Goshen planning board raises parking, snow-removal and safety concerns about proposed student-bus depot

The Goshen Planning Board discussed a proposal to use a property in the town for a student-bus storage and service facility that would stage roughly three dozen buses, with board members focusing on employee parking, snow removal, fuel-tank placement, and emergency access.

Board members said the applicant told the Planning Board the operation staggers buses by departure order and pre-stages vehicles overnight, but members pressed for more detail about how that operating practice would work on the proposed site. Concerns centered on the existing gravel surface on much of the lot, which several members said will not hold line paint or orderly stalls and may rut under repeated heavy truck and bus traffic.

Planning board member Louie said the operator typically “park[s] them in a way that the earliest route goes out first,” intending to pre-stage buses so they leave in order. Louie and others said they remain uncertain how employee cars and drivers will be accommodated: multiple members said they expect spillover parking onto nearby Industrial Drive if on-site stalls are insufficient.

Board members asked for a traffic/turning study at the site entrance where buses would turn right onto the adjacent roadway; several participants noted they had not received a travel or traffic study showing how large buses would use the intersection or whether they would need to occupy multiple lanes to complete turns. One member suggested reworking the paved apron at the driveway or removing a curved curb cut to create more room for turns.

Snow removal and surfacing were a recurring concern. Members repeatedly asked what surface aggregate the applicant will place in high-use areas and whether the pavement section would support emergency apparatus and fuel-delivery trucks without rutting. Several members recommended a higher-spec aggregate or a paved apron near the entrance and fueling area; one engineering comment requested that the applicant show cross-sections for the driveway and the area near the proposed 600-gallon diesel tank described in the plans.

Board members also requested a lighting plan for early-morning and late-night arrivals and departures for worker safety, and asked the applicant to show how emergency vehicles — specifically fire apparatus — would enter and move around the site without getting stuck on soft surfacing. Members noted the applicant had said some buses would be stored indoors, but questioned whether enough vehicles could be accommodated inside the building to reduce outside stacking.

Other issues discussed included a proposed lot-line shift tied to the site plan, potential encroachment of gravel onto the public roadway, and the presence of an existing cell-tower facility and overhead utilities on or near neighboring parcels. The board asked the applicant to demonstrate legal access to rear parcels and to indicate any recorded rights-of-way on the plan.

The Planning Board did not take a vote during the discussion. Board members asked the applicant to provide the missing travel/turning analysis, a lighting plan, clarified surfacing cross-sections and specifications (including load-bearing detail for emergency apparatus), and a clear plan for employee parking to avoid overflow onto Industrial Drive. The item will return to the Planning Board when the applicant submits the requested materials.