Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board takes initial steps on Student Bus Company site plan; raises traffic, well, septic and fuel questions
Summary
The board accepted lead agency for an unlisted action and held an initial review of a proposed 3.4-acre bus terminal and maintenance site; staff and board raised questions about well location, septic loading, fuel storage, parking, traffic and possible lot-line adjustment before a public hearing.
The Goshen Planning Board declared its intent to serve as lead agency under SEQRA and accepted the Student Bus Company site-plan application as an unlisted action for a proposed bus terminal and maintenance facility on Industrial Drive. The board held an initial presentation and discussed engineering, environmental and operational issues but did not approve construction.
Applicant representatives including Anthony Tortiano of Fometown Engineering, Matt Kuehl (vice president, Student Bus Company), project attorney John Fellows and construction consultant Gary Kuehl presented a plan to operate about 25 long buses and 11 short buses from roughly 2.5 acres of a 3.4-acre parcel. The applicant said the lessee intends eventually to purchase the required parcel but is leasing now; the site plan application focuses on the leased area and proposed uses.
Planning staff and board members raised multiple technical questions that must be resolved before a hearing or approval: confirmation from the health department on the existing well location and its suitability for operations; structural evaluation of an existing septic tank and leach field that underlie proposed parking and gravel areas; fuel storage capacity and containment for diesel refueling (applicants said tanks are typically under thresholds that would trigger heightened DEC requirements and that double containment/skid tanks are planned); stormwater and runoff management for bus parking and wash activities; parking layout and circulation given peak-morning vehicle movements; site distance and traffic impacts at the Industrial Drive/NY 17A intersection; and whether a lot-line adjustment rather than a separate subdivision might streamline approvals and address existing unpermitted contractor storage on the adjacent parcel.
The board advised the applicant to: obtain confirmation from the health department on the well; expose and test the septic tank and obtain any necessary structural remediation; provide traffic information for the 17A intersection to the town's traffic reviewer; clarify fuel tank size and operations on Part 1 of the EAF; and consider a lot-line adjustment or formal lot line change so the leased area aligns with town code measurements. The board voted to declare intent to serve as lead agency and classified the project as an unlisted action under SEQRA; the applicant was instructed to submit a revised EAF and additional documents so the board can prepare mailings for a public hearing.
No final approvals were granted; the board emphasized safety and operational questions (septic tank loading, well protection, fuel containment, circulation, and idling restrictions) that applicants must address before the board will schedule a public hearing and take further action.
