meeting, which is June 14.

The existing filling and grading approval for Quail Road and the commons is set to expire in June.  The Applicant is will be requesting an extension and requested that the Board schedule the associated public hearing for that application. 

The Board voted unanimously in favor of scheduling this public hearing for the next meeting as well.

The Applicant has a clearing and grading permit that was issued for West Terrace back in December, but the resolution restricts any utilities from being installed there.  Again, the Applicant did not address this concern in the initial Application as they believed they would have final approval by the time construction began.  They would like to move forward with the construction of a water tank and a well.  This will require an amendment to the clearing and grading permit as issued and the applicant requested that the Board consider this.

The Town Engineer commented that he would like the opportunity to review this.  He would like to further investigate why the Planning Board denied utilities when they original granted approval.  It was then suggested that it be deferred to the next meeting.

Town Planner Bonnie Franson inquired as to whether or not the well was required for all of Phase One, suggesting that the YMCA could not be constructed without it.

The answer was yes, the tank is necessary in order for that construction to proceed. 

The Board attorney pointed out that the applicant was not building anything yet.

The Applicant responded that this was correct, but they would like to start building as soon as they can.

Following some further discussion with regard to the scheduling of the hearing, the Board voted unanimously in favor of setting a public hearing on this proposed amendment for their next meeting. 

The Board Attorney, Alyse Tehrune then ran through a brief list of loose ends that need to be closed up with the Applicant.

Village of Tuxedo Park Trustee Paul Gluck inquired as to whether the applicant believed that they would close on the various land grants and conservation easements before the public hearing.

The Applicant responded that they were working as quickly as possible with the intent to close as soon as they could.

Ms Tehrune inquired as to how the marketing was going.

The Applicant responded that they were trying to move ahead as quickly as possible but marketing had become a challenge as there have been some issues raised with regard to the "viability of certain things."  They would like to move forward, however they cannot force people to buy land.

Board Chair Mike Reardon then suggested that what was holding things up was the school, commenting: “Everybody wants to protect the school, but the school is holding us up.  People can say what they want.  I think it's great to have a High School but if it is pushing the Town back, the Town has to make a decision.”

There followed a very brief discussion about this with audience member Mary Graetzer commenting that she had actually just been at the school’s Open House and the presentation given there only solidified her belief that Tuxedo needed to maintain the program and keep the school open despite the temporary decrease in enrollment.

Ultimately It was agreed that this issue would not be discussed further and the meeting was adjourned.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting May 10, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the March 8, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Joseph & Nancy Ribaudo - 3 Lot Subdivision - Conditional Final Approval
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
4. Tuxedo Farms - Extension - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plan Approval
   Section 14 Block 1 Lots 34-39, 14, 13.11 and 42
5. Tuxedo Farms - Nortli Ridge - Clearing Filling and Grading Application
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
6. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting April 12, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the March 8, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3. Joseph & Nancy Ribaudo - 3 Lot Subdivision
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
4. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting March 8, 2016

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday March 8 at 7pm. All members were present.

Joseph & Nancy Ribando – 3 Lot Subdivision:
The applicant’s engineer, Mike Sandour, provided the Board with a brief overview, informing them that the Health Department had provided the necessary approval for the septic system as proposed. Additionally, the applicant met with the TAC committee during the month of February where some additional issues were raised and discussed. Some of these included curbing, changes in pipe sizes, a drainage swale and its associated piping and the possibility of the Town securing a drainage easement, which would allow them to maintain said drainage system should it be neglected by future home owners.

Mr. Sandour asserted that the Highway Superintendent had visited the site and verbally approved the curbing as proposed. He had been assured that a letter would be submitted to the Planning Board, however the letter has not been received to date. Planning Board Clerk, Debbie Villaneuva stated that she would follow up with the Superintendent on this.

Additionally, the applicant was supposed to secure a letter from the Tuxedo Union Free School District and this has not yet been received either.

Mr. Sandour reminded the Board that the applicant had already completed some off-site improvements to the drainage infrastructure above the property, thus mitigating certain issues that might have occurred as a result of the construction.

The issue of bonding was discussed. Mr. Sandour stated that the applicant was hopeful that the Board would consider tying the bond to the permitting process somehow.

Board Attorney Alyse Tehrune responded that this had been looked into, and it appeared as though a bond would be required before the applicant was permitted to cut into the roadway in order to ensure that the work was completed in full. The Board only has the authority to grant a waiver for this in extreme circumstances, which is not the case here.
The issue of monies owed to the Town and bills currently in dispute was also discussed. Ultimately it was determined that any approval would be granted conditional upon payment in full.

Following some further discussion of various engineering related issues, the Board voted unanimously in favor of having their attorney draft up a resolution for final approval, which will reflect the various “idiosyncrasies” as discussed. It was agreed that the applicant would return to the next meeting for possible final approval, however an extension was granted through May 10 in order to allow for any hiccups that might arise.

Tuxedo Farms – Discussion – Field Changes/Drawing Review Procedures:
Board Chair Mike Reardon began the discussion by calling on Board member John Ruel for comments. Mr. Ruel noted that given the size and probable duration of the project, its construction was a sensitive matter and for this reason, he found it very unfortunate that while they had only just begun, the site was, in his view, somewhat of a disaster. The condition of the access road, located by the old Applewood Kennels, is awful. The silt fencing does not extend far enough. When it rains, Route 17 floods. There is a single drain and minimal silt screening. If the drain is not constantly maintained, it will become clogged easily. There is dirt everywhere. Tractor-trailers are not covering their loads and dirt has been spilling out onto the roadway. There is also a giant pile of mulch by the access the road that has been left unattended to for quite some time. Brown water has built up within it. Mulch and associated contamination is an extremely sensitive issue in Tuxedo. Mr. Ruel alleged that there are “no trout left in Warwick Brook” because of contamination from a mulching outfit at the north end of town. He urged the developer to be more mindful of this and to take better care in maintaining the site.

The applicant responded that they would make the necessary changes to the silt fencing as soon as possible. They noted that the access road in question was not being utilized by their contractors but rather by the outfit who is laying the sewer lines. All the same, they will insist that the situation be remedied by week’s end and will put a stop to the uncovered loads immediately.

Mr. Ruel replied that regardless of who was doing the work, Related’s name was on the project. Again, he stressed the importance of maintaining a clean, compliant jobsite.

Next, Mr. Ruel addressed the issue of blasting, suggesting that much of the blasting to date has been much more powerful than the developer suggested it would be. Making sure to note that the work was certainly being doing in a professional manner, Mr. Ruel stated that his own home shook in its entirety with the blasting and that several of his neighbors had expressed similar concerns.

The location of seismographs was then discussed. There are two currently in use; one by the apartments and one that the blasters move around with them from site to site.

Board member Darren Maynard commented that his children had been able to feel the blasting within the high school and he suggested that perhaps a seismograph should be installed there.

Board Chair Mike Reardon pointed out that Related was not the only one blasting in the area. He suggested that some of the bigger blasts could have been the Highway people, who are busy with their project along 17 in Sloatsburg.

Everyone was in agreement that this was possible. Furthermore it was agreed that while some people might have been under the impression that they would not feel the blasting at all, this was not necessarily a realistic expectation.

The applicant briefly outlined the post-blast process, explaining that there had been 50 blasts to date and that following each one, a report was issued and sent to various entities (the Town, the Building Department, the Police Department, the Fire Department) detailing what had occurred. Every blast has been below the maximum level.

Mr. Ruel responded that he had no doubt that this was true, but that perhaps the installation of a few seismographs, in various visible locations would help to assure concerned residents that everything was ok and well within the guidelines. He further stated that as a Board member he felt it was his responsibility to do some due diligence, which was why he took it upon himself to visit the site regularly and make note of any issues he encountered there.

The developer agreed to install more seismographs and again stated that they would make sure that Mr. Ruel’s other concerns regarding site maintenance were addressed immediately.

There followed a fairly lengthy discussion with regard to shop drawings and the procedure for reviewing these documents. Shop drawings are essentially project drawings with greater attention paid to the details as they pertain to various specifications. They go further into depth than the original specs by providing a catalogue cut of what the developer can expect to receive from the various manufacturers.

Currently there is no procedure in place for reviewing these. Needless to say, careful review is important in order to ensure that what is detailed on these plans correlates directly with what has been approved as part of the Special Permit and that everything remains compliant. The Special Permit is an enormous document and therefore, the process of cross-referencing the shop drawings can be quite time consuming. Planning Board Engineer Sean Hoffman expressed a desire to have the applicant perform this task and then provide the Town with official certification in the form of a letter stating that there were no discrepancies between the two documents and that everything was in accordance with the Special Permit.

There was some pushback from the applicant on this as they were unsure as to exactly what was being requested of them and whether the additional work was truly necessary.

The applicant’s engineer stated that he did not believe they should have to recertify the drawings as they were already certifying them for their client.

Mr. Hoffman then stated that his firm had conducted an initial review and discovered 9 small discrepancies that exemplified deviations from what had been approved. He further stated that in several cases the changes were positive and that as an Engineer, he was in agreement with the decisions that had been made however, it was in the best interest of the Town to create an official process for identifying these moving forward. For example, the Special Permit calls for manholes of a specific size, however, the manholes that are being installed are a different size. Mr. Hoffman feels that the change makes sense and would be more suitable for the project, but it is not what was approved and it was never officially noted.

The applicant’s engineer expressed concern that if they were to go through and identify every discrepancy between the Special Permit and shop drawings, that this would hold up the process considerably. He wondered what the process for handling these discrepancies would be and specifically whether or not each change would require Town Board approval. He further pointed out that the Town Code allows for some field changes.

Mr. Hoffman acknowledged this but reiterated his belief that it was the applicant’s responsibility to review the documents and certify that they were in accordance with the Special Permit and if they were not, identify the specific discrepancies so that the Town could review them systematically.

Board Chair Mike Reardon commented that this was a project that would be on-going for many years and that he felt it was important to put a process in place for dealing with the changes that are bound to occur. As time progresses, industry standards will change and new products will no doubt become available. Processes may be refined and improved. There needs to be protocol in place for dealing with these things.

Again, the applicant inquired as to what would occur after changes had been identified and specifically whether or not the Town Engineer would have the authority to grant waivers of if they would need to come before the Planning Board and then the Town Board with each change.

Mr. Hoffman stated that he did not have the authority to grant ok changes that reflected deviances from the Special Permit.

The Applicant then wanted to know what the process would be if the Town Engineers proposed a change.

Chair Reardon stated that the engineers would need to have open dialogue about any and all changes. There are certain changes that Mr. Hoffman can ok, such as those that are within the spirit and intent of the approved plan, but he does not have the authority to approve any change having to do with the performance standards as laid out in the Special Permit. The Planning Board will approach the Town Board in hopes of acquiring some more authority in terms of approving these types of changes in an effort to keep the process moving.

Some of the changes as noted earlier by Mr. Hoffman were then briefly discussed.

Included in these was the proposed re-pitching of a roadway within the North Ridge section of the development.

Town Planner Bonnie Franson pointed out that there could be some changes that had already been approved by other Boards, specifically the ARB, and that they would need to be careful not to identify these as needing further review.

The Applicant then inquired about timing, pointing out that there were several changes that had been before the Planning Board since October of 2015.

Mr. Hoffman responded that the reason there had been no approvals was because there had been no procedure in place until February 14. Now that the process had been discussed and ironed out to a certain extent, he assured the applicant that if they could certify that the proposed plans did not deviate from the Special Permit, the approvals could be issued within a weeks’ time.

There followed a discussion with regard to a change in piping materials. While the plans call for cement and ductal iron water mains, the applicant has switched to PVC. The reasons for the change, as noted by the applicant, are ease installation and cost. The applicant noted that in 2010, all the other piping within the development save the water lines had been changed to PVC and approved by the Town Board.

Board member Darren Maynard inquired about the ability and ease to locate these pipes beneath the roadways if they were not made of metal.

He was informed that they would have metal tape above them and ductal iron fittings, which would make them easy to locate.

Board member Ray Ferri wondered why a change as big as this had not been previously noted and discussed.

He was informed that a general change to PVC had been discussed and that the applicant thought they had a waiver when in fact they did not.

Following further discussion it was determined that this would need to be referred to the Town Board for approval.

Ms. Terhune reiterated the importance of keeping on top of the changes, stating that she understood why the applicant may have thought a variance was granted for the water lines at the same time as the others, but it had not been.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting March 8, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the December 8, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. Joseph & Nancy Ribando - 3 Lot Subdivision
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
4. Tuxedo Farms- Discussion - Field Changes/Drawing Review Procedures
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34
5. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting January 12, 2016

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the December 8, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. Joseph & Nancy Ribando - 3 Lot Subdivision
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
4. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting December 8, 2015

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the November 10, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. Approval of the November 24, 2015 Special Meeting Minutes
4. Iazzetti - Clearing Filling & Grading Approval Extension
   Section 10 Lot 2 Block 1
5. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting November 10, 2015

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, November 10 at 7pm.  Board member John Ruel was absent.

Public Hearing – Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Clearing, Filling and Grading Application:
A representative for the applicant stated that all of the necessary paperwork had been submitted and that they were now seeking a clearing, filling and grading permit for the West Terrace section of the Development.

Jim Hays inquired as to how many Building Inspectors the Town had checking the site on a regular basis.

The answer was 1.

Mr. Hays wondered whether this was enough.

Board Chair Mike Reardon responded that he believed it was all that the Town could afford.

Mr. Hays commented that it was his understanding that within the Special Permit there was a clause stating that the applicant would pay for additional Building Inspectors as needed. 

Chair Reardon replied that this would take effect once construction started, but not during the initial clearing phase.

Board Attorney Alyse Terhune stated that there was an enforcement schedule in place with the Building Inspector, Town Engineers H2M and the applicant and that regular inspections were taking place. 

Engineer Dennis Lindsay of H2M concurred, commenting that they while they did not visit the site on a daily basis, they were “up there all the time.”

Chair Reardon added that there was a standard weekly call every Wednesday at 2pm with a status update.

Board member Joe Gartiser asked Mr. Lindsay if the engineers were satisfied with the state of the project.

Mr. Lindsay responded that they were.  He reiterated that his team was on site frequently for various reasons such as general project oversight, blasting and payment related matters.

Chair Reardon inquired as to whether they had encountered any problems.

The answer was no.

The applicant then stated that they had hired an additional, third party firm that is also conducting various weekly inspections.

Pierre Henrique stated that he lived at 7 Mountain Road and as a result he has been directly impacted by the blasting that is currently underway, which he can feel in his home.  He further commented that he did not have a clear idea of what the different phases of the development were and when he could expect the blasting to occur.

He wondered if they might be able to provide him with a schedule.

A construction map was presented and reviewed with Mr. Henrique.  Blasting areas were clearly identified.  The applicant explained that residents living within close proximity to the blasting sites could expect to receive three letters by mail from the applicant.  The first letter would serve as a general notification and also an offer to have the developer take a look at any and all wells on the property.

The second letter would contain an offer for a pre-blast home inspection.  He strongly encouraged Mr. Henrique to accept this as it is the only real way to insure that any damages that might occur to the home as a result of the blasting would be entirely covered and repaired by the developer.

The third letter will extend an offer to have a licensed plumber come in and   determine how the home will be hooked up to running water should there be an unforeseen issue and water is lost.

Mr. Henrique then asked the applicant when they expected to begin constructing houses.
The Applicant responded that they anticipate turning the lots over to builders in August or September of 2016.

Chair Reardon noted that the sewer lines were being laid in Sloatsburg and he wondered whether any blasting notices had been sent about that there.

The answer was no. 

Iazzetti – Clearing Filling & Grading Approval Extension:
The Board voted unanimously in favor of setting a Public Hearing date of December 8, as required by the code, in anticipation of grating the applicant a 1-year extension. 

Tuxedo Farms – West Terrace – Clearing Filling and Grading Application:
On behalf of the Developer, Megan Guy outlined the work that has been done in response to various comments from H2M and other agencies. 

All snake dens in the area have been looked at and it has been determined that they should not pose a problem.  Should a problem arise, there is a certified onsite snake monitor who can assist immediately. 

Although it had initially been suggested that further archeological studies might be necessary, the applicant presented their findings, which included various surveys of slopes and depth of rock,  and based on these stated that they do not believe further studies will be necessary.
Town Planner Bonnie Franson agreed.

Andrew Dance of Related stated that attorneys for the developer , the Village of Tuxedo Park and the Town of Tuxedo were currently in talks with an attorney from Orange County Land Trust regarding the proposed gifting of land to the Town.  While there were some disagreements there, the group is working to resolve them as soon as possible.  They are also attempting to sort out potential issues surrounding the possible Pilgrim Pipeline, namely the proposed rerouting of the pipeline through a portion of land known as “The Northern Tract” which also serves as a buffer between the Village and the Development.  According to Mr. Dance, these issues are “being worked out.” 

Engineer Dennis Lindsay brought up the issue of erosion control on the site, noting that it would be next to impossible for the applicant to remain in keeping with exactly what was laid out in the special permit because of conditions on the site and that some leeway would have to be granted.  However, it will be important to ensure that good practices are undertaken in the appropriate spots (silt fences etc.) and that there is monitoring in place to ensure this.

Next he noted that the DEC wetlands permit is in place, however it refers to a set a plans that the engineers do not have.  The existence of the correct plans needs to be verified and those plans attached to the permit.

An engineer for the applicant explained that a separate set of plans featuring only the “meat” of what they needed to know, along with various applicable details had been created for and submitted to the DEC and these are what the permit is referring to.   The can and will be submitted to the Town as well, although they are redundant as the information is also encompassed within the plans the Town already has.

Finally Mr. Lindsay presented some figures with regard to the amount of material being produced and moved in cubic yards and suggested that these did not add up.  He wondered whether or not the applicant was stockpiling material.

The Applicant responded that they would take a look at the numbers as presented and follow up as soon as possible.

Attorney Terhune stated that the Board was still waiting for the GML Review from the county, and therefore they could not approve the application that evening.  If the county does not respond within 30 days, the Board can move forward without the review, but they have until November 23 to send it.  Ms. Terhune advised that at the Board’s request she could put together a resolution of approval and once the Review was received, or the time limit had expired, they could call a special meeting for the purpose of approving the application.
Mr. Dance inquired as to what the purpose of the GML review was.  He suggested that the County had already reviewed the application.

Ms. Guy concurred, reading aloud a section of GML guidelines.

Ms. Terhune responded that the application had not already been reviewed in this manner.

Mr. Dance stated that he respectfully disagreed and that he believed requiring the review was a totally inappropriate action on the part of the Board.  He suggested that they had received prior filing and grading permits without a GML review.

Ms. Tehrune responded that this was a “discreet and discretionary” action by the Planning Board and that she believed it was the most responsible and protective action for everyone involved, the developer included.

Bonnie Franson stated that for the record, the applicant had been required to have a GML review for their previous filling and grading permit and she cited the exact date of the review.
Following some further discussion it was unanimously agreed that Ms. Tehrune would prepare the resolution and that the Board would hold a special meeting on Tuesday, November 24 with the intent of approval.

Tuxedo Reserve – Review of Lighting Plans:
Although the applicant is not ready to submit the final package because they are still waiting on some approvals from various agencies, Ms. Guy stated that they would like the Board to review the proposed lighting plan ahead of the final plans and provide general feedback/blessing.  The abbreviated plan that was presented included West Terrace, Upland Park, Quail Road and The Commons.  The consultants have made various comments and these have been addressed for the most part.  The applicant is hoping to switch from halide lighting to LED and will need a waiver from the SmartCode in order to do so.  The light poles themselves will also be shortened. 

The new lights and specifically their compliance with the Dark Sky requirement were discussed.  Ms. Guy assured the Board that the proposed lights will have zero up-light and comply with Dark Sky standards even though they do not appear to be dark-sky certified on paper.

Mr. Lindsay suggested that the developer contact the manufacturer and inquire as to why the lights were not dark sky certified.  The Board could then take a look at this letter and determine whether or not what was being proposed would be suitable.    It was agreed that this would be done.

In the meantime, the Board voted unanimously in favor of granting the applicant a waiver from the SmartCode and allowing them to use LED instead of halide. 

The Board also voted unanimously in favor of granting the applicant a 6-month extension on their preliminary subdivision approval.

Spacing of the lighting and distance between poles was then briefly discussed.
Before moving on to the next agenda item, Mr. Dance presented the Board with a handout depicting some of the proposed retail space within the commons area of the development.

He provided a brief verbal overview of the layout and types of potential businesses commenting that it was “always intended to be neighborhood retail.”  To view a copy of this handout as presented, click here.

Tuxedo Plaza – Proposed Retail/Office Space:
Revised plans were presented and briefly discussed.  Since the last meeting, the applicant has addressed all of the comments received during the public hearing.  Additionally, they met with the fire inspector and are working to address their concerns, which were as follows:

1. Siamese Standpoint must be shown on plans (it is)
2. A diesel generator must be installed as back-up to trigger the pump for the sprinkler in case of power outages.
3. Well Capacity must be noted (this information is not yet known)
4. A central alarm that is tied to the fire station must be installed.

The applicant is in receipt of engineering comments and these were briefly discussed.  The D.O.T. has issued all the necessary approvals.

There was some discussion with regard to road dedication, sidewalks and run-off mitigation, following which the Board voted unanimously in favor of giving the application a negative declaration under SEQRA.  They then voted unanimously in favor of approving the application conditional upon the applicants’ compliance with the engineering memo, their dedication of the road as discussed and their compliance with the fire commissioners requests.

back to top

Agenda For Town Planning Board Meeting November 10, 2015

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the October 13, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. lazzetti - Clearing Filling & Grading Approval Extension
   Section 10 Lot 2 Block 1
4. Tuxedo Farms - West Terrace- Clearing Filling and Grading Application
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
5. Tuxedo Farms - Review of Lighting Plans
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34.2
6. Tuxedo Plaza - Proposed RetailJOffice Space
   Section 5 Block 3 Lot 12.21
7. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting October 13, 2015

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, October 13, 2015.  All members were present. 

Tuxedo Farms – North Ridge – Site Plan Review:
On behalf of the Related Companies and Tuxedo Farms, Megan Guy presented the Board with plans depicting the overall layout of part of Phase 1 of the project, the neighborhood of North Ridge.  (to view the plan, click here) Back in July, the developer presented the Board with the amended plan for this neighborhood and at that time they requested 1 waiver; for front loading garages, which was granted.  At this time they are seeking four additional waivers as follows:

1. Lot Coverage – Per table 6J lot coverage shall be 40% min, 70% max. The proposed North Ridge development encompasses 52.6 acres of which approximately 2 acres of building area for a lot coverage of 3.8%.

2. Frontage Buildout (Principal) – Per table 6J minimum is 60%.  The developer is not proposing any portions of the buildings extending beyond the front setback line.

3. Frontage Buildout (Secondary) – Per table 6J minimum is 50%, maximum is 90%.  The developer is not proposing any portions of the buildings exgtednind beyond the secondary setback line.

4. Principal Building Setback – Per table 1 the Front principal setback shall be a minimum of 8’, 13’ maximum (18 max for handicap access) Setback is defined in the SmartCode as “the area of a lot measured from the lot line to a building façade or elevation that is maintained clear of permanent structure, with the exception of encroachments listed in section 2.5,  Given the size of the lot and the ownership structure (condominium vs. fee simple), the setback is calculated the Route 17 Right of Way (ROW) or Quail Road.  The closest building to Route 16 ROW is approximately 379 feet and the closest building to Quail Road is 550 feet.

The waivers were presented in slide format and discussed. Comments from both the Town Planner and Engineers H2M had been previously submitted in the form of a memo and several of these were addressed.  Town Planner Bonnie Franson explained that in one of the recent North Ridge amendments, the housing mix had been changed and housing that was originally slated to be built in the Commons area had been moved into North Ridge, which was zoned differently, and therefore the requested waivers are necessary. 

There was some discussion as to the roadways, those that are public vs. those that are private, and what the protocol for management would be with the private roads (HOA).
Board member Linda Phelps wanted to know what would happen if they HOA neglected their responsibility to maintain the roads.  The answer was that the responsibility would pass on to the owner of the buildings and should that individual also neglect the responsibility, it would then pass on to the Town, who could levy the taxes in order to recoup the funds.

Board member John Ruel wondered whether any analysis had been done in terms of the Fire Department and their overall capacity to handle the development.  The answer was yes, the Fire Department was consulted both in 2004 and then again in 2010 as part of the SEQRA process.  Regardless, the Board Attorney suggested that any and all amendments could and should be referred to the fire commissioners for review and feedback.

The Board then voted unanimously in favor of granting the four waivers as requested.
There followed some discussion regarding the proposed addition of a lot line.  Due to some reconfiguration, the Developer would like to add a lot line in order to create an Open Space parcel contiguous to North Ridge.  Board Attorney Alyse Tehrune argued that the addition of a new lot line technically constituted a new subdivision and the procedure for correctly pursuing this was reviewed.

Finally, the developer is looking to submit a clearing, filing and grading permit for another area of the development called West Terrace.  The reason for this is that they would like to begin blasting the rock and grading the area in order to create fill that will be needed to complete a portion of Quail Road and North Ridge.  It was explained that the issuance of such a permit will require a public hearing, which must be noticed a minimum of 10 days beforehand.

Following a somewhat lengthy review of possible timelines for this, it was agreed that the public hearing would be set for the next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting, which is on November 10.  Bonnie Franson advised the applicant that they should be careful with regard to snakes in the area and following the correct protocol for removal if they should discover any.  The applicant agreed and assured the Board that this was already being done.

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting October 13, 2015

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the September 8, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge - Site Plan Review
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34
4. Tuxedo Plaza - Proposed Retail Office Space
   Section 5 Block 3 Lot 12.21
5. Adjournment

back to top

Town Planning Board Meeting September 8, 2015

The Town Planning Board met on Tuesday, September 8 at 7pm.  Board member Joe Gartiser was absent

Barba Property - Sterling Mine Road I Filling & Grading- Discussion on Application Status:
Board Chair Mike Reardon stated that following the site visit, the applicant’s engineer was supposed to follow up with the Board, however they have heard nothing to date.  Following some brief discussion with regard to next steps and various methods of fill certification, it was agreed that the file would remain open.

Joseph & Nancy Ribando - 3 Lot Subdivision- Discussion on Application Status:
The Board is in receipt of a letter from the applicant’s engineer Mike Sandour, which was read into the record by Chair Reardon.  Fill testing has been completed on the site and the drawings are currently being finalized for review and approval.  The applicant is requesting that the town consultants review the plans and provide any pertinent comments prior to the Department of Health’s approval.  They are also requesting a 30-day extension. 
The Board voted unanimously in favor of granting this approval.

Tuxedo Farms - YMCA- Commons Neighborhood:
A representative for Tuxedo Farms provided a brief project update, informing the Board that construction had begun on the new sewer plant as well as on the project site itself.  They are still awaiting approvals from the outside agencies for many of the neighborhoods within the development. 

Preliminary plans for the YMCA were submitted back in May.  Since that time, all comments have been addressed and the applicant believes that the current plans are in good shape.  They offered to answer any questions that the Board might have.

Noting that there were some lot lines that needed to be shifted due to wetlands, Board Attorney Alyse Tehrune inquired as to when the applicant believed they would have the final subdivision plans for The Commons area ready for approval. 

The answer was roughly 6 weeks, depending on responses from the D.E.C. and the D.O.H..

Based on this, Ms. Tehrune then wanted to know when the applicant anticipated transferring the lots to the YMCA property.

The applicant is targeting construction on the YMCA to being in April, so the transfer would come some time before then.

Town Planner Bonnie Franson inquired about the details of the two proposed signs. 
She was informed that they would both probably say Tuxedo Farms and YMCA, but the details have not yet been finalized. 

Plantings and the planting schedule were briefly discussed as were lighting and parking.

There remain a few small engineering issues with the plan as well as a few additional conditions to be considered.  It was unanimously agreed that Ms. Tehrune would draft a resolution of approval subject to these conditions. 

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting September 8, 2015

1. Call to Order of the Regular Meeting
2. Approval of the July 14, 2015 Meeting Minutes
3. Barba Property - Sterling Mine Road I Filling & Grading- Discussion on Application Status Section 17 Block 1 Lots 43
4. Joseph & Nancy Ribando - 3 Lot Subdivision- Discussion on Application Status
   Section 11 Block 2 Lot 1.46
5. Tuxedo Farms - YMCA- Commons Neighborhood
   Section 14 Block 1 Lot 34
6. Adjournment

back to top

Agenda for Town Planning Board Meeting July 14, 2015

The Town Planning Board met on July 14 at 7pm. Board member Darren Maynard was absent.

Tuxedo Farms - North Ridge- Site Plan Review:

Representing the applicant, Andrew Dance of Related Companies explained that at a recent TAC meeting, Town Planner Bonnie Franson had expressed some concerns over some waivers that will be necessary within this first phase of the development.  The applicant has chosen a builder for North Ridge, Mill Creek, and general building design and unit layouts were presented at a Planning Board meeting this past December.  Before they will begin the engineering, the applicant would like some assurance that the Planning Board will grant the waivers in question as they do not want to waste a ton of money engineering something that will not be approved.  To this end, they came prepared to re-present some of the information that was originally put forth back in the December presentation, answer any questions that might arise with regard to the waivers and hopefully receive a favorable response from the Planning Board prior to moving forward with the engineering for North Ridge.

Board Chair Michael Reardon asked for an explanation of the waivers.

Planning Board Attorney Alyse Tehrune explained that the design as currently presented calls for front loading garages, which are specifically prohibited by the applicant’s zoning code, otherwise known as The Smart Code.  These particular buildings were